Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XXXIV

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

From that ESPN article:

"Panarin has contributed 20 points to that power play and has 1.20 points per game this season. That's a dip from his average over the previous two seasons (1.38), and that has Younggren somewhat concerned.
"He's declined drastically over the last one or two seasons and continues to struggle, especially defensively," Younggren said. "Getting Panarin back on track is maybe their biggest non-systems-based issue.""

Giant issue.

Panarin hasn't been as good all around this year as the last 2 years, but "declined drastically in the last 2 years" seems like it's an extremely misleading quote at best.

His pace this season of 1.20 ppg is higher than his career average (1.10), in fact, it's higher than any season in his career prior to joining the Rangers.

Yes, he was 1.37 his first year here and 1.38 in year 2, but are we REALLY going to act like Panarin being at 1.20 is a DRASTIC decline? Seems like a great player who had a Hart worthy season which will probably be his career peak, and his 'drastic decline' sees him still being virtually a 100 point player.

Panarin scoring at a 99 point pace with the team being a playoff team or scoring 113 point pace and being a lottery team. Which do you think Panarin and the Rangers would prefer?

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I don't see a paywall

Others were a little more direct in their feelings on the Rangers. We asked one NHL executive whether the Rangers are "just" Igor Shesterkin.
"Yes," they said.

Is there anything else to New York's success?
"No," they said. "They're not very good."

See, that quote from that executive is just as bad as people who think the Rangers are totally great just because of their record.

There's nothing else to their success? Having a good PP and PK are things that actually exist and are important to the game of hockey. Having the league's goal scoring leader? Leading point scorer among defensemen? Panarin playing at a 99 pt pace, Zibanejad at a ppg pace. Goodrow with 10 goals, Trouba playing at a 43 point pace. Being able to close out tight games where in past seasons they floundered and lost tons of winnable one goal games, that type of progress does actually happen.

Their 5v5 play has been terrible, we all know this, but come on. There's more nuance to the team than they suck and that's that.

 

[CLW]

Stall will be heavily scouted at the Olympics. So will other teams. It’s very possible 1-2 players may play themselves into the NHL.

Staal was pretty cooked last year with MTL. Don't see how he will add anything to the Rangers. The Rangers need more speed, not to get even slower.

 

[McRanger92]

I mentioned it a while back and wasn't taken seriously, but the Rangers should consider Eric Staal. Nothing but cap space and is the type of attitude that holds players accountable. Of course, I still support acquiring lehkonen which gives you a 3rd line of Lehkonen-Staal-Goodrow. Could be a shrewd move if we are unwilling to part with certain players and prospects.

I love this idea. Veteran center on the cheap for the bottom 6. He’s well past his prime but he’d full a big need for depth & experience

 

[tlk]

This thread will be crazy over the next two weeks. Time to deal!

 

[jay from jersey]

From that ESPN article:

Panarin hasn't been as good all around this year as the last 2 years, but "declined drastically in the last 2 years" seems like it's an extremely misleading quote at best.

His pace this season of 1.20 ppg is higher than his career average (1.10), in fact, it's higher than any season in his career prior to joining the Rangers.

Yes, he was 1.37 his first year here and 1.38 in year 2, but are we REALLY going to act like Panarin being at 1.20 is a DRASTIC decline? Seems like a great player who had a Hart worthy season which will probably be his career peak, and his 'drastic decline' sees him still being virtually a 100 point player.

Panarin scoring at a 99 point pace with the team being a playoff team or scoring 113 point pace and being a lottery team. Which do you think Panarin and the Rangers would prefer?

he still produces a bunch. but I think playing with strome hasn’t been great for the rest of his game.
No doubt they can produce together. Strome is reaping the rewards from that and being gifted that last PP spot.
I’ve said it 100 times... I wouldn’t mind if Panarin was a 90pt guy that played a tenacious responsive 2-way game, rather then 100-110pt guy with strome who cheats on the offensive side a bit and plays his 2 man offensive game with strome.

Panarins 1st year with us was the best individual effort from a player since Jagr/ Lundqvist breathes life back into this franchise.....

if you go back and watch CBJ panarin in reg season/playoffs or his 1st year with NYR, you see a pretty big difference in his overall game, even though production wise, he’s still up there producing well....
To me it’s critical to get a dogged 2-way center like PLD ( mold) to center panarin after this season.....
Honestly, I wouldn’t be opposed to trading him for a gigantic haul either, but the odds of that are unlikely....
Imo the more likely more prudent think to do and probably the best outcome for the rangers is to bring in a player or 2 via trade/UFA to get him back to that level of playing a hard 2 way game.....

if you would have told me at the bridging of the season that out of Zibby/Panarin/Kreider/ strome that kreider was the most consistent 2-way player on both ends of the ice over the other 3, I wouldn’t have believed it. But here we are

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

From that ESPN article:

Panarin hasn't been as good all around this year as the last 2 years, but "declined drastically in the last 2 years" seems like it's an extremely misleading quote at best.

His pace this season of 1.20 ppg is higher than his career average (1.10), in fact, it's higher than any season in his career prior to joining the Rangers.

Yes, he was 1.37 his first year here and 1.38 in year 2, but are we REALLY going to act like Panarin being at 1.20 is a DRASTIC decline? Seems like a great player who had a Hart worthy season which will probably be his career peak, and his 'drastic decline' sees him still being virtually a 100 point player.

Panarin scoring at a 99 point pace with the team being a playoff team or scoring 113 point pace and being a lottery team. Which do you think Panarin and the Rangers would prefer?

I could be wrong but I thought I saw the biggest issue with Panarin is he’s now exclusively scoring on the PP while in past years that wasn’t the case.

And that ties into deeper issues with this team rn, they never score 5v5 and having to rely on the PP and in the playoffs that is going to get you a quick exit

 

[McRanger92]

From that ESPN article:

Panarin hasn't been as good all around this year as the last 2 years, but "declined drastically in the last 2 years" seems like it's an extremely misleading quote at best.

His pace this season of 1.20 ppg is higher than his career average (1.10), in fact, it's higher than any season in his career prior to joining the Rangers.

Yes, he was 1.37 his first year here and 1.38 in year 2, but are we REALLY going to act like Panarin being at 1.20 is a DRASTIC decline? Seems like a great player who had a Hart worthy season which will probably be his career peak, and his 'drastic decline' sees him still being virtually a 100 point player.

Panarin scoring at a 99 point pace with the team being a playoff team or scoring 113 point pace and being a lottery team. Which do you think Panarin and the Rangers would prefer?

I hope that article makes the rounds in the Rangers locker room. The league thinking they are frauds should motivate them

 

[tlk]

Which do you think Panarin and the Rangers would prefer?

I think he doesn't give a flying f what's his numbers are as long as the team not only makes the play-offs but actually has a shot at it. And he has some experience at it relative to many other guys.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I could be wrong but I thought I saw the biggest issue with Panarin is he’s now exclusively scoring on the PP while in past years that wasn’t the case.

And that ties into deeper issues with this team rn, they never score 5v5 and having to rely on the PP in the playoffs is going to get you a quick exit

He's at 40% of his points coming on the PP.

Last year he was at 31% and the first year here he was at 25%. So yeah, this year (and last year) is an increase - but that should be expected considering the PP a lot better this season than the last 2 years (24% this season, it was 19% last year and 21% his first year here) and the way the team has performed this year they've relied on their PP more.

I think Panarin doesn't look as good this year as he does the last two years, at least consistently enough at all. He has great games here and there but the last two years he was great every single night. I think him being injured earlier, missing time with Covid protocol and that line not having a consistent RW has had an impact. I just didn't like the way that quote was framed in the article. Panarin can be better but he's still playing at a 100 pt pace, calling it a "drastic decline over the past 1 or 2 years" is absurd in my opinion. He's certainly not a problem with this team right now. If anything the "problem" with him is that him and Strome pass up shots like they're allergic bc they wanna globetrotter out there together and it would probably be good for them to either be split up or have serious self reflection about how they're playing and what needs to be changed.

 

[leetch99]

Bread is not getting traded. No big contract is anytime soon.

#1 no one has space or the money for it
#2 he loves and chose New York
#3 he's arguably our best talent to ever wear the uniform

He needs to be reigned in and directed. Problem is the room is still weak and there's no clear voice. Could take a Messier right about now....

His work ethic without the puck will never be compared to former Ranger Nemchinov .

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Its obvious the Rangers arent a great team or even a top 5 cup contender, even though their record on paper may suggest otherwise.

The way I look at it is they have a few very valuable players that could take any team over the hump with a single game breaking play or stop, and enough on the roster to do some damage in the playoffs - regardless of the analytics. They've also shown a knack for finding ways to win with different players contributing, which is what great teams do.

The power rankings and contender debates are just that to me - debates. The analytics, the output. It can all be scrutinized and rightly so. This isnt a traditional "great" team.

We watched MTL get 3 wins away from a Cup, with a majority of the same roster from last year (minus a few very key players). They are now wallowing in the sludge at the bottom of the barrel. When it gets to the dance anything can happen. Just getting there is the important thing and there would need to be a collapse of epic proportions for that not to happen.

I am enjoying this team and all of its warts, because they are winning - a lot. Who knows. Maybe they can go on a run, but its hard for me to waste my time trying to examine it in too much detail. This appears to be a team that doesn't follow the traditional roster form and tell-tale analytics one would expect from a true contender.

So im kinda just along for the ride while understanding that they are probably either ahead of schedule in their rebuild or everything is just breaking right with incredible goaltending, play from Fox and good coaching.

Montreal would not have even made the playoffs last year in a few of the divisions out there, not to mention how it's not translatable to right now because of the pandemic divisions and how many games were played, and who they had to play in the playoffs (teams that also shouldn't have been there). Also, they lost - badly.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

I hope that article makes the rounds in the Rangers locker room. The league thinking they are frauds should motivate them

They know this already. That's why they say things like "Maybe people will start to take us seriously" and "we can play with the big boys."

The problem is that they follow up statements like that by either losing to an actual good team or by playing the way they did the last three games. It don't mean shit to them.

 

[Blais to Win]

Zib was poor for two months but still picked up a point every game from the PP. Thankfully he is back on track again now but to just point at points is not telling the whole story, same with Panarin.

That's fine, but he hasn't gotten on the scoresheet 30% of the time. That's not inconsistent. It's just not dominant. They're two different things.

Just for fun in 93-94 Messier was scoreless 22 times. That's basically the same percentage of scoreless games.

 

[Avery16]

I could see CLB as a trade partner

Roslovic , Domi , Korpisalo, Kukan

could package Chytil , Gauthier , Hajek , Georgiev

not realistic to see this many players in a deal but kinda makes sense to me

Gavrikov

 

[Fitzy]

Analytics have taken the enjoyment out of the game, which is a shame because they are very useful. Everyone is an expert now, and we aren’t allowed to enjoy wins or players if the charts don’t look good. The team has some major flaws right now (and thankfully they know it) but I didn’t need the advanced metrics to tell me that.

It's not the analytics themselves, but the people who tend to like them.

These guys are all in their late 20's early 30s and are convinced that most NHL GMs are idiots who actively play bad players and would be so much better if they just built teams based on analytics. It's the single most arrogant, entitled, self aggrandizing philosophy I've seen.

It's obnoxious. They're obnoxious. Vince can't even make a simple assertion about Barclay Goodrow without a bunch of people flashing xGF and other metrics all the time.

 

[McRanger92]

It's not the analytics themselves, but the people who tend to like them.

These guys are all in their late 20's early 30s and are convinced that most NHL GMs are idiots who actively play bad players and would be so much better if they just built teams based on analytics. It's the single most arrogant, entitled, self aggrandizing philosophy I've seen.

It's obnoxious. They're obnoxious. Vince can't even make a simple assertion about Barclay Goodrow without a bunch of people flashing xGF and other metrics all the time.

I completely agree, despite betraying my fellow late 20s/early 30 year olds haha

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Going into the season a lot of us felt that if this team were to make the playoffs, we would need the young kids to step up and produce. Chytil, Laffy, Kakko in particular.

Now the three of them have contributed but its a stretch to say they have stepped up and produced at another level. They havent been the deciding factor for the Rangers success thus far

Its kinda scary to think how good this team would be if those three were actually scoring at the paces they were predicted to be at this stage.

These are the same predictors who are saying the Rangers arent a good team.

 

[Fitzy]

I completely agree, despite betraying my fellow late 20s/early 30 year olds haha

Bunch of wannabe Nate Silvers lol

 

[bbny]

It's not the analytics themselves, but the people who tend to like them.

These guys are all in their late 20's early 30s and are convinced that most NHL GMs are idiots who actively play bad players and would be so much better if they just built teams based on analytics. It's the single most arrogant, entitled, self aggrandizing philosophy I've seen.

It's obnoxious. They're obnoxious. Vince can't even make a simple assertion about Barclay Goodrow without a bunch of people flashing xGF and other metrics all the time.

POTD, and POTY contender

 

[McRanger92]

Going into the season a lot of us felt that if this team were to make the playoffs, we would need the young kids to step up and produce. Chytil, Laffy, Kakko in particular.

Now the three of them have contributed but its a stretch to say they have stepped up and produced at another level. They havent been the deciding factor for the Rangers success thus far

Its kinda scary to think how good this team would be if those three were actually scoring at the paces they were predicted to be at this stage.

These are the same predictors who are saying the Rangers arent a good team.

This is a big factor in the second half and beyond. The core players have guaranteed the Rangers to have a fairly high floor, as we’ve seen. The ceiling of the team will be dictated by Laf/Chytil/Kakko’s breakouts (or the players they are eventually replaced by)

 

[McSauer]

From that ESPN article:

Panarin hasn't been as good all around this year as the last 2 years, but "declined drastically in the last 2 years" seems like it's an extremely misleading quote at best.

His pace this season of 1.20 ppg is higher than his career average (1.10), in fact, it's higher than any season in his career prior to joining the Rangers.

Yes, he was 1.37 his first year here and 1.38 in year 2, but are we REALLY going to act like Panarin being at 1.20 is a DRASTIC decline? Seems like a great player who had a Hart worthy season which will probably be his career peak, and his 'drastic decline' sees him still being virtually a 100 point player.

Panarin scoring at a 99 point pace with the team being a playoff team or scoring 113 point pace and being a lottery team. Which do you think Panarin and the Rangers would prefer?

Can we sticky this post, please? Unbelievable people would point to Panarin as a problem.

 

[haohmaru]

It's not the analytics themselves, but the people who tend to like them.

These guys are all in their late 20's early 30s and are convinced that most NHL GMs are idiots who actively play bad players and would be so much better if they just built teams based on analytics. It's the single most arrogant, entitled, self aggrandizing philosophy I've seen.

It's obnoxious. They're obnoxious. Vince can't even make a simple assertion about Barclay Goodrow without a bunch of people flashing xGF and other metrics all the time.

This guy deserves one of Glen Sather's best cigars.

 

[DanielBrassard]

From that ESPN article:

Panarin hasn't been as good all around this year as the last 2 years, but "declined drastically in the last 2 years" seems like it's an extremely misleading quote at best.

His pace this season of 1.20 ppg is higher than his career average (1.10), in fact, it's higher than any season in his career prior to joining the Rangers.

Yes, he was 1.37 his first year here and 1.38 in year 2, but are we REALLY going to act like Panarin being at 1.20 is a DRASTIC decline? Seems like a great player who had a Hart worthy season which will probably be his career peak, and his 'drastic decline' sees him still being virtually a 100 point player.

Panarin scoring at a 99 point pace with the team being a playoff team or scoring 113 point pace and being a lottery team. Which do you think Panarin and the Rangers would prefer?

When looking at 5v5, he has declined significantly. The reason he's scoring at a 99 point pace is because he's scoring around 9P/60 on the PP which is way higher than he's ever scored. That's not even including his play-driving numbers which are pretty bad.

 

[TheDirtyH]

Analytics have taken the enjoyment out of the game, which is a shame because they are very useful. Everyone is an expert now, and we aren’t allowed to enjoy wins or players if the charts don’t look good. The team has some major flaws right now (and thankfully they know it) but I didn’t need the advanced metrics to tell me that.

It's not the analytics themselves, but the people who tend to like them.

These guys are all in their late 20's early 30s and are convinced that most NHL GMs are idiots who actively play bad players and would be so much better if they just built teams based on analytics. It's the single most arrogant, entitled, self aggrandizing philosophy I've seen.

It's obnoxious. They're obnoxious. Vince can't even make a simple assertion about Barclay Goodrow without a bunch of people flashing xGF and other metrics all the time.

I've yet to read a post (exceptions to that one Isles fan who posts here all the time) telling anyone they're 'not allowed to enjoy wins or players if the charts don't look good.'

Being a sports fan has always meant everyone being an expert, everyone convinced that the GMs are idiots or that players are terrible and don't do the obvious good things they should. Are you guys serious? Or were you just never sports fans before 'analytics'? I can't tell you the amount of time I've spent on a barstool next to some dude telling me all about what's wrong with his favorite team's coach, players, culture, management, etc. Why do coaches have a short shelf life, why do GMs get fired, why are wins so important--BECAUSE FANS DON'T SUPPORT (see: pay for tickets, merchandise, etc.) LOSERS.

I like the new stats that have come out, but they're not anything that different than what used to exist. They're basically plus/minus. Like you, I find they dominate the discussion too much, and I have big issues with the way that they've confused a lot of people about cause and effect. But the irony is that so much of the whining about them--at least here recently--amounts to people pointing to other statistics in their criticisms. And I find the 'let people enjoy things' take to be as vacuous and snobby as it shares the same goal: get these people to shut up because I know better. How can you say Panarin's been bad look at his POINTS, or PPG, or the team's RECORD.

Personally, I don't care if you're enjoying the team winning. If anything, I think that's great, and I'm glad that some find that entertaining. I'm someone who loves the game of hockey much more than I love the Rangers (who I'm also a fanatic for, obviously). So what I take issue with in this team isn't their analytics, it's what ugly, uninspiring, and ineffective hockey they play. And just because they win, doesn't make it fun for me to watch. If you're different in that regard, power to you!