Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo - Part II

[Machinehead]

Tony DeAngeNO

The good - He is the only Ranger D that can make a stretch pass. I like his gumption.
The bad - He is not a good defenseman.

If you had this opinion a year ago, I would have been like "I disagree, but whatever."

But now?

 

[Beer League Sniper]

If you had this opinion a year ago, I would have been like "I disagree, but whatever."

But now?

This fanbase tends to crucify offensive defensemen. It's nothing new.

The fact of the matter is that the other team has far less opportunities to score when DeAngelo is on the ice.

Why?

Because the puck is in their zone, not ours.

Guys like Staal and Girardi traditionally get a pass because their mistakes are far more insidious. The decisions they make with the puck more often lead to the other team being right back on the attack again, but they're back there in position to "defend." Whereas, DeAngelo can make 10 great decisions with the puck in a row, but that one mistake or missed read, either by himself or who he's directing the puck to, and he gets reamed for not making "the smart play," aka a chip up the boards directly to the other team.

Also, DeAngelo defends quite well, actually. He's not going to muscle anyone off the puck, so bigger forwards are a problem for him, but he uses his skating to keep contesting the play. Sure, he's made a couple mistakes when he thinks the team is going to transition to offense, but every other defender on the team regularly blows coverages and leave players wide open in the slot, yet largely get a pass for it.

 

[Machinehead]

This fanbase tends to crucify offensive defensemen. It's nothing new.

The fact of the matter is that the other team has far less opportunities to score when DeAngelo is on the ice.

Why?

Because the puck is in their zone, not ours.

Guys like Staal and Girardi traditionally get a pass because their mistakes are far more insidious. The decisions they make with the puck more often lead to the other team being right back on the attack again, but they're back there in position to "defend." Whereas, DeAngelo can make 10 great decisions with the puck in a row, but that one mistake or missed read, either by himself or who he's directing the puck to, and he gets reamed for not making "the smart play," aka a chip up the boards directly to the other team.

Also, DeAngelo defends quite well, actually. He's not going to muscle anyone off the puck, so bigger forwards are a problem for him, but he uses his skating to keep contesting the play. Sure, he's made a couple mistakes when he thinks the team is going to transition to offense, but every other defender on the team regularly blows coverages and leave players wide open in the slot, yet largely get a pass for it.

You know, to that point, Leetch is generally revered now that his career is over, but I shudder to think if we had internet in the 90's... (well, technically we did, but you know what I mean)

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Guys like Staal and Girardi traditionally get a pass because their mistakes are far more insidious.

You know, to that point, Leetch is generally revered now that his career is over, but I shudder to think if we had internet in the 90's... (well, technically we did, but you know what I mean)

Pick one Defenseman to build a team around? Leetch vs Karlsson vs Doughty

Disgusting

 

[Machinehead]

Shit like this can happen to anyone though.

My thing with Pionk Girardi was the tosses around the boards to nobody that fans aren't going to remember but absolutely kill the team's possession.

 

[Machinehead]

Pick one Defenseman to build a team around? Leetch vs Karlsson vs Doughty

Disgusting

I guess I could see Doughty because he's a totally different style of player, but Leetch was just a better Karlsson.

 

[True Blue]

Also, DeAngelo defends quite well, actually. He's not going to muscle anyone off the puck, so bigger forwards are a problem for him, but he uses his skating to keep contesting the play. Sure, he's made a couple mistakes when he thinks the team is going to transition to offense, but every other defender on the team regularly blows coverages and leave players wide open in the slot, yet largely get a pass for it.

Yawn,......is this more of the conspiracy theory that Quinn has it out for DeAngelo? Or more from the more assinine, that Quinn hates players with skill?

 

[Beer League Sniper]

Yawn,......is this more of the conspiracy theory that Quinn has it out for DeAngelo? Or more from the more assinine, that Quinn hates players with skill?

I was quite clear that I was talking about the fanbase, not the coaching staff. I think Quinn's done a good job thus far.

 

[McRanger]

In my company, all the evaluations come to me. Our sales guys, obviously mission #1 is selling our software solutions. But the managers often fill the evaluations with other goals that are aimed at building good sales people (particularly our junior sales people)--focus on memorizing and understanding the collateral, sharpen up on your Challenger and Sandler, recommit yourself to utilizing our sales model and methodologies, etc. They're all secondary to actually closing sales, but the purpose is to establish the foundation for these younger guys to become great sales people.

That's the whole point, I think, of what Quinn is trying to do. He has plans for his young guys and if they adhere to the plans, in theory, they become better at their jobs and eventually the team succeeds. At my company, if one guy isn't great at his job but is doing everything the manager asks and is clearly working on improving himself according to the objectives provided, he's going to be just fine. If there's another guy who is making more sales but is offering all these discounts and telling people the software can do this, that and the other thing without consulting implementations to see if it actually can, and ignoring his personal objectives as stated by the manager, he's going to find himself on a PIP even if he's making a bunch more sales.

I think, whether we're talking about your profession or the NHL, it breaks down to some sort of bottom line. Discounts cost money. Missed deadlines cost money. Fixing broken promises cost money. Tarnished reputations cost money. And so on. At the end of the day it is probably an impossibly complicated task reconciling all those numbers by month or quarter or year and ultimately decide who is a positive for the company and who is a negative.

Hockey is a different animal. Your average player puts in less than a standard work week on the ice a year and the results are simpler: goals for, goals against, wins and of course the underlying numbers that give us an idea whether or not success or failure is sustainable. Unless we veer into the realm of trying to quantify intangibles or the unknown of what happens behind the scene, its pretty easy to break down who is a positive force on the ice and who is a negative.

The crazy part about this whole thing is how often we seem to disregard those results in favor of other standards. I mean we as fans aren't the manager is your example, or their managers or even the guy on the PIP, we (as consumers of hockey) are the clients potentially getting or not getting the discount!

As for the bold, I agree but my concern is that focusing on "playing the game the right way" doesn't seem to include playing the game the right way. In other words Quinn has ridden ADA for "whatever" but seems perfectly content to play Pionk regardless of his struggles. Just like ADA was "told to do A", at some point Pionk was told or needs to be told to stop ceding the blueline on every play. So either Quinn hasn't said that or Pionk is not listening and not being held accountable. And neither are particularly good scenarios.

Accountability does't have to equal good play. You eventually reach a point where the quality of play becomes more important, but during a rebuild I think establishing the culture and building the foundation are even more important.

True, but if you are viewing accountability through the lens of how it affects other players, then it does need to equal good play, at least to a point.

One argument that has been made is that playing a guy like ADA will have a negative effect on other players because they will see his behavior and emulate it or they will resent him for the coach playing him despite the fact that he is a problem child. Frankly, I think that is an argument that belongs in a Disney movie or a teen after school special; it isn't logical and isn't grounded in the reality of how people actually behave. But if we were to accept that argument, how can we then disregard the idea that playing someone who can't do their job isn't also a problem that could lead to the development of bad habits and a culture of resentment?

For example let's say we shed a bunch of LD at the deadline (or there are injuries or whatever) and Lindgren ends up playing the rest of the season with us. How would ADA and Pionk being in the same lineup or on his defense pair affect him? Is he going to see ADA arguing with Quinn or showing up late to meetings and decide that's the behavior he is going to emulate? Is he going to look at how an established player is treated and think he should be treated the same and complain about it or let it affect his play? Or does that behavior sound fantastical and counter productive to Lindgrens goal of continuing to play in the NHL and make money? On the other hand who would Lindgren rather play with? Would he prefer to play with the off ice problem child who usually plays well on the ice or the other guy? Is it really that crazy to think Lindgren might resent being glued to an offensive blackhole and defensive sieve, no matter how great a guy he is? Who knows. But I dont think that scenario is any less likely.

 

[Off Sides]

Just to play sarcastic devils advocate, Pionk intends not to have poor gap control which is different than ADA intending to turn the puck over.

 

[nyr2k2]

Well, I don't know. I watch the team every night and I like what I see. Maybe Quinn isn't handling ADA right. Maybe he's not handling Pionk right. I don't like how Howden is being used, or how the team has handled Andersson. But overall I like what I see, so I'm going to put my faith in this guy that he knows what he's doing and that in the long term, it will work out for the individual players and the team as a whole.

Personally I think the ADA saga has been one of the most overblown situations I can remember. Quinn is working with him in a way that some seem to hate, and yet I see the player playing probably the best hockey of his career. Maybe it's despite Quinn's methods, maybe it's because of them. Again, given my general satisfaction with what the coach is getting out of the team, I will defer to him--for now.

 

[True Blue]

I was quite clear that I was talking about the fanbase, not the coaching staff. I think Quinn's done a good job thus far.

Ahh, my bad

 

[True Blue]

Just to play sarcastic devils advocate, Pionk intends not to have poor gap control which is different than ADA intending to turn the puck over.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the "intentions" as Quinn defines them.

 

[Off Sides]

That has absolutely nothing to do with the "intentions" as Quinn defines them.

How can you possibly know what he is talking about when he proclaims he can say for sure one way or another what a players intentions were?

The NHL can not even say what a players intentions were after the 10th time they head check another player, yet Quinn knows what the players intentions are?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I was quite clear that I was talking about the fanbase, not the coaching staff. I think Quinn's done a good job thus far.

This fan is more upset that DeAngelo seems to be a self-destructive jerk of a person than anything having to do with his on-ice performance.

 

[offdacrossbar]

intentions with quinn are code for "trying hard, overlooking obvious on ice failure, and just not being anthony deangelo".

the whole "intentions" thing is a smoke screen to cover up quinns obvious bias against ADA whether its his "behavioral issues" or his on ice play. there isnt a faster hook on the team than quinns on ADA.

seems anytime tony slips on either of those, hes scratched to be taught a lesson.

meanwhile..... deangelo has the lowest high danger corsi against on this defense and neal pionk is a disaster to waiting to happen.

lastly, concern with quinns methods relative to ADA aren't the same as giving ADA cart blanche to do whatever dumb stuff he wants. there's a middle ground there.

 

[Off Sides]

This fan is more upset that DeAngelo seems to be a self-destructive jerk of a person than anything having to do with his on-ice performance.

I think we would all be surprised by the amount of players who are just that who have also had long careers in the NHL.

 

[True Blue]

Hockey is a different animal. Your average player puts in less than a standard work week on the ice a year and the results are simpler: goals for, goals against, wins and of course the underlying numbers that give us an idea whether or not success or failure is sustainable. Unless we veer into the realm of trying to quantify intangibles or the unknown of what happens behind the scene, its pretty easy to break down who is a positive force on the ice and who is a negative.

We can't, but we do know that these factors exist. So while you as a fan are judging very simply by what you see or what metrics may or may not tell you, Quinn does not do so. Nor does any other coach. Nor should they.

The crazy part about this whole thing is how often we seem to disregard those results in favor of other standards. I mean we as fans aren't the manager is your example, or their managers or even the guy on the PIP, we (as consumers of hockey) are the clients potentially getting or not getting the discount!

Discarding them and acknowledging that they exist are two different things. Discarding them and pointing out some obvious items, not seen on a score sheet, are also a different thing.

As for the bold, I agree but my concern is that focusing on "playing the game the right way" doesn't seem to include playing the game the right way. In other words Quinn has ridden ADA for "whatever" but seems perfectly content to play Pionk regardless of his struggles. Just like ADA was "told to do A", at some point Pionk was told or needs to be told to stop ceding the blueline on every play. So either Quinn hasn't said that or Pionk is not listening and not being held accountable. And neither are particularly good scenarios.

Or, again from what Quinn said, if he told Pionk to view the game a specific way and if he does it with those "intentions" and happens to yield the blue line, that he (Quinn) can live with it. Similarly, if he told ADA to take an X approach, and of his own free will, ADA decided not to do X or decided to do X+1 and a poor play occurred, well that may not something that he is willing to live with.

One argument that has been made is that playing a guy like ADA will have a negative effect on other players because they will see his behavior and emulate it or they will resent him for the coach playing him despite the fact that he is a problem child. Frankly, I think that is an argument that belongs in a Disney movie or a teen after school special; it isn't logical and isn't grounded in the reality of how people actually behave. But if we were to accept that argument, how can we then disregard the idea that playing someone who can't do their job isn't also a problem that could lead to the development of bad habits and a culture of resentment?

I think making a blanket statement that is is childish is in fact a childish argument. There are cases in which players see a player not listen to the coach and continue to play. They they decide that they also know better and can also can act accordingly. That is just human nature. May not be everyone. May not be to the same extent, but these things will occur.

You keep on white washing what Quinn unequivocally stated. There are certain things that are absolutely non-negotiable to him. He can live with mistakes as long as the intent is there. I think that most players have gotten this message.

Is he going to see ADA arguing with Quinn or showing up late to meetings and decide that's the behavior he is going to emulate? Is he going to look at how an established player is treated and think he should be treated the same and complain about it or let it affect his play? Or does that behavior sound fantastical and counter productive to Lindgrens goal of continuing to play in the NHL and make money? On the other hand who would Lindgren rather play with? Would he prefer to play with the off ice problem child who usually plays well on the ice or the other guy? Is it really that crazy to think Lindgren might resent being glued to an offensive blackhole and defensive sieve, no matter how great a guy he is? Who knows. But I dont think that scenario is any less likely.

I fully get the blowing out a scenario to make a point obvious, but it may not be that drastic. Lidngren can start to take short cuts that do not do the team or him any favors, but are subtle enough that he can have an NHL career.

 

[True Blue]

intentions with quinn are code for "trying hard, overlooking obvious on ice failure, and just not being anthony deangelo".

I presume that Quinn has directly interpreted it that way for you?

the whole "intentions" thing is a smoke screen to cover up quinns obvious bias against ADA whether its his "behavioral issues" or his on ice play. there isnt a faster hook on the team than quinns on ADA.

Yes. You are right. The much more plausible explanation is that Quinn has an agenda against ADA.

seems anytime tony slips on either of those, hes scratched to be taught a lesson.

Seems to me that lately he has done some poor things on the ice, but yet continued to take regular shifts until his play really went south. Nor has he been scratched to learn more lessons.

meanwhile..... deangelo has the lowest high danger corsi against on this defense and neal pionk is a disaster to waiting to happen.

Quoting Corsi as evidence of a player performance is like quoting +/-. The stat can be deceiving and does not necessarily tell the whole tale.

lastly, concern with quinns methods relative to ADA aren't the same as giving ADA cart blanche to do whatever dumb stuff he wants. there's a middle ground there.

At last check, Quinn was the coach and DeAngelo was the player. Why is there a middle ground? And who the frig' is DeAngelo to even deserve a middle ground? At last check, we are not talking about Paul Coffey or Brian Leetch.

 

[True Blue]

How can you possibly know what he is talking about when he proclaims he can say for sure one way or another what a players intentions were?

The NHL can not even say what a players intentions were after the 10th time they head check another player, yet Quinn knows what the players intentions are?

Because he clearly stated that it is not just results.

 

[Off Sides]

This thread makes me feel like I am taking crazy pills or should at least start to do so.

 

[TominNC]

This thread makes me feel like I am taking crazy pills or should at least start to do so.

Thanks for summarizing my feelings

 

[Rempe73]

Well, I don't know. I watch the team every night and I like what I see. Maybe Quinn isn't handling ADA right. Maybe he's not handling Pionk right. I don't like how Howden is being used, or how the team has handled Andersson. But overall I like what I see, so I'm going to put my faith in this guy that he knows what he's doing and that in the long term, it will work out for the individual players and the team as a whole.

Personally I think the ADA saga has been one of the most overblown situations I can remember. Quinn is working with him in a way that some seem to hate, and yet I see the player playing probably the best hockey of his career. Maybe it's despite Quinn's methods, maybe it's because of them. Again, given my general satisfaction with what the coach is getting out of the team, I will defer to him--for now.

I think Quinn is the best coach possible for someone like DeAngelo, but I also think he’s not perfect. For the most part, the issue for me and probably many others was not knowing what was going on. It seemed like the same old story with ADA getting scratched for no reason. But finally, there is a reason, and I’m cool with it. But it still feels like DeAngelo has a very short leash relative to others. Maybe not. Maybe it’s just me seeing what I want to see.

 

[Chimpradamus]

**** like this can happen to anyone though.

My thing with Pionk Girardi was the tosses around the boards to nobody that fans aren't going to remember but absolutely kill the team's possession.

Sure, but it happens a lot more to players like Girardi or Staal, than players who have some vision and are good at handling the puck.

 

[The Mouth]

Anthony DeangeNO is not good. Neil Stionk last years 25 game wunderkind is Not Good.

It's ok to change your mind fellas. Just because you dubbed Stionk as "Torey Krug lite" or DeangeNo as the poor mans "Seth Jones." last year you can evolve. You can always just say I was wrong.

Instead of sticking to your guns championing mediocrity at every turn. Instead these pedestrian fans blame the coaches and the organization for the reason these average players never develop. Stop with conspiracy theories and he needs to get "meaningful minutes" whining. They just might not be good NHL players.

" If only AV had given Emerson Etem ( Kucherov Lite) more minutes" statements, discredit everything you say afterwards as a joke. So do a mea culpa once in awhile. Even I have been wrong a few times in my illustrious 40 years being a Ranger fan.