Toggle sidebar

Second impressions of Marty St. Louis (Mod warning in OP)

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
aufheben said:
I know, we can't say anything bad about the precious Rangers.

lol "since Chrismas" so, -3 months of the season? Color me impressed. I'll admit that if you pick and choose successful parts of the season, we have an elite record.
Click to expand...

I also said if you take out the first 9 games of the season the Rangers have a top 3 record in the East.

Thats a very small sample to remove...about 10% of the season. if 10% is crap, and 90% is strong, what does that make the team? It makes them CONSISTENT.

The Rangers..

CONSISTENTLY outshoot their opponents.

CONSISTENTLY outpossess their opponents.

CONSISTENTLY kill penalties.

CONSISTENTLY give up 3 or fewer goals.

CONSISTENTLY win more games than they lose.


So yeah, they are consistent. What levels of inconsistencies are you seeing that are within the realm of any team in the NHL being able to actually hit?

Take a look at the Blues...look how streaky they are..
http://www.nhl.com/ice/schedulebyseason.htm?season=20132014&gameType=2&team=STL&network=&venue=

Same thing with the Brooins.

No team is able to pull of some unattainable level of consistency.

No team will always score 3 goals.

No team will always give up 1 goal.

No team will always have their goalie play an A game.

No team will always score on the power play.

No team will always kill off every penalty.

But, when you look at it as a whole, the Rangers are a pretty damn consistent team.

AND, their initial 9 game slump is OBVIOUS to explain and really it shouldnt be necessary to say this. Start the first bajillion games in a row on the road AND introduce a brand new coach with a completely different playing style.
 
The inconsistency I was talking about, which I should have been more specific about, was the effort of the defense and the back checking of our forwards. Time will tell whether that is just natural progression of things, or if it's a fundamental flaw.

This has gotten off-topic, but I also don't trust our slot and crease coverage AT ALL.
 
Jersey Girl said:
Having to throw out two 9 game stretches to be able to call the Rangers consistent kinda flies in the face of actually showing consistency.
Click to expand...

the fact that those 2 9 game stretches in themselves are extremely inconsistent within the confines of a typical NHL season themselves makes it a lot easier to throw them out.

But, even if you don't.

The Rangers are trending upwards.

Cry about some mythical "consistency" all you want. The Rangers season has been improving, not getting worse.

AND, this is with Nash being relatively quiet, MSL being COMPLETELY invisible, and Richards being very "meh"

All at the same time.

The likelyhood that continues is pretty damn low. You'd expect, at the very least, 1 of them to get hot.

Rangers with none of them producing (but Henrik being Henrik) = Rangers are an Average team.

Rangers with 1 of them producing along with Henrik = Rangers a good team.

Rangers with 2 of them producing along with Henrik = Rangers a great team.

Rangers with 3 of them producing along with Henrik = Rangers a cup favorite team.

Am I saying it WILL happen?

No.

But, I think it's far more likely that one of the other 2 start to happen than it is the team suddenly starts to regress.



The only inconsistency I see with this team is with individual performances, rather than with the team overall.

Which is 100% exactly what to expect from 95% of the teams out there.

Some guys will get hot, some guys will get cold, and some guys will be "ok".

MSL and Richards are cold, Nash is "ok"

and we're still winning.

To me, i see far more positives than negatives RIGHT NOW.

does that mean things can change? Sure. Look at the Leafs for proof of that.

But, going into this post season I like my chances. I still feel MSL will bounce back big time. I feel like once he "Gets it" he's going to go on a tear.

I don't want to make excuses for him, but it seems like every player that comes into AVs system seems to struggle with it to start off.

Klein has looked WORLDS better since getting a dozen or so games under his belt. IMHO he looked quite poor to start off his tenure here. Since then, he's been extremely strong for us.

Same thing with pretty much every forward to start the season...and every defenseman.

Remember how horrendous Staal looked to start the year? Right now he's playing like a #1 defenseman.

I refuse to accept a 12 game sample size over a 14or so year career of consistent performance (for MSL). Just the same way that I refuse to take the first 9 games in this season as being a true reflection of what this team is rather than the 60+ games since then.
 
aufheben said:
I don't have a problem with our record, we have a good record for sure, I just don't see how that necessitates consistency. Just my feeling on it.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from, but the record along with the team's elite possession stats makes me a believer in the team.
 
aufheben said:
The inconsistency I was talking about, which I should have been more specific about, was the effort of the defense and the back checking of our forwards. Time will tell whether that is just natural progression of things, or if it's a fundamental flaw.
Click to expand...

i disagree with the effort being the problem.

to me the "motion" is the problem.

the more teams move around in our defensive zone, the harder the man on man coverage is. Teams with lots of movement, like the Bs, hurt this system.


thats one thing i will vehemently disagree with AV.

he took one of the best zone coverage teams, and made them play an asinine man to man coverage.

its stupid.
 
Inferno said:
I refuse to accept a 12 game sample size over a 14or so year career of consistent performance (for MSL). Just the same way that I refuse to take the first 9 games in this season as being a true reflection of what this team is rather than the 60+ games since then.
Click to expand...

Well, steering this back to St Louis, first of all he's played 14 games with us so far, not 12, out of a regular season total of 20. We paid a premium to have his services this year, so it's starting to look like the premium we paid was unjustified.

It may have been wiser to keep Callahan, give up nothing this Spring, then pay less for St Louis over the summer. That way St Louis could have that 20-40 game 'break-in' period with the Rangers, that so many in this thread have said is required.
 
Last edited:
Jersey Girl said:
Well, steering this back to St Louis, first of all he's played 14 games with us so far, not 12, out of a regular season total of 20. We paid a premium to have his services this year, so it's starting to look like the premium we paid was unjustified.

It may have been wiser to keep Callahan, give up nothing this Spring, then pay less for St Louis over the summer. That way St Louis could have that 20-40 game 'break-in' period with the Rangers, that so many in this thread have said is required.
Click to expand...

lol, ok, 14...

but, 14 and 12 are pretty much the same thing in terms of sample size. Also, a few of them he had the flu...so really....12.

i'm going to disagree with you on the Cally thing in only that...if it were me, I would have traded Cally to San Jose for picks...not for MSL.

But, theres no way I would have held on to him. None whatsoever. You know for sure you're losing him in the offseason, get what you can while you can get it.

but to me, the net difference of potentially saving our 1st and 2nd as well as getting maybe a 1st or a 2nd plus a prospect, makes it worth moving him for picks instead of MSL.

iwth that said, MSL is a great player, and this trade looks a helluva lot different if he's producing at the PPG pace he's historically produced at.
 
Inferno said:
lol, ok, 14...

but, 14 and 12 are pretty much the same thing in terms of sample size. Also, a few of them he had the flu...so really....12.
Click to expand...

14 games is 70% of the entire season St Louis is going to spend here. 70% is a pretty big sample size.

i'm going to disagree with you on the Cally thing in only that...if it were me, I would have traded Cally to San Jose for picks...not for MSL.

But, theres no way I would have held on to him. None whatsoever. You know for sure you're losing him in the offseason, get what you can while you can get it.

but to me, the net difference of potentially saving our 1st and 2nd as well as getting maybe a 1st or a 2nd plus a prospect, makes it worth moving him for picks instead of MSL.
Click to expand...

Certainly debatable. I thought for sure we'd trade Cally and get younger for a change, or at least keep him and stay the same. Would have been happy with a second round draft pick in 2015 for Cally, as that draft is supposed to be so strong and deep.

iwth that said, MSL is a great player, and this trade looks a helluva lot different if he's producing at the PPG pace he's historically produced at.
Click to expand...

I don't know - even if St Louis had scored on that one breakaway he had in one of his first games, maybe bounced the puck off Scrivens' mask and into the net instead of out of the rink (everything else seemed to bounce off an Oiler into the net), and picked up a few assists along the way - he still seems to play small out there. Points or no points, I'm not seeing an elite winger out there. I want to, but I'm not.

A PPG game pace would probably change my outlook on St Louis, but let's start small before we talk about that. He'll need 17 points in his last six games to give us a PPG pace this year. Would love it, but wouldn't bet my house on it.

Quick stick to be sure and he is trying, but I'm amazed how easily St Louis is knocked off the puck at times, and he is 38. I know it seems odd that his game would start aging NOW, precisely when we traded for him, but with the Rangers' luck it would not be that shocking.
 
shinchanyo said:
Yes you have but since this is a semantic/opinion based evaluation you may choose to disagree with what was in fact presented despite your assertion in this post
Click to expand...
Then again, show me the abundance of good, young players. Not show me young players, of which some are good.
 
Inferno said:
but, 14 and 12 are pretty much the same thing in terms of sample size. Also, a few of them he had the flu...so really....12.
Click to expand...
When all you have for this year is a quarter of a season, then the sample size is not so small.

And again, as the price paid was for an elite level difference maker, MSL does not get the luxury of a waiting period.
 
True Blue said:
When all you have for this year is a quarter of a season, then the sample size is not so small.

And again, as the price paid was for an elite level difference maker, MSL does not get the luxury of a waiting period.
Click to expand...

The calendar has turned to April.

Time to accept things as they are and clamp down for a playoff run, which involves hoping MSL gets massively better.

There will be plenty of time to complain after the elimination.
 
True Blue said:
Then again, show me the abundance of good, young players. Not show me young players, of which some are good.
Click to expand...

Lol, you've failed to define "good" and "abundance" I listed 6-7 young players, all of which contribute to our team in their own way, all of which are good players. There are 20 spots on a roster, that's a third of the roster.
 
Jersey Girl said:
14 games is 70% of the entire season St Louis is going to spend here. 70% is a pretty big sample size.
Click to expand...

This is just...wow. You're serious?

Way to manipulate a statistic to make it fit your narrative.

14 games is a very small sample size in an 82 games season. Doesn't matter that he played ~20 with the Rangers and ~60 with the Lightning.
 
BrianBoyle said:
This is just...wow. You're serious?

Way to manipulate a statistic to make it fit your narrative.

14 games is a very small sample size in an 82 games season. Doesn't matter that he played ~20 with the Rangers and ~60 with the Lightning.
Click to expand...

Pretty insane isn't it? Worth a laugh though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom