Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part VII: Now with less frenzy!

[Levitate]

I'm not a big 'ol systems expert but it looked to me like yes the Rangers played a somewhat overall unique system compared to most NHL teams (which isn't to say that other teams didn't do similar stuff at times), it was confusing and a hard system for the defensemen AND forwards to play, and AV kept trotting it out there even when it seemed apparent he didn't have players who could run it well.

I feel like Ola is saying "the Rangers didn't do anything unique, their players just all sucked!" which I don't think is really true. You see a guy like Girardi go elsewhere and do better in a different system, and I think that's short selling some of the players the Rangers have had. I do think that yes, they struggled to make the right decisions at the right time but I think it's because the system required them to make those tough decisions more often compared to other teams.

I dunno, it was just a mess where players didn't seem to know what they should be doing. That's on the coaching staff for not finding a system they could run.

I also think the Rangers were extremely bad at taking away space on the ice in their own defensive zone compared to other teams. The pressure was poor from the forwards and the D...it was always "float towards a player and theoretically try to take away a lane but because you're not putting any pressure on them they have all day to decide what do do". Forwards routinely had to skate too far to get into position because the whole team would shift to one side of the ice but do little to keep the other team from moving the puck around to other side.

If I had to guess I'd say there was a theory of trying to force the other teams to move the puck to a specific area so the Rangers could then overload and take it away but I don't really like how it worked most of the time for these past several years. I'm also suspicious that AV had been coaching his defensemen to play a specific way in front of the net in order to facilitate them retrieving the puck faster...don't get tangled up trying to box out and move players from the front of the net, don't get your stick tangled up (so no getting your stick under the forwards, always over the top trying to tie them up but letting you easily disengage, which has mixed results). Rely on the goalie to make a save and defensemen be able to get loose and get to the puck quickly. I could be wrong, but the Rangers were bad in front of their own net and a lot of it was stuff that could be coached like positioning and using the stick

 

[Mikos87]

I agree with Lev.

A lot of a do zone coverage issues can be fixed. If you want to see a night and day difference of systems, look at FLA under Gallant, and Rowe.

The former was a zone coverage that stressed taking away the cross pass, and while the latter was a swarm defense.

One was a great fit for them, the other... Well they had the same goalies, you can see the difference in their numbers.

 

[Lone Ranger]

The thing that was most apparent to me about AV's system, and the thing that's the most incongruous, is that he wanted our players to overload the puck with numbers in order to force turnovers. In theory, this should lead to opposing players making hasty decisions with the puck that should lead to more mistakes and turnovers. And yet, what I was always amazed at, is the amount of extra time our opponents always seemed to have in our zone to make plays, wait for trailing teammates, and to set up scoring chances.

 

[Levitate]

The thing that was most apparent to me about AV's system, and the thing that's the most incongruous, is that he wanted our players to overload the puck with numbers order to force turnovers. In theory, this should lead to opposing players making hasty decisions with the puck that should lead to more mistakes and turnovers. And yet, what I was always amazed at, is the amount of extra time our opponents always seemed to have in our zone to make plays, wait for trailing teammates, and to set up scoring chances.

Yes, they were terrible at actually applying pressure. This also went for forechecking in general...so many fly bys, no real attempt to pressure a guy into a mistake, just lazy skating in the vague direction. There must have been a reason but dammed if I know why

 

[Kovalev27]

Was it just me or did we all miss Dustin Tokarski joining the organization battling for the back up position?

Just heard Drury mention him on NHL radio. Hasn’t played many nhl games since his run with Montreal but that’s a solid move for Hartford at worst

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Was it just me or did we all miss Dustin Tokarski joining the organization battling for the back up position?

Just heard Drury mention him on NHL radio. Hasn’t played many nhl games since his run with Montreal but that’s a solid move for Hartford at worst

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/rangers-sign-dustin-tokarski-to-a-one-year-deal.2530305/

 

[Tawnos]

Yes, they were terrible at actually applying pressure. This also went for forechecking in general...so many fly bys, no real attempt to pressure a guy into a mistake, just lazy skating in the vague direction. There must have been a reason but dammed if I know why

We need to separate the first two seasons from the last 3. Why? Because they were really good at pressuring in those first years. And to the point @Lone Ranger was making, teams never had any time with the puck in those first years. That changed and changed quickly.

It’s a leadership by example issue, in my mind. Those teams had Hagelin and Cally/MSL. All three players were tenacious in puck pursuit and the team followed suit. And Hagelin and MSL were both faster than their replacements as well. Not that a player like Miller is slow, but he’s not as fast and doesn’t have the same kind of mindset. Somewhere in there, they lost that tenacity. Brassard was more that way than Zibanejad has shown to be as well.

It’s funny, because the Rangers were really the forerunners of a style that several teams in the league play now. Pittsburgh won two Cups playing a modified, more conservative, version of the same style. Yet the Rangers success with it was very short-lived.

The biggest indictment of AV is that he never adapted to a changing roster.

 

[Kovalev27]

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/rangers-sign-dustin-tokarski-to-a-one-year-deal.2530305/

Totally missed this thanks

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

We need to separate the first two seasons from the last 3. Why? Because they were really good at pressuring in those first years. And to the point @Lone Ranger was making, teams never had any time with the puck in those first years. That changed and changed quickly.

It’s a leadership by example issue, in my mind. Those teams had Hagelin and Cally/MSL. All three players were tenacious in puck pursuit and the team followed suit. And Hagelin and MSL were both faster than their replacements as well. Not that a player like Miller is slow, but he’s not as fast and doesn’t have the same kind of mindset. Somewhere in there, they lost that tenacity. Brassard was more that way than Zibanejad has shown to be as well.

It’s funny, because the Rangers were really the forerunners of a style that several teams in the league play now. Pittsburgh won two Cups playing a modified, more conservative, version of the same style. Yet the Rangers success with it was very short-lived.

The biggest indictment of AV is that he never adapted to a changing roster.

They were only good at pressuring in the first season. Not a surprise it was with the most torts roster AV had.

After that it progressively got worse. It didn’t matter as much in 14-15 because the roster was stacked. A better coach wins with that team, injuries and all.

They never had any speed going into the o zone when they dumped the puck in which made for easy outlets for the other team. This turned into we’d dump it in and then change lines 100 times a game because the guys were exhausted from defending minutes in his last season.

They won’t be doing that anymore which will be a welcome change but I’d caution anyone from expecting a drastic change immediately, we still have a very AV roster.

 

[nyr2k2]

They were only good at pressuring in the first season. Not a surprise it was with the most torts roster AV had.

After that it progressively got worse. It didn’t matter as much in 14-15 because the roster was stacked. A better coach wins with that team, injuries and all.

They never had any speed going into the o zone when they dumped the puck in which made for easy outlets for the other team. This turned into we’d dump it in and then change lines 100 times a game because the guys were exhausted from defending minutes in his last season.

They won’t be doing that anymore which will be a welcome change but I’d caution anyone from expecting a drastic change immediately, we still have a very AV roster.

This is an important thing to remember. Part of what made us initially successful under AV is that the players still had some tendencies from Torts' system--they were always in shooting lanes, blocking shots, everyone was still trying to be very responsible defensively, etc. Eventually we started turning over the roster with guys that didn't play under Torts, and those that did became fully adherent to AV's style. So, point is, I agree--it will take some time for the guys that have been around to break their AV habits.

 

[Tawnos]

They were only good at pressuring in the first season. Not a surprise it was with the most torts roster AV had.

After that it progressively got worse. It didn’t matter as much in 14-15 because the roster was stacked. A better coach wins with that team, injuries and all.

They never had any speed going into the o zone when they dumped the puck in which made for easy outlets for the other team. This turned into we’d dump it in and then change lines 100 times a game because the guys were exhausted from defending minutes in his last season.

They won’t be doing that anymore which will be a welcome change but I’d caution anyone from expecting a drastic change immediately, we still have a very AV roster.

We were really talking about defensive zone scheming, where Torts teams didn't pressure at all. That's why relatively stationary defensemen like Girardi and Staal were so good in it.

Second, 14-15 the Rangers scored on the rush like crazy. That was a result of the huge amounts of pressure they were putting on the puck in the defensive zone.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

We were really talking about defensive zone scheming, where Torts teams didn't pressure at all. That's why relatively stationary defensemen like Girardi and Staal were so good in it.

Second, 14-15 the Rangers scored on the rush like crazy. That was a result of the huge amounts of pressure they were putting on the puck in the defensive zone.

They scored on the rush like crazy because they had the players to do it. Seriously it seemed like every single quality opportunity they had went in. Torts ran a more passive system, but guys knew where to be and were rarely caught out of position while playing it. As those guys started to leave, the team got worse.

They still gave up an absurd amount of chances against in 2014-15 though, IIRC they were 2nd worst in the league in quality scoring chances against.

 

[Levitate]

We need to separate the first two seasons from the last 3. Why? Because they were really good at pressuring in those first years. And to the point @Lone Ranger was making, teams never had any time with the puck in those first years. That changed and changed quickly.

Yeah I definitely agree there. Those first couple of years under AV the Rangers would often pressure hard and generally played fast in all areas of the game. Cut to last season and they were slow everywhere on the ice and it's like they thought being "fast" only meant how fast you could get the puck through the neutral zone and after that you could just dial it back.

It’s a leadership by example issue, in my mind. Those teams had Hagelin and Cally/MSL. All three players were tenacious in puck pursuit and the team followed suit. And Hagelin and MSL were both faster than their replacements as well. Not that a player like Miller is slow, but he’s not as fast and doesn’t have the same kind of mindset. Somewhere in there, they lost that tenacity. Brassard was more that way than Zibanejad has shown to be as well.

I kind of agree, but I think it has something to do with the veteran leadership on the team getting complacent and the coaching staff letting them run the show rather than kicking them in the ass when needed. After having success, the Rangers seemed to feel like "we've been here before, we've done this, we know if we can just play our game we'll be fine" but that translated to their game being more cautious and plodding. You never really saw the Rangers say "we need to get our asses in gear and be aggressive and force the issue", it was always just "we need to play our game and go through the process". Not enough urgency, too much complacency and thinking "we're a good team look how good we've been int he past we don't need to be urgent in our play we know what we're doing".

That said, I do think the coaching staff might have had some influence...I'm thinking of game 7 against Tampa where the Rangers just sat back and played passive all game long and lost because they couldn't be bothered to up their energy and urgency. IMO it's because when they played fast and loose in other games that series, they scored a lot but so did Tampa and the coaching staff/team freaked out and wanted to play it conservative instead. Their best bet to win would still have been to go hard after Tampa IMO but they went conservative and it started a trend.

I think Zibanejad, Miller, etc could all play that faster more aggressive game but when the strategy has clearly been "don't bother forechecking hard unless it's the perfect opportunity, otherwise just do a flyby and then sit back" you're not going to get anyone spending energy to forecheck.

It’s funny, because the Rangers were really the forerunners of a style that several teams in the league play now. Pittsburgh won two Cups playing a modified, more conservative, version of the same style. Yet the Rangers success with it was very short-lived.

The biggest indictment of AV is that he never adapted to a changing roster.

Yup, the Rangers were the original "fast" team, rolling lines of attackers and generating offense off the rush. Then they quickly became a slow team because they had no urgency or killer instinct to their game. AV either never fixed that attitude or never adjusted to the players he had.

They scored on the rush like crazy because they had the players to do it. Seriously it seemed like every single quality opportunity they had went in. Torts ran a more passive system, but guys knew where to be and were rarely caught out of position while playing it. As those guys started to leave, the team got worse.

They still gave up an absurd amount of chances against in 2014-15 though, IIRC they were 2nd worst in the league in quality scoring chances against.

I mean, they scored off the rush like crazy basically every season under AV until the wheels really fell off this past season but it started trending downward before that as well I think. His entire system was designed to try to break out the puck out and up the ice quickly, but in recent seasons the rush would turn into everyone gliding as soon as they crossed the blueline, the puck carrier pulling up at the hashmarks, the other players gliding past the net instead of attacking the front, and a hail marry pass through the slot that would rarely connect.

shit just got lazy

e: I don't think that it's quite as simple as "Torts guys and AV guys", players can be taught different styles and systems so it's not like the Rangers have to turn over their entire roster to play well under a different coach, but yeah it's going to be a bit of a transition and I think it's going to be harder to score if they can't find a way to keep generating those rushes while also being better defensively.

 

[eco's bones]

IMO AV's system might have worked better if we were a younger and more talented team. In '14 that was a lot more the case than by '18. AV did not change--he just kept on going and not adjusting as the team aged and players had to be dumped because of cap issues......and gradually AV's man on man system wreaked havoc on the defense because guys like Girardi, Klein and Staal couldn't keep pace with it while all the while we were dumping forwards that really helped out the D like Hagelin, Boyle, Moore and Stepan. The Rangers needed to switch more to zone a good 2 and a half--three years ago. The man on man played to the weaknesses of too many players.

 

[Off Sides]

I think it's a general coaching trap in a way, they think they need this type of player to complement their system but once the roster gets more and more of that type of player the more predictable they play. The more predictable they play and the more the other team adjusts, especially in the playoffs.

At some point obviously another team is going to notice them sending two men to one in a corner and come up with a plan to have their players open in front. Similar with Torts eventually another team is going to notice the points are open for shots and if they just shoot away good things will happen.

I think the best coaches are flexible to what they have and do not try to hammer every player into some system they have little chance at succeeding in.

 

[Tawnos]

They scored on the rush like crazy because they had the players to do it. Seriously it seemed like every single quality opportunity they had went in. Torts ran a more passive system, but guys knew where to be and were rarely caught out of position while playing it. As those guys started to leave, the team got worse.

They still gave up an absurd amount of chances against in 2014-15 though, IIRC they were 2nd worst in the league in quality scoring chances against.

The amount of chances was always a calculated gamble. From the very moment AV took over.

...

That said, I do think the coaching staff might have had some influence...I'm thinking of game 7 against Tampa where the Rangers just sat back and played passive all game long and lost because they couldn't be bothered to up their energy and urgency. IMO it's because when they played fast and loose in other games that series, they scored a lot but so did Tampa and the coaching staff/team freaked out and wanted to play it conservative instead. Their best bet to win would still have been to go hard after Tampa IMO but they went conservative and it started a trend.

...

All the stuff in the ... I agree with, but personally I don't think they had anything left to give at the end of the Tampa series. Game 6 had all the hallmarks of the "last gasp of a fading team"... games 5 and 7 were where they really were.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

We need to find AV and make him pay.

 

[Edge]

Jesus, not this again.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

Jesus, not this again.

Horse is still breathing.

Must continue beating it!

 

[BBKers]

This is the Ultimate T & P mob if you ask me...

 

[Metranger]

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/rangers-sign-dustin-tokarski-to-a-one-year-deal.2530305/

I loved Tokarski in Animal House.

 

[Ola]

I'm not a big 'ol systems expert but it looked to me like yes the Rangers played a somewhat overall unique system compared to most NHL teams (which isn't to say that other teams didn't do similar stuff at times), it was confusing and a hard system for the defensemen AND forwards to play, and AV kept trotting it out there even when it seemed apparent he didn't have players who could run it well.

I feel like Ola is saying "the Rangers didn't do anything unique, their players just all sucked!" which I don't think is really true. You see a guy like Girardi go elsewhere and do better in a different system, and I think that's short selling some of the players the Rangers have had. I do think that yes, they struggled to make the right decisions at the right time but I think it's because the system required them to make those tough decisions more often compared to other teams.

I dunno, it was just a mess where players didn't seem to know what they should be doing. That's on the coaching staff for not finding a system they could run.

I also think the Rangers were extremely bad at taking away space on the ice in their own defensive zone compared to other teams. The pressure was poor from the forwards and the D...it was always "float towards a player and theoretically try to take away a lane but because you're not putting any pressure on them they have all day to decide what do do". Forwards routinely had to skate too far to get into position because the whole team would shift to one side of the ice but do little to keep the other team from moving the puck around to other side.

If I had to guess I'd say there was a theory of trying to force the other teams to move the puck to a specific area so the Rangers could then overload and take it away but I don't really like how it worked most of the time for these past several years. I'm also suspicious that AV had been coaching his defensemen to play a specific way in front of the net in order to facilitate them retrieving the puck faster...don't get tangled up trying to box out and move players from the front of the net, don't get your stick tangled up (so no getting your stick under the forwards, always over the top trying to tie them up but letting you easily disengage, which has mixed results). Rely on the goalie to make a save and defensemen be able to get loose and get to the puck quickly. I could be wrong, but the Rangers were bad in front of their own net and a lot of it was stuff that could be coached like positioning and using the stick

Good post and description.

One important thing though, AV is of course a lot more reliant on the stretch pass compared to say other man/man coaches like Babcock and Quenville.

So I have no problem whatsoever putting our poor CF% on AVs system. It’s clear as day.

But as to the breakdowns defensively, no, I haven’t seen us trying to do something other man/man defenses don’t do. We had all the typical problems that a failings man/man defense have.

 

[bobbop]

What would Theodore cost, and could a deal be built around one of Hayes/Spooner/Names

A lot more than you are offering. Theodore is the best (and really the only) young defenseman on a defense that got exposed by Washington.

 

[Zibanejbread]

The first pre-season game is less than a month away; does anyone know when training camp will roughly start? I couldn't find anything. Thanks.

 

[Irishguy42]