Our goalscoring this year based on last year's stats

[Beacon]

This is how many goals our guys scored last season.


1. Gaborik: 41
2. Richards: 25
3. Nash: 30
4. Callahan: 29
5. Stepan: 17
6. Hagelin: 14, but projected to 18 over a full season (started in Hartford)
7. Boyle: 11
8. Rupp: 4
9. Pyatt: 9
10. Asham: 5
11. Halpern: 4
12. Kreider: Let's project 15 goals over a full season
13. Our injury replacements scored 6 goals last year.

FORWARD TOTAL: 210


1. McDonagh: 7
2. Staal: 7 goals in 2010-11 when he was (kinda) healthy
3. Girardi: 5
4. MDZ: 10
5. Stralman: 2
6. Gilroy: 3
7. Bickel: 0
8. Eminger: 2

DEFENSE TOTAL: 36


TEAM TOTAL: 246 or exactly 3 goals per game, meaning 144 goals over 48 games.

This is 20 goals more for the season, which makes sense considering that Nash alone should scored as much as Dubinsky, Anisimov and Prust combined. It would move us up from #13 in scoring to #8, just 3 goals behind the #4 offensive team. In essence, it would mean we'd be tied for the 4-8 place offensively. If we can keep goals against about the same, the team would be third in Goals For-Against in the league.

Granted, all the games have to be played

Click to read more...

 

[BBKers]

This is how many goals our guys scored last season.


1. Gaborik: 41
2. Richards: 25
3. Nash: 30
4. Callahan: 29
5. Stepan: 17
6. Hagelin: 14, but projected to 18 over a full season (started in Hartford)
7. Boyle: 11
8. Rupp: 4
9. Pyatt: 9
10. Asham: 5
11. Halpern: 4
12. Kreider: Let's project 15 goals over a full season
13. Our injury replacements scored 6 goals last year.

FORWARD TOTAL: 210


1. McDonagh: 7
2. Staal: 7 goals in 2010-11 when he was (kinda) healthy
3. Girardi: 5
4. MDZ: 10
5. Stralman: 2
6. Gilroy: 3
7. Bickel: 0
8. Emerson: 2

DEFENSE TOTAL: 36


TEAM TOTAL: 246 or exactly 3 goals per game, meaning 144 goals over 48 games.

This is 20 goals more for the season, which makes sense considering that Nash alone should scored as much as Dubinsky, Anisimov and Prust combined. It would move us up from #13 in scoring to #8, just 3 goals behind the #4 offensive team. In essence, it would mean we'd be tied for the 4-8 place offensively. If we can keep goals against about the same, the team would be third in Goals For-Against in the league.

Granted, all the games have to be played

Emerson?

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Its never a perfect science to build stats like this, because guys that come in are on different lines with different roles playing with different players in different systems, etc.

Id say the Rangers will be in the top half for scoring in the NHL, but im not going to guarantee top tier just yet. They do have the potential if all works out, though I still think they need another skater for the 3rd line.

 

[Beacon]

Its never a perfect science to build stats like this, because guys that come in are on different lines with different roles playing with different players in different systems, etc.

Id say the Rangers will be in the top half for scoring in the NHL, but im not going to guarantee top tier just yet. They do have the potential if all works out, though I still think they need another skater for the 3rd line.

It will be a disappointment if we are not in the top third instead of the middle third like we were last year. Kreider should at least match Dubi's 10 goals and and Nash should double Anisimov's 16. All other changes are minor scorers. Had we scored 6 more goals last year, we'd have been in the top-10. I think Nash alone should do the trick.