Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo: Part V

[NYRFANMANI]

Holy motherload of advanced stats there!!

5.5m/8y

git'er dun

 

[usekakkorightquinn]

Advanced stats are useless. It's what wanna be scouts and GM's use when they can't look at a player with their eyes and see who they are. TDA is below average defensively and always will be. The teams that make deep runs in the playoffs keep the puck out of the net. TDA sucks at doing that. Thankfully JD and Gorton realize this and he will not be a Ranger long term. Now they might sign him to a 4 year deal without a NTC or NMC at a good amount to increase his value when they trade him as his new team can have him controlled. Make no mistake, they will trade him. Fox is very capable of being a top PP QB and Lundkvist is headed in that direction as well. Unlike TDA those two actually know how to play defense. Unfortunately, many of our fans still have the stupid AV mentality where they are wowed by defenseman who put up points but can't keep the puck out of the net.

 

[True Blue]

Thankfully JD and Gorton realize this and he will not be a Ranger long term.

#MyRealNameIsGortonDavidson

 

[Irishguy42]

Nothing @EdJovanovski posted suggested Tony was good defensively tho. In fact, the underlying metrics prove exactly what you "see" about Tony on the ice: Great offensively, both in the offensive zone and in transition, but not great at all in his own end defensively.

Analytics exist because it's IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to accurately and objectively remember most of what they see over the course of a quarter of a season, let alone multi-year careers. You just can't, even if you think you can. And it's not like people advocate that you use JUST analytics. No one has advocated that for years. It's an old, tired argument that the anti-analytics crowd keeps bringing up for some reason. You sit down at your table, and you have your video tapes on one side, your charts/tracking data/analytics/etc. on the other, and you go from there. Analytics helps define trends/deficiencies/etc. and gives a good spring-board to understand a player or team a lot better.

I can't believe this argument still needs to be had, but I guess people are just ignorant and don't want to spend 5 minutes to learn/enhance the knowledge-base and resources available to them. Yeah, I love to just back myself into a corner where my opinion on a players skillset is mostly just based on memory.

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

Advanced stats are useless. It's what wanna be scouts and GM's use when they can't look at a player with their eyes and see who they are. TDA is below average defensively and always will be. The teams that make deep runs in the playoffs keep the puck out of the net. TDA sucks at doing that. Thankfully JD and Gorton realize this and he will not be a Ranger long term. Now they might sign him to a 4 year deal without a NTC or NMC at a good amount to increase his value when they trade him as his new team can have him controlled. Make no mistake, they will trade him. Fox is very capable of being a top PP QB and Lundkvist is headed in that direction as well. Unlike TDA those two actually know how to play defense. Unfortunately, many of our fans still have the stupid AV mentality where they are wowed by defenseman who put up points but can't keep the puck out of the net.

Give it up, lol. The only way he gets traded is if the other team offers something substantial. Near 60 point d-men at his age that can drive a play don't just grow on trees. And Lundkvist is still unproven at the NHL level.

Quit with the hyperbole of him being below average defensively as well. He may not be great (yet at least), but he's around average defensively.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Nothing @EdJovanovski posted suggested Tony was good defensively tho. In fact, the underlying metrics prove exactly what you "see" about Tony on the ice: Great offensively, both in the offensive zone and in transition, but not great at all in his own end defensively.

Analytics exist because it's IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to accurately and objectively remember most of what they see over the course of a quarter of a season, let alone multi-year careers. You just can't, even if you think you can. And it's not like people advocate that you use JUST analytics. No one has advocated that for years. It's an old, tired argument that the anti-analytics crowd keeps bringing up for some reason. You sit down at your table, and you have your video tapes on one side, your charts/tracking data/analytics/etc. on the other, and you go from there. Analytics helps define trends/deficiencies/etc. and gives a good spring-board to understand a player or team a lot better.

I can't believe this argument still needs to be had, but I guess people are just ignorant and don't want to 5 minutes to learn/enhance the knowledge-base and resources available to them. Yeah, I love to just back myself into a corner where my opinions on a players skillset is mostly just based on memory.

Yeesh, that's a lot of red, especially in the right circle, the slot, and in front of the net...

 

[cwede]

... The only way he gets traded is if the other team offers something substantial. Near 60 point d-men at his age that can drive a play don't just grow on trees. ..

i won't mind being wrong,
but i think that nonsense, inviting a guy to come by MSG after a game for a confrontation, could increase FO or ownership interest in moving on.
Some folks argue that it was 'less' than Kane or AMatt's bad behavior,
but this directly involves the team and the arena and the fans.

precisely because of what you wrote above, his value may never be higher,
and Trouba's presence, Fox's fast emergence, Lundkvist's upcoming arrival all lessen the hole on the right which his departure would leave
AND a trade would make room for the LHD upgrade that many here want addressed sooner than later

no need for a nasty response, i may be wrong, but both these aspects are real ...

 

[Leetch3]

Nothing @EdJovanovski posted suggested Tony was good defensively tho. In fact, the underlying metrics prove exactly what you "see" about Tony on the ice: Great offensively, both in the offensive zone and in transition, but not great at all in his own end defensively.

he doesn't need to be great defensively...very few guys are great at both ends. if he is great offensively and decent defensively it is a net positive. he just can't be bad/terrible cause then you start looking at guys that don't put up the points but are better defensively so are a net positive in comparison. I don't think he's awful and his defensive flaws have been overblown a bit, but I'm not sure how high on that scale he truly falls.

 

[Leetch3]

i won't mind being wrong,
but i think that nonsense, inviting a guy to come by MSG after a game for a confrontation, could increase FO or ownership interest in moving on.
Some folks argue that it was 'less' than Kane or AMatt's bad behavior,
but this directly involves the team and the arena and the fans.

precisely because of what you wrote above, his value may never be higher,
and Trouba's presence, Fox's fast emergence, Lundkvist's upcoming arrival all lessen the hole on the right which his departure would leave
AND a trade would make room for the LHD upgrade that many here want addressed sooner than later

no need for a nasty response, i may be wrong, but both these aspects are real ...

there are reasons to consider trading him, what he says on social media isn't one of them. the only people that care about that are people on social media and here. its a small % of fans. every indication is that everyone within the organization loves him

 

[EdJovanovski]

Nothing @EdJovanovski posted suggested Tony was good defensively tho. In fact, the underlying metrics prove exactly what you "see" about Tony on the ice: Great offensively, both in the offensive zone and in transition, but not great at all in his own end defensively.

Analytics exist because it's IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to accurately and objectively remember most of what they see over the course of a quarter of a season, let alone multi-year careers. You just can't, even if you think you can. And it's not like people advocate that you use JUST analytics. No one has advocated that for years. It's an old, tired argument that the anti-analytics crowd keeps bringing up for some reason. You sit down at your table, and you have your video tapes on one side, your charts/tracking data/analytics/etc. on the other, and you go from there. Analytics helps define trends/deficiencies/etc. and gives a good spring-board to understand a player or team a lot better.

I can't believe this argument still needs to be had, but I guess people are just ignorant and don't want to spend 5 minutes to learn/enhance the knowledge-base and resources available to them. Yeah, I love to just back myself into a corner where my opinion on a players skillset is mostly just based on memory.

Do they have charts for when DeAngelo is with and without the one eyed wonder?

 

[OrlandK]

there are reasons to consider trading him, what he says on social media isn't one of them. the only people that care about that are people on social media and here. its a small % of fans. every indication is that everyone within the organization loves him

He's apparently very popular with the players and considered a good teammate. And listening to his podcast a bit he seems different than his stereotype. Very complementary and respectful of players on other teams too. More importantly he has become a very good hockey player. I don't think he will ever be great defensively, and his size does hurt him in his own zone, but he has improved quite a bit defensively and his offensive skills are elite.

Also ridiculous to say advanced stats are meaningless. While not everything they are an important tool and really only completely discounted at this point by Luddites who don't have the ability to understand them. How can driving play and possession be meaningless? Not to mention that the unbiased eye test reveals an offensive talent that few others in the entire league possess.

 

[Irishguy42]

Do they have charts for when DeAngelo is with and without the one eyed wonder?

I'm not sure if Micah has a WOWY variant version of these (I am not a patreon), but...

Going by 5v5 xG/60 like in Micah's graphic, according to NST, Tony/Staal work out as such:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD][/TD]
[TD]xGF/60[/TD][TD]xGA/60[/TD][TD]xGF%[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Staal + Tony[/TD][TD]2.26[/TD][TD]2.73[/TD][TD]45.32[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Staal w/o Tony[/TD][TD]1.85[/TD][TD]2.79[/TD][TD]39.91[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Tony w/o Staal[/TD][TD]2.93[/TD][TD]2.87[/TD][TD]50.54[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

 

[Filthy Dangles]

he doesn't need to be great defensively...very few guys are great at both ends. if he is great offensively and decent defensively it is a net positive. he just can't be bad/terrible cause then you start looking at guys that don't put up the points but are better defensively so are a net positive in comparison. I don't think he's awful and his defensive flaws have been overblown a bit, but I'm not sure how high on that scale he truly falls.

No, he doesn't need to be great nor will he ever be 'great' but he needs to be closer to average than he is. He's a bit of an enigma. For as elite as he is in all those stats offensively, he's almost just as bad in the defensive ones.

A good offense is also a good defense so his offensive abillites shelter him a bit defensively (by simply possessing the puck and having play go away from his net) but when he is stuck defending the cycle or when he has to defend an oncoming rush it can be very ugly at times.

If he stays a Ranger longer term, hopefully a better LHD partner, better overall team defense and a little more experience can insulate some of his deficiencies without the puck.

 

[Leetch3]

I'm not sure if Micah has a WOWY variant version of these, but...

Going by 5v5 xG/60 like in Micah's graphic, according to NST, Tony/Staal work out as such:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD][/TD]
[TD]xGF/60[/TD][TD]xGA/60[/TD][TD]xGF%[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Staal + Tony[/TD][TD]2.26[/TD][TD]2.73[/TD][TD]45.32[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Staal w/o Tony[/TD][TD]1.85[/TD][TD]2.79[/TD][TD]39.91[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Tony w/o Staal[/TD][TD]2.93[/TD][TD]2.87[/TD][TD]50.54[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

can you translate those numbers for the dumb people (me)? what is considered good?

 

[Leetch3]

No, he doesn't need to be great nor will he ever be 'great' but he needs to be closer to average than he is. He's a bit of an enigma. For as elite as he is in all those stats offensively, he's almost just as bad in the defensive ones.

A good offense is also a good defense so his offensive abillites shelter him a bit defensively (by simply possessing the puck and having play go away from his net) but when he is stuck defending the cycle or when he has to defend an oncoming rush it can be very ugly at times.

If he stays a Ranger longer term, hopefully a better LHD partner, better overall team defense and a little more experience can insulate some of his deficiencies without the puck.

I know we don't have many good option on LD right now but I'd really like to see him with a better partner (and a tighter system) before writing him off defensively

 

[Irishguy42]

can you translate those numbers for the dumb people (me)? what is considered good?

These are just rate stats for expected goals (xG), for and against (xGF and xGA respectively). Expected goals are used to determine quality of attempts for and against, using data such as shot location, type, if it was a rebound or not, etc. There are several different models out there, but generally they all use the same underlying metrics, but with some different weighting.

We use rate stats to help compare players with different number of games played or different average TOI and whatnot. Probably not the easiest

Obviously, you want to generate a better xGF than xGA, and the xGF% is just a %-value to simplify whether you are generating more quality goal attempts for your team as opposed to against. The 50% mark is just when your for and against is equal, and that's for a lot of other stats too. The aim is to be 50% or better (when your attempts for are greater than the attempts against)

So what we see here is that when Tony is on the ice without Staal, he generates a lot of quality goal attempts for the Rangers, but also is on for a lot of quality attempts against, but overall, he's generating more for than against. Staal, on the other hand, generates vastly lower quality attempts for and is also on for a lot of quality against. Together, they give us a lot of quality attempts against, and a lower quality amount for. Considering their impacts apart, it's fair to say that Tony is the one driving the offense when the two are together, but they're both not good defensively, so they give up a lot of quality attempts against.

tl;dr you can just look at xGF% and then if it's ~50 or above, good, if not, it's not good.

 

[Irishguy42]

Let's make it a little bit easier, @Leetch3, and just go with actual goal stats.

Together, this past season at 5v5, Tony and Staal were on the ice for 21 goals for, and 18 against, giving them a 53.85 goals for% (good!) Tony without Staal was on the ice for 35 goals for, and 24 against, giving him at 59.32 goals for% (GREAT!) Staal without Tony, it's 6 goals for and 9 against (40% - not good), but that was also half the time as the other two scenarios.

Let's dial it back a bit and include last season (18-19) as well.

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]2018-2020[/TD][TD] TOI[/TD][TD]Goals For[/TD][TD]Goals Against[/TD][TD]GF%[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Tony+Staal[/TD][TD] 893:40[/TD][TD]39[/TD][TD]37[/TD][TD]51.32[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Tony w/o Staal[/TD][TD] 1126:39[/TD][TD]67[/TD][TD]47[/TD][TD]58.77[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Staal w/o Tony[/TD][TD] 1114:27[/TD][TD]34[/TD][TD]52[/TD][TD]39.53[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
Again, we can see that Staal and Tony, together and apart, give up a lot of goals. Tony, however, drives offense A LOT better, and it's a safe assumption that he is the one driving the bus for when he's paired with Staal as well. The expected goal trends line up with this too, even though the exact numbers all don't quite line up.

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]2018-2020[/TD][TD]xGF[/TD][TD]xGA[/TD][TD]xGF%[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Tony+Staal[/TD][TD]34.87[/TD][TD]40.88[/TD][TD]46.04[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Tony w/o Staal[/TD][TD]50.35[/TD][TD]50.96[/TD][TD]49.70[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Staal w/o Tony[/TD][TD]36.93[/TD][TD]48.87[/TD][TD]43.04[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
So, that's what the stats are getting at, in layman's terms. Staal and Tony are giving up high quality chances against together and apart, but Tony is able to drive the goals and quality of goals higher away from Staal.

Is this the only thing we look at when we're looking at analytics? No. Is it a handy metric to have to determine goal quality driving capability? Yeah, it's one of them.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Just for clarification, Staal's xGF away from DeAngelo would have placed him 4th from the bottom in the league amongst defensemen who played at least 220 minutes (the amount of time Staal played with out DeAngelo.)

Only Libor Hajek, Sami Niku and Jonathan Ericsson were worse.

So basically Staal w/o Tony is on the level of 2 rookies who struggled and a vet who was on one of the worst teams in NHL history. In Libor's case, he barely played with the team as they turned a corner (he didn't deserve to) so I don't think its a stretch to say that his numbers there would have improved had he done so.

Moral of the story: We need 3LD help. Maybe Hajek takes a huge step forward, but we know that Staal won't and only stands to get worse from here on out. I wouldn't count on Libor taking that massive step forward either. We don't need spectacular, we need league average.

Moral of the Story pt 2: DeAngelo was such a f***ing beast last year having to partner with a player as bad as Staal is.

 

[Kords]

Why do people always say that "everyone on the team loves him"? Not saying it isn't true, but aside from Strome and Lemmy I don't think there is anyway to know for sure. It's not like anyone is gonna admit to hating him. I'm sure it's not all sunshine and lollipops between everybody on the team. If anyone has a source, i'd be curious where this narrative started.

 

[Chytilmania]

Why do people always say that "everyone on the team loves him"? Not saying it isn't true, but aside from Strome and Lemmy I don't think there is anyway to know for sure. It's not like anyone is gonna admit to hating him. I'm sure it's not all sunshine and lollipops between everybody on the team. If anyone has a source, i'd be curious where this narrative started.

Hot Takes with Tony D. He even interviewed the moms!

 

[EdJovanovski]

Why do people always say that "everyone on the team loves him"? Not saying it isn't true, but aside from Strome and Lemmy I don't think there is anyway to know for sure. It's not like anyone is gonna admit to hating him. I'm sure it's not all sunshine and lollipops between everybody on the team. If anyone has a source, i'd be curious where this narrative started.

Look at the smiles on everyone’s faces when he got his hat trick, look on Instagram you’ll always see him and Buch commenting inside jokes on each others posts, him always bantering back and forth with all his former arizona teammates, other players jokingly bring him up in interviews and Quinn said if he’d want one player to step in as coach for a day he joked about it being Tony. He’s the guy who replaced Stepan for doing all the funny lockerroom interviews. He has the biggest personality on the team and is always upbeat, he’s always the first to come to his teammates defense on and off the ice, Strome called him the best teammate he’s ever had.

 

[Leetch3]

Why do people always say that "everyone on the team loves him"? Not saying it isn't true, but aside from Strome and Lemmy I don't think there is anyway to know for sure. It's not like anyone is gonna admit to hating him. I'm sure it's not all sunshine and lollipops between everybody on the team. If anyone has a source, i'd be curious where this narrative started.

There have been interviews with Quinn and kreider at least that have spoken very highly about him in the locker room...last year he took quinn’s Tough love to heart, did what was asked and became a better player and I think Quinn gained a huge amount of respect for the maturity he showed

 

[Leetch3]

Thanks for the stat explanation. I knew that above 50% was good but wasn’t sure if really good was over 60 and there for low 50s isn’t bad but really not good either. And at what % levels you move up the charts from above average to good to very good etc

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Not saying it's not true – I can totally see him being popular, even with those who don't agree with his off-ice stances. But by the same token, I'm going to take any "I'm with the media and here's a mic in your face, please go on record as to whether or not you like ADA" interviews with like a whole handful of salt.

I mean, can you see Chris Kreider saying "nah, that guy's an asshole" about anyone he's ever played with/for – much less a current teammate?

 

[Uncle Scrooge]

DeAngelo has been trending in this direction for a bit, he didn't just explode on the scene like Gustafsson did.

18 of his 30 points in 2018-19 came in the teams last 29 games. Thats a pace of around 51 over 60. No joke, he lost 6 points in 18-19 on goals that got called back on offsides. Yes those aren't goals to begin with, but thats a ridiculous number and shows at least, that he was consistently getting the puck to players in areas where they can finish.

Looks like he just picked up where he left off. Yes, playing with good offensive players helps (do you feel this way about John Carlson?), but he also had a hand in those players being as productive as they were. As for the PP? It looked A LOT worse when he wasn't on the top unit. A big part of the reason it struggled as much as it did in the post season was because he played on one leg.

He was one of the best offensive defensemen in CHL history. Its not like the ability for him to be a really good point producer at this level was severely questioned, it's what got him taken in the 1st round of his draft year despite all of the other concerns in the first place. With out the hot headedness, he would have easily been a top 10 selection and no one would be questioning his production this year.

When I made my post it was specifically regarding what has happened in Rangerland.

I would be paying him for what he has been doing for over a year now. That would make this a good gamble for me. Everything is a risk. but I would rather gamble on the side that he does it here rather than elsewhere.

No, they are not going to have career years all the time, but some of the younger players will step up. That is the point of such defensemen. They will get the puck to the other players. Didn't really make that much of a difference to Zubov to whom to send the puck to.

Well if you guys are confident he can keep it up then who am i to argue.

But i will say shorter term would still be the best unless the cap hit is good obv. Can never be too careful with guys who play their best hockey on show-me years. Especially when given his role on the depth chart 5v5.

I guess the next question with ADA on board is how to improve the left side and potentially upgrade on Strome?