HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sauer is + 18, and Mcdonagh is +17

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-29-2011, 03:37 PM
  #51
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,817
vCash: 500
to me the top 4 should be cemented in ranger blue for a good long while. i dont particularly care for either of our options at 5 and 6 this season. id love to get MDZ and Valentenko in the lineup next season if they are ready.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 03:39 PM
  #52
NYROrtsFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
to me the top 4 should be cemented in ranger blue for a good long while. i dont particularly care for either of our options at 5 and 6 this season. id love to get MDZ and Valentenko in the lineup next season if they are ready.
Exactly...

Although I'm not sure about MDZ.

NYROrtsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 03:42 PM
  #53
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,531
vCash: 500
I would love to see a Valentenko-McIlrath pairing in the future as they both play mean, nasty games. But then of course where do MDZ, Kundratak and Pashnin play? Also forgot Parlett.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 05:03 PM
  #54
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,531
vCash: 500
Here's a name people haven't mentioned yet for next season:

Andrei Markov on a 1 or 2 year deal for 3.5-4 million/season.

If he gets hurt, then he opens a spot up for a young player. If he is healthy, the Rangers have a top-pairing, puck-moving, veteran defenseman.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 06:35 PM
  #55
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
Here's a name people haven't mentioned yet for next season:

Andrei Markov on a 1 or 2 year deal for 3.5-4 million/season.

If he gets hurt, then he opens a spot up for a young player. If he is healthy, the Rangers have a top-pairing, puck-moving, veteran defenseman.
With extra money and no B.R. maybe this becomes an option. But then again with those injury shortened two seasons in a row idk I'd want to throw that much money for what will likely have to be 3 years.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 07:02 PM
  #56
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 11,975
vCash: 2679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
actually its more like 17-18 minutes a night, and they play about 1/3rd amount of high leverage time that Staal and Girardi plays (PK, which doesnt affect +/- but does help to get the kids into lower leverage situations to help them with their confidence, keep them fresher, etc.

if your argument is that McD and Sauer are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than MDZ, Eminger, and Gilroy in their own zone, then i will whole heartedly agree with you, you don't need a very questionable stat to bring that up. +/- to me only matters if youre a HUGE minus player, then it says somethings up...other than that, i tend to ignore it by and large.

again, im mostly agreeing with you, the 2 kids have been amazing in their own zone, they usually look like vets rather than the rookies they are, but they are being put into much lower leverage situations and as such that 1 stat is artificially inflated. they play more like ~even players if they had to match up against the better forwards in the league...as rookies, that speaks volumes.
So if they were -17 and -18 it would matter but not +17 and +18?

Thats beyond hypocritical.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 07:06 PM
  #57
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 11,975
vCash: 2679
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYROrtsFan View Post
I don't understand why people are looking to get rid of Girardi... Even if these two end up being very good defensemen, good depth is a very nice thing to have. It's not like Girardi is ever going to bring back a high level scorer either, so it's just not worth trading him.
Reading comprehension is a great skill to have. Im guess you were just SOL when that was being given out. No where did I say I want to get rid of Girardi, I even made it clear I have no desire to. I was just proposing a simple question.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 07:13 PM
  #58
we want cup
Ants in the Pants
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 11,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolskii View Post
So if they were -17 and -18 it would matter but not +17 and +18?

Thats beyond hypocritical.
Not really.

They're defensemen. If they're minus players, they aren't doing their jobs, i.e. keeping the puck out of the net. Theoretically, you can have a high +/- without playing great defense, if your forwards happen to be scoring a lot while you're on the ice, or at least keeping the puck in the offensive zone for extended periods.

__________________

RANGERS =
we want cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 07:23 PM
  #59
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Cupcake schedule.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SoutheastOfDisorder
Country: United States
Posts: 11,975
vCash: 2679
Quote:
Originally Posted by we want cup View Post
Not really.

They're defensemen. If they're minus players, they aren't doing their jobs, i.e. keeping the puck out of the net. Theoretically, you can have a high +/- without playing great defense, if your forwards happen to be scoring a lot while you're on the ice, or at least keeping the puck in the offensive zone for extended periods.
But wait, aren't we an offensively challenged team?

Again this isn't the days of Jagr Straka and Nylander inflating the entire Dcorps +-.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 07:30 PM
  #60
Florida Ranger
Bring back Torts!
 
Florida Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tampa, FLA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
Marek Malik was like a +30 something while he was here...he was a perennial high +/- guy, as was Tom Poti if im not mistaken (way too tired to look up the stats.)

so, no, i disagree with ya here man.
But we're talking about two rookies doing this.

Florida Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 07:55 PM
  #61
we want cup
Ants in the Pants
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 11,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolskii View Post
But wait, aren't we an offensively challenged team?

Again this isn't the days of Jagr Straka and Nylander inflating the entire Dcorps +-.
We're a team that tends to spend a lot of time cycling the puck around in the offensive zone, which is good for our defensemen's +/- ratings. We're obviously more likely to get that good offensive zone time when other teams' top lines aren't on the ice (and, consequently, Staal and Girardi aren't either).

We also have an awesome goalie who bails out more mistakes than many other goalies. Both of these are factors that help out the +/- ratings of our defensemen.

Look, nobody is saying that McD and Sauer haven't played very, very well. I just think that their +/- ratings may make them look even better than they are if you consider the conditions in which they're playing.

we want cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2011, 11:37 PM
  #62
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 13,219
vCash: 500
It's really annoying when people discredit the +/- statistic.

Yes, you're right. There is no way to universally apply the stat in the same way to every player league wide. That doesn't mean it's a bad circumstantial stat. In fact, I'd say it's a very good circumstantial stat. Marek Malik's +/- was high because of Jagr and co. I don't think he was as bad as most people made him out to be, but that stat was certainly inflated and our observations made light of that fact. On the other hand, DelZotto's +/- last year was horrible. We might look at this case of the stat being an affirmation of what we're seeing with our eyes: that DelZotto was playing pretty terrible defense.

In regards to the topic: people say that +/- for defensemen gets inflated by good offensive forwards playing well. But I have to ask you, is that the case here? I mean, can we reasonably point out that this pair does a VERY good job on the ice defensively, albeit against 2nd and 3rd lines more often that 1st lines? We see it with our own eyes and the statistic backs it up. we want cup says that our team spends a lot of time cycling the puck around in the offensive zone. In the Rangers scheme, the D play such a large part of that... you can't say the forwards are inflating the stat in isolation. The defense are inflating their own stat... imagine that! It's an indicator of how good a job the D are doing!!!

They aren't playing against the opponent's absolute best and they aren't having their numbers inflated by offense. Their +/- still tells me that they're doing a damn good job out there.

The lack of understanding of how to apply this statistic to reality is mind-boggling. There is a reason this is kept track of, despite the wide attempts by fans to discredit it.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2011, 01:39 AM
  #63
tpb209
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
It's really annoying when people discredit the +/- statistic.

Yes, you're right. There is no way to universally apply the stat in the same way to every player league wide. That doesn't mean it's a bad circumstantial stat. In fact, I'd say it's a very good circumstantial stat. Marek Malik's +/- was high because of Jagr and co. I don't think he was as bad as most people made him out to be, but that stat was certainly inflated and our observations made light of that fact. On the other hand, DelZotto's +/- last year was horrible. We might look at this case of the stat being an affirmation of what we're seeing with our eyes: that DelZotto was playing pretty terrible defense.

In regards to the topic: people say that +/- for defensemen gets inflated by good offensive forwards playing well. But I have to ask you, is that the case here? I mean, can we reasonably point out that this pair does a VERY good job on the ice defensively, albeit against 2nd and 3rd lines more often that 1st lines? We see it with our own eyes and the statistic backs it up. we want cup says that our team spends a lot of time cycling the puck around in the offensive zone. In the Rangers scheme, the D play such a large part of that... you can't say the forwards are inflating the stat in isolation. The defense are inflating their own stat... imagine that! It's an indicator of how good a job the D are doing!!!

They aren't playing against the opponent's absolute best and they aren't having their numbers inflated by offense. Their +/- still tells me that they're doing a damn good job out there.

The lack of understanding of how to apply this statistic to reality is mind-boggling. There is a reason this is kept track of, despite the wide attempts by fans to discredit it.
The problem with the +/- stat is that a person could have absolutely nothing to do with the goal for. The player could also have absolutely nothing to do with the goal against.

The supposition is that these outliers will even out over the long term, but for many players this may not happen. It is the same way for many stats. This is the main problem people have with traditional baseball stats. A pitcher could give up 8 runs in 5 innings and still get a win. Does that "win" mean that this pitcher is better than a pitcher with one less win? No, it does not. In my opinion, logical, rational statistics only represent what a specific player is responsible for. It really is not possible, at this point, to do that in overall hockey statistics. There is too much white noise. In baseball, it is easier to create advanced metrics because almost everything is made up of 1v1 matchups.

The problem is, without watching every game, a person does not know how well a player is playing. Ranger fans, for the most part, know that McD and Sauer are playing well, but they may or may not be playing as well as their +/- indicates.

(If this isn't clear or well thought out, I apologize. It was trivia night at the bar and I had a few.)

tpb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2011, 06:17 AM
  #64
HoosierDaddy
Registered User
 
HoosierDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpb209 View Post
The problem with the +/- stat is that a person could have absolutely nothing to do with the goal for. The player could also have absolutely nothing to do with the goal against.

The supposition is that these outliers will even out over the long term, but for many players this may not happen. It is the same way for many stats. This is the main problem people have with traditional baseball stats. A pitcher could give up 8 runs in 5 innings and still get a win. Does that "win" mean that this pitcher is better than a pitcher with one less win? No, it does not. In my opinion, logical, rational statistics only represent what a specific player is responsible for. It really is not possible, at this point, to do that in overall hockey statistics. There is too much white noise. In baseball, it is easier to create advanced metrics because almost everything is made up of 1v1 matchups.

The problem is, without watching every game, a person does not know how well a player is playing. Ranger fans, for the most part, know that McD and Sauer are playing well, but they may or may not be playing as well as their +/- indicates.

(If this isn't clear or well thought out, I apologize. It was trivia night at the bar and I had a few.)
Good analogy and well thought out comments.

HoosierDaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2011, 06:25 AM
  #65
HoosierDaddy
Registered User
 
HoosierDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,062
vCash: 500
McSauer +/- are a good indicator of their play. In the same way you can get a plus on a goal you have no part in scoring you can get a "minus" when you've played very well. In the end they wash out; for the most part. However, the trend, either negative or positive, is a very good indicator that good or bad things happen when you are on the ice. That is a given.

In the same way Hank bails out our team when they make bonehead plays our D spend a lot of time and effort blocking shots that could have been goals against and led time a "minus" and bad stats for Hank.

I'll take a consistently plus player over a consistently minus player every day of the week; and twice on Sundays.

HoosierDaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2011, 09:00 AM
  #66
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 13,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpb209 View Post
The problem with the +/- stat is that a person could have absolutely nothing to do with the goal for. The player could also have absolutely nothing to do with the goal against.
A defenseman positioning himself exactly where he should contributes to the success of a scoring or defensive play whether he ever directly involved in the play or not. If a player is on the ice, his actions are part of the overall scenario being played out and therefore, I don't believe that what your saying in this statement is true at all.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2011, 09:03 AM
  #67
allstar3970
Registered User
 
allstar3970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
A defenseman positioning himself exactly where he should contributes to the success of a scoring or defensive play whether he ever directly involved in the play or not. If a player is on the ice, his actions are part of the overall scenario being played out and therefore, I don't believe that what your saying in this statement is true at all.
Read what he posted again. He's just saying that it can and does happen that way often, not "every single play in which a player is not directly involved with the puck"

allstar3970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2011, 09:08 AM
  #68
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 13,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by allstar3970 View Post
Read what he posted again. He's just saying that it can and does happen that way often, not "every single play in which a player is not directly involved with the puck"
I read what he posted. My point still stands. There is no action that a player takes in which there is absolutely no bearing on the resolution of the play. Had said player change what he did in that situation in any way at all, the resolution is potentially different.

It's a rarity, not a commonality, that a player is not involved in the play on the ice in any capacity.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2011, 10:23 PM
  #69
ECL
Very slippery slope
 
ECL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Middle America
Country: United States
Posts: 79,015
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ECL
McDonagh ranked 50 in the top 50 prospects feature. My God what a horrible job by HF.

He's ranked behind players such as Jake Gardiner (a player he's been better than his entire career), Eric Tangradi, Stefan Elliott, and a number of other players not as good as him.

Joke city.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
I still think there should be a section of people at MSG behind the visiting bench, in curly wigs, and dark rimmed glasses, calling themselves the Pidtophiles. - Zamboner
ECL is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.