Post-Game Talk: Rangers @ devils -- 4/18/21

[chosen]

Yeah, who could have foreseen a 4 game sweep... 'iNsAnElY uNlIkElY'

True dat.

 

[Fitzy]

HF NYR failing the vibe check big time right now.

 

[chosen]

I like Panarin & the others. Believe me, I do. But if this group of vets was so dominant, we would already be in the playoffs. We would have done better v Carolina last year.

This team looks good, but not good enough to win. We need to build for the future, and a lot of that is getting the young players opportunities to play & learn & improve. If we are to win it will be with these young players in a larger role than what they have now.

You can say, well Kravtsov is new and Laf is new, so break them in slowly. Well, maybe, though they've both shown their quality. But this is Chytil's fourth year, he puts up good numbers, and last night he played all of 8:15. I don't get that.

McDavid and Draisaitl might be the two best forwards in the NHL, yet zero to show for it.

 

[ohbaby]

I like Panarin & the others. Believe me, I do. But if this group of vets was so dominant, we would already be in the playoffs. We would have done better v Carolina last year.

This team looks good, but not good enough to win. We need to build for the future, and a lot of that is getting the young players opportunities to play & learn & improve. If we are to win it will be with these young players in a larger role than what they have now.

You can say, well Kravtsov is new and Laf is new, so break them in slowly. Well, maybe, though they've both shown their quality. But this is Chytil's fourth year, he puts up good numbers, and last night he played all of 8:15. I don't get that.

We won didn't we? You don't think it's a bit trifle how many minutes a player got when we won the game? I don't hear anyone screaming Panarin played only 14 minutes the other night? Guy is averaging two points a game the last ten games. Where's the outrage that our superstar is not being used? Because we know Panarin averages close to 20 minutes a game. Just like we know Chytil averages 13 minutes a game. His minutes did decrease over last year. But then he also broke his thumb this year. And regardless of the fact he is playing, a broken thumb takes at least 3 months to fully heal. That will be the end of April.

Last year I don't know what happened. The playoffs were a complete disappointment. And it might happen again if we make the playoffs. But the team is winning right now, and you can only take it one game at a time. You stick with what works until it doesn't.

 

[Larrybiv]

So then I guess the question is...

Does management decide that Quinn needs to go to help the progress of the younger players... or does management decide to ship off Quinn's "crutches" to force him to play the kids?

Any idea which way they are leaning?

I guess there is always the option that management is fine with what is happening... but if that's the case...ugh...

Of course they would be leaning towards letting Quinn go. That is ALWAYS what happens.
I have an idea, switch Knoblach and Quinn next season. See what those results are. Then again, that would be setting up Quinn to look like he WAS holding back a team that is destined for greatness, its simply not there, YET!
And I.......for one, would like him to get the opportunity to be a part of it. Hell, get him an x's and o's assistant, that works.

 

[Synergy27]

I'm a subscriber to the yin-yang approach. There is good in the bad, and bad in the good.

I don't dislike DQ, but I don't always agree with him either.

I think there are things he does well, that he doesn't credit for. I think there are things he doesn't do well, that he should accountable for.

When I see Blackwell playing 1/3 of the game, Howden getting 13 mins, and Laf, Chytil, Kakko and Kravtov getting less time - yeah, that pisses me off.

Blackwell has exceeded any and all expectations. He deserves to play. But that has it's limits and there is no way on the planet he should playing nearly 20 minutes. That is unacceptable to me.

I will tell you that someone like Blackwell also concerns me a little bit. Here is a guy who never scored more than 6 goals or 19 points in college. Never scored more than 17 goals or 45 points in the AHL. Had 3 goals and 10 points in 33 NHL games coming into this season.

Now suddently he has 12 goals, 22 points in 36 games. Yes, there are late bloomers. But it's rare for late bloomers to completely blow away any production they've had at previous levels at the age of 28.

With Blackwell I worry that he's kind of like junk food for the Rangers. They're hungry, they don't feel like cooking, so they grab a bag of chips from the cupboard. It fills their stomach, but there's really no sustenance or nutrition pulled from the bag of chips.

Blackwell has a place on this team, but he's also not a long-term answer on this team, nor should he be used as a go-to guy. We're not at the point where we have not one, not two, not even three, but four young, skilled forwards who we aren't consistently giving more opportunities to.

And no, it's not about handing them opportunities. It's about putting them in different situations where we can see what they've got, maybe situations that play to their strengths and minimize their weaknesses, and when appropriate, reward them for results.

Last game was a prime example of what drove me nuts. Not one, but two of them score a goal, they show zip, and then I'm watching Blackwell taking a pass from Panarin while the kids sit on the bench, or watching the line rotations change up so that it kills any momentum they had, or doesn't allow them to rebuild and overcome a mistake.

I defend DQ, but I don't always agree with the takes. But I'm also objective, and that's the shit that drives me nuts.

Summed it up perfectly. Well done.

 

[Synergy27]

I mean clearly the answer is yes regarding the usual suspects. Just look at your takes.

 

[duhmetreE]

I told you, it's hard to define, and boils down to the fact that people who watch hockey have an idea of what an attempted shot is. It's not perfect but there aren't enough grey area shot attempts to move the needle, so no, that's not why the numbers don't match.

The numbers mostly don't match because 1) what I posted is a tiny sample and I've repeated this ad nauseum 2) people remember goals. I thought Miller and Trouba played poorly until I saw the numbers, but they were on the ice for a particularly ugly goal against where both of them blew it. That's probably what I remember, and I'm disregarding 20 minutes of play besides that.

The point is, analytics aren't perfect. If I say this one more time, I will have said it one million times. But you'll harp on that and then accept your eye test which is 100% subjective. Why don't we hold the two to the same scrutiny?

If somebody says, let's say, "Panarin made a nice play" nobody derails the thread saying "define a nice play." But if you post that he had a given number of shot attempts, you have to define shot attempts. It's not a fair shake.

but my eye test is 100% subjective and accurate

 

[Synergy27]

Lirl people have been disagreeing with Edge all season. Like come on.

Sure. But Edge gets the benefit of respectful disagreement, which he of course deserves. Now he comes in with a take that a bunch of people have suffered just straight ad hominem attacks for, so I’m just commenting on how it’ll be fun to see that responded to.

There’sa group of posters here that have no interest in conversing. They just assert their opinions and literally call everyone that disagrees with them stupid. It’s nice to see an unimpeachably not stupid poster fall on this side of an argument.

 

[True Blue]

Yawn......

 

[duhmetreE]

HF NYR failing the vibe check big time right now.

this is what happens when people aren't criticizing the team but the posters of the board. It gets weird

 

[True Blue]

Sure. But Edge gets the benefit of respectful disagreement, which he of course deserves. Now he comes in with a take that a bunch of people have suffered just straight ad hominem attacks for, so I’m just commenting on how it’ll be fun to see that responded to.

As his takes are not idiotic, my guess is that it will be a good deal different.

 

[duhmetreE]

Colin Blackwell on PP2 over Laf and Kravtsov is beyond absurd. There's no excuses for it. KAM has struggled a lot on PP2. When you have Laf, Krav in the bullpen... It's unacceptable not to give them a shot.

There is nothing that Blackwell is better at than Kravtsov. Panarin Strome Kravtsov

 

[Synergy27]

As his takes are not idiotic, my guess is that it will be a good deal different.

You have called people idiotic for the same take. Or perhaps more accurately, you have called people idiotic based on your purposefully narrow interpretation of this same take.

 

[Edge]

Disagree here. Blackwell is on the shortest possible leash but with that he's been producing at a very nice clip since put into top-6 role.
So is the sum total will be the same if he's flipped off Strome's line vs Kakko or Kravtsov (who singlehandedly made 4th line dangerous)? IMO I don't think Kakko will be able to produce this well with Panarin, and Blackwell will have a lesser impact on the 4th line than Kravtsov (even if Kravtsov matches Blackwell production in top-6).
If DQ thinks the same then he's going to ride his horses in the same order until their charge to get to playoffs is over, which is a big priority at this point to be able to maintain (and for kids to experience) this intensity level.

I personally think Kakko has shown glimpses he's capable of producing Panarin. Would it inherently match Blackwell point for point? I don't know. But part of the reason I don't know is because we haven't had enough chance to see it.

I hear where you're coming from, and you're not necessarily wrong. But the fact that we have to qualify our comments with "we think" shows that an approach hasn't been tried enough for us to answer with more clarity. And to some extent, at this point, we should have a better understanding of whether its an option.

I'll be honest with you as well, I really could give two shits if Blackwell isn't having as big of an impact on the fourth line. That's a chance I'm willing to take to get a longer look at two highly skilled top 10 picks, or to get one of three top ten picks some meaningful powerplay time.

I also don't think it has to be all or nothing, like so many topics end up becoming. I don't need to give Blackwell 4 minutes and the other kids 20 mins each, but 19 minutes for Blackwell, when he'd done nothing, compared to those time allotments for kids who showed something, is not acceptable to me.

Let's cycle a kid into the powerplay from time to time. Let's skim some minutes from Howden, Rooney and Blackwell. If we took a combined 12 minutes from them, it wouldn't be revolutionary. No one needs to see Blackwell, Howden and Rooney for a combined 40 minutes/two-thirds of an NHL hockey game.

On the one hand we talk about having to put Blackwell in a position where he has the higher impact. That's great, let's do it with the forward trinity as well from time to time. The kid line not clicking, break it up, match em with some veterans. It doesn't have to be complete overhaul.

I get why DQ does what he does. It's not mystery to me. He's not alone in his approach. And like any coach, that's typically why management ends up having to take the training wheels away. Many coaches seldom do it on their own.

 

[romba]

I re-watched the 3rd goal, we had the puck briefly on Chytil's stick in the d zone but he made half a move to try to buy time and it backfired. Kravtsov then actually lifted Hirschier's stick a second before his goal, good intentions by VK there, just a strong play by Hirschier to be ready for the stick lift and to get his stick down right away to shoot a well aimed shot.

On the 1st goal Zbad chooses to push his man over instead of tying his man's stick up. Not a bad play, but the split second difference needed to gear up for a push versus a stick tie up was the difference in a goal being scored.

 

[Ex Officer Friendly]

HF NYR failing the vibe check big time right now.

Between the group that doesn’t get this

the Toffness group

and the charts and graphs crowd

We never pass a vibe check

 

[kovazub94]

I personally think Kakko has shown glimpses he's capable of producing Panarin. Would it inherently match Blackwell point for point? I don't know. But part of the reason I don't know is because we haven't had enough chance to see it.

I hear where you're coming from, and you're not necessarily wrong. But the fact that we have to qualify our comments with "we think" shows that an approach hasn't been tried enough for us to answer with more clarity. And to some extent, at this point, we should have a better understanding of whether its an option.

I'll be honest with you as well, I really could give two shits if Blackwell isn't having as big of an impact on the fourth line. That's a chance I'm willing to take to get a longer look at two highly skilled top 10 picks, or to get one of three top ten picks some meaningful powerplay time.

I also don't think it has to be all or nothing, like so many topics end up becoming. I don't need to give Blackwell 4 minutes and the other kids 20 mins each, but 19 minutes for Blackwell, when he'd done nothing, compared to those time allotments for kids who showed something, is not acceptable to me.

Let's cycle a kid into the powerplay from time to time. Let's skim some minutes from Howden, Rooney and Blackwell. If we took a combined 12 minutes from them, it wouldn't be revolutionary. No one needs to see Blackwell, Howden and Rooney for a combined 40 minutes/two-thirds of an NHL hockey game.

On the one hand we talk about having to put Blackwell in a position where he has the higher impact. That's great, let's do it with the forward trinity as well from time to time. The kid line not clicking, break it up, match em with some veterans. It doesn't have to be complete overhaul.

I get why DQ does what he does. It's not mystery to me. He's not alone in his approach. And like any coach, that's typically why management ends up having to take the training wheels away. Many coaches seldom do it on their own.

I hear you and we’re probably talking 3-4 shifts adjustment from Quinn. Should I care about these shifts (because I don’t)? I definitely more cautious to disrupt things that proved working vs. let’s take a chance because it could.

Yesterday when the Rangers had to a.) not give up a lead and b.) get an extra point as the minutes we’re going down - it was a case to rely on what’s been working recently rather than experiment. If I were in Quinn’s shoes I’d take the same approach. What we don’t know (thank god) is what Quinn would’ve done if Devils were to take a lead. In this situation I’d expect that Quinn would’ve moved up Kravtsov to the top line and cut the rotation to 3 lines (minus Rooney and Howden).

Speaking of cutting rotation. Even if you think kids line didn’t get enough minutes, previously Quinn would’ve sat them down the stretch in the 3rd altogether, but now the line stayed in the rotation till the end. Progress.

 

[Edge]

I hear you and we’re probably talking 3-4 shifts adjustment from Quinn. Should I care about these shifts (because I don’t)? I definitely more cautious to disrupt things that proved working vs. let’s take a chance because it could.

Yesterday when the Rangers had to a.) not give up a lead and b.) get an extra point as the minutes we’re going down - it was a case to rely on what’s been working recently rather than experiment. If I were in Quinn’s shoes I’d take the same approach. What we don’t know (thank god) is what Quinn would’ve done if Devils were to take a lead. In this situation I’d expect that Quinn would’ve moved up Kravtsov to the top line and cut the rotation to 3 lines (minus Rooney and Howden).

Speaking of cutting rotation. Even if you think kids line didn’t get enough minutes, previously Quinn would’ve sat them down the stretch in the 3rd altogether, but now the line stayed in the rotation till the end. Progress.

And ultimately that's what frustrates me --- it really isn't a huge pivot.

As for should you care. The honest answer is maybe.

Right now, I don't feel like it's a make or break for our young talent. Maybe more of an efficiency thing. That feeling that even if what we're doing works, we can probably do it better.

It's not all bad. It's not all good. I think it can be better.

 

[duhmetreE]

And ultimately that's what frustrates me --- it really isn't a huge pivot.

As for should you care. The honest answer is maybe.

Right now, I don't feel like it's a make or break for our young talent. Maybe more of an efficiency thing. That feeling that even if what we're doing works, we can probably do it better.

It's not all bad. It's not all good. I think it can be better.

That is the crux of all the criticism

 

[kovazub94]

And ultimately that's what frustrates me --- it really isn't a huge pivot.

As for should you care. The honest answer is maybe.

Right now, I don't feel like it's a make or break for our young talent. Maybe more of an efficiency thing. That feeling that even if what we're doing works, we can probably do it better.

It's not all bad. It's not all good. I think it can be better.

I’d care more if there weren’t such a huge turnaround once the earlier roster issues went away. In a normal season we’d still be what late January / early February, and poised to go on a good run.

Should I be more concerned about prospects - sms. I clearly see things I’d be giddy if I saw from Lafreniere and Kakko (let alone Kravtsov) in early February in a normal season. Let’s give it two years and I revisit and I will fully admit to being wrong if prospects current use has impacted their development (hopefully I won’t have to).

 

[True Blue]

You have called people idiotic for the same take. Or perhaps more accurately, you have called people idiotic based on your purposefully narrow interpretation of this same take.

If you can’t tell the difference between your hot takes and Edge’s statements, you give yourself far too much credit.

 

[Synergy27]

If you can’t tell the difference between your hot takes and Edge’s statements, you give yourself far too much credit.

I honestly don’t even know what this means. I take very few definitive stances here. One of them was exactly what Edge is suggesting, that perhaps this team is riding journeyman Blackwell a bit too much at the expense of the continued growth of the team’s future cornerstones. Real hot take there.

The other was that the punditry expected Lafreniere to be a 50-60 point player this year. I think you told me to “put down my crack pipe” on that one, despite links to videos that prove the point.

I also think you think you are some truth telling realist that is here to shut down the uninformed. You’d do well to dial back the arrogance a bit. You aren’t as smart as you think you are.

 

[Synergy27]

That is the crux of all the criticism

But everyone “defending” Quinn is desperate to make it an all or nothing argument in an attempt to dunk on the dummies. Very few people here are locked into some binary view of the Ranger world. They see things that can be adjusted and come here to talk about it.

I don’t really know what this place is for if it’s not for that. I don’t know why the guys that want to shut down conversation come to a public message board.

 

[True Blue]

I also think you think you are some truth telling realist that is here to shut down the uninformed. You’d do well to dial back the arrogance a bit. You aren’t as smart as you think you are.

Clearly I am not, given some of the posts that of my own free will I choose to respond to.

I know very well what Edge said. Don’t need your interpretation of it. And no, your tales are nothing like his.