Post-Game Talk: RANGERS @ islanders

[aufheben]

W/r/t Strome, he doesn’t just take penalties, he’s in the 3th percentile for Penalty +/-, literally one of the worst in the league.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

W/r/t Strome, he doesn’t just take penalties, he’s in the 3th percentile for Penalty +/-, literally one of the worst in the league.

He's such a frustrating player. I like him offensively and he undoubtedly has good chemistry with Panarin.

But he's used on the PK and he's trusted by Quinn to play important matchups and minutes but he just really seems flat out lazy whenever he's not on the offense. Like his motor goes 100% when scoring a goal is possible but only 75% when trying to prevent one. Between his careless and listless back checking to his constantly being out of position defensively and then his abhorrent penchant for taking bad penalties, particularly stick infractions which are almost always lazy and avoidable. It's just very frustrating bc he's a talented player and it really seems like his issues defensively are effort.

Like you can tell his whole life he's been a skill player and probably didn't even think about defense until he was in the NHL and in his mind this is him caring. Idk. He plays like he's as good as Panarin and can afford to focus more on offense at all times. And yet the real irony is Panarin busts his ass all over the ice every game like he's Jesper Fast. It makes no sense.

 

[Blue Blooded]

He's such a frustrating player. I like him offensively and he undoubtedly has good chemistry with Panarin.

But he's used on the PK and he's trusted by Quinn to play important matchups and minutes but he just really seems flat out lazy whenever he's not on the offense. Like his motor goes 100% when scoring a goal is possible but only 75% when trying to prevent one. Between his careless and listless back checking to his constantly being out of position defensively and then his abhorrent penchant for taking bad penalties, particularly stick infractions which are almost always lazy and avoidable. It's just very frustrating bc he's a talented player and it really seems like his issues defensively are effort.

Like you can tell his whole life he's been a skill player and probably didn't even think about defense until he was in the NHL and in his mind this is him caring. Idk. He plays like he's as good as Panarin and can afford to focus more on offense at all times. And yet the real irony is Panarin busts his ass all over the ice every game like he's Jesper Fast. It makes no sense.

I hope the only reason he's used in those situations are his faceoff skills, because the defensive side of his game leaves a lot to be desired in my book and Quinn should pick up on this.

 

[ohbaby]

He's such a frustrating player. I like him offensively and he undoubtedly has good chemistry with Panarin.

But he's used on the PK and he's trusted by Quinn to play important matchups and minutes but he just really seems flat out lazy whenever he's not on the offense. Like his motor goes 100% when scoring a goal is possible but only 75% when trying to prevent one. Between his careless and listless back checking to his constantly being out of position defensively and then his abhorrent penchant for taking bad penalties, particularly stick infractions which are almost always lazy and avoidable. It's just very frustrating bc he's a talented player and it really seems like his issues defensively are effort.

Like you can tell his whole life he's been a skill player and probably didn't even think about defense until he was in the NHL and in his mind this is him caring. Idk. He plays like he's as good as Panarin and can afford to focus more on offense at all times. And yet the real irony is Panarin busts his ass all over the ice every game like he's Jesper Fast. It makes no sense.

Not sure I agree entirely on the degree of Strome's defensive lapses. But it is really puzzling why Panarin isn't on the PK. I believe he is our best defensive forward. Zibad is a very close second.

That play in OT, where he stands his ground at the blueline, as the 3 Isles enter the zone and strips the puck, is something you never see. Not 3 on 3. I could only imagine what he would do at the blueline on the PK. Our shorthanded goals would triple.

 

[kovazub94]

The Rangers have been scoring 3.43 5v5 GF/60 (60 GF%) with DeAngelo on the ice and 3.21 (59 GF%) with Fox compared to 2.12 (40 GF%) with neither of them.

Looking at Panarin specifically; 10+77 has scored 5.74 GF/60 (72 GF%), 10+23 5.4 GF/60 (84 GF%) and 10 without 23+77 3.24 GF/60 (56 GF%). 10+23+77 are at 12.05 GF/60 (89 GF%).

The suggestion that DeAngelo and Fox are significant drivers of Panarin's point production does not seem baseless.

I'm happy my eyes can still support fancy stats. : )

 

[ohbaby]

I'm happy my eyes can still support fancy stats. : )

I can see them just find, but it doesn't make it any easier to wrap my head around those stats. LOL

 

[Shesterkybomb]

The rule explicitly states that simply being in the crease isn't enough of a reason to disallow a goal.

"This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed."

And I doubt people have been saying in this conversation that he was in the crease screening the goalie, so therefore no goal.

I said he was in the crease interfering with the goalie....like everyone said.

 

[nyr2k2]

Count me among those that thought the waived-off goal call was trash. I can see why in live action they might have thought Georgiev was interfered with, but on replay? Georgiev wasn't restricted from moving in his crease, and the only contact was when Georgiev stepped into Lee and put both hands into his back. Terrible call, IMO.

I know some people feel it was somehow correct. Just remember this one the next time we get absolutely f***ed. LOL.

 

[ohbaby]

I said he was in the crease interfering with the goalie....like everyone said.

There was contact. Georgie made sure of it by going to the edge of the crease.. Sorry Landers no goal. LOL

That was so great.

 

[TominNC]

Count me among those that thought the waived-off goal call was trash. I can see why in live action they might have thought Georgiev was interfered with, but on replay? Georgiev wasn't restricted from moving in his crease, and the only contact was when Georgiev stepped into Lee and put both hands into his back. Terrible call, IMO.

I know some people feel it was somehow correct. Just remember this one the next time we get absolutely f*cked. LOL.

He was in the crease. So when Georgiev tried to skate out to the edge of the blue area, as is his right per the rules, and the Isles guy was in his way, then backed further in obstructing his view, while in the crease, that's no goal.

 

[Krams]

These Islander fans are delusional talking about the Trouba hit. They are going to start talking about crisis actors soon I swear to god.

It was about as clean of a hockey hit as you can get. Beautiful. Shoulder driven, not to the head. A lesson as to why you keep your head up. Glad MDC is alright, but Trouba made him his *****.

 

[Kaapo di tutti capi]

Count me among those that thought the waived-off goal call was trash. I can see why in live action they might have thought Georgiev was interfered with, but on replay? Georgiev wasn't restricted from moving in his crease, and the only contact was when Georgiev stepped into Lee and put both hands into his back. Terrible call, IMO.

I know some people feel it was somehow correct. Just remember this one the next time we get absolutely f*cked. LOL.

I tend to agree, but it's one of those things that's really open to interpretation by whichever individual happens to be officiating the game. We've certainly seen good goals called with WAY more interference than that (The 2013-2014 L.A. Kings say "hi"). The thing I find more interesting is Trotz challenging the call. Those kind of calls almost never get overturned. Luckily for him we didn't cash in on the ensuing power play.

 

[PuckLuck3043]

Looks like a good hit to me from those stills.

 

[Thirty One]

Looks like a good hit to me from those stills.

They have been doctored by the NHL, who is conspiring to lift the Rangers up and knock the Islanders down. It's shameful.

 

[kovazub94]

Count me among those that thought the waived-off goal call was trash. I can see why in live action they might have thought Georgiev was interfered with, but on replay? Georgiev wasn't restricted from moving in his crease, and the only contact was when Georgiev stepped into Lee and put both hands into his back. Terrible call, IMO.

I know some people feel it was somehow correct. Just remember this one the next time we get absolutely f*cked. LOL.

I think the exception is for the situations where opposing player is in the crease "elsewhere" - where he can't interfere with the play. In the last game this spot would be somewhere by the right post. What actually happened is Lee was in the area of the crease where Georgiev was attempting to move to and was prevented by him standing there already. No goal.

 

[PuckLuck3043]

They have been doctored by the NHL, who is conspiring to lift the Rangers up and knock the Islanders down. It's shameful.

Yes yes I know, and the refs are out to get them also. Butch Goring said so.

 

[Krams]

Looks like a good hit to me from those stills.

Clean as a whistle

 

[kovazub94]

Honestly during the game, especially late in the 2nd and during the 3rd period I thought refs allowed Isles to get away with a lot of obstruction interference.

 

[duhmetreE]

W/r/t Strome, he doesn’t just take penalties, he’s in the 3th percentile for Penalty +/-, literally one of the worst in the league.

The 3th?

 

[duhmetreE]

Strome makes some bad plays but he's not dumb. He has a high IQ for the game. Sometimes he tries something he shouldn't, instead of the simple and obvious play.

It happens with Panarin as well. He'll make a dangerous pass that leaves you wondering.

 

[Larrybiv]

This PO run we are on, is really becoming much closer to reality. (NOT that I ever questioned it being such, haha, lol)

Thursday Islanders next game in St. LOUIS (Good luck with that)
Friday is Colorado at Carolina (who is their goaltender?)
AND we have 3 games at hand on idle Columbus.

Now, all we have to do is, take care of business against Montreal.

We legitimately are RIGHT THERE, and winning 2 of next 3, bolts us quite possibly past Carolina and tied with the Jackets.

Then the REAL fun stuff happens. Home and home with Philly....... our next conquest moving up the PO ladder.

We win our next 3 then wooooohooooo!

To heck with the WC, am looking at at least 3rd place in Metro.

 

[nyr2k2]

He was in the crease. So when Georgiev tried to skate out to the edge of the blue area, as is his right per the rules, and the Isles guy was in his way, then backed further in obstructing his view, while in the crease, that's no goal.

Obstructing the goalie's view is fine, even in the crease. That's the definition of a screen. Kreider spends 2 minutes there each night. You can't prevent the goalie from movie freely about his crease or from making a save, and neither of those things happened. I just don't see it. It was a perfect screen, Georgiev could go wherever he wanted, he just couldn't see.

If it was ruled a good goal on the ice, 100% it would have stood had we challenged it.

 

[TominNC]

Obstructing the goalie's view is fine, even in the crease. That's the definition of a screen. Kreider spends 2 minutes there each night. You can't prevent the goalie from movie freely about his crease or from making a save, and neither of those things happened. I just don't see it. It was a perfect screen, Georgiev could go wherever he wanted, he just couldn't see.

If it was ruled a good goal on the ice, 100% it would have stood had we challenged it.

Georgiev was restricted from moving where he wanted/needed to be in his crease. There was contact. No goal. An offensive player goes in the blue paint he runs the risk of that call. At least they got rid of the nonsense from some years ago where even if you had a toe in the ther side it was a no goal, but this guy was right in front of the goalie and made contact.

 

[Hire Sather]

We've passed Columbus in playoff probability.

This honestly looks like a kid just scribbled

 

[nyr2k2]

Georgiev was restricted from moving where he wanted/needed to be in his crease. There was contact. No goal. An offensive player goes in the blue paint he runs the risk of that call. At least they got rid of the nonsense from some years ago where even if you had a toe in the ther side it was a no goal, but this guy was right in front of the goalie and made contact.

I understand the point about a goaltender being restricted, I just don't buy for one second that Georgiev WAS. He skated to the top of the crease and initiated contact on his own, not because he wanted that space but to draw attention to Lee's position. And it paid off for him. So, good on him. I just think it's bullshit, and coming from a guy who played goalie and always gives goalies the benefit of the doubt. JMO, though.