These numbers shows us how the teams are doing compared to others in a number of different categories. The rangers have good overall statistics but there are a few areas that really hurts them. Goals(G) and PowerPlay(PP). Theese two are obviously linked together. Other categories they should improve is FaceOff(FO 21st in the league) and Shot against (SA 17th in the League).
Interesting stats: Rangers shoot 2nd most in the league after Red Wings, They hit the most in the league, They get hit the least in the league, They have the second best penalty kill, They have the 7th least giveaways.
The teams that scores much have more giveaways than Rangers. Should mean that they play more of a puck possesion game than Rangers.
I think that these number shows us that if Rangers somehow can get the PowerPlay on fire they would be a very tough team to beat. If they also try to get more quality chances instead of shooting the puck without traffic (Cycling and passing) wich also leads to more time in the offensive zone they would be one of the best teams in the league i think.
Would love to see a V.Lecavalier type of player on the first line instead of Gomez.
You know what else you need to be one of the best teams? Better players. Until that happens, it doesn't matter what style this team plays.
Yeah pretty much this. A different style of play won't help if the players can't finish their chances, and that's really been a big part of the goal scoring problem. The team lacks a legit finisher, or at the very least, another top 6 quality winger who can finish on a somewhat consistent basis.
My point is that if the Rangers get their PP clicking they will be a good team.
To be one of the best teams (Contender) i think they need to play a different style of hockey.
I really don't think this should come as a surprise to anyone. Pretty neat analysis you put together there, but all you had to do was look at the SHGA category and the various "Fire Pearn" threads on this board to know that there is something very, very wrong with the Rangers PP.
Better players never hurts of course but i think they can make changes in the system to be a better team.
I would like to see the defencemen to get more involved in the offence.
I would like to see the team to make more pressure in the offensive zone.
I don´t think that getting Gomez the puck just for him to take it in the zone and throw away a bad shot is really effective.
I´m not really surprised that the players have a low shooting percentage because they take a lot of worthless shots. Whats the point to get in the zone and fire away a shot without traffic ?
The one thing I would really like to see this team do and continue to work on, is play in the defensive zone. A lot of times I see them running around and chasing too much. This is how a team takes penalties (hooking calls, slashing, trying to lift a stick and the result is a stick blade to the face, etc.).
When a team has gained the Rangers zone and starts passing the puck around or is trying to establish the forecheck, sometimes (and the Ducks did this very well against the Devils last night) it's best to just set up a zone and clog up the middle (almost like defending against a pp except both teams are even). This often times, leads to turnovers, blocked shots, low percentage shots on goal from side angles, and deflections. The Rangers were doing more of that against Ottawa and need to continue to do so. Know when to stop chasing and fall back.
The PP still isn't clicking and I don't think Shannahan would have made one bit of difference. I would like to see other players tried on the power play however, instead of the same bunch. The bottom line is. If they can set up (which most of the time is the biggest problem) shoot the puck. Dawes did that. It wasn't a great over powering shot but it deflected off of a defense-man, just throwing the goalie off a bit and "bam," it's 1-0.
So IMO, the Rangers DO NOT necessarily need more skilled forwards. A quarterback defense-man would be even nicer. There's nothing overly skillful about scoring on the PP and the Rangers do not need a great "sniper" to come here and save it. They proved that the other night.
They got the puck set up and a big body (Orr) in front of the net. Mara flipped one on goal and Miller nor any other goalie cannot stop what he cannot see and "bam," it's 1-0.
While the Rangers continue to work on the PP I finally have to give the coaching staff credit. If you're not going to score a PP goal, at least stay away from SH goals. And even if that means being a bit more conservative because of their confidence level on the PP then so be it. But we all know, SH goals just kill hockey games for your team.
Last edited by gravytrain6t: 01-12-2009 at 11:56 AM.
If you guys remember, back in the beginning of the season when Henke was letting in exactly 2 goals a game, how at least one seemed to be a really random fluky bounce? And remember how there was a thread about how the Rangers didn't get many of those?
Well, there you have it. They didn't give themselves opportunities for fluky bounces. And that's one big reason the PP has sucked.
I also often see people in front of the net who slide away just as the shot comes (not just on the Rangers team). But if you look at Holmstrom, he doesn't move out of the way, but stays there. Because it's harder for the keeper to see. And if it bounces of him, then it would probably bounce of the keeper anyway.
More of that, and the PP will get better!