Confirmed with Link: NYR acquire Adam McQuaid from Bruins for Kampfer, and 4th round pick

[silverfish]

Not a good quality because they cannot be measured by Corsi.

Well, it can. Generally, players who are aggressive and hit a lot are chasing the game, not driving it. These types of players often have bad shot attempt metrics because they don't have the puck.

Among the leagues top 20 hitting d-men last year who played at least 250 minutes (hits for per 60, to effectively account for differences in total TOI), 13 of them had a negative relative shot attempts for %. 18 of them had a relative shot attempts for % of < 1 %. The two outliers of this sample are Alex Biega and Eric Gryba.

Of course, there are flaws in this very quick analysis. Hits are an extremely subjective metric. Many arenas, MSG included, are much more lenient with what they deem a hit than other arenas. The Islanders scorekeeper was also this way.

[data from Corsica.Hockey]

 

[Levitate]

Again I'm failing to properly articulate why this move has me concerned. It concerns me for the future years. When this team is ready to win, to try and compete, what will they value in their players? I'm not sure I know the answer to that question, but the past has me concerned for the future.

It's also interesting to me that giving up a draft pick for a failing veteran is a move that has the future in focus, but I digress.

e: Think of it this way. When this team is three years down the line, and the rebuild went swimmingly. Kravtsov, Andersson, and Chytil are all effective top-6 players with Kreider, Zibanejad, and Buchnevich. Is JG going to look at this team and think to himself: we need a guy like Lucic and a guy like Russell to really round out this roster with grit, character, and toughness, and then go and spend big UFA money on players of that ilk?

I can't say with confidence that he's proven that he wouldn't do that. Other people may feel different, but that is my opinion.

I'll take a Lucic on this team in an instant if it's prime Boston years Lucic

that said, I think we've mostly seen the front office target the physical, tough, but sucky guys for low minute positions. Glass and McLeod were never signed to play in the top 9, I don't think McQuaid was acquired to play in the top four if it can be helped. I know you have a different opinion on that and I think you're overreacting a bit with it but, again, ultimately we'll have to wait and see.

I think the front office and coaches would 100% rather play younger talented players over these guys mentioned but they're not beyond playing them in the lineup if they feel things aren't going well otherwise

 

[Off Sides]

Again I'm failing to properly articulate why this move has me concerned. It concerns me for the future years. When this team is ready to win, to try and compete, what will they value in their players? I'm not sure I know the answer to that question, but the past has me concerned for the future.

It's also interesting to me that giving up a draft pick for a failing veteran is a move that has the future in focus, but I digress.

e: Think of it this way. When this team is three years down the line, and the rebuild went swimmingly. Kravtsov, Andersson, and Chytil are all effective top-6 players with Kreider, Zibanejad, and Buchnevich. Is JG going to look at this team and think to himself: we need a guy like Lucic and a guy like Russell to really round out this roster with grit, character, and toughness, and then go and spend big UFA money on players of that ilk?

I can't say with confidence that he's proven that he wouldn't do that. Other people may feel different, but that is my opinion.

You and I are on a similar page, in four years this is not going to be a factor on whether or not this rebuild turned out good or not, what would be a factor is if ADA/Pionk turned out good or not. The focus in my opinion should be on giving every possible effort to promote the later, this move in my opinion hinders it.

 

[True Blue]

Well, it can. Generally, players who are aggressive and hit a lot are chasing the game, not driving it. These types of players often have bad shot attempt metrics because they don't have the puck.

That is a distinction by obfuscation. Ovechkin hits plenty. Are his shot metrics awful? And if they are, what does it tell you about a metric that makes one of the best goal scorers in the NHL look negative?

You are also generalizing: players who are aggressive and hit a lot are chasing the game, not driving it. This is generalization. This is also further helped when you are the arbiter of "driving the game" means.

we need a guy like Lucic

How many would not take an in-prime Luccic? Or are you saying that you would not have him on your team as his shot metrics are poor?

 

[Levitate]

Eh I mean there's some sense to it...if you have the puck all the time you're not going to be doing a lot of hitting but still feels like there's a ton of variables in all of that.

The more useful thing would be to figure out how to evaluate who is an effective hitter...every player has to play without the puck, no one always has the puck all the time, so who is good at throwing hits that create turnovers? Not every player plays defense the same way, not every player tries to throw hits when they don't have the puck...so do some guys who hit have a positive impact because they can create turnovers that way

Maybe someone is already doing this but I haven't really seen anything other than the general wisdom "you can't hit if you have the puck so therefore if you're hitting you must be sucking because you don't have the puck"

 

[Edge]

You and I are on a similar page, in four years this is not going to be a factor on whether or not this rebuild turned out good or not, what would be a factor is if ADA/Pionk turned out good or not. The focus in my opinion should be on giving every possible effort to promote the later, this move in my opinion hinders it.

I hear you, but you can't turn a dog biscuit into a diamond just because you really want it to happen and because it would be beneficial.

We don't know what ADA will look like heading into this season. We only know that to this point, he has not yet made that jump and at 23 that there's a distinct possibility that it might not happen.

There comes a point where a player has played enough pro games that focus changes a little from giving them effort possible opportunity, to them creating their opportunity with their play.

We're close to that point with ADA --- at this point, it's on him to stand out. Not for the Rangers to put things on hold for him to do so.

 

[eco's bones]

A small clarification on my point. I do think McQuaid will play a bunch. I just don't think he's going to play over young players when those young players deserve the playing time. So he'll be in the lineup for sure when there are injuries. He'll also be in the lineup if the young players either need some time in the AHL or need some time in the press box, both of which shouldn't be unexpected at various times. He may also be in the lineup against some of the more physical teams in the league. All of those situations combined, I would be surprised to see him with less than 40 games (if he can stay healthy himself).

I agree with that. The likelihood I think is that McQuaid gets moved at the deadline anyway. I think there will be teams looking for a big defenseman that can play a grinding, physical game---there are always teams looking to stock up on defensive depth anyway and having a Stanley Cup ring helps too.....so unless McQuaid is injured or he completely falls apart (ala Brendan Smith last year) he should bring us back at least something close if not better than what we lost trading for him.

Before yesterday I didn't see that stabilizing force on our right side defense. Shattenkirk is an offensive D who is okay at best defensively. DeAngelo and Pionk are works in progress and not very experienced and I don't particularly care for DeAngelo's defending. If he can improve that though he could be a really good player. I would expect Brendan Smith to be better but it wasn't like he was great to begin with. I don't think any of them could really be called dependable as far as playing defense. McQuaid's more of you know what you're getting every night and coaches like that. He plays within his limitations. I don't expect Adam to be averaging 20 minutes a night though on particular nights he might get that.

If a younger player shows he can step in and replace him during the season and do a creditable enough job---yeah they need to play then. We've got several guys with NHL experience and Lindgren and Hajek. Most of them are lefties though.

 

[silverfish]

That is a distinction by obfuscation. Ovechkin hits plenty. Are his shot metrics awful? And if they are, what does it tell you about a metric that makes one of the best goal scorers in the NHL look negative?

You are also generalizing: players who are aggressive and hit a lot are chasing the game, not driving it. This is generalization. This is also further helped when you are the arbiter of "driving the game" means.

How many would not take an in-prime Luccic? Or are you saying that you would not have him on your team as his shot metrics are poor?

Ovechkin has the 205th highest hits per 60 in the league among players who played 25 game last season (661 players). His shot metrics are not awful, because he's good.

Yes, I explicitly used the word generally because there are exceptions to every rule. Matt Martin had the third highest hits per 60 last year, but still maintained a positive shot attempt relative metric. Victor Mete recorded 0.09 hits per 60 minutes, lowest in the league in this sample, and still had a negative shot attempt relative metric.

 

[eco's bones]

It's a skill game but also a physical game and hitting is important to it. The best teams (Washington, Tampa, Boston, Pittsburgh, Winnipeg, Vegas, Nashville for example) in the league play physical hockey. They all have a number of big, physical players who grind other teams down. Soften the opposition and then let your skill players take over. It's a strategy that works.

 

[Edge]

I always kind of chuckle to myself when these conversations drift into the metrics side of things.

I feel like building a team while married to the concept of advanced stats is like a government going neck deep on Libertarian principles.

There's a reason why no one is undertaking the task, despite an insistence on how it's the best way to proceed.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Hits are a useless metric to me. Josh Khalfin was trying to start something a couple of years ago about trackings hits that forced turnovers which would have been incredibly interesting.

I know Sportlogiq has some proprietary stuff that measures these, and I’d be teams rely on these measures way more than just hits.

 

[haveandare]

I'll take a Lucic on this team in an instant if it's prime Boston years Lucic

that said, I think we've mostly seen the front office target the physical, tough, but sucky guys for low minute positions. Glass and McLeod were never signed to play in the top 9, I don't think McQuaid was acquired to play in the top four if it can be helped. I know you have a different opinion on that and I think you're overreacting a bit with it but, again, ultimately we'll have to wait and see.

I think the front office and coaches would 100% rather play younger talented players over these guys mentioned but they're not beyond playing them in the lineup if they feel things aren't going well otherwise

Yeah, this is where I'm at too.

They moved Kampfer, an absolutely nothing 7D, and a fourth for this guy. I'm not sure why this being read as some sign that they don't want skill players or don't care if someone can play or not. They traded a barely useable player for a different type of barely useable player. Kampfer wasn't a lynchpin in the D and McQuaid likely won't be either. If they moved Sjkei for this type of player, ok, then there's something behind this type of complaint.

All things considered, if we have two more or less equally useless players in terms of contributing to the game, I'd rather have one who stands up for himself and his teammates and tries to wear down the opposition physically. This team was embarrassingly allergic to anything physical for years. I don't think deterrence exists or anything like that, but I do think it's bad for morale when the other team pushes you around and you, as a group, roll over and take it repeatedly. Again, if we're not talking about a skilled player either way, I'd rather have the rough guy.

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

I'm calling him Randy McQuaid

 

[silverfish]

I always kind of chuckle to myself when these conversations drift into the metrics side of things.

I feel like building a team while married to the concept of advanced stats is like a government going neck deep on Libertarian principles.

There's a reason why no one is undertaking the task, despite an insistence on how it's the best way to proceed.

Nobody who uses advanced stats is only using advanced stats to evaluate the game.

This has never been the case. This will never be the case.

Can we get rid of this narrative already?

 

[Bruin4]

McQuaid is a warrior! He's extremely underrated defensively and offensively. Although he wont set the world on fire offensively he makes the right decisions and his shot always seems to get through to the net. He also has the presence of mind of knowing when to take the shot or dump the puck into the corner very seldom will you see him make a bone head play.

Defensively he's a positional player not fleet of foot but his strength,courage and brains make up for that. Hes not going to throw any thundering body checks but he's going to take some because he sacrifices his body for the good of the team and no one wants to match up with him in front of his own net. He's one tough cookie.

He's a perfect 5-6 d-man Bruins played him with Krug a lot in Torrey's first couple of yrs and they were a decent pairing, and you'll never have to worry about Tom Wilson not being stepped too when he's running around and taking liberty's on the other Rangers when McQuaid is the line-up.

He'll be a fan favorite shortly.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I don't see McQuaid as an upgrade to Kampfer, to add a 4th round pick is bad asset management when we're supposed to be rebuilding. Adds some physicality I guess

I actually think we can flip him for higher than a 4th at the deadline. I can see him bringing in a 3rd and a 6th or something like that.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

1.) There's no such thing as "minutes that should be going to Pionk or ADA." If they can't beat out Adam McQuaid, they aren't ready to play in the league full-time.
2.) There's nothing stopping Quinn from using McQuaid in some games and using another player in others, depending on how the young guys are doing. Roster deployment is different when you're rebuilding vs when you're trying to compete and it doesn't require having the same lineup game-in, game-out. You can more effectively use a rotation.
3.) Injuries are going to happen

Thank you.

 

[Waivers]

No he isn't...

McQuaid is bad at everything and he isn't even all that cheap. Could have signed a better player for less money on a 1 year deal in FA. In fact we already did in Claesson.

I just signed online since my last post. Rangers have no NHL depth on the defensive end. McQuaid is blocking who again? He's blocking ADA? Are you really sold on this kid just because he was picked in the first round (hi Peter Holland)? He has shown nothing that would suggest he deserves consistent NHL minutes. Kids gotta work for it, even if the roster is on fire - no plugging pieces in because they're young. You can completely f*** up someone's growth if you mishandle their development. I would rather have McQuaid than ADA in the defensive zone, and it's not even close...

Shit, nothing even suggests Pionk can play 82 games this year, though I think he's more deserving to play in the NHL than ADA by watching last season.

 

[Edge]

Nobody who uses advanced stats is only using advanced stats to evaluate the game.

This has never been the case. This will never be the case.

Can we get rid of this narrative already?

I think that's certainly doable.

Of course it would help if it wasn't the overwhelming topic that they tend to discuss or where they steer conversations toward.

I think the narrative exists based on people's experiences, not because they picked some random attribute to agree upon as a stereotype.

 

[LORDE]

Things systematically wrong with this team:

- Soft as baby poo
- Constantly gave away the front of the crease
- Very little pushback
- Not one could/would clear the crease

This guy won't solve all (or maybe any) of these by himself. Kampfer certainly wasn't lol

IF:

- You can flip him for a 3rd or more its good asset management (won't know for a while)
- He has any type of positive effect on some of the young guys (not a deterrent)
- Bring some type of leadership/accountability in the locker room
- Plays with an edge and does even a little damage physically

It's a win.

Also, we haven't even gotten to TC yet... if some kid blows everyone away on the right side and they STILL play him then we can complain. Until/unless that happens Gorton has to be believed that he'll make room.

 

[SA16]

I just signed online since my last post. Rangers have no NHL depth on the defensive end. McQuaid is blocking who again? He's blocking ADA? Are you really sold on this kid just because he was picked in the first round (hi Peter Holland)? He has shown nothing that would suggest he deserves consistent NHL minutes. Kids gotta work for it, even if the roster is on fire - no plugging pieces in because they're young. You can completely **** up someone's growth if you mishandle their development. I would rather have McQuaid than ADA in the defensive zone, and it's not even close...

****, nothing even suggests Pionk can play 82 games this year, though I think he's more deserving to play in the NHL than ADA by watching last season.

The point isn't that he's blocking anyone. It's that he's bad. There's no need to give up assets for a bad player. Would rather just play Kampfer and not give up anything at all if ADA or anyone don''t make the team.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

The point isn't that he's blocking anyone. It's that he's bad. There's no need to give up assets for a bad player. Would rather just play Kampfer and not give up anything at all if ADA or anyone don''t make the tea.m

And if they flip him for more than a 4th at the deadline?

 

[nyr2k2]

Hopefully we get rid of him at the TDL and then Lindgren is ready to take over in a bottom-pairing role next year. He may need more time, but I'm just saying, hopefully.

 

[True Blue]

Ovechkin has the 205th highest hits per 60 in the league among players who played 25 game last season (661 players). His shot metrics are not awful, because he's good.

Yes, I explicitly used the word generally because there are exceptions to every rule. Matt Martin had the third highest hits per 60 last year, but still maintained a positive shot attempt relative metric. Victor Mete recorded 0.09 hits per 60 minutes, lowest in the league in this sample, and still had a negative shot attempt relative metric.

Does Ovechkin go out of his way to hit players?

You can use metrics to enhance any argument as long as the metrics fit what you are trying to say. For example, half of the teams that made the playoffs last year were also 8 of the top 12 penalized teams in the league. And 7 of them were top 12 in major penalties. Further, of them, 7 were top-12 in fights per game. In looking at it that way, one could credibly argue that the tougher and rougher your team is, the better chance you stand of being in the playoffs.

Sure there are exceptions to every rule, but making a general statement and being the sole judge of what defines it, makes it very easy to submit your argument as correct.

 

[Off Sides]

He is blocking players, Rangers are rebuilding they have two on the cusp RD who played in most of the games post the deadline last year except for injury, they have Shattenkirk, now they added another vet RD. The math is one of the on the cusp NHLers is likely to be scratched more often than they play at least in the NHL.

Rebuilding teams play some prospects, at this point I would not be surprised to see only one of Pionk or ADA out of all the prospects on the starting line-up. It's not like they did not have enough vets already.

I am more patient about a rebuild than most, but then do it, take the lumps by leaving some spots open for the on the cusp prospects, let them hopefully find their games, if they don't then scratch them or waive them and play Kampfer or whoever, but filling up pretty much every spot prior to camp is not really development, it's kind of a waste or time.