Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo: Part V

  • 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.
The Crypto Guy said:
Yeaa....they only waited 2 years. We got a guarantee here though folks! :laugh:
Click to expand...
People seem to forget the Rangers had a super strict media policy previously. You act like it’s crazy that they would ask him to tone down his tweets.

Voight said:
Contract extension szn
Click to expand...
Yeah this is probably one of the reasons.

If I was an agent of a client who routinely says incendiary things, about to sign a big new deal, I’d be telling him to shut up too
 
  • Like
Reactions: leetch99
Oscar Lindberg said:
People seem to forget the Rangers had a super strict media policy previously. You act like it’s crazy that they would ask him to tone down his tweets.


Yeah this is probably one of the reasons.

If I was an agent of a client who routinely says incendiary things, about to sign a big new deal, I’d be telling him to shut up too
Click to expand...

Especially since, at present, he can't distract from that stuff as much with good play on the ice
 
I’m very worried about the defensive side of the game more than anything. A player’s behavior outside of the game shouldn’t matter unless it goes against the law or league/team rules.

TDA defensively is mediocre to average. For a team that already struggles defensively and has too many right handed shots, I don’t know how wise it is to keep him long term. Maybe he’s better as a trade piece. I love his offense, but it’s not like we’re really struggling to score.

He’s an RFA. I’m curious what kind of value he can get for us.
 
MysticLeviathan said:
I’m very worried about the defensive side of the game more than anything. A player’s behavior outside of the game shouldn’t matter unless it goes against the law or league/team rules.

TDA defensively is mediocre to average. For a team that already struggles defensively and has too many right handed shots, I don’t know how wise it is to keep him long term. Maybe he’s better as a trade piece. I love his offense, but it’s not like we’re really struggling to score.

He’s an RFA. I’m curious what kind of value he can get for us.
Click to expand...
He’s in the top 4 area in defense. Add on his elite offense he equals an elite top #3, borderline top pair dman. His value is easily 5-6M. And offense always gives you more value so maybe more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ponzu4u and NYRFANMANI
NYRFANMANI said:
I don't get the defense argument. He's an offensive d-man, we should care less! And he's not close to being bad actually. We have Staal as a benchmark in that regard.

Add his snarl and big [REDACTED] mentality, there is no way we should let him go.

Feel like I'm posting this for the 400th time ...
Click to expand...

Saying he’s better than Staal is not saying much. You’d have a point if our defense were actually good. It’s not, and it desperately needs to improve if we’re to have any hope of seriously competing. Yes, Shesterkin is a massive improvement over Hank or George, but I have a hard time believing he can physically or mentally last 40-50 shots every game, especially come playoff time. And our current defense allows plays that give our goalie no chance at all.

I’m not saying TDA can’t be part of our future. Trouba, Fox, and Niles are all right handed shots as well. And TDA is a RFA. Maybe we can get a good deal for him.
 
55-60 points RHD don't grow on trees. Is he good defensively? No. Is he awful? Also no, he's below average. There are times where he makes a bad read or gets caught chasing. He could really benefit from a steady stay at home dman to allow him to be a rover/extra forward on the ice and also limit the high danger chances.

Easier to find a stable defense first guy than a 60 pt dman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KirkAlbuquerque
WojtekWolski86 said:
55-60 points RHD don't grow on trees. Is he good defensively? No. Is he awful? Also no, he's below average. There are times where he makes a bad read or gets caught chasing. He could really benefit from a steady stay at home dman to allow him to be a rover/extra forward on the ice and also limit the high danger chances.

Easier to find a stable defense first guy than a 60 pt dman.
Click to expand...
He will also likely become a 75 point dman as the whole team gains more experience and talent/depth and likely also to still make the odd gaff...not many don't , especially dman .
 
  • Like
Reactions: ponzu4u and NYRFANMANI
I don’t think DeAngelo is bad defensively at all. I think there’s a cognitive tendency to assume high octane young offensive dmen are automatically poor defensively. There’s no mutual exclusivity there but it’s an archetype in peoples’ minds. DeAngelo is not some kind of Weber or Suter level elite defender, but he’s hardly a poor one, honestly and with 31 teams each with 3 openings in the top 3, I feel pretty comfortable me that his defense coupled with what he brings in terms of zone exists and offense, gets him into the top 93 guys available (if not, than right on the border). Sorry, no interest in moving a young, cost controlled, top 3 dman who fits this team like a glove. The offer would have to be a coup for us, and it won’t be because anyone we try to bargain with will attempt to leverage DeAngelo’s past and the fact they don’t know if this season is repeatable to drive the value down. What we’d get for Tony would NEVER be worth moving him for at this stage.
 
MysticLeviathan said:
Saying he’s better than Staal is not saying much. You’d have a point if our defense were actually good. It’s not, and it desperately needs to improve if we’re to have any hope of seriously competing. Yes, Shesterkin is a massive improvement over Hank or George, but I have a hard time believing he can physically or mentally last 40-50 shots every game, especially come playoff time. And our current defense allows plays that give our goalie no chance at all.

I’m not saying TDA can’t be part of our future. Trouba, Fox, and Niles are all right handed shots as well. And TDA is a RFA. Maybe we can get a good deal for him.
Click to expand...

DeAngelo at the moment is probably the 2nd best (and probably the toughest to replace) defenseman out of that group of 4.

I think you underestimate just how much he lifts Staal up/Staal drags him down. Staal goes from really bad to historically bad with out DeAngelo, his numbers across the board sans DeAngelo are horrifying.

Fox is a stud who has franchise cornerstone written all over him, but he cannot operate a PP as well as DeAngelo can. The PP was a major part of this team's turn around from the new year on. I wouldn't be looking to take out a pretty massive component of it just because there is someone who has yet to sign an NHL contract who *might* be better than him.

They're also not giving up 40-50 shots every game. It happened a few times, less frequently so after this team got its shit together and when it did happen, it happened in games where they were leading by and ended up winning by 3 or more goals most of the time. The totals when you're winning by that much become a facade, quality chances against are what we should really be looking at.

The defense may not be good, but removing DeAngelo doesn't improve it. Remove Staal with a competent player and you'll see them improve. Remove Staal and replace him with an actual good player and the group will improve dramatically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ponzu4u
Loki Dog 74 said:
I don’t think DeAngelo is bad defensively at all. I think there’s a cognitive tendency to assume high octane young offensive dmen are automatically poor defensively. There’s no mutual exclusivity there but it’s an archetype in peoples’ minds. DeAngelo is not some kind of Weber or Suter level elite defender, but he’s hardly a poor one, honestly and with 31 teams each with 3 openings in the top 3, I feel pretty comfortable me that his defense coupled with what he brings in terms of zone exists and offense, gets him into the top 93 guys available (if not, than right on the border). Sorry, no interest in moving a young, cost controlled, top 3 dman who fits this team like a glove. The offer would have to be a coup for us, and it won’t be because anyone we try to bargain with will attempt to leverage DeAngelo’s past and the fact they don’t know if this season is repeatable to drive the value down. What we’d get for Tony would NEVER be worth moving him for at this stage.
Click to expand...
The 4th leading scoring defenseman in the NHL (who is 5 years younger than anybody ahead of him) being a borderline top 93 defenseman in the league is a hysterically conservative take. :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: KirkAlbuquerque and ponzu4u
EdJovanovski said:
The 4th leading scoring defenseman in the NHL (who is 5 years younger than anybody ahead of him) being a borderline top 93 defenseman in the league is a hysterically conservative take. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Yes, we’ll people seem so ready to part with him that it seems far more likely to win with a conservative take than to tout him higher. But that’s kind of the point. They’d really rather have Nils because ...? He may be good? He won’t be better. If he was better he’d be Erik Karlsson and we aren’t that lucky. DeAngelo has trade value? He won’t get his true worth because of ??s about his past and sustaining this performance so he’s worth far more to us. Package Nils and Buch and Hajek and a 1st and whatever and go fill the holes you’d like to fill that way. Tony should not be going anywhere.
 
ecemleafs said:
So with the regular season finished, DeAngelo was 4th in the NHL in points for defensemen this year. What a pleasant surprise.
Click to expand...

Yes. We should trade him because Nils Lundkvist, who has never played an NA game, may be a pretty good NHL dman eventually.

Lundkvist, while he has high value and may very well be a really great defenseman, is actually still at least partially a question mark, and if he weren’t, I‘d still guarantee you the odds of him ever being the 4th leading scoring Dman in the NHL are not high. I’d rather cash in on a high value prospect to fill a known hole and say our right side is set than trade the 4th leading defensive scorer in the NHL and open up a new hole so that Lundkvist MAY fill it.

Being great in the SHL and looking like a really top flight prospect isn’t a guarantee. Rangers fans should have had more than their fill of believing in ‘sure thing’ prospects by now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KirkAlbuquerque and EdJovanovski
You guys don’t think he would take 5.5 million/5-6 years?
I know It doesn’t mean anything now after he put up ridiculous numbers but 95 percent of the hockey world was looking upon him being in bust territory (albeit we all know d men take longer to mature) after going to his his third team in 3 years
 
N3iqsIJ.png

Most popular lockerroom cancer ever!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom