- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,910
- 2,292
Lindgren is bad defensively and a black hole offensively. The things he is good at are like grit and vibes and the power of friendship and that doesn't translate on the ice.
Player Discussion Ryan Lindgren
- Thread starter LOFIN
- Start date
Lindgren is bad defensively and a black hole offensively. The things he is good at are like grit and vibes and the power of friendship and that doesn't translate on the ice.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,709
- 5,859
Then how did we make the final four two years out of three? Imagine if we were properly constructed!
Maliks PlusMinus
Registered User
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,709
- 5,859
Some people call scoring at the right times and getting a key save at the right time being CLUTCH... Not us I guess.
Two trips to the ECF in three years isn't luck. We may not all LIKE the way they do it, but the team finds ways to win.
yup. But some people probably think that would be preferable...
Maliks PlusMinus
Registered User
Harbour Dog
Registered User
Yeah, their actual GA/60 was reasonable. Literally every other metric is bottom of the team though, along with Bonino in most cases.
They got beat up on, but Igor's (and Quick's) Sv% was ~6-7% higher for them than for Fox and Miller.
Could something they're doing have helped that along? Sure. But is that the horse we should be tying our shutdown defensemen to? 'Sure, they get caved in, but the goalie can clearly see all the extra scoring attempts the opponents are getting'.
Fitzy
Very Stable Genius
- Jan 29, 2009
- 35,703
- 22,989
You "believe" that goals, shots, or chances for/against over the course of a full NHL regular season are a relatively accurate indicator of the quality of a roster.
That rests on a number of epistemological assumptions. So belief is an element of this.
Winning games by one goal doesn't mean the team just got lucky. Teams don't play the same hockey in close games as they do in blowouts. The 5th or 6th goal in a 4-1 game is not qualitatively the same as whether a team can really bunker down when it's a 1 goal advantage. Sometimes low-event hockey is preferable, even when you're giving up more chances than you're getting.
Point is, we've got much better metrics than we used to, but their use and generalizability regarding assertions as to the suitability of a roster are not gospel, still. I work with time-series data on international trade disputes from time to time and the list of assumptions and jumps we have to excuse before presenting findings is wild. It'd be worse with this 'sports data' being used that doesn't even have to pass peer review.
Maliks PlusMinus
Registered User
I’d argue that on the PK their main focus is staying positionally sound and trying to keep the shots to ones that are more manageable. Miller especially is more likely to pursue the puck a bit more, maybe intercept it and maybe have a positional breakdown.
That said all the guys out there were playing it well and that definitely includes the goalies, but for slower more position focused dmen trying to block or to give the shooter a small portion of the net where they trust their goalie to be is good pk’ing.
In fact the very fact trouba clearly understands and can do all that is what makes his odd charges out of the play at both even strength and down a man so god damn frustrating for me.
So you're saying we haven't beaten more than 2 teams in the playoffs... knowing the goal is to beat four.
Also, luck of the draw. Washington wasn't a playoff team. Pittsburgh was thoroughly injured/depleted... etc etc etc.
The second this team faces a team that can minimize odd man rushes... they are done.
This team can't/doesn't forecheck. They don't bang bodies in the offensive zone. They don't create offensive zone turnovers. They don't wear out the opposition defense with cycling and offensive zone control. And they can't get the puck out of their zone in a controlled manner.
If you don't see that... I'm not sure what to tell you.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,910
- 2,292
It doesn't take an understanding of the nature of knowledge to read results. The 5v5 results were mediocre. The underlying numbers at 5v5 were mediocre.
And being mediocre at 5v5 can be problematic since its most of the game. I don't think its a coincidence most good teams are good at 5v5.
So we can roll with our mediocrity while hoping special teams and goaltending save us or we could improve the team at 5v5 by getting rid of players who are bad at 5v5, especially players that play a lot of minutes.
So many? Alright, go for it!
He's also not a good PK'er. He's okay. He and Trouba bled shots and chances against (way more so than Fox-Miller.) This held true through the playoffs too.
It's amazing how illusions can be formed when the goalie makes the saves behind you (or doesn't, Trouba's 2nd half last year was marred by this before he got hurt.)
Fitzy
Very Stable Genius
- Jan 29, 2009
- 35,703
- 22,989
The underlying question for me when it comes to the figures is the idea of the 'replacement player' as a concept, and then who that player is in function on this current roster.
Lindgren is, for my money, a better option today than Mackey, Robertson, etc. Had we re-signed Gus, I'd be all over trading Lindgren. Give me a 2nd+ for him all day. But we didn't, and so it's now sort of a Lindgren vs Replacement convo, in which I'll take Lindgren. You can always demote him if other guys play better. Even if we assume Lavi has some weird obsession with using him with Fox (I doubt) Drury can look at the deadline.
Much like I said when we re-signed Strome- for all his deficiencies I do think we are a better team today for having him in the roster. If Lindgren were to go out tomorrow with career ending injury we would be on balance slightly less likely to win the cup controlling for all other factors.
HockeyBasedNYC
Feeling it
if they are in the same position as last year they will be trading at the deadline regardless.
kovazub94
Enigmatic
- Aug 5, 2010
- 13,304
- 8,981
Being our 4th best D is not overly relevant tbh. I used to be a supporter of his and argued team-construct effectiveness of having $3m defenseman on team's top pair (that allows spending on lineup improvement elsewhere the difference between what he gets vs average top pair D). I continue to not buy an argument that Fox's partner needs to be better in the offensive zone and transition, but what made me change my mind is that in this playoff run he showed that he wasn't effective in the defensive zone either (partially attributable to his size) as the team gotten deeper and him facing top level of competition. His current 1-year salary is pretty much as I expected (whoever was thinking it would've started with a number $3- or even $2 have absolutely no understanding of how salaries work in the NHL) but for his $$ there should be bigger D who's better defending in the own zone. There's nothing "radical" in this assessment and hopefully something that can be addressed.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,910
- 2,292
A healthy Lindgren is better than replacement level but I do not think there is a huge difference between the Lindgren we've seen lately (who seems perpetually banged up) and a replacement player.
But yes, the safe move is to just roll with Lindgren over the players you mentioned or any other meh UFAs. Its not what I would have done but given the current circumstances I see why Drury is doing it. But the risk that a healthy Fox makes a healthier-than-usual Lindgren look good enough to re-sign him is a legit problem.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,709
- 5,859
I’m saying we finished in the top four out of 32 teams twice in the last three years. That’s not luck, not a fluke. You don’t get there by sucking. If you can’t see that I don’t know what to tell you either. Hahaha. We don’t have to agree. I’m just giving you my outlook and listening to yours.
will1066
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2008
- 47,925
- 66,902
@SnowblindNYR is reading this thread and wanting to post that it's giving him AIDS, but he checks himself because he said that he's not that type of angry poster.
bleedblue94
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2004
- 9,221
- 9,667
How do you have bad players not playing big minutes if you don't have enough good players to eat minutes? This is some of the must no sensical language mutilation I've seen in a long time.
Lindgren isn't elite, we all know that. 10 years ago he's a 3rd pair guy, in a 32 team league he is a top 4 defenseman even if people want to ignore the general watering down of player level compared to roster slot across the league. It's just a natural part of a league expanding.
Lindgren isnt elite but he isn't even close to the biggest issue on this team. In the playoffs there were 2 other d men that were grotesquely worst playing soft matchups, yet people want to play word gymnastics shitting on Lindgren.
Yeah, Lindgren was not better than anyone on our defense in the playoffs.
He was the worst guy by a LONG shot.
These are 5v5 numbers before anyone wants to play that game.
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
The solution is have enough good players. Stunning, I know.
Always love when a guy and his partner make a fork on the chart. Great endorsement of the guy going down.
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
You know who has not a single bad player? Florida.
Edmonton definitely beats them if not for the fact that Edmonton is running a defense pair that they can't afford to put on the ice.
This story plays out every year and people won't accept it because "well the Rangers tried their best and hockey is hard." It's not hard. You put good players on your roster and you win. It's a two step process. These f***ing morons have every resource in the world to analyze everyone from McDavid to guys you've never heard of.
Edmonton definitely beats them if not for the fact that Edmonton is running a defense pair that they can't afford to put on the ice.
This story plays out every year and people won't accept it because "well the Rangers tried their best and hockey is hard." It's not hard. You put good players on your roster and you win. It's a two step process. These f***ing morons have every resource in the world to analyze everyone from McDavid to guys you've never heard of.
SeanAveryTheGreatOne
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2021
- 734
- 1,464
if this chart does not prove that Miller deserves a shot at partnering Fox, what does? If the trend of Key playing to the level of his partner holds up with him next to Adam...
LionsHeart
Registered User
I’m not flipping out over 1 year, but hopefully this means Drury sees what the rest of us see too. Signing Lindgren to any sort of long term contract is a huge mistake, and LHD should be a position that he looks to upgrade at the TDL.
eco's bones
Registered User
Speaking of the Panthers it will be a real challenge for them to repeat next year with the team they have now IMO. Their defense for one looks like it's going to be a lot different without cap casualties Montour and Ekman-Larsson. They added Nate Schmidt, Adam Boqvist and Jaycob Megna and maybe Uvis Balinskis will take a spot but their top 4 guys now are Forsling, Ekbald, Mikkola and Kulikov. Ekblad can be an adventure sometimes and Mikkola and Kulikov are primarily steady stay at home D. It looks to me like it's going to be a lot different dynamic and less offense from their D.
They also lost some forward depth---I thought Stenlund was pretty effective for them in a bottom line and penalty killing role. They add AJ Greer, Tomas Nosek and Adam Boqvist's brother Jesper. None of them for me are that notable and Tarasenko and Lomberg are also gone and Cousins, Okposo and Lorentz remain unsigned UFA's.
They also lost some forward depth---I thought Stenlund was pretty effective for them in a bottom line and penalty killing role. They add AJ Greer, Tomas Nosek and Adam Boqvist's brother Jesper. None of them for me are that notable and Tarasenko and Lomberg are also gone and Cousins, Okposo and Lorentz remain unsigned UFA's.
