Team defense (11-12 Comparison)

[aufheben]

Your refusal to compromise on any point is probably what makes it so complicated.

Here is something you were absolutely right about: I disagree with Snow that you can go about making a comparison after removing the NYR 10 worst games and leaving in every other teams ten worst.

I have no problem removing every teams 10 worst and then making a comparison. If the NYR truly faced more abnormal adversity then it will show in the adjusted stats. It still may be inaccurate but it may also show if the adversity the team faced was abnormal compared to other teams

Is that really so frustrating that you just threw your hands up claiming absurdity?

Um, yeah, it is. When people who agree with me are still arguing with me.

Bizarro world.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Ok this is just absurd at this point, I've said my piece. I have no idea what is so complicated.



This is, literally, what I said.

Yeah, but leaving that 10 game sample is also quite a bit deceiving. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Thirty One]

It all depends on whether the stat makes the Rangers look better or worse. If I removed our 10 best games of the season for reasons that I deemed justifiable, the same people would jump all over it.

If you can think of a justification that is as reasonable as those presented for the first month of the season, I'd gladly hear it. I have no idea what it would be though.

On the flip side, I think the same situation exists for the Rangers first round opponent, the Flyers. The Flyers first month of the season was in disarray and I don't think its necessarily reflective of the team they are today.

 

[AHB*]

If you can think of a justification that is as reasonable as those presented for the first month of the season, I'd gladly hear it. I have no idea what it would be though.

On the flip side, I think the same situation exists for the Rangers first round opponent, the Flyers. The Flyers first month of the season was in disarray and I don't think its necessarily reflective of the team they are today.

I also think you have to look at the makeup of that team. It's really quite a different group.

I took this from the Devils game, which was game #7 on the season.

In the lineup: Powe, Miller, Pyatt, Biron, Falk (MDZ benched), Fast

So after this crap start we added: Klein, Carcillo, Kreider, Diaz, Talbot, MSL.

Then add in guys who were injured and not playing at that time: Nash, Hagelin, Callahan.

Basically, from that team, we've added 5 significant starters in addition to Diaz, Carcillo and Talbot.

It's really a completely different team. We're talking about our top players basically being added.

Nash, Hags, MSL & Kreider. That's 4 of our top 6 right there.

Then you have Klein, basically a top 4 guy.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I also think you have to look at the makeup of that team. It's really quite a different group.

I took this from the Devils game, which was game #7 on the season.

In the lineup: Powe, Miller, Pyatt, Biron, Falk (MDZ benched), Fast

So after this crap start we added: Klein, Carcillo, Kreider, Diaz, Talbot, MSL.

Then add in guys who were injured and not playing at that time: Nash, Hagelin, Callahan.

Basically, from that team, we've added 5 significant starters in addition to Diaz, Carcillo and Talbot.

It's really a completely different team. We're talking about our top players basically being added.

Nash, Hags, MSL & Kreider. That's 4 of our top 6 right there.

Then you have Klein, basically a top 4 guy.

Even then if we were accustomed to the system that game is not 4-0.

 

[AHB*]

Even then if we were accustomed to the system that game is not 4-0.

You can take into account the coaching adjustment as a big part of it as well, for sure.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

If you can think of a justification that is as reasonable as those presented for the first month of the season, I'd gladly hear it. I have no idea what it would be though.

On the flip side, I think the same situation exists for the Rangers first round opponent, the Flyers. The Flyers first month of the season was in disarray and I don't think its necessarily reflective of the team they are today.

I can't figure out if this concept is too difficult for him to understand or it just wouldn't his narrative of this team being only decent so he chooses to ignore this. The fact that anyone can equate the Rangers' start to a good stretch from the team, is mind boggling.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

You can take into account the coaching as a big part of it as well, for sure.

I wanted to include Lundqvist playing his worst since the 06 playoffs but figured that would be unfair, I can't just factor out Lundqvist playing poorly. But the system is a good reason.

 

[AHB*]

I wanted to include Lundqvist playing his worst since the 06 playoffs but figured that would be unfair, I can't just factor out Lundqvist playing poorly. But the system is a good reason.

You can look at multiple poor starts, but that wouldn't be fair either. I mean how about Zucc. Guy was almost a PPG after his benching. He was crap to start the year. How about Pouliot? Everyone wanted him gone, now he's one of our most vital depth players going into the playoffs.

You have to toss that up to the system adjustment. I think we all expected it to have some lumps, just not as bad as they were. All in all though, it ended up being a rather impressive season considering their was a part overhaul of our roster over the course of the year and that we completely changed the system both offensively and defensively.

I'm concerned with our health going into the playoffs, but our play has been very good.

I was quite a cynic up until recently, but this team has me changing my tune. I still don't think we're cup contenders due to our lack of size. I really can't see us beating Boston or a Western powerhouse, but I think we have a nice thing going and could certainly be a dark-horse moving forward.

Time will tell. Regardless, we have a nice platform to bounce off of beginning next year. Just really hoping that we maintain the majority of the roster and only replace a select few spots. Continuity these days is incredibly important in creating a successful franchise and we REALLY haven't been sticking to that thesis.

 

[True Blue]

I wouldn't have a problem eliminating both the best and worst 10 games when evaluating a team.

Removing the highest and lowest outlier is done on many statistical evaluations. In sports and in work.

What you say is fine, as it treats all teams in the same exact manner. Trying to make a statistical analysis in which you keep the entire population static except for the one member in which you subjectively alter the metrics does not really work.

 

[aufheben]

I can't figure out if this concept is too difficult for him to understand or it just wouldn't his narrative of this team being only decent so he chooses to ignore this. The fact that anyone can equate the Rangers' start to a good stretch from the team, is mind boggling.

I guess asking for objective analysis is a "narrative" now. It's ridiculous that if some users point out a fallacy, they're heralded as "myth busters", but if I do, I get personally attacked.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I guess asking for objective analysis is a "narrative" now. It's ridiculous that if some users point out a fallacy, they're heralded as "myth busters", but if I do, I get personally attacked.

The OP went into this with the agenda already written - dubious to call it an analysis in the first place.

The fact that the '11-12 team scored more goals and gave up less goals than the '13-14 team takes a back seat, especially when you can arbitrarily start taking games away. Oh, and bonus points for a style of play that makes him

 

[Tawnos]

When evaluating this team, I fail to see what impact the '11-12 teams statistics have on the assessment.

 

[NickyFotiu]

The OP went into this with the agenda already written - dubious to call it an analysis in the first place.

The fact that the '11-12 team scored more goals and gave up less goals than the '13-14 team takes a back seat, especially when you can arbitrarily start taking games away. Oh, and bonus points for a style of play that makes him

Of course style of play matters to many fans. A major part of the game is about entertainment for many fans. If not they would be soccer fans......or NJ Devils fans.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

When evaluating this team, I fail to see what impact the '11-12 teams statistics have on the assessment.

Agreed.

The only reason for the comparison seems to be the OP's obsession with discrediting the '11-12 team because he didn't like the way they played the game.

Those 2 teams are about as different as it gets. One day, God willing, we'll be able to have a GM that finds a happy median between the two.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Of course style of play matters to many fans. A major part of the game is about entertainment for many fans. If not they would be soccer fans......or NJ Devils fans.

Do you think the '11-12 team was even capable of playing this sort of puck possession game?

Point is, why ***** about putting a square peg in a round hole just because a style is not to your liking? I guess it comes down to if you weigh sports being more about entertainment or competition.

For me, its the latter. The gloating about this team, before its even played a playoff game, having had less wins, less GF, and more GA than the ECF team of a couple seasons ago, its just bizarre to me as someone who puts results ahead of style points.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Do you think the '11-12 team was even capable of playing this sort of puck possession game?

Point is, why ***** about putting a square peg in a round hole just because a style is not to your liking? I guess it comes down to if you weigh sports being more about entertainment or competition.

For me, its the latter. The gloating about this team, before its even played a playoff game, having had less wins, less GF, and more GA than the ECF team of a couple seasons ago, its just bizarre to me as someone who puts results ahead of style points.

In the beginning of the season all the bashers said this teams players could only play Torts style and thats why we were losing. I heard the same sort of stuff last season as well to explain why we played such a ridiculous stone age 6 goalie system. That turned out to be nonsense. After a rough start our players did fine in this system. People do not put style before results. People would like a entertaining style and good results. The 11-12 team worked hard and got behind a hot Lundy. They deserve credit for that but they barely won playoff series in 7 games by 1 goal. They were not a dominating team. How has Torts "results" style gone over in Vancouver?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

In the beginning of the season all the bashers said this teams players could only play Torts style and thats why we were losing. I heard the same sort of stuff last season as well to explain why we played such a ridiculous stone age 6 goalie system. That turned out to be nonsense. After a rough start our players did fine in this system. People do not put style before results. People would like a entertaining style and good results. The 11-12 team worked hard and got behind a hot Lundy. They deserve credit for that but they barely won playoff series in 7 games by 1 goal. They were not a dominating team. How has Torts "results" style gone over in Vancouver?

Not well. But thats just a red herring isnt it? Much like the comparison between this roster and the roster from 2 years ago when half the players are different.

As for the bolded, Ill be curious to see what happens if the Rangers lose in 6 to the Flyers. Will that be better than "barely winning playoff series in 7 games?"

The playoffs are the playoffs. They are a crapshoot and teams can only hope to survive and advance. Applying style points to that is not only equally stupid, but its awfully ballsy to do as a Ranger fan, being the team hasn't had many jaunts past the 2nd round over the past few decades.

Now we get to nitpick about how they didn't get there in a fashion thats to your liking? What ****ing nerve.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I don't weigh entertainment more than competition. I just thought the 11-12 team was both incapable of winning a cup AND boring. I do appreciate the 109 point season and the run to the ECF. But I don't think it's so ridiculous to call a team with worse stats better than a team with better stats. I think the stats would be a lot closer if this was our 3rd year in AV's system like it was for that team under Torts.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Not well. But thats just a red herring isnt it? Much like the comparison between this roster and the roster from 2 years ago when half the players are different.

As for the bolded, Ill be curious to see what happens if the Rangers lose in 6 to the Flyers. Will that be better than "barely winning playoff series in 7 games?"

The playoffs are the playoffs. They are a crapshoot and teams can only hope to survive and advance. Applying style points to that is not only equally stupid, but its awfully ballsy to do as a Ranger fan, being the team hasn't had many jaunts past the 2nd round over the past few decades.

Now we get to nitpick about how they didn't get there in a fashion thats to your liking? What ****ing nerve.

Get where? Losing in the ECF is not a big difference to most fans than losing in the first round or the second round.You seem to enjoy when we do poorly. You bash our players. You bash our team. Once again I will ask you how did your results based style go over in Vancouver? Were you rooting for it and them?

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I guess asking for objective analysis is a "narrative" now. It's ridiculous that if some users point out a fallacy, they're heralded as "myth busters", but if I do, I get personally attacked.

How did I personally attack you? I agreed with you, that it's not ideal to take out 10 games from us and compare to untouched records from other teams, but you keep equating taking out 10 games that had a legit reason behind being awful with taking the best 10 games that had no reason behind it. Why is that so difficult to understand?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Get where? Losing in the ECF is not a big difference to most fans than losing in the first round or the second round.You seem to enjoy when we do poorly. You bash our players. You bash our team. Once again I will ask you how did your results based style go over in Vancouver? Were you rooting for it and them?

Dont have a good argument? Resort to the "real fan" angle.

Im thankful theres enough clarity in my brain to admit that Tortorella and Vigneault were/are good coaches for this team and went about getting very good results from the absurd jig-saw puzzle of a roster that was handed down to them, albeit through different methods.

People continue to focus on "style of play" and coaching, and ignore that this team hasn't had a 20 man unit capable of winning the Stanley Cup in Sather's entire tenure.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Dont have a good argument? Resort to the "real fan" angle.

Im thankful theres enough clarity in my brain to admit that Tortorella and Vigneault were/are good coaches for this team and went about getting very good results from the absurd jig-saw puzzle of a roster that was handed down to them, albeit through different methods.

People continue to focus on "style of play" and coaching, and ignore that this team hasn't had a 20 man unit capable of winning the Stanley Cup in Sather's entire tenure.

I do not remember using the words "real fan" but based on your history of posting I have little doubt other people have used that phrase. We have not won a cup under Slats. Neither have plenty of other teams in that time. Hopefully we will soon but I'm going to be real. You give off an impression you would be miserable if we won the cup this season under Slats, playing this style with these players.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I do not remember using the words "real fan" but based on your history of posting I have little doubt other people have used that phrase. We have not won a cup under Slats. Neither have plenty of other teams in that time. Hopefully we will soon but I'm going to be real. You give off an impression you would be miserable if we won the cup this season under Slats, playing this style with these players.

I would be ecstatic if the Rangers won the cup, playing any style.

I hope this clears things up for you.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

The fact that people call taking out the first 10 games "arbitrary" says all you need to know. I guess BRB thinks we're the same team that lost 9-2 to San Jose, jesus.