If Trouba is so thoroughly mediocre and vastly overpaid, I'm not sure where the interest will be.
Prospect Info: Nils Lundkvist: Part II
- Thread starter aufheben
- Start date
- Status
based off of performance this season I don’t see how it’s incorrect.
He’s been better sans Skjei but that sample
Size is small.
I keep hearing this argument that Trouba consistently have more difficult assignments than Fox and DeAngelo. Do we actually have any real stats that suggest this? Because I have seen Fox out against teams' top lines fairly regularly and performing quite well in those situations. So I am curious if it really is so disproportionate how they are used against tough assignments.
Also for the sake of this argument we are talking about the RD so Robertson and Jones shouldn't be in the discussion. The question really is, will Lundkvist pan out? Obviously it is a gamble but even if it doesn't pan out, finding a solid 3rd pair RD won't be that hard. But I rather go with Fox and ADA as my 1RD and 2RD than to have Trouba replace either one of them, especially with his contract. I see Lundkvist at the very least being a capable 3RD, which fits into our plans. Anything more than that is just gravy.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,872
- 40,409
Lundkvist himself expects to start in Hartford. He was very clear about that last month. There's really no reason to get ahead of ourselves and expect him to make the team, forcing us to make a decision. The 3 guys on the right will all be there next season.
DeAngelo starts 39% of his shifts in the offensive zone against 30% in the defensive zone. Fox is at 33/28. Trouba is at 27/34, 5v5 per Corsica. Unfortunately the QoC stats out there aren't particularly good, or not really good for showing much. Like I could tell you that the CF% QoC for those three has Trouba on top, but separated by a half-percent, with basically the entire defense separated by a point. So you can't tell anything from that.
I think based on zone starts and observing match ups, it was pretty clear Quinn would try to have the Skjei-Trouba pairing out there as often as possible, and would try to get them out on the fly against top lines as much as possible. Again, all the stats that I'm aware of, not really great at illustrating that. That's what I saw, though.
I also saw an increasingly reliance on Fox and Lindgren as the season wore on. Particularly Fox. He's good at everything. I do also feel that Quinn recognizes DeAngelo is defensively limited and tries to put him in a position to succeed as much as possible, while keeping him away from offensively gifted lines, particularly those with weight to them.
YoSoyLalo
me reading HF
So we can both agree that defensively they are both not very good. And I'm sure offensively DeAngelo is miles ahead of him. But DeAngelo will likely be a $5.5-6mill defenseman while Trouba an $8mill defenseman. But somehow DeAngelo is the one you rather trade than Trouba?
Where did I say that I'd rather trade Deangelo than Trouba? I wouldn't trade either of them. I'd rather move ADA or Fox to the left side than trade one of our RD for a LD that'll probably be worse than what we're trading.
And no, I don't agree that Trouba isn't very good defensively at all lmao. I think that's pretty clear. You just like putting words in my mouth.
YoSoyLalo
me reading HF
We still need him. Defense would be smurfsville without him on it, and yes, it matters.
BBKers
Registered User
Replacing Staal and Smith in a year with Lundqvist and Miller should be a plus. We will see what happens
Does everyone here really think a long term solution for the rangers is to move one of their RD to LD?
- May 30, 2013
- 42,963
- 18,384
Why should they ? Can’t hand Lundkvist a spot . IF plays great then they can figure it out
What if a RD gets hurt ? Can slide him in
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,872
- 40,409
They should, but they won't. Once Lundkvist earns his spot on the team (in 2021), they can tackle that issue. Until then, Fox, DeAngelo and Trouba will be playing on the right side
Blue Blooded
Most people rejected his message
It does, but Lindgren plays big and Robertson/Miller are 6'4 while Hajek/Rykov are 6'2 so we will likely have bigger/tougher guys on the left to compensate. Also not particularly worried about Fox against pretty much anyone.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,872
- 40,409
Blue Blooded
Most people rejected his message
I mean mid- to long term. They can just bring in someone like Nemeth or Claesson while playing Smith (who also plays "big") next year.
the second half of that is the key...they probably aren't going to move one of them if there are only 3. there is no point....but if Lundkvist is the real deal (which I think he is) and gets added as a 4th guy then decisions need to be made. and you have to weigh the options of moving one to the left vs the potential return in a trade.
I also think that many people are looking at this in a short term view, the left side of our blueline is atrocious right night. but the system is loaded with LHD, just cause the RHD are a little older and more ready doesn't mean we should just forget about all the LHD that we have coming. how those kids develop will also weigh in on the decision
Just look at total ice time and how many defensive zone shifts have been taken.
Fox has been for a while and hes done a better job with it.
When it comes to DeAngelo, you have to take into account the great equalizer
- May 30, 2013
- 42,963
- 18,384
not exactly referring to "for Lundkvist". I think it should be a long term strategy regardless of how Lundkvist develops.
- May 30, 2013
- 42,963
- 18,384
it's a good way to get your three really good RHD lots of the minutes you want them to have.
I'd like all three of them getting 20+ minutes of TOI a game between all situations unless we somehow find a similar embarrassment of riches on the left side.
Yes, but that does not make him a good defender or play less sheltered minutes
- Sep 1, 2010
- 9,806
- 7,684
I think Brooks' argument, that NYR should park Nils and K'Andre in Hartford, and leave them there all season, resist temptation to call up, makes a lot of sense.
They both would benefit and just be more ready when needed.
Next year is (hopefully) the final transition season, get through it without those 2.
They both would benefit and just be more ready when needed.
Next year is (hopefully) the final transition season, get through it without those 2.
- Status
