Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part VIII: Dilly Dilly - Lets Tank!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gardner McKay

RIP, Jimmy.
Jun 27, 2007
25,702
14,592
SoutheastOfDisorder
The hockey advanced stats guys are starting to put their 2018-19 models/projections out.



Rangers are the 2nd worst team in the NHL in this model. 75 points. They had 77 points last season.


I'm not having a hard time believing that we will be a bottom 5 team. I have a very hard time understanding why Boston is at the top and how Ottawa is above us.
There's a reason why a lot of posters who used to post here don't post anymore. And it's because they pointed this out, backed it up with new metrics people didn't like, and essentially got chased from the boards.

So, no. It may have been obvious to you, but it was not obvious to everyone.

Or because they had a pompous, holier than thou attitude that people didn't like. :dunno:
 

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
41,932
52,349
In High Altitoad
I'm not having a hard time believing that we will be a bottom 5 team. I have a very hard time understanding why Boston is at the top and how Ottawa is above us.


Or because they had a pompous, holier than thou attitude that people didn't like. :dunno:

Boston is good. They weren't too far off from being the best team in the league (Regular season) Last year.

Ottawa is a mess, but I'd imagine that what ever went into the projection is banking on Anderson to bounce back to a level of respectability and for EK to be EK for the entire season.

The harsh reality that no one wants to face: Ottawa needs fewer things to bounce their way in order to be competitive than the Rangers do.
 

NYR Viper

Registered User
Sep 9, 2007
47,010
16,806
Jacksonville, FL
For sure, but when you're debating with facts against other people's subjectivity, it's hard to not act like you're right... because you are :dunno:

Statistics are a tool to help paint a picture of a player. Not all statistics are properly even relevant. I think that is sometimes forgotten by those who live and die on the hill that is statistical analysis in hockey specifically.
 

silverfish

got perma'd
Jun 24, 2008
34,644
4,353
under the bridge
Statistics are a tool to help paint a picture of a player. Not all statistics are properly even relevant. I think that is sometimes forgotten by those who live and die on the hill that is statistical analysis in hockey specifically.
Why did you beat my edit stop being so fast.

speed/60 off the charts
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYR Viper

Gardner McKay

RIP, Jimmy.
Jun 27, 2007
25,702
14,592
SoutheastOfDisorder
Boston is good. They weren't too far off from being the best team in the league (Regular season) Last year.

Ottawa is a mess, but I'd imagine that what ever went into the projection is banking on Anderson to bounce back to a level of respectability and for EK to be EK for the entire season.

The harsh reality that no one wants to face: Ottawa needs fewer things to bounce their way in order to be competitive than the Rangers do.
I know Boston is good. I just don't believe they are likely to finish with the most points.

I don't know that I agree about Ottawa. In fact, I strongly disagree. Their forward group is a joke. Their only real forward threat, Stone, will likely be traded/walk away. Duchene is horribly overrated. Karlsson will be gone and their defense also is a joke. Chabot will be good but they are a dumpster fire.

They, like us, have an aging goalie but we have a significantly better goaltending pipeline (we have an overall better prospect pool) than they do. I don't disagree with you often but I personally believe there is no argument that Ottawa is the worst team now and will be the worst team for a very long time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GodlyRangers

Drew4u

Registered User
Jul 22, 2016
1,637
522
Boston is good. They weren't too far off from being the best team in the league (Regular season) Last year.

Ottawa is a mess, but I'd imagine that what ever went into the projection is banking on Anderson to bounce back to a level of respectability and for EK to be EK for the entire season.

The harsh reality that no one wants to face: Ottawa needs fewer things to bounce their way in order to be competitive than the Rangers do.

How so? Ottawa's locker room is a complete mess, their forward core is worse and Anderson was one of the worst goaltenders last year. I really think with a new coach this team could be competitive.
 

NYR Viper

Registered User
Sep 9, 2007
47,010
16,806
Jacksonville, FL
Why did you beat my edit stop being so fast.

speed/60 off the charts

Boring day at work. I actually really like the use of the stats we have (although I am still learning and it's a slow go for me). I do think that the interpretation of the stats and what is useful vs noise is the difficult thing, like all things. It's the same difference between a technician and an engineer or an accountant and a finance person. Interpretation and deeper explanation
 
  • Like
Reactions: silverfish

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
29,061
10,752
Charlotte, NC
Well, that is the thing. When most of these metrics were brand new, it wasn't unreasonable for people to be skeptical on their legitimacy and usefulness.

You know what I mean?

Facts are facts (and truth is truth), but statistics is way more than the simple recitation of numbers. The specific stats cited and the way those stats are used is a subjective endeavor. It always has been and always will be.

There's a famous Mark Twain quote that comes to mind, although that was really a Benjamin Disraeli quote.
 

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
41,932
52,349
In High Altitoad
I know Boston is good. I just don't believe they are likely to finish with the most points.

I don't know that I agree about Ottawa. In fact, I strongly disagree. Their forward group is a joke. Their only real forward threat, Stone, will likely be traded/walk away. Duchene is horribly overrated. Karlsson will be gone and their defense also is a joke. Chabot will be good but they are a dumpster fire.

They, like us, have an aging goalie but we have a significantly better goaltending pipeline (we have an overall better prospect pool) than they do. I don't disagree with you often but I personally believe there is no argument that Ottawa is the worst team now and will be the worst team for a very long time.

Duchene may be overrated, but he's still probably better than all of our forwards (He would have been our top scorer last year.)

Again, all that really needs to happen for them is for EK to be EK, Stone to be Stone, Anderson to bounce back and Duchene to step up in a contract year.

Compare that to the Rangers, who need a new system to kick in, Steps forward from Kreider, Zibanejad, Buchnevich and Hayes. Zucc to not be declining and Hank to not get old among other things.

I don't expect Ottawa to have EK when the season starts so the point is moot, but if they stay as they are, I could see it.
 

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
41,932
52,349
In High Altitoad
How so? Ottawa's locker room is a complete mess, their forward core is worse and Anderson was one of the worst goaltenders last year. I really think with a new coach this team could be competitive.

Their high end forwards are better and they have a game changer in EK if he stays. Their toxic locker room situation has been solved now with the booting of Hoffman.

Again, I think the damage has been done with EK and even if he stays, that cloud will hang over them, but they really need 3 or 4 things to go their way, we need like double that.

The coaching change is not magic pixie dust for us. I like the change and am hopeful that it will go well, but I dont expect it to happen over night, we don't have the roster for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jas

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
29,061
10,752
Charlotte, NC
Their high end forwards are better and they have a game changer in EK if he stays. Their toxic locker room situation has been solved now with the booting of Hoffman.

Again, I think the damage has been done with EK and even if he stays, that cloud will hang over them, but they really need 3 or 4 things to go their way, we need like double that.

The coaching change is not magic pixie dust for us. I like the change and am hopeful that it will go well, but I dont expect it to happen over night, we don't have the roster for it.

The toxic locker room situation comes from the very top of the organization. Simply removing Hoffman isn't going to fix it.
 

Levitate

Registered User
Jul 29, 2004
31,059
7,850
I'm not having a hard time believing that we will be a bottom 5 team. I have a very hard time understanding why Boston is at the top and how Ottawa is above us.

Boston has a lot of guys who crush the fancy stats I think. That whole Bergeron Marchand line owns bones, McAvoy, etc. They're a good team, they turned it around real fast, they could easily be the best team in the league next season IMO. Could just as easily not be but they're a contender

If I had to guess it'd be that Ottawa did a far better job suppressing shots and scoring chances than the Rangers did last season and that helps boost them above the Rangers in the standings. Boucher runs a conservative system, Rangers allowed a shitton of high quality chances all the time, etc.

Also hard to use past stats under a different coach to predict exactly how things will be this season IMO but what else are you gonna do when you have a coach with no past history? I doubt the Rangers will be as bad shots for/again as they have been in recent years but that doesn't mean they'll bea good team

edit: Ottawa could be decent or really bad next season, though I lean towards bad. I think Boucher isn't a good coach, their owner and GM can't help being idiots and meddle, and they basically live and die by Karlsson who they still might trade.

Going forward I think the Rangers are in a much better position than Ottawa to be good but Ottawa might have a better top end potential for next season even if I don't think they'll live up to that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad