Post-Game Talk: #3 - Jackets @ Rangers

[Infinitum Vitae*]

I love Yandle and hope the Rangers start working on an extension with him ASAP. I hate the beat writers constantly writing that Yandle is as good as gone because there's no room for him on the D corps. The guy is a bonafide top 10 scoring D in this league, his breakout passes as so crisp, he's fantastic as the stretch pass and he is really good at making a breakout pass when it seems there is none to be made. He's a really good defenseman.


I also think he might be the most chippy D man on the team. I swear every shift he's slashing someone's hands and he's playing gritty. His "soft" label is not deserved at all.

No way McD is way worse when it comes to chippy. I remember reading quotes after quotes of players complaining about McD. But i do think Yandle is right behind him. Must be an American thing

 

[CupWindow]

People around the league think our D is good because our goals against is good. They don't see the **** Lundqvist has to put up with.

The worst New York Rangers defenseman is ________.

Fill in the blank with any of our top 6.

That's why the "people around the league think our D is good"

 

[CupWindow]

Quit it with the hyperbole. The defense has been an issue dating back to last season. This isn't just one game.

Who is our worst defenseman?

Please respond.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

This. I can appreciate fans having an opinion (we all do), getting upset, and occasionally being right (often by ****ing accident), but when you can't acknowledge that coaches, even the "bad ones", who have normally coached at every level, implemented systems of play for elite athletes, and have a depth of experience in managing personalities and maximizing output from players, are more knowledgable than you, then you need to check your ego. It is easy to see when they are failing in their role, and fair enough to suggest that it's time for a change when this happens, but to suggest that you actually know more than a coach or GM who (in most cases) have spent years working their way to that position, is so ridiculous that it's a bad caricature of internet forum arrogance.

So you read some player usage charts, a scatter-dot of CF%, and you follow Rob Vollman on Twitter. Awesome. I do that stuff too, you're probably a really knowledgable fan. There are people out there who are on Web MD all day too and read peer-reviewed studies in medical journals. They know a ******** more than the average person. Still doesn't equate to six years of Med School and every day professional experience.

Without ever having that experience yourself, you are blind in one eye to many of the factors that go in to their decision making. Unless you see every practice, watch every video breakdown, have access to the exact same internal team data and are privy to all the conversations the coaches and GMs are, you can only ever evaluate them with the "best available public information", which frankly isn't much.

If you stepped into their world, you would 100% get your ass humbled right quick, just as you would any other profession that you have zero to minimal experience in, and have only evaluated as a spectator.

You are not more knowledgable than the coach. You have a better mind for the game than most fans, hopefully you played organized hockey at some level (otherwise PLEASE temper your idea about how much you think you know), and occasionally you are right and the coach is wrong. But I think as fans, even super knowledgable ones like the fans here, need to operate under the caveat that there is a lot to the game that we're just not able to see at a certain level, and a wealth of information, data and performance wise, that we are not and probably never will be privy to.

That's a really long rant. Breathe.

1) Coaches can be more knowledgeable than regular people without being perfect. Sometimes coaches are wrong. Same thing with GMs.

2) Coaches have to deal with the human factor of players and be biased due to their relationship with a player that fans do not have.

 

[nevesis]

This. I can appreciate fans having an opinion (we all do), getting upset, and occasionally being right (often by ****ing accident), but when you can't acknowledge that coaches, even the "bad ones", who have normally coached at every level, implemented systems of play for elite athletes, and have a depth of experience in managing personalities and maximizing output from players, are more knowledgable than you, then you need to check your ego. It is easy to see when they are failing in their role, and fair enough to suggest that it's time for a change when this happens, but to suggest that you actually know more than a coach or GM who (in most cases) have spent years working their way to that position, is so ridiculous that it's a bad caricature of internet forum arrogance.

So you read some player usage charts, a scatter-dot of CF%, and you follow Rob Vollman on Twitter. Awesome. I do that stuff too, you're probably a really knowledgable fan. There are people out there who are on Web MD all day too and read peer-reviewed studies in medical journals. They know a ******** more than the average person. Still doesn't equate to six years of Med School and every day professional experience.

Without ever having that experience yourself, you are blind in one eye to many of the factors that go in to their decision making. Unless you see every practice, watch every video breakdown, have access to the exact same internal team data and are privy to all the conversations the coaches and GMs are, you can only ever evaluate them with the "best available public information", which frankly isn't much.

If you stepped into their world, you would 100% get your ass humbled right quick, just as you would any other profession that you have zero to minimal experience in, and have only evaluated as a spectator.

You are not more knowledgable than the coach. You have a better mind for the game than most fans, hopefully you played organized hockey at some level (otherwise PLEASE temper your idea about how much you think you know), and occasionally you are right and the coach is wrong. But I think as fans, even super knowledgable ones like the fans here, need to operate under the caveat that there is a lot to the game that we're just not able to see at a certain level, and a wealth of information, data and performance wise, that we are not and probably never will be privy to.

Excellent post.

 

[Open Mind]

People around the league think our D is good because our goals against is good. They don't see the **** Lundqvist has to put up with.

I don't have that impression at all. Of the hockey fans I know that I've spoken to about this think our D is really good because their team's is a lot worse, particularly on bottom or middle pairings. If you get to watching a lot of other teams, or talking to a lot of other fans about their teams, as much as anyone here can pick this or that apart, few teams in this league have a Keith Yandle on their 2nd or 3rd pair.

 

[Vickers8]

The worst New York Rangers defenseman is ________.

Boyle

 

[Fanned On It]

That's a really long rant. Breathe.

1) Coaches can be more knowledgeable than regular people without being perfect. Sometimes coaches are wrong. Same thing with GMs.

2) Coaches have to deal with the human factor of players and be biased due to their relationship with a player that fans do not have.

Snowblind... His post was amazing and every fan should read it before complaining. Your counter to it said nothing but, "Fans might have a better perspective because they're not biased towards certain players," which is 100% false anyway.

 

[egelband]

This. I can appreciate fans having an opinion (we all do), getting upset, and occasionally being right (often by ****ing accident), but when you can't acknowledge that coaches, even the "bad ones", who have normally coached at every level, implemented systems of play for elite athletes, and have a depth of experience in managing personalities and maximizing output from players, are more knowledgable than you, then you need to check your ego. It is easy to see when they are failing in their role, and fair enough to suggest that it's time for a change when this happens, but to suggest that you actually know more than a coach or GM who (in most cases) have spent years working their way to that position, is so ridiculous that it's a bad caricature of internet forum arrogance.

So you read some player usage charts, a scatter-dot of CF%, and you follow Rob Vollman on Twitter. Awesome. I do that stuff too, you're probably a really knowledgable fan. There are people out there who are on Web MD all day too and read peer-reviewed studies in medical journals. They know a ******** more than the average person. Still doesn't equate to six years of Med School and every day professional experience.

Without ever having that experience yourself, you are blind in one eye to many of the factors that go in to their decision making. Unless you see every practice, watch every video breakdown, have access to the exact same internal team data and are privy to all the conversations the coaches and GMs are, you can only ever evaluate them with the "best available public information", which frankly isn't much.

If you stepped into their world, you would 100% get your ass humbled right quick, just as you would any other profession that you have zero to minimal experience in, and have only evaluated as a spectator.

You are not more knowledgable than the coach. You have a better mind for the game than most fans, hopefully you played organized hockey at some level (otherwise PLEASE temper your idea about how much you think you know), and occasionally you are right and the coach is wrong. But I think as fans, even super knowledgable ones like the fans here, need to operate under the caveat that there is a lot to the game that we're just not able to see at a certain level, and a wealth of information, data and performance wise, that we are not and probably never will be privy to.

The above should go without saying. But since it doesnt, thank you. Humility is a virtue.

 

[KingDeathMetal]

That's a really long rant. Breathe.

1) Coaches can be more knowledgeable than regular people without being perfect. Sometimes coaches are wrong. Same thing with GMs.

2) Coaches have to deal with the human factor of players and be biased due to their relationship with a player that fans do not have.

Agreed and agreed. Somewhere in that hold-my-breath rant, I think I mentioned that us common folk are perfectly capable of finding legitimate error in coaching staff decisions and whatnot. It's just that unabashed claims of being more knowledgable than coaches is a bridge too far for me. I think we also get carried away with accusations of who the coaches favorites are, based on nothing more than a few quotes here and there.

Example: AV is so biased towards his favorite player Tanner Glass that he made the team as an "extra forward", didn't play until the third game of the season...and actually played a decent game.

JT Miller is in AV's dog house, which is why he got stuck on the third line wing where...he's compiled the most points on the team and has been instrumental in making them our best line so far.

Could be coincidental, or maybe one of the best coaches in the league actually knows what he's doing? Maaaybe he is more knowledgable than the Blueshirt Banter comments section.

I realize you didn't actually argue any of this, but it's just to illustrate the type of mentality that one frequently encounters on the interwebz.

 

[Off Sides]

Early reports are that it will be something between $74-75M, but we'll know more around American Thanksgiving.

There's the World Cup of Hockey that will add to the HRR by $100M.

No way to have a very good prediction yet, but the World Cup money is not going to be considered NHL HRR from what I have read so no cap effect there.

Cap prediction, best indicator so far, they started off the season with 16% escrow for the players. it at least indicates they think the players share may come up short although I am sure they leave some wiggle room in there so I doubt they expect it to come up 16% short, just their worst case scenario. If escrow goes up next quarter or in the following ones, it would mean they want more wiggle room which would be a bad sign that they think even 16% withheld may not be enough.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...2016-with-controversial-format-204306509.html


http://www.tsn.ca/nhl-union-set-escrow-for-first-quarter-of-season-at-16-per-cent-1.374417

 

[Tawnos]

That's a really long rant. Breathe.

1) Coaches can be more knowledgeable than regular people without being perfect. Sometimes coaches are wrong. Same thing with GMs.

2) Coaches have to deal with the human factor of players and be biased due to their relationship with a player that fans do not have.

Where is the inherent virtue in being unbiased though? If it was ONLY a numbers game, then yes. Staying objective would be important. But it isn't. The human element to things is very important.

I work for a retail music instrument company. For YEARS, the people that got promoted to be managers were the people with the best sales numbers. Upper management didn't trust store management to make the right decisions, so the decision was taken off their plate. The thing is that the best salespeople don't always make the best managers. Eventually, that changed and there's no longer a sales minimum to get a promotion. The management teams within stores are much, much better now and it makes for a better company. The totally objective method didn't work as well as the subjective, and therefore biased, store manager assessment. (If you think there aren't heavy similarities to building a sports team and a sales team, you're dead wrong)

Informed bias is a good thing as long as the right person is making the decisions. That doesn't mean people can't make mistakes, but the reason for the mistake is not that the person is too biased. It's that it's impossible to be perfect.