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

Sather must decide: Is dealing Girardi best for Rangers?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-12-2014, 02:26 PM
  #701
Tikkanese
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 124
vCash: 500
Poor correlation studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Blooded View Post
It has been scientifically proven that managing your zone entries to gain the zone with possession greatly increases your shot volume and goal volume, and that preventing controlled entries against you is the most effective way of preventing shots and goals against.
I keep seeing this in various fora, and I cannot help but wonder about the bias inherent in the historical information - who do you think carries pucks through the neutral zone effectively, good offensive players or bad ones? And who do you think gets off more shots and scores more goals, good offensive players or bad ones?

That complex statistical analysis you're referencing relly just says that the more good offensive players you have, the better you are on offense, but it is dressed up and phrased such that it appears scientific. Did anyone advise Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby etc. to play dump and chase? Of course not - you have players who aren't as good handling the puck do dump and chase, because at least then if it results in a turn over they don't get caught going the wrong way.

All that being said, I do think that the statistics show that coaches should be pushing their forwards to attempt more zone entries with the puck. But you need to recognize the relative strengths of your roster. If you have Milan Lucic, you tell him to dump and chase. If you have Pavel Datsyuk, you tell him to carry in.

Tikkanese is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 02:50 PM
  #702
Vidic15
Registered User
 
Vidic15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Country: Romania
Posts: 1,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Rangers management never talks to the fans. When Tortorella was here,he would go on the radio with Kay and you would get a feel of what was going on. He was the mouthpiece for Rangers management. Sather hasn't done an interview on NY radio since 2002. He was terrible in them because Francesa and Russo would destroy him. Those guys don't know hockey but they are very good interviewers. Pump them with information and they would get to the bottom of any situation.
It's a shame we have to listen to Edmonton radio to hear anything insightful from Sather regarding this team. You posted a link over the summer. It's obvious he insulates himself from the NY media. He runs the Rangers like the politicians run this country. Zero accountability.

Vidic15 is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 02:58 PM
  #703
bathgate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Last time I did that,all of the Zuccarello people came after me for suggesting selling high on the player. The player is having a really good year and is a year away from group III. Arbitration eligible. He is a $3.5M-$4M player.

Build the team around Stepan,Kreider,Nash and Miller. Keep Brassard as a stop gap center for a year. I like Hagelin but would move him in the right deal. The rest of them can go. Amnesty Richards. Trade Callahan. He isn't worth 7 years at $6M-$7M per.

Build the D around McDonagh. Hopefully,McIlrath wins a spot next season. I like Moore but he's soft. Maybe the Rangers can get something out of him. Allen. The rest of them can go. Girardi isn't worth a long-term contract. Staal's contract expires in July 2015 which isn't that far away. DZ needs a change of scenery. Stralman. The Rangers haven't talk about a new contract with him.

Lundqvist in net. Try to sign Talbot to an extension.
I generally agree with two exceptions. I also keep Staal who is still a shutdown defenseman and attempt to trade Lundqvist despite his new contract. By the time we retool, Lundqvist May no longer be elite

bathgate is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 03:05 PM
  #704
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bathgate View Post
I generally agree with two exceptions. I also keep Staal who is still a shutdown defenseman and attempt to trade Lundqvist despite his new contract. By the time we retool, Lundqvist May no longer be elite
Lundqvist has an NMC. Unless he waives it, he can't be moved.

http://www.capgeek.com/player/643

__________________
Jabroni is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 03:22 PM
  #705
Tikkanese
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 124
vCash: 500
If there was even an inkling of a plan to move Lundquist, so many things would have been different about the contract extension/negotiation, not least the inclusion of a full NMC.

He is too valuable to the franchise (merchandise, media coverage, etc) for Dolan to consider moving him. As ownership, better to compete for a playoff spot every year with Lundquist than to trade him and lose all the ancillary benefits even if it resulted in a SC down the road. From a financial perspective, that Lundquist contract is NPV positive for NYR.

Tikkanese is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 03:24 PM
  #706
bathgate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni View Post
Lundqvist has an NMC. Unless he waives it, he can't be moved.

http://www.capgeek.com/player/643
Understood but if Lundqvist wants a Cup, he might waive during a rebuild. In my opinion , no individual should receive a seven year contract after the age of twenty eight or twenty nine

bathgate is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 03:33 PM
  #707
Thirty One
portnor, pls
 
Thirty One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,550
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by bathgate View Post
Understood but if Lundqvist wants a Cup, he might waive during a rebuild. In my opinion , no individual should receive a seven year contract after the age of twenty eight or twenty nine
I don't think it should be that black and white, but you definitely shouldn't give a 32 year old a 7 year deal with an AAV of 20% greater than any of his peers.

__________________


Rangers Unlimited
Hockey Graphs
Thirty One is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 03:39 PM
  #708
Mikos87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanese View Post
If there was even an inkling of a plan to move Lundquist, so many things would have been different about the contract extension/negotiation, not least the inclusion of a full NMC.

He is too valuable to the franchise (merchandise, media coverage, etc) for Dolan to consider moving him. As ownership, better to compete for a playoff spot every year with Lundquist than to trade him and lose all the ancillary benefits even if it resulted in a SC down the road. From a financial perspective, that Lundquist contract is NPV positive for NYR.
And plenty of FV as well. Losing the captain of the team would be a big blow in both regards as well. Same with the anchoring the defense for years in G.

Confusion within the organizational ranks is only a means towards disharmony. My guess is there is an internal rift of ideologies. Perhaps AV and the rest of the staff don't share the same set of principles.

Any well run organization and management staff should now it's assets inside out, and who to keep and move. Hockey or not.

Mikos87 is offline  
Old
01-12-2014, 05:01 PM
  #709
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
I don't think it should be that black and white, but you definitely shouldn't give a 32 year old a 7 year deal with an AAV of 20% greater than any of his peers.
When even a big goalie sceptic like Tulsky says it's a decent contract, it can't be THAT bad though.

Blue Blooded is online now  
Old
01-13-2014, 01:54 AM
  #710
Kwayry
Take the damn deal
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,914
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Slats biggest mistake was hiring John Tortorella.
I don't think that's a fair statement to make.
The problem was the system, not the coach. I don't think Torts set out to play that style from the get go. Given the lack of high end talent, that's the system he though would win games.
In retrospective, the mistake that Sather made was not forcing Torts to hire an offensive assistant.

Kwayry is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 02:00 AM
  #711
Kwayry
Take the damn deal
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,914
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Last time I did that,all of the Zuccarello people came after me for suggesting selling high on the player. The player is having a really good year and is a year away from group III. Arbitration eligible. He is a $3.5M-$4M player.
A reasonable question to ask. When do you trade Zuke and why?
I am a big fan, but will his value be any higher than today? Maybe, maybe not. I'd rather sell a little too soon, than a little too late.
The problem is, Zuke appears to be a perfect fit for AV's system. He has good vision, can skate, can pass and has great hands.
He backchecks like a demon to cover for bad pinches, has enough snarl to his game.
If AV is here to stay, then so is Zuke.

Kwayry is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 02:40 AM
  #712
spiller19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 143
vCash: 500
If the rangers were to be moving girardi is there anything reasonable from the avalanche you would want. Tyson Barrie might make sense as part of a deal

spiller19 is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 02:47 AM
  #713
azaloum90
Registered User
 
azaloum90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: The coop!
Posts: 3,334
vCash: 500
moving girardi has to include at least 1 nhl ready forward and a top 4 defenseman... There's no less of a package you could take, because G and McD are the anchors of our defense, as piss poor as it's been.

azaloum90 is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 03:04 AM
  #714
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanese View Post
I keep seeing this in various fora, and I cannot help but wonder about the bias inherent in the historical information - who do you think carries pucks through the neutral zone effectively, good offensive players or bad ones? And who do you think gets off more shots and scores more goals, good offensive players or bad ones?

That complex statistical analysis you're referencing relly just says that the more good offensive players you have, the better you are on offense, but it is dressed up and phrased such that it appears scientific. Did anyone advise Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby etc. to play dump and chase? Of course not - you have players who aren't as good handling the puck do dump and chase, because at least then if it results in a turn over they don't get caught going the wrong way.

All that being said, I do think that the statistics show that coaches should be pushing their forwards to attempt more zone entries with the puck. But you need to recognize the relative strengths of your roster. If you have Milan Lucic, you tell him to dump and chase. If you have Pavel Datsyuk, you tell him to carry in.
Well considering that it has been shown that there is no discernible difference in shots generated by a controlled entry from Zac Rinaldo (i.e. a useless 4th liner) or Claude Giroux (i.e. a skilled 1st line center). The difference between the players lie in the frequency of controlled entries generated and shot quality upon entry. But the expected amount of shots per controlled/non-controlled entry is the same for all players.

I can't find the link to the more extensive academic paper right now, but here is one of Tulsky's posts on the subject.

Blue Blooded is online now  
Old
01-13-2014, 04:16 AM
  #715
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,797
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanese View Post
I keep seeing this in various fora, and I cannot help but wonder about the bias inherent in the historical information - who do you think carries pucks through the neutral zone effectively, good offensive players or bad ones? And who do you think gets off more shots and scores more goals, good offensive players or bad ones?

[...]

All that being said, I do think that the statistics show that coaches should be pushing their forwards to attempt more zone entries with the puck. But you need to recognize the relative strengths of your roster. If you have Milan Lucic, you tell him to dump and chase. If you have Pavel Datsyuk, you tell him to carry in.
You of course have a point that skill matters when you enter the zone, but I think you are spot on with your last paragraph.

For a long time, you risked a broken arm if you tried to stick-handle across the blue-line. The game was about not giving up anything, and a stickhandling move against a 4-5 man at the blueline that could slash, hook and grab you as much as they wanted just didn't pay off. And this was especially the case in the PO's.

Now you just have soo much more room to operate there. And taking advantage of that area, also really opens up for dump-ins. The last 4 years, we faced many teams that just collapsed with one D to fetch dump-ins, when you start to challenge in that area, the D will have to stand in and the dump-in will pay off.

I think the key really is to get the players away from the dump-in being the default option when you enter the zone. The guy with the puck needs to take the puck into dangerous areas, and the other forward and a D must get up ice to provide him with options. When you do that, you get all kind of room in that high area of the attacking zone.

So in the end, I definitely don't think this is a phenomen that only is skill related. Skill matters, but it don't have to be Crosby type of skill. Can just as well be the 2-3 lineer that aint brain-dead that executes those type of plays.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 07:26 AM
  #716
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,867
vCash: 500
Trading Callahan and Girardi isn't rebuilding. Their contracts are up. They want big contracts. Its a business. The Rangers have talked to both players. No progress has been made. Callahan is a third line winger on this team. He plays on the PK. Vigneault doesn't use him on the PP. Many people say the Rangers can't trade or not re-sign the captain of the team because it doesn't look. They sound like AROD who is obsessed with how people perceive him. The Rangers will either meet the asking price or they won't. Sather and Gorton should trade him. Same thing with Girardi.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 07:46 AM
  #717
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwayry View Post
A reasonable question to ask. When do you trade Zuke and why?
I am a big fan, but will his value be any higher than today? Maybe, maybe not. I'd rather sell a little too soon, than a little too late.
The problem is, Zuke appears to be a perfect fit for AV's system. He has good vision, can skate, can pass and has great hands.
He backchecks like a demon to cover for bad pinches, has enough snarl to his game.
If AV is here to stay, then so is Zuke.
The Rangers have a tendency to trade players at the low end of their value. Zuccarello has a chip on his shoulder. He is playing for a big contract. Dubinsky got his big contract in 2011 after the contract squabble in 2009. Prucha was another guy who had good value after his first year. Zuccarello will be arbitration eligible in July and can be a group III in 2015. Do the Rangers want to commit $3.5M-$4M in a long term deal for him? Zuccarello has played one full NHL season. This one. Does management believe the player can do it again? They do a one year deal with the player and he can become a group III in 2015. Then the player is definitely going to group III with the possibility of losing him for nothing.

I think Dubinsky relaxed a bit after getting his contract. Its only human nature.

AV has a 5 year contract. Where was he going? When the Rangers lose,AV's system sucks. When they win,the system isn't mentioned.

Zuccarello will be here for all five years? Most Ranger players have a short shelf life on Broadway.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 07:50 AM
  #718
Lightningfan24
Thank you Jeter!
 
Lightningfan24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 2,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Trading Callahan and Girardi isn't rebuilding. Their contracts are up. They want big contracts. Its a business. The Rangers have talked to both players. No progress has been made. Callahan is a third line winger on this team. He plays on the PK. Vigneault doesn't use him on the PP. Many people say the Rangers can't trade or not re-sign the captain of the team because it doesn't look. They sound like AROD who is obsessed with how people perceive him. The Rangers will either meet the asking price or they won't. Sather and Gorton should trade him. Same thing with Girardi.

Callahan is NOT a third line winger on this team. He has been playing on the top line and that line has 5 goals in 5 games. AV has been using him for top 5 on 5 mins and it has been very successful. He is adjusting well to AV's system with 4 points in the last 5 games.

Lightningfan24 is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 08:50 AM
  #719
haohmaru
#bdwyblueshirts
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 5,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The Rangers have a tendency to trade players at the low end of their value. Zuccarello has a chip on his shoulder. He is playing for a big contract. Dubinsky got his big contract in 2011 after the contract squabble in 2009. Prucha was another guy who had good value after his first year. Zuccarello will be arbitration eligible in July and can be a group III in 2015. Do the Rangers want to commit $3.5M-$4M in a long term deal for him? Zuccarello has played one full NHL season. This one. Does management believe the player can do it again? They do a one year deal with the player and he can become a group III in 2015. Then the player is definitely going to group III with the possibility of losing him for nothing.

I think Dubinsky relaxed a bit after getting his contract. Its only human nature.

AV has a 5 year contract. Where was he going? When the Rangers lose,AV's system sucks. When they win,the system isn't mentioned.

Zuccarello will be here for all five years? Most Ranger players have a short shelf life on Broadway.
You're just way off base here on at least 2/3 of the guys your advocating trading.

Girardi/McD are our shutdown pair. How'd the Flyers top line do last night? How about Seguin & Co.? How about Chicago? Toronto? Etc... That's a guy you sign long term and a pair you keep together. Girardi CAN'T be replaced with a prospect and a #1. It could take years to develop another #1 RD. Girardi has to be signed. Period.

MZA - the Rangers have their first decent PP in how long and he's clearly the catalyst. You think now that he's got a coach that sees what he brings to the team that we should shuffle him off for another forward or some picks makes some kind of sense? It doesn't. The Rangers PP has been ~6th in the league for weeks for a reason: MZA. The Nash unit does nothing compared to the 2nd unit, which I have to remind you gives Mats a supporting cast of Pouliout and Brassard. And he somehow makes THAT work. 3.5/4 million with an escalating cap for a guy that took a steep discount to play here to begin with? Sign him.

Callahan is the only guy I'd consider trading DEPENDING on what his demands are. We don't know. If it's 5-6, I entertain it. Is it a coincidence that the Rangers are 4-1-1 with him back in the lineup? Probably not. But, he's a guy I can certainly see getting overpaid elsewhere.

haohmaru is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 10:07 AM
  #720
CharlieCharleschuk
Registered User
 
CharlieCharleschuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 214
vCash: 500
The only problem with signing Callahan is his durability over the length of the contract. Otherwise he's the freaking Captain and you do what you need to to keep him.

CharlieCharleschuk is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 10:10 AM
  #721
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,732
vCash: 910
Awards:
I'd like to keep one of the two, if possible. Moving both is just too drastic of a shakeup for me. I don't think the team needs a massive overhaul. Trading your captain and a top pair defenseman is a big change. And then with Richards gone in the summer... We don't need that much turnover.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 10:54 AM
  #722
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieCharleschuk View Post
The only problem with signing Callahan is his durability over the length of the contract. Otherwise he's the freaking Captain and you do what you need to to keep him.
Just a durability issue? How about the fact hes going to get more years and more $'s than his on-ice play dictates? Im not interested in paying for that C on his sweater.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 10:55 AM
  #723
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
I'd like to keep one of the two, if possible. Moving both is just too drastic of a shakeup for me. I don't think the team needs a massive overhaul. Trading your captain and a top pair defenseman is a big change. And then with Richards gone in the summer... We don't need that much turnover.
Fair enough. When looking at it that way, I think Girardi is the safer investment.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 11:00 AM
  #724
CharlieCharleschuk
Registered User
 
CharlieCharleschuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Just a durability issue? How about the fact hes going to get more years and more $'s than his on-ice play dictates? Im not interested in paying for that C on his sweater.
At this point, I'd say he's quite valuable for his on-ice play. He's not Drury, yet... but who knows in two or three years how he'll hold up. He seems to be increasingly out of the lineup. Yeah, I agree that a huge contract over a long period with a NMC would be a bad bad idea with a guy showing this kind of wear.

CharlieCharleschuk is offline  
Old
01-13-2014, 11:07 AM
  #725
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieCharleschuk View Post
At this point, I'd say he's quite valuable for his on-ice play. He's not Drury, yet... but who knows in two or three years how he'll hold up. He seems to be increasingly out of the lineup. Yeah, I agree that a huge contract over a long period with a NMC would be a bad bad idea with a guy showing this kind of wear.
Hes going to be going after 7 years. He'll get it somewhere on the open market. The Rangers, being a mediocre team, have done quite a job of inflating the worth of good players by depending on them so much. These are not great players we are talking about.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what a 36 year old Callahan will look like. He'll need to play with a walker.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Closed Thread

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 06:52 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.