Speculation: Roster Building Thread III (2019/2020) - Tick Tock

[Irishguy42]

"Best defender tho"

But he's obviously good because he gets a lot of minutes, no? What about without our fearless defensive leader?

Still bad, but a lot better, particularly on the...*gasp*...left side?

But he gets a lot of minutes, so he must be good defensively on the PK, no?

Oh. Well...a team's best defender surely must allow this much offensive pressure to opposing teams all the time. Let's see what the weaker PK without our "best defender" looks like.

Oh.

Nearly every player on the roster was better without Staal on the ice as opposed to being on the ice with him. Some oddities like Pionk and Howden, in which Staal+player were better apart from each other than with each other (better still being not great, but better than dog poo).

 

[Irishguy42]

But no. He's good because "why else does he get the minutes he gets every night" or some other BS evidence/analysis like that.

I've been soundly defeated once again. Damn.

There's no evidence that will change your mind. You're already set in your way because you watched all the games.

 

[nyr2k2]

How bout answering the question posed? Instead of making excuses not to answer.

If you don't like my argument? Then how bout you explain why he will earn an average of 18- 19 minutes per game this season? Or why he averaged that last year? And not third pair minutes?

If you can't answer these questions, then you have no valid argument.

He received the TOI that he did last season out of necessity. He played less than Skjei, who himself isn't even that good, and more than guys Brendan Smith and Freddie Claesson, who are either borderline AHL-caliber or spare parts, respectively. The only other people that could "challenge" him for time would be rookies like Lindgren and Hajek, who weren't ready for big NHL minutes.

So basically, he played the minutes he did because he's modestly better than trash and guys making their professional debut in Hartford. This makes him good? If his contract was moveable, which it isn't because he's awful, or if a buyout fixed the cap problems like it did with Shattenkirk, dude wouldn't be around. He's not a good player at this point, it's pretty much glaringly obvious, but unfortunately we're stuck with him until something changes.

Neal Pionk was 4 seconds off the team lead in TOI among D. Did he get that because he's f***ing awesome, or because of circumstance and questionable usage by the coach?

 

[Irishguy42]

Neil Pionk was 4 seconds off the team lead in TOI among D. Did he get that because he's ****ing awesome, or because of circumstance and questionable usage by the coach?

Because he's good, duh. How else could we have gotten a comparable first pairing D in Trouba in return?

 

[nyr2k2]

Because he's good, duh. How else could we have gotten a comparable first pairing D in Trouba in return?

I mean, 18-19 minutes, who f***ing cares. He got that two years ago as well as was still third among LD on the team behind an apparently declining McDonagh and a Brady Skjei having a bad year. Playing 18-19 minutes isn't some massive accomplishment indicative of a great defender, particularly on a team that's been as abysmal on the back end as ours the past few years.

 

[pld459666]

"The KHL is less physical and less taxing overall. "

Ok, still it is over 5 years in time. And say maybe 3 years comparable to NHL in games played. But the way management explains it, you would think he has many more years to play. And that may be so, but certainly not at a high caliber worth 11 mil a year.

Its more than just 5 years of a reduced workload

His junior career is also less than what he could have expected.

His age is 27 going on 28, but his body has the wear and tear of a 24 year old going on 25.

 

[ohbaby]

The only thing worse than Marc Staal’s defense is this post.

Another one who can't answer the question. Anyone? Anyone willing to give a reasonable answer as to why Rangers continue to give Marc Staal valuable minutes? It's not like they don't have choices. They have 7 D-men, he doesn't need to play 80 games. He doesn't need to play 19 minutes a game. I guess Lindsey Ruff and David Quinn should hire you guys as an assistant.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Another one who can't answer the question. Anyone? Anyone willing to give a reasonable answer as to why Rangers continue to give Marc Staal valuable minutes? It's not like they don't have choices. They have 7 D-men, he doesn't need to play 80 games. He doesn't need to play 19 minutes a game. I guess Lindsey Ruff and David Quinn should hire you guys as an assistant.

18-19 minutes isn’t a lot for a defenseman

 

[D713B]

Its more than just 5 years of a reduced workload

His junior career is also less than what he could have expected.

His age is 27 going on 28, but his body has the wear and tear of a 24 year old going on 25.

I understand the logic that goes into this presumption and respect those with this opinion. In a vacuum it's a sound theory. From my perspective it's difficult to gauge mileage on a human body. By comparison to his peers he has led a less taxing path. However everybody's phenotype is different and thus reacts differently to it's environment over time.

That said, I hope he dominates for the next seven seasons. Looking forward to watching him play.

 

[ohbaby]

He received the TOI that he did last season out of necessity. He played less than Skjei, who himself isn't even that good, and more than guys Brendan Smith and Freddie Claesson, who are either borderline AHL-caliber or spare parts, respectively. The only other people that could "challenge" him for time would be rookies like Lindgren and Hajek, who weren't ready for big NHL minutes. So basically, he played the minutes he did because he's modestly better than trash and guys making their professional debut in Hartford.

Thank you. Finally a reasonable answer to my question. Which BTW proves my point entirely. Which was Staal was and probably still is our best defender. As you said,... Skjei sucked last year, and the others were even worse or rookies.

Thank you nyr2k2.

And expect more of the same this year. Staal gets his 19 minutes because we will be thin in strong defenders this year also. I hope Skjei rebounds off his terrible season. If he does he will be our best defender. Mac leaving really hit him hard I think.

 

[ohbaby]

18-19 minutes isn’t a lot for a defenseman

That's not the point. That is what he has been averaging the last 4 years. If he was dropping down the depth chart his minutes would reduce. And they have not. So he has remained valuable to this team.

 

[Irishguy42]

That's not how "value" works, but alright.

 

[Gresch04]

That's not the point. That is what he has been averaging the last 4 years. If he was dropping down the depth chart his minutes would reduce. And they have not. So he has remained valuable to this team.

A chef who can barely cook is not valuable simply because no one else at the restaurant can cook. The food is still crap and the business will fail. Relative value is irrelevant. He’s either a good defenseman or not. He is not.

 

[ohbaby]

A chef who can barely cook is not valuable simply because no one else at the restaurant can cook. The food is still crap and the business will fail. Relative value is irrelevant. He’s either a good defenseman or not. He is not.

Another terrible analogy. Every coach in the NHL knows the importance of minutes played. And only doles them out based on performance. 19 minutes per game is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[Irishguy42]

Just stop, you're already far behind.

 

[RGY]

I love Staalsy, but he has been bad for a few years now. Surprising to see this come up as a debate.

Agreed. Enough about Staal. I love him too. It seems like a lifetime ago that he came up. I was finishing up high school. The Rangers were finally somewhat developing from within. Staal, Girardi, Dubinsky, Callahan. Then guys like Anisimov, Stepan, Del Zotto, Sauer followed. It was a breath of fresh air. Ive grown up with Staal. First Player Jersey i ever bought. I have to say he means a lot to me as part of my Ranger fandom in a way. BUT, he is no more than a 6th defenseman and he is certainly overpaid at that. Its unfortunate because now he takes so much abuse around here. Like its his fault we paid him. To be fair he wouldve gotten the money from somewhere. We handed out the contract in the midst of those playoff runs. Organization was keeping most of the core around with the exception of Callahan and Anisimov. I mean its so easy to criticize now, hindsight is 20/20.

Just enough with the Staal complaining. Talking in circles for no reason here.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

That's not the point. That is what he has been averaging the last 4 years. If he was dropping down the depth chart his minutes would reduce. And they have not. So he has remained valuable to this team.

Or he just wasn't that valuable the last four years?

 

[RGY]

I also dont think DQ is going to hand out minutes for free. If Hajek, Lindgren, or Rykov prove themselves to be better than Staal then Marc will be relegated to the 3rd pair. They are not sitting here giving him 2nd pair minutes out of stubbornness or some longterm investment. His contract is up in 2 years. They need to start transitioning to the kids they have.

 

[Ola]

"Best defender tho"

But he's obviously good because he gets a lot of minutes, no? What about without our fearless defensive leader?

Still bad, but a lot better, particularly on the...*gasp*...left side?

But he gets a lot of minutes, so he must be good defensively on the PK, no?

Oh. Well...a team's best defender surely must allow this much offensive pressure to opposing teams all the time. Let's see what the weaker PK without our "best defender" looks like.

Oh.

Nearly every player on the roster was better without Staal on the ice as opposed to being on the ice with him. Some oddities like Pionk and Howden, in which Staal+player were better apart from each other than with each other (better still being not great, but better than dog poo).

I am sorry Irish, but seriously, this is barely relevant and you make it out like it’s some kind of conclusive proof.

1. Your data 5 on 5 doesn’t take into account that Staal might have received a much harder assignment than Skjei/Gilmour/Smith/Hajak.

It’s also proved so many times at this place that the simplistic data available cannot “adjust” for the above. A player can look like he is “no doubt the worst player in the league ever, AINEC” on one team, and then all of a sudden he changes teams and he over night performs over league average.

It just don’t fly, comparing apples with oranges. It don’t pass the very simple tests with very low thresholds.

Like use the exact same approach and compare TDA during his NY stint with Adam Clendenning during his NY stint — who is better? Let me guess, it’s the later AINEC. All Ds playing on our 3rd pairing under AV looked great data wise and different adjustments failed to account for it.

2. @ohbaby of course make a relevant point. Right or wrong, but it’s not ‘irrelevant’ when a bunch of NHL coaches obviously is of of one opinion and a group of posters at hfboards think otherwise. Is it conclusive proof? Of course not. But not irrelevant.

Should at the very least cause some afterthought.

3. In addition, nobody is saying that Staal should win a Norris. It is certainly possible to — suck — and still be our best D at defending.

Our blueline was hardly good last season.

 

[Ola]

I also dont think DQ is going to hand out minutes for free. If Hajek, Lindgren, or Rykov prove themselves to be better than Staal then Marc will be relegated to the 3rd pair. They are not sitting here giving him 2nd pair minutes out of stubbornness or some longterm investment. His contract is up in 2 years. They need to start transitioning to the kids they have.

After a year of DQ I think I like some things and I am afraid that I will have issues with others. It’s hard to tell for sure of course, but overall my general feeling is slightly positive.

But one thing — I love — is how dynamic he has been with his lineup.

So many coaches establish a top 6+1 on D the last day of camp and after that it will take a ton to move anyone even for a single night.

I am sure we will see some rotation on the blueline next season too.

 

[Black Tank]

TL;DNR: Panarin was a great signing because I want to watch entertaining hockey.

Panarin at 28 is absolutely the right move, but it depends on your perspective as a fan.

A. If your sole focus is try to win the Cup then it raises risk a few years into his deal as well as affecting draft order and jeopardizes that sole focus.

B. If you have dual focus in priority order: 1) watch entertaining, high skill winning hockey and 2) try to win the Cup, then it's a no brainer. Also notice the use of "try" to define the Cup goal. There are so many variables needed to win the Cup every season that you can't rack up a high number of top picks and walk away thinking it's a done deal.

For me the dual focus is much more rewarding. Try a little exercise to see where you fall in the split between A and B by seeing where your NYR fandom fits into your own life:

My earliest memories are of Dec 1974, watching the Rangers on Channel 9 on a b&w orange plastic TV in the bedroom I shared with my brother. My Dad worked with the rich guys who lived on the Island and when the Isles went on their run, he would come home visible irritated. But the Rangers had some good and entertaining teams in the late 70s. Then my brother and I started catching the M4 on our own to go to the Garden and met our sister who worked in the Woolworths around there to all go home together. Good times and good entertaining hockey.

Fast forward to 1992-1994. Nothing more to say about those seasons other than the brilliance of a lot of the players wearing blueshirts and then the ultimate payoff. But again great hockey. But by this point I was living on Long Island and graduating law school and moving across the country. My sis was married and my brother had passed away in a car accident. Life goes on but the Rangers were always a part of it and I was glad that I was being entertained.

The Lundquist era, the Jagr teams, our first young core, some amazing PO series and the shots at the Cup. Great entertaining hockey and so damn close. Now I was married and getting ready to move to Europe.

The Panarin, Kakko, Zib era. Probably the most excited I've been about the start of a season. But I'm 50 and have three kids (named after Messier, Richter and Graves) and live in very rural England. My sister is retired, my Dad is 85 and it seems that we were all just in that small apartment in NY. One Cup. One f***ing Cup. But decades of good, entertaining hockey with awful stretches that just sucked and had me barely paying attention. I don't want any more of those types of seasons. I want to try and win the cup while playing entertaining, high skilled hockey. And Panarin brings that nearly every shift, just like Zib did last season.

This trip down nostalgia f***ing lane puts me firmly in B. I don't have f***ing time to waste on Edmonton or Isles type seasons.

 

[LokiDog]

Its more than just 5 years of a reduced workload

His junior career is also less than what he could have expected.

His age is 27 going on 28, but his body has the wear and tear of a 24 year old going on 25.

He bathes in deer blood guys. He’ll be in his physical peak for another 20 years. Next Jagr.

Blackhawks star Artemi Panarin got stronger by bathing in deer blood

(I’m totally kidding, but I wouldn’t complain)

 

[Ola]

He bathes in deer blood guys. He’ll be in his physical peak for another 20 years. Next Jagr.

Blackhawks star Artemi Panarin got stronger by bathing in deer blood

(I’m totally kidding, but I wouldn’t complain)

I think Panarin in general is the type who ages really well, almost a perfect fit. The keys for him to create offense is just not to be faster and stronger than the rest nor to get into the worst high traffic areas. He goes to where the open ice is.

But of course, personal issues or injuries and whatnot can change that.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Another terrible analogy. Every coach in the NHL knows the importance of minutes played. And only doles them out based on performance. 19 minutes per game is nothing to sneeze at.

I see you like analogies. Here's one for you: Marc Staal is that old guy in the office. He has no clue how the new tools work, but he's been working the same job for 30 years and management loves him for reasons other than his performance. Sure, he fails to meet his deadlines, and he struggles to keep up with the new procedures, but he's been around forever. He knows everyone and is part of the culture.

That's why Staal isn't bought out

 

[NYSPORTS]

U

Another one who can't answer the question. Anyone? Anyone willing to give a reasonable answer as to why Rangers continue to give Marc Staal valuable minutes? It's not like they don't have choices. They have 7 D-men, he doesn't need to play 80 games. He doesn't need to play 19 minutes a game. I guess Lindsey Ruff and David Quinn should hire you guys as an assistant.

The Rangers gave up 272 goals, accumulated the 6th lowest point total in the NHL and are in full rebuild mode. They would love to move this awful player yet can’t b/c the ROI isn’t worth it. The Rangers throw him out and others with no plans to retain him nor several of these defensemen. Good lord, the Ny Giants gave Flowers many starting reps too. Doesn’t mean he was any good.