Game Analysis: #2 - 10/7/13 | New York Rangers @ Los Angeles Kings | Analysis

[Trxjw]

61 goals in 293 games, a season high of 16.

If what you're saying is true about his shooting %, I guess it means he simply doesn't get many chances. I thought he worked hard last night.

Wouldn't say his SH% is "high" but it's better than average. The guy just doesn't put the puck on net enough. Some of it is due to limited minutes, but much of it is because of his battles with consistency.

That being said, he definitely looked good last night. I thought he was consistently one of the more dangerous players on the ice. He tends to thrive in physical contests, and I think this system benefits him with the amount of counter-attacking that seems to be going on.

 

[ColonialsHockey10]

I think his skating will forever prevent him from getting to that level. Think he'll be a very good 1B center in this league for a long time.

I was referring specifically to his defensive stick work.

He's well on his way to being Bergeron-caliber though. That's not even a question.

 

[Raspewtin]

while we're discussing Pouliot I had NO idea he was that fast. Two hybrid icing races he should've won. If he can just raise the puck a little bit he'd have a few goals by now.

 

[NYR Viper]

Agreed. Liked what I saw last night. He was forechecking hard, and got screwed by the hybrid icing rule a couple times.

That Pouliot-Brassard-Zuccarello combo is fun to watch, very creative. But can they produce?

His speed, as I thought, adds a different dimension which is good to see. I think that asking him to produce like a 2nd line player is asking too much but I like the look of that line so far.

 

[Blue Blooded]

I love this post. According to these numbers the Rangers did not play well at all. However, if you watched the game they were stellar against one of the biggest and best teams in the league. Please spare us these stupid stats as they are clearly no reflection of the activity on the ice. And btw, McDonagh and Girardi were great last night against one of the toughest lines in the league to defend who were paired with strong offensive defenseman. You really do make me laugh.

I have high expectations, an A would be beating the Blackhawks 5-0.

If this game was an A what would the other game be graded as?

As I said a C is good, it is pretty much meeting expectations. I think this Rangers team should challenge for the Presidents Trophy.

Overall I gave the team a B, i.e. surpassing expectations. I don't see the problem. Everyone but the fourth line and McD-Girardi met or exceeded expectations. The third line was fantastic.

Just because the team was good doesn't mean there wasn't areas where they could improve. And just because there is grading inflation in the US and everything below A is awful doesn't mean I have to subscribe to it. As the scale said a B is very good.

 

[chosen]

I think his skating will forever prevent him from getting to that level. Think he'll be a very good 1B center in this league for a long time.

He is Yzerman without speed.

 

[Levitate]

Why does it seem like multiple people thought Brad Richards turned the puck over that lead to LA's goal? Did Sam call it that way?

It was actually Pyatt and Girardi who turned the puck over, Richards was way down the ice (possibly coming off the bench) and not involved in the turnover at all. However, he did a poor job defensively picking up Muzzin on the actual goal

 

[NYR Viper]

Wouldn't say his SH% is "high" but it's better than average. The guy just doesn't put the puck on net enough. Some of it is due to limited minutes, but much of it is because of his battles with consistency.

That being said, he definitely looked good last night. I thought he was consistently one of the more dangerous players on the ice. He tends to thrive in physical contests, and I think this system benefits him with the amount of counter-attacking that seems to be going on.

I think that his speed is going to be his biggest asset in this system.

while we're discussing Pouliot I had NO idea he was that fast. Two hybrid icing races he should've won. If he can just raise the puck a little bit he'd have a few goals by now.

I called it in the off-season. Both he and Moore add some speed and tenacity to the forecheck. Both are relatively gritty players.

 

[NYR Viper]

I actually think Stepan looked much faster than last year in last nights game. I think his lack of speed is being a bit overblown. He is good on his edges. He will never be Hagelin but he never seems to be left behind during any play.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Sorry BB I VERY often agree with what you say, but this post is spot on. I'd say Dominic Moore was one of their best players tonight, to be honest. And Richie-Step-Nash were spectacular, idrc what the stats say...

The stats say Richie-Step-Nash were good, I was actually going by my eye test on that one. I was just observing how they were creating chances and they were a lot worse than say Pyatt-Boyle-Callahan at entering the zone and setting up an attack.

Stepan was fantastic at generating turnovers which they were able to strike on, but I'm not sure that is a sustainable way of creating offence.

And Dominic Moore has definitely not been fantastic, what in the world are people basing that on? He is constantly chasing the puck in his own end when he is on. Now the entire fourth lines of the first two games have been awful, but he is likely a part of that problem.

 

[OverTheCap]

You'd like to have at least one proven, capable 20-goal scorer on your 2nd line, and as the lines are constructed as of now, we don't have that. Pouliot-Brass-Zucc are fun to watch but if they don't produce that line will broken up.

 

[Levitate]

The stats say Richie-Step-Nash were good, I was actually going by my eye test on that one. I was just observing how they were creating chances and they were a lot worse than say Pyatt-Boyle-Callahan at entering the zone and setting up an attack.

Stepan was fantastic at generating turnovers which they were able to strike on, but I'm not sure that is a sustainable way of creating offence.

On the other hand I dont' think Boyle's line really created any respectable chances with their zone entries and attack setup...it's kind of a tough spot where zone entries and possession are great unless you don't actually generate good chances (and weak unscreened wristers or backhands from a ways out, or wrap around attempts that have no chance of working really aren't good chances) and I felt that's where Boyle's line struggled some.

I would like to see the top line get some more possession in there, sure, but I'm not going to be satisfied if it's possession without chances

 

[NYR Viper]

I only saw the 1st period but Boyle looked REALLY good. Did that continue?

 

[Vickers8]

Quality win on the road against a quality opponent...glad to see richards playing well we need him

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I love this post. According to these numbers the Rangers did not play well at all. However, if you watched the game they were stellar against one of the biggest and best teams in the league. Please spare us these stupid stats as they are clearly no reflection of the activity on the ice. And btw, McDonagh and Girardi were great last night against one of the toughest lines in the league to defend who were paired with strong offensive defenseman. You really do make me laugh.

He doesn't seem to watch the game and just reads the stats, it's laughable.

 

[Bardof425*]

I have high expectations, an A would be beating the Blackhawks 5-0.

If this game was an A what would the other game be graded as?

As I said a C is good, it is pretty much meeting expectations. I think this Rangers team should challenge for the Presidents Trophy.

Overall I gave the team a B, i.e. surpassing expectations. I don't see the problem. Everyone but the fourth line and McD-Girardi met or exceeded expectations. The third line was fantastic.

Just because the team was good doesn't mean there wasn't areas where they could improve. And just because there is grading inflation in the US and everything below A is awful doesn't mean I have to subscribe to it. As the scale said a B is very good.

But if you watched the game you saw McD and Girardi thwarting Kopitar's line all night. Much of that took place in the neutral zone and at the offensive points. To say they played below expectations (i.e., poorly) is ridiculous and pokes a huge hole in the way you determine success on the ice. Outside of the giveway that Girardi and Pyatt combined to commit which led to the Kings' goal in a 4 on 4 situation that pair was stellar. The stats don't tell that story therefore they are not of much use.

And I agree with the other poster who said D. Moore was good. Dorsett was also very good last night creating havoc all over the ice. Please just watch the games and form an opinion from that instead of inundating us with advanced stats. For fans all advanced stats do is give you an objective argument on a board built for subjectivity. That is the fun of this after all.

And it appears that the objectivity you are looking to interject is not broad enough to jive with the reality of the contest. Can't we just disagree on the games based on our biases without "stats" getting in the way?

 

[Raspewtin]

I only saw the 1st period but Boyle looked REALLY good. Did that continue?

yes, Boyle had a great game.

 

[I Am Chariot]

Cally is the sparkplug. This team just is something special when they play with him leading the charge.

 

[Bardof425*]

I only saw the 1st period but Boyle looked REALLY good. Did that continue?

I am his biggest detractor and he played a very strong game. He shouldn't be on the PP and it showed last night but that's on AV.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Great analysis. Very in-depth.

So, if they play poorly next game, does that mean that Torts would have never let them play that poorly or is this a one way street analysis?

Cherrypicking anecdotal information and extrapolating from it is weak.

Were you expecting a novel? I never said AV was better than Torts because of it, just that we rarely looked this good in all 3 zones under Torts. Oh and if we lose 6-0 tonight or something I will gladly say we almost never lost this badly under Torts (we lost by more than 3 goals exactly once in the last 2 seasons).

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Maybe it was because it was the first night of a back to back, but every player played more than 10 minutes last night. Refreshing to see.

Also, John Moore is a beautiful skater, but the kid has a lot to learn about how to play defense. Hes a suitable #6 guy, but he needs to be a bit more careful with his decision making.

 

[Bardof425*]

Maybe it was because it was the first night of a back to back, but every player played more than 10 minutes last night. Refreshing to see.

Also, John Moore is a beautiful skater, but the kid has a lot to learn about how to play defense. Hes a suitable #6 guy, but he needs to be a bit more careful with his decision making.

Agree about Moore. He's raw and needs to play protected minutes at this juncture.

 

[NYR Viper]

Cally is the sparkplug. This team just is something special when they play with him leading the charge.

This is why this team needs MORE players like him.

I am his biggest detractor and he played a very strong game. He shouldn't be on the PP and it showed last night but that's on AV.

Good, I hope it continues. He can be a big part of this team

Maybe it was because it was the first night of a back to back, but every player played more than 10 minutes last night. Refreshing to see.

Also, John Moore is a beautiful skater, but the kid has a lot to learn about how to play defense. Hes a suitable #6 guy, but he needs to be a bit more careful with his decision making.

Extremely refreshing.

It's good he is getting sheltered minutes.

 

[Raspewtin]

having a #6 that can really skate and play the game is a huge advantage that NYR haven't had in a few years. I think it'll really help us down the road this season.

 

[Ola]

Some additional thoughts.
...

The Brassard line gets a lot of positive buzz here, and I'm not sure I agree with all of it. They can create offensive pressure at times, but they're also inconsistent. Everyone raves about Zucc's game, but I thought it was pretty mediocre by his standards. A few nice passes and forced a few turnovers, but on the whole I expect more from him. He was better last year. Hopefully he gets going again.
Grade: C
...

McDonagh-Girardi was better than against Phoenix, but it is hard to be worse than they were in that game. Still found themselves unnecessarily trapped in their own end too often, and Girardi had a big part in the Kings' goal, but still some improvement.
Grade: D

I thought the second line had two long stretches in the 1st and 2nd where they got nothing going. They played well a few odd shifts in the first two periods and then played really well in the 3rd.

McD and Girardi really needs to pick it up. They have a long way to go. Hopefully it will come sooner rather than later. I think Ulfie is taking it step by step with them, not pushing it.