NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 17,193
- 9,198
If that is true than I apologize. I hope I am wrong but your posts do not usually give off a positive feeling towards the team.
Team defense (11-12 Comparison)
- Thread starter SnowblindNYR
- Start date
-
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
If that is true than I apologize. I hope I am wrong but your posts do not usually give off a positive feeling towards the team.
I'm not bothering to read through the rest of the thread, so apologies if any of these points have already been made.
--
I don't get it. What is the OP's overall point?
Are you arguing that this team is as good as or just slightly worse than the 11-12 team?
This team has less goals for. More goals against. Worse record. If you're trying to use stats to make your argument, they don't paint the picture it seems like you're trying to paint.
Are you arguing that the people saying the D would be "exposed" when Torts left were being hyperbolic?
The people making that point (I was one of them - though not as definitively as you have framed it here), weren't making the point that this team would completely collapse defensively. Instead, the point was that they didn't believe that a more "open" system would lead to a better result because they believed an increase (if any) in offense resulting from such a system would likely bring with it tradeoffs on defense -- assuming all things being equal between the two coaches' teams (meaning similar personnel and performance among the individual players; which obviously hasn’t been the case).
This team's goals against increased. The goals for decreased. If anything - solely based on the stats - that is movement in the wrong direction.
I didn’t buy this – but for those who thought “anything but Torts” would open up the offensive flood gates: Despite having one of the deeper, and more offensively talented teams, in terms of individual personnel, of the past several seasons, this year’s team has had the worst goals for of any team since ’09-’10.
And this coming from you is pretty ironic. You, who rides Hank the hardest of almost anyone on these boards, are ignoring the fact that Hank just happened to have one of the worst starts to the season of any of the past several years? And that this just happened to occur in the year that the team changed coaches and systems – and changed to one that led to Hank seeing more high-quality chances against each game? This isn’t a dig against Hank. But if he sees more quality chances, he’s going to give up more goals. I don’t care how good he is. This shouldn’t be surprising. And the offense didn’t improve enough (read: over the whole season, at all) to make up for that. Hence, still a 5/6/7/8 seed playoff bubble team.
With your “disregard the 10 worst game sample” argument, are you seriously saying the teams of the last few years never had any similar adversity to overcome? Do we have that poor of a memory?
The 11-12 team lost Staal for a huge portion of the season. Same for the 12-13 team. The 12-13 team was playing in a bastardized season, with zero training camp and a hugely overhauled roster (saying nothing of how ****** that roster was by comparison). Did many of the 12-13 team’s players not have a new system to learn and new teammates to get used to? And that 12-13 team had even less time to do those things than this year’s team (which had a training camp and preseason prior to the god awful start to the regular season). The 12-13 team had a Gaborik and Richards who were playing some of the worst hockey of their careers.
I'm sure if you looked, you could find excuses for virtually any season for almost any team, why a 10 game sample should be excluded if someone buys into your argument on this point.
Are you arguing that the switch to AV from Torts was a good one?
If anything, if this team doesn’t take the next step under AV – especially with a vastly improved roster from most of the Torts teams – I see it primarily as a wash.
The main improvement I’ve seen that seems likely to have been impacted the most by the coaching change is the improvement in the power play. I’m very happy with it (despite its regression later in this season). At the same time, it didn’t lead to an overall higher goals for during the season. So, what good does that do us? And heading into the playoffs, games will be called tighter. That said, I’m still thrilled that it is no longer so abysmal that an NYR power play actually gives the other team momentum.
In my eyes - any other improvements seem more attributable to personnel on this team than anything else. Still has a ways to go to become a legit contender in my eyes; and Sather still can’t commit to a concept to build a team around, rather opting for an amalgam of roster pieces that he continually overhauls year after year in search of a team that looks attractive on paper, but just doesn’t fit together.
But sure, this team is one of the deeper and more offensively talented teams of the past several years (though they clearly still lack the finish they have for years… and its mind boggling). It's not because of AV. It’s because of the personnel. And even saying that, at best, I still don’t see them making it past the ECF. Of course, hoping to be proven wrong.
--
I don't get it. What is the OP's overall point?
Are you arguing that this team is as good as or just slightly worse than the 11-12 team?
This team has less goals for. More goals against. Worse record. If you're trying to use stats to make your argument, they don't paint the picture it seems like you're trying to paint.
Are you arguing that the people saying the D would be "exposed" when Torts left were being hyperbolic?
The people making that point (I was one of them - though not as definitively as you have framed it here), weren't making the point that this team would completely collapse defensively. Instead, the point was that they didn't believe that a more "open" system would lead to a better result because they believed an increase (if any) in offense resulting from such a system would likely bring with it tradeoffs on defense -- assuming all things being equal between the two coaches' teams (meaning similar personnel and performance among the individual players; which obviously hasn’t been the case).
This team's goals against increased. The goals for decreased. If anything - solely based on the stats - that is movement in the wrong direction.
I didn’t buy this – but for those who thought “anything but Torts” would open up the offensive flood gates: Despite having one of the deeper, and more offensively talented teams, in terms of individual personnel, of the past several seasons, this year’s team has had the worst goals for of any team since ’09-’10.
And this coming from you is pretty ironic. You, who rides Hank the hardest of almost anyone on these boards, are ignoring the fact that Hank just happened to have one of the worst starts to the season of any of the past several years? And that this just happened to occur in the year that the team changed coaches and systems – and changed to one that led to Hank seeing more high-quality chances against each game? This isn’t a dig against Hank. But if he sees more quality chances, he’s going to give up more goals. I don’t care how good he is. This shouldn’t be surprising. And the offense didn’t improve enough (read: over the whole season, at all) to make up for that. Hence, still a 5/6/7/8 seed playoff bubble team.
With your “disregard the 10 worst game sample” argument, are you seriously saying the teams of the last few years never had any similar adversity to overcome? Do we have that poor of a memory?
The 11-12 team lost Staal for a huge portion of the season. Same for the 12-13 team. The 12-13 team was playing in a bastardized season, with zero training camp and a hugely overhauled roster (saying nothing of how ****** that roster was by comparison). Did many of the 12-13 team’s players not have a new system to learn and new teammates to get used to? And that 12-13 team had even less time to do those things than this year’s team (which had a training camp and preseason prior to the god awful start to the regular season). The 12-13 team had a Gaborik and Richards who were playing some of the worst hockey of their careers.
I'm sure if you looked, you could find excuses for virtually any season for almost any team, why a 10 game sample should be excluded if someone buys into your argument on this point.
Are you arguing that the switch to AV from Torts was a good one?
If anything, if this team doesn’t take the next step under AV – especially with a vastly improved roster from most of the Torts teams – I see it primarily as a wash.
The main improvement I’ve seen that seems likely to have been impacted the most by the coaching change is the improvement in the power play. I’m very happy with it (despite its regression later in this season). At the same time, it didn’t lead to an overall higher goals for during the season. So, what good does that do us? And heading into the playoffs, games will be called tighter. That said, I’m still thrilled that it is no longer so abysmal that an NYR power play actually gives the other team momentum.
In my eyes - any other improvements seem more attributable to personnel on this team than anything else. Still has a ways to go to become a legit contender in my eyes; and Sather still can’t commit to a concept to build a team around, rather opting for an amalgam of roster pieces that he continually overhauls year after year in search of a team that looks attractive on paper, but just doesn’t fit together.
But sure, this team is one of the deeper and more offensively talented teams of the past several years (though they clearly still lack the finish they have for years… and its mind boggling). It's not because of AV. It’s because of the personnel. And even saying that, at best, I still don’t see them making it past the ECF. Of course, hoping to be proven wrong.
Last edited:
I was arguing that even despite factors such as learning a new system and Lundqvist playing poorly for much of the season the team defense is very close to what it was in 11-12 when they had Vezina Lundqvist and no system to adjust to. Just saying the defense has been excellent.
Don't worry in 2 years he'll be positive about this team just so that he can negative about the next one.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,923
- 2,329
I dont see the issue with using '11-'12 (or any other season for that matter) for comparisons.
'13-'14
-------------------PPG-----------------------GFG-------GAG------Goal Differential
Oct-Jan------1.024 (19th in NHL)----2.341--------2.659------ -0.317 (22nd in NHL)
Jan-April----1.324 (4th in NHL)------3.081--------2.108------0.973 (2nd in NHL)
Season-----1.1728 (12th in NHL)-----2.691--------2.370--------0.321 (12th in NHL)
'11-'12
Oct-Jan---1.389 (2nd in NHL)--------2.972-----2.139-----0.833 (4th in NHL)
Jan-April--1.283 (6th in NHL)--------2.587-----2.391------0.196 (13th in NHL)
Season----1.329 (2nd in NHL)--------2.756------2.280----0.476 (6th in NHL)
Comparing the success/failure to the underlying numbers usually gives a good idea of not only in which direction the team is headed, but also an idea if there are any statistical anomalies or aberration.
Come on now. There is a world of difference between loosing in the ECF and bowing out in the first round.
No Rangers fans enjoys it when the Rangers loose. And as Rangers fans, they are allowed to criticize.
Really? I mean, REALLY?
Inferno
Registered User
that 11/12 goal differential and PPG from Jan to April really shows how incredible Henrik was during that stretch. To have basically no margin for error at all, and to have that good of a record, is nothing short of incredible.
ar·bi·trar·y [ahr-bi-trer-ee] Show IPA
adjective
1.
subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.
Ok. Fine. Team defense has improved over the course of the season. This doesn't seem like some big revelation.
It has been better overall than I expected prior to the season and after the first several games. Still not as good as 11-12, or as good as I would like it to be. And it probably won't be. But that is the direction in which Sather is moving this team (who knows if he'll throw it all away and pick a new direction in the offseason). If the offense can make up for sacrifices on defense, then it might work out. Only time will tell whether that will happen or not. So far it hasn't. Not convinced it is a good direction - but it is what we have.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
It's a different team competing against different teams. You aren't even comparing it to last years team, which bears a greater resemblance to this years team, both in roster and regular season finish.
Like I said, what the 11-12 team did or didn't do doesn't have much impact on how I feel about this team and what it's capable of. If we were the Kings, with a largely intact roster from two years ago under the same coach? Sure. We aren't that though.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 17,193
- 9,198
1 goal separated us from winning and losing in the first round to the 8th seed that season. Hardly a significant difference. Thank I thank Lundy not the boring system.
Everyones posts speak for themselves including my own. Do I seem happy when we play well or miserable? Do I seem happy when players play well or miserable? Plenty of people are both happy for good things and critical over bad things. Those types of fans are normal. We both know those kinds of fans are not what I was referring to. It is not very difficult to see who is happy about our teams and players success and who is not over the years.
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
Considering we got Hank in Vezina form versus mediocre Hank, I don't think it's a stretch that our D rivals 11-12, quite easily and that's without considering the system transition.
I think you are off here. Over the years, I have had many debates here. Not once did I think that any of those fans would be happy if the Rangers lost. Heck, SoS and I have had blood battles. But never once did I think that he roots for the Rangers any less than I do. Same for McRanger.
Opinions are just that.
Oh no someone analyzes stats rather team just reads them off NHL.com, the horror.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 17,193
- 9,198
I respectfully disagree with your conclusion. It is easy to go look at the various MZA threads. You will see a handful of bashers that seemed please and posted about him very often when he had issues. Most of them have disappeared from his threads while 100's of other NYR fans have been very happy and said so in the threads. One of those bashers also challenged everyone to a bet that Torts would have a better record than we do this year in those threads. I would never bet against the team I love.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,923
- 2,329
I don't think you are understanding the point.
This is not a comparison of rosters or coaches or playing styles. Or any else along that line, either abstract or concrete.
It is a comparison of numbers. The positive/negative trending of teams along with correlation between the underlying stats and the ultimate outcome of the games.
All teams in all seasons have the same starting point and the same end goal. To see how teams got there and in what fashion is, I find, useful. Or at the very least interesting.
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
It isn't interesting though. In fact, it's quite boring. The interesting comparisons, right now for this team, are with its contemporaries. Once the year is over, including the playoffs, then it's interesting to see how this team stacks up to others in history.
The way the team is viewed will change over the course of the next few weeks (or hopefully couple of months).
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,923
- 2,329
Between me and -31- the point must have been explained 4,000 times. I'm not sure I have it in me to do so again.
Besides the fact that they completely miss the point, repeatedly, the fact that the size of acceptable samples changes on a post-to-post basis is hysterical.
Its perfectly acceptable to draw conclusions about the team based on ten games in October... or draw conclusions about St. Louis after a dozen games in March... or draw conclusions about Tortorella's success based only on his best season... or about Lundqvists play using only his entire career numbers.....
...but using the most recent 90% of the current season is somehow a ridiculous sample size and the entire concept is intellectually dishonest.
Its... interesting, to say the least.
You really are right. apparently analyzing stats by arbitrary parameters while keeping the entire population static is now mathematically fair.Don't even bother.
Latest posts
-
-
-
GDT: 2024-25 season game 55 LA Kings vs Vegas Golden Knights @7:30pm 2/24/25- Latest: RayMartyniukTotems
-
