Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo - Part II

[Off Sides]

If Pionk was the one being scratched there would be nuggets about how and why too, but since he is in pretty much every game the media has no reason to dissect his game into the good / not good. Rangers would not likely look kindly on that sort of criticism, but with ADA it just bolsters their case in not playing him.

 

[Edge]

Because he's a good old NCAA boy, just like our head coach is.

Pionk has been pitiful on the defense end but gets free pass after free pass.

See, now I don't think the first part is accurate. I think that's where these conversations sort of go down a path that doesn't really lead anywhere.

I think if ADA went to a D1 school, it probably wouldn't make any difference.

Just like it doesn't make a difference if Howden played in the WHL, or Staal in the OHL, or someone else in Europe, etc. etc. etc.

I think more than anything else, Quinn is looking for effort and a commitment to the system and instruction he is providing. I think he'll live with mistakes, even horrid mistakes, and poor play if he feels it's working within the system he is building, and if the player is trying to institute what is being instructed.

I think he views this year as one where he expects players to learn his system and get comfortable with it. I think next year is when he's starting to look for "mastery" of the system. I'll be curious to see how he grades mistakes at that point though.

 

[McRanger]

The thing is that coaches don't act in a vacuum.

They consult with their assistants and other members of the organziation. In ADA's case, I'm sure he's also come up in conversations with Gorton and the front office. So it's not just on a coach per se.

So that would mean a double digit amount of people are all missing something.

Or, and this is probably the most plausible but least interesting, they simply don't trust him and don't think he's applying the things they are trying to teach him.

I know that's not as bold as getting into the psychological tendencies of coaches, or what kind of teammate ADA is or isn't, or other factors. But it's probably the one that is closer to the source of the problem.

They see things they don't like, they don't see the commitment to improve them, and so he sits.

Whether he should be sitting or not is an understandable debate. But I don't know if there's really too much depth to the "why" of the situation, even if we don't necessarily agree with it.

I actually think its significantly more than double digit amount of people who have this issue and that it extends well past Deangelo.

I think coaches (and assistant coaches and GMs and fans) would rather a D man who doesn't make obviously bad plays even if that means the alternative is a player who is pinned in his zone for long stretches at a time; even if that D is more likely to be on the ice for a goal against and of course be significantly less likely to be on the ice for a goal for.

I also think that bias is less of an issue when you are talking about a "name" player, a guy who is undoubtedly both talented and established like Yandle, but a serious problem when you are talking about a nobody like ADA.

To sum it up I think the fact that people still think of defense as less about giving up goals against and transitioning to (or participating in) goals for, and more about being back in the D zone promptly and trying REALLY hard to be in the right position, is a problem.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

See, now I don't think the first part is accurate. I think that's where these conversations sort of go down a path that doesn't really lead anywhere.

I think if ADA went to a D1 school, it probably wouldn't make any difference.

Just like it doesn't make a difference if Howden played in the WHL, or Staal in the OHL, or someone else in Europe, etc. etc. etc.

I think more than anything else, Quinn is looking for effort and a commitment to the system and instruction he is providing. I think he'll live with mistakes, even horrid mistakes, and poor play if he feels it's working within the system he is building, and if the player is trying to institute what is being instructed.

I think he views this year as one where he expects players to learn his system and get comfortable with it. I think next year is when he's starting to look for "mastery" of the system. I'll be curious to see how he grades mistakes at that point though.

Maybe. But MY speculation is no different then 90% of the speculation on here on why ADA gets scratched. Nobody knows ANYTHING. Everyone is just making assumptions.

 

[Edge]

Maybe. But MY speculation is no different then 90% of the speculation on here on why ADA gets scratched. Nobody knows ANYTHING. Everyone is just making assumptions.

Yes, but some assumptions have a bit more merit and are echoed in comments made by the coaches and articles.

Not all assumptions are equally plausible. Just like not all trade proposals are inherently as balanced, or not all players projections are inherently as plausible.

 

[Thirty One]

Because he's a good old NCAA boy, just like our head coach is.

Pionk has been pitiful on the defense end but gets free pass after free pass.

This is libelous on many fronts.

 

[Edge]

I actually think its significantly more than double digit amount of people who have this issue and that it extends well past Deangelo.

I think coaches (and assistant coaches and GMs and fans) would rather a D man who doesn't make obviously bad plays even if that means the alternative is a player who is pinned in his zone for long stretches at a time; even if that D is more likely to be on the ice for a goal against and of course be significantly less likely to be on the ice for a goal for.

I also think that bias is less of an issue when you are talking about a "name" player, a guy who is undoubtedly both talented and established like Yandle, but a serious problem when you are talking about a nobody like ADA.

To sum it up I think the fact that people still think of defense as less about giving up goals against and transitioning to (or participating in) goals for, and more about being back in the D zone promptly and trying REALLY hard to be in the right position, is a problem.

But those name players weren't always name players. I'm glad you mentioned Yandle.

That same Keith Yandle you cited as an example played for Dave Tippet as a 23 year old, relatively unproven kid. He put his game together under Tippet.

That same organization and coach also had ADA as a 21 year old, relatively unproven kid. He was traded at the end of the season.

So while name players will always get longer leashes, they didn't inherently have long leashes from the start.

ADA is not the first offensive-minded defenseman to try to break into the league and come with some risk.

We can point to Yandle, Pionk, younger rookies, older rookies, etc. etc. etc. But ADA's case is not particularly unique.

So when we start finding other examples, it only adds to the case that either coaches aren't getting something they want from ADA, or they are all idiots, and (based on some of the examples we can cite) borderline schizophrenic when it comes to how they approach ADA compared to other players.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

This is libelous on many fronts.

You should probably look up that word before using it, funny man.

 

[TheGortonConspiracy]

I'd rather trade Pionk over ADA at the deadline. Pionk is like a Girardi/MDZ hybrid. Bad stats yet he probably has some value.

 

[True Blue]

I'd rather trade Pionk over ADA at the deadline. Pionk is like a Girardi/MDZ hybrid. Bad stats yet he probably has some value.

The stats do not always tell the whole story. And an in-prime Girardi was a legit top line defender.

 

[Rangers in 7]

The stats do not always tell the whole story. And an in-prime Girardi was a legit top line defender.

i wouldnt push it he was good but mac carried him

 

[Edge]

Girardi and MDZ have nearly played 1500 combined NHL games. I mean let's at least acknowledge that much.

As for the whole long-leash comments, MDZ is another example of a player who managed to stick while having a few of the same defensive concerns ADA had as well. He too was not necessarily the safe bet for his coaches.

 

[Edge]

i wouldnt push it he was good but mac carried him

Wasn't he an all-star before his pairing with Mac, and a player for whom Torts vouched for as being a key part of the defense?

 

[True Blue]

i wouldnt push it he was good but mac carried him

Before McD came to the Rangers, Girardi was already an all star. He and Staal formed one of the better defensive shutdown pairs in the league.

 

[Rangers in 7]

Wasn't he an all-star before his pairing with Mac, and a player for whom Torts vouched for as being a key part of the defense?

he was a shot blocking machine which is why torts loved him....im not saying he was bad but that team played extremely defensive

 

[Rangers in 7]

Before McD came to the Rangers, Girardi was already an all star. He and Staal formed one of the better defensive shutdown pairs in the league.

he was an all-star in 2012 i believe when he averaged 28 minutes a night, great defensive defensemen but there wasnt much else to his game

 

[Edge]

he was a shot blocking machine which is why torts loved him....im not saying he was bad but that team played extremely defensive

I get that, but I think he's one of those guys who has generated a lot of resentment on this board and we severely downplay how good of a player he was, and how important he was to those teams.

If anything, you can make the argument that it was Torts' style that took years off more than a few players careers.

In the post-AV world you'd almost think Torts was universally loved and praised around here.

The reality is people were bitching about his moves and decisions all the same.

 

[Edge]

he was an all-star in 2012 i believe when he averaged 28 minutes a night, great defensive defensemen but there wasnt much else to his game

How many all-star defenseman have we had post 2005 lockout?

I think we're undervaluing what that actually means a bit.

 

[nyr2k2]

Everyone is entitled to a theory. For sure. Not all theories are as plausible as others.

He had some maturity issues in junior hockey. We all know about them. It is what it is. He was a kid, yeah. Doesn't necessarily absolve a person from those things, but whatever. A lot of people seem to take maturity issues as a teen, brush them aside, and just assume they're all cured when you grow up. Fine, let's assume for ADA's sake that he grew up.

Steve Yzerman, who seems to have a pretty good idea of what he's doing, drafts the kid in the middle of the first, and then two years later trades him for a second. Of course Yzerman is professional about it and says it has nothing to do with DeAngelo, they just really wanted that pick (Hajek). But the rumblings were that they were somewhat sour on the kid. He was having the same "issues" he's having now, all the way back then. He plays in the AHL and has an awesome 43 points in 69 games, but a not-awesome eight scratches. "Coaches decision." The organization doesn't comment. Then he's gone. Chatter of bad defense, bad attitude being the reasons. You can find it online I'm sure.

Then in Arizona he has the silly thing in the AHL, and finds himself getting scratched and benched by Tippett for not implementing all the defensive work he puts in at practice. John Chayka, who at 27 probably is not subscribing to some old-school mentality about how guys have to play or whatever, is okay with this, and is okay trading him despite the promise he shows. Again we hear the rumblings of a questionable attitude and no commitment to defense.

Then he comes here and has whatever issues under AV. Then, issues under Quinn. All Quinn will say is that ADA knows what he needs to work on and that is is related to practice, or happens at practice, or whatever. The point is, there is something that the organization is asking from the kid, and there is something the kid is not doing. On a rebuilding squad, the kid cannot consistently get in because he's evidently doing something that is wrong enough to justify not getting games.

Is it Quinn, Gorton being stupid? If Quinn and Gorton are stupid, so is Dave Tippett and John Chayka, and Steve Yzerman, and the AHL coaches that scratched and benched him whose names I do not know offhand. In addition to them, all the other guys that have a say in the matter that also went along with it are also stupid.

Just look at the kid's f***ing career to date and there are some pretty damn clear trends. We can all piss and moan that he's not playing more (and to clarify--I'd like him to play; unless he's fighting with teammates every day or spitting on coaches or something, he should be in) BUT the reasons he's not in there should be abundantly clear at this point. Much of it is just looking at his history and seeing the same things at every stop, and the rest can be ascertained by just reading between the lines.

Or we can just say the coaches are stupid and hold him to different standards. Whatever.

 

[McRanger]

But those name players weren't always name players. I'm glad you mentioned Yandle.

That same Keith Yandle you cited as an example played for Dave Tippet as a 23 year old, relatively unproven kid. He put his game together under Tippet.

That same organization and coach also had ADA as a 21 year old, relatively unproven kid. He was traded at the end of the season.

So while name players will always get longer leashes, they didn't inherently have long leashes from the start.

ADA is not the first offensive-minded defenseman to try to break into the league and come with some risk.

We can point to Yandle, Pionk, younger rookies, older rookies, etc. etc. etc. But ADA's case is not particularly unique.

So when we start finding other examples, it only adds to the case that either coaches aren't getting something they want from ADA, or they are all idiots, and (based on some of the examples we can cite) borderline schizophrenic when it comes to how they approach ADA compared to other players.

Yandle broke in under Gretzky in a year where they were terrible and started a ton of rookies. Actually not unlike our current situation, rebuilding years are the perfect time to get rid of veterans and see what younger outside-looking-in players can do. He was an established player by the time Tippet came around. He was actually pretty obviously their best defender until OEL showed up.

Which was my point. And I dont see it as schizophrenic or contradictory or confusing at all. If you are an offensive d-man coaches (GMs and fans and everyone) will tolerate you until you stop putting up points. When you stop putting up points, or sometimes even if they dont stop putting up points, they will often assume you are a defensive liability even if you are better at keeping the puck out of your own net than a defensive D man. I mean Yandle came here and AV looked at him as an error prone guy and thought "Marc Staal should play more minutes than him". People have a problem reconciling my point but that makes sense?

In other word , as you said, coaches aren't getting something they want from ADA. They want him to play a mistake free game, which he wont ever. And they are willing to play inferior D man over him regardless of that fact. It's not the first time and it wont be the last.

 

[McRanger]

Everyone is entitled to a theory. For sure. Not all theories are as plausible as others.

He had some maturity issues in junior hockey. We all know about them. It is what it is. He was a kid, yeah. Doesn't necessarily absolve a person from those things, but whatever. A lot of people seem to take maturity issues as a teen, brush them aside, and just assume they're all cured when you grow up. Fine, let's assume for ADA's sake that he grew up.

Steve Yzerman, who seems to have a pretty good idea of what he's doing, drafts the kid in the middle of the first, and then two years later trades him for a second. Of course Yzerman is professional about it and says it has nothing to do with DeAngelo, they just really wanted that pick (Hajek). But the rumblings were that they were somewhat sour on the kid. He was having the same "issues" he's having now, all the way back then. He plays in the AHL and has an awesome 43 points in 69 games, but a not-awesome eight scratches. "Coaches decision." The organization doesn't comment. Then he's gone. Chatter of bad defense, bad attitude being the reasons. You can find it online I'm sure.

Then in Arizona he has the silly thing in the AHL, and finds himself getting scratched and benched by Tippett for not implementing all the defensive work he puts in at practice. John Chayka, who at 27 probably is not subscribing to some old-school mentality about how guys have to play or whatever, is okay with this, and is okay trading him despite the promise he shows. Again we hear the rumblings of a questionable attitude and no commitment to defense.

Then he comes here and has whatever issues under AV. Then, issues under Quinn. All Quinn will say is that ADA knows what he needs to work on and that is is related to practice, or happens at practice, or whatever. The point is, there is something that the organization is asking from the kid, and there is something the kid is not doing. On a rebuilding squad, the kid cannot consistently get in because he's evidently doing something that is wrong enough to justify not getting games.

Is it Quinn, Gorton being stupid? If Quinn and Gorton are stupid, so is Dave Tippett and John Chayka, and Steve Yzerman, and the AHL coaches that scratched and benched him whose names I do not know offhand. In addition to them, all the other guys that have a say in the matter that also went along with it are also stupid.

Just look at the kid's ****ing career to date and there are some pretty damn clear trends. We can all piss and moan that he's not playing more (and to clarify--I'd like him to play; unless he's fighting with teammates every day or spitting on coaches or something, he should be in) BUT the reasons he's not in there should be abundantly clear at this point. Much of it is just looking at his history and seeing the same things at every stop, and the rest can be ascertained by just reading between the lines.

Or we can just say the coaches are stupid and hold him to different standards. Whatever.

Which is what exactly? No one seems to be able to actually articulate what ADA has done that shows he is an inferior choice to any of our other trash defensemen.

The closest thing is that we assume because Yzerman and Tippet didn't like him that there must be something we all don't see that trumps actual on ice results.

And its not just Ranger fans. You want a laugh? This is the coyote fans reactions to ADA being sent to the minors his rookie year.

Recalled/Assigned: - DeAngelo and Dauphin Assigned to Tucson - Perlini called up

 

[Inferno]

But I kind of feel like some of the reporters have dropped some nuggets out there.

I think the Athletic touched on the subject just the other day with a story talking about the good and not so good of ADA in the lineup. I believe Brooks has relayed similar aspects.

That's why I really don't think it's quite as big of a mystery as we believe. Now, we may not agree with what's being said. But I don't feel like it's a foreign concept either.

I don't have the athletic. Blech. I hate how in order to get any decent coverage now you need the athletic t
To get it.

 

[haohmaru]

I don't have the athletic. Blech. I hate how in order to get any decent coverage now you need the athletic t
To get it.

It's worth it, IMHO. The guys/girls that write deserve to get paid, too.

 

[Edge]

Yandle broke in under Gretzky in a year where they were terrible and started a ton of rookies. Actually not unlike our current situation, rebuilding years are the perfect time to get rid of veterans and see what younger outside-looking-in players can do. He was an established player by the time Tippet came around. He was actually pretty obviously their best defender until OEL showed up.

Which was my point. And I dont see it as schizophrenic or contradictory or confusing at all. If you are an offensive d-man coaches (GMs and fans and everyone) will tolerate you until you stop putting up points. When you stop putting up points, or sometimes even if they dont stop putting up points, they will often assume you are a defensive liability even if you are better at keeping the puck out of your own net than a defensive D man. I mean Yandle came here and AV looked at him as an error prone guy and thought "Marc Staal should play more minutes than him". People have a problem reconciling my point but that makes sense?

In other word , as you said, coaches aren't getting something they want from ADA. They want him to play a mistake free game, which he wont ever. And they are willing to play inferior D man over him regardless of that fact. It's not the first time and it wont be the last.

Yandle was 23 and played 119 games in the NHL. In that time he posted 44 points. I really don’t think that’s established. But, for the sake of the discussion let’s say he is.

Does that now mean ADA is established at this point with 99 games and 32 points at the age of 23?

We can point to them starting under the same coach. Though I would argue the assertion that Yandle was established to be a stretch.

We can also point to OEL coming in an establishing himself at some point, even though he was an unknown.

We can argue as to why Arizona traded him - even with a new coach coming in.

We can even argue that ADA has nearly the same number of games under his belt now that he’s 23.

But I don’t think any of them do ADA any favors — if anything they kind of debunk the whole “unproven” defense.

But, let’s go one better than that. We’ll throw all of those things off the table. They no longer exist when talking about this next point.

Somehow ADA is sitting in favor of Pionk, a defenseman the same age, with less experience, who makes his share of mistakes. Not only that, this is the second coach under which this happening.

So we are right back to square one — I don’t think it’s the “unknown” factor.

I also don’t think the expectation has ever been mistake free hockey. Ever.

And the defenseman he is playing behind aren’t playing mistake free hockey.

At some point it’s either the world against ADA, the dumbest of luck finding coaches who expect perfection, or maybe, juuuust maybe, some of this might be on him. And maybe it’s a little more than we want to acknowledge.

Because the other assertions have some pretty big discrepancies in them. That’s not a fun or happy answer to arrive at, but it’s very much there.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Yandle was 23 and played 119 games in the NHL. In that time he posted 44 points. I really don’t think that’s established. But, for the sake of the discussion let’s say he is.

Does that now mean ADA is established at this point with 99 games and 32 points at the age of 23?

We can point to them starting under the same coach. Though I would argue the assertion that Yandle was established to be a stretch.

We can also point to OEL coming in an establishing himself at some point, even though he was an unknown.

We can argue as to why Arizona traded him - even with a new coach coming in.

We can even argue that ADA has nearly the same number of games under his belt now that he’s 23.

But I don’t think any of them do ADA any favors — if anything they kind of debunk the whole “unproven” defense.

But, let’s go one better than that. We’ll throw all of those things off the table. They no longer exist when talking about this next point.

Somehow ADA is sitting in favor of Pionk, a defenseman the same age, with less experience, who makes his share of mistakes. Not only that, this is the second coach under which this happening.

So we are right back to square one — I don’t think it’s the “unknown” factor.

I also don’t think the expectation has ever been mistake free hockey. Ever.

And the defenseman he is playing behind aren’t playing mistake free hockey.

At some point it’s either the world against ADA, the dumbest of luck finding coaches who expect perfection, or maybe, juuuust maybe, some of this might be on him. And maybe it’s a little more than we want to acknowledge.

Because the other assertions have some pretty big discrepancies in them. That’s not a fun or happy answer to arrive at, but it’s very much there.

I agree with what you're writing, but what throws me off is the fact that you're saying there is zero indication there is an attitude issue or that he rubs people the wrong way. I would think a player deciding that he knows better than the coach in how to play his game would get mentioned as an attitude issue.

Because that is what I would think it is otherwise. As a coach you have to maintain the respect of the room and if you explicitly tell a player to do a certain thing and the player decides not to, it doesn't matter whether that has no effect on the end result of the game or even still the player and team is actually performing better doing his own thing - that would actually be even worse in a sense. In that scenario it makes sense that you as a coach is forced to regularly scratch one of your best players if you can get away with it WRT your GM. But that would as earlier stated definitely fall under the category of attitude issues.