SA16
Sixstring
Smith was a good player before the Rangers, and while with the Rangers, until he got scapegoated for AV's awful defensive system (which did not get any better once he left the team).
Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo (MOD WARNINGS: Post #12/#900)
- Thread starter free0717
- Start date
- Status
Smith was a lazy piece of crap who got married and decided to just take the money from his new contract. He was a disgrace and an embarrassment to himself and his family. He deserved to rot in the minors. As far as DeAngelo goes, I've said it 100 times He has absolutely no NHL future as a defenseman. The organization needs to move him to wing. He has NHL offensive skills on a pretty high level. None as a defenseman.
mas0764
Registered User
- Jul 16, 2005
- 13,832
- 11,203
silverfish
got perma'd
Okay but how do you really feel?
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
I mean, my takes are better than the dude who hinges his entire argument on stats against teenagers.
I think ADA is still a solid prospect. But I’m also not so desperate as to cite CHL stats of a guy who will be 23 to open the season.
But by all means. Rely on CHL stats for a 23 year old. Most of us will enjoy the laugh.
Last edited:
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
I don’t recall anyone ever saying that Miller was a #1 pick or the best ever, though.
Only the hottest of takes, I guess.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
The two are not mutually inclusive, IMO. Smith sucked but so did AV’s system. They were both terrible.
eco's bones
Registered User
Until Anthony starts doing really positive stuff there are going to be doubts. What I saw last year I liked Pionk quite a lot better. That doesn't mean I think Neal is more skilled but he's close enough and he did better with what tools he had.
Tony has his work cut out for him. He's not going to be the first powerplay guy probably right off. That's going to be Shattenkirk. A top 4 d-man needs to be a good special teams player and it's either power play, penalty kill or both. It can't be none. He's got to push himself into the picture.
Pionk pushed himself into the picture late last year. People carp about his possession numbers but when you're a brand new to the NHL guy and on D and on a depleted roster--thrown into the deep end--asked to kill penalties--asked to line up against other teams top players every night that's asking a lot. Most (especially rookie pros) rookies get broken in very softly--the Rangers tossed him into the deep end and they didn't throw him a lifesaver. He responded well. DeAngelo will have to outplay him--will have to show that he can be an all situations guy. I would like to see him do that because if he does the Rangers will be better for it.
Tony has his work cut out for him. He's not going to be the first powerplay guy probably right off. That's going to be Shattenkirk. A top 4 d-man needs to be a good special teams player and it's either power play, penalty kill or both. It can't be none. He's got to push himself into the picture.
Pionk pushed himself into the picture late last year. People carp about his possession numbers but when you're a brand new to the NHL guy and on D and on a depleted roster--thrown into the deep end--asked to kill penalties--asked to line up against other teams top players every night that's asking a lot. Most (especially rookie pros) rookies get broken in very softly--the Rangers tossed him into the deep end and they didn't throw him a lifesaver. He responded well. DeAngelo will have to outplay him--will have to show that he can be an all situations guy. I would like to see him do that because if he does the Rangers will be better for it.
I'm hopeful for DeAngelo. Between his production in the OHL, Syracuse, and Arizona, plus watching him on the Rangers, it's clear that he has legitimate offensive skill. Personally, I think his coverage in the D zone is poor and I don't think he is a good defensive player yet. I don't think +/- is a great stat, but statistically, the odds of him posting a +/- rate worse than -20 per 82 games in 4 of his last 5 stops, and that being a coincidence (ie all the situations he's been put in were so disadvantageous that he posted outlier results despite being fantastic himself) is pretty low. That said, it's tough to imagine that, combined with skating and stick skills, he could have such good hockey sense in the offense zone and not be capable of playing at least solid defense if he really cared about it. My guess is that the issues are maturity and time / comfort with a system (he hasn't played more than 40 games with the same team since 4 teams ago). I don't know if it will happen this year or not, but both of those strike me as things that should be fixable issues.
Separately, I think we are getting carried with all the assertions that players who were 2nd line / 3rd line tweeners last year are magically going to become first liners now that they aren't coached by AV. Firstly, there aren't very many cases where genuinely talented / skilled players are so dramatically suppressed by a system. Secondly, I don't think AV is that bad of a coach. He had some faults to be sure. His D zone scheme was complicated, he might have been better suited for an older team, and he might have had a shelf-life, but he's a 2-time Stanley Cup finalist with a 60% winning percentage in the NHL. Everyone says his results are just a function of coaching great players, but when he swapped teams with Tortorella, who is a Stanley Cup winning coach in his own right, Vancouver dropped off a cliff and the Rangers had the best season they've had in the last 20+ years. I think he just gets the blame for the facts that Martin St Louis and Brad Richards got old and retired, we let Stralman go, Girardi and Stall got old and declined and the level of talent on our team became much worse over the past 5 years when that really had nothing to do with him. For example, I think it's very likely that our issues in the defensive zone last year had a lot more to do with the fact that we were playing 4 rookie defensemen than the fact that we were using a system that 2 teams have made it to Stanley Cup finals with.
I think the reality is that to be an above-average coach in the NHL, you have to be one of the 10-15 best hockey coaches in the world. It's tough to find one of those guys who doesn't have already have an NHL job. There's a reason that, across sports, the success rate of newly hired coaches is so low. Based on the options available to us, Quinn seems like a perfectly reasonable and well-qualified hire to me, but I think the expectations for how much players are going to improve away from AV are totally unrealistic.
Separately, I think we are getting carried with all the assertions that players who were 2nd line / 3rd line tweeners last year are magically going to become first liners now that they aren't coached by AV. Firstly, there aren't very many cases where genuinely talented / skilled players are so dramatically suppressed by a system. Secondly, I don't think AV is that bad of a coach. He had some faults to be sure. His D zone scheme was complicated, he might have been better suited for an older team, and he might have had a shelf-life, but he's a 2-time Stanley Cup finalist with a 60% winning percentage in the NHL. Everyone says his results are just a function of coaching great players, but when he swapped teams with Tortorella, who is a Stanley Cup winning coach in his own right, Vancouver dropped off a cliff and the Rangers had the best season they've had in the last 20+ years. I think he just gets the blame for the facts that Martin St Louis and Brad Richards got old and retired, we let Stralman go, Girardi and Stall got old and declined and the level of talent on our team became much worse over the past 5 years when that really had nothing to do with him. For example, I think it's very likely that our issues in the defensive zone last year had a lot more to do with the fact that we were playing 4 rookie defensemen than the fact that we were using a system that 2 teams have made it to Stanley Cup finals with.
I think the reality is that to be an above-average coach in the NHL, you have to be one of the 10-15 best hockey coaches in the world. It's tough to find one of those guys who doesn't have already have an NHL job. There's a reason that, across sports, the success rate of newly hired coaches is so low. Based on the options available to us, Quinn seems like a perfectly reasonable and well-qualified hire to me, but I think the expectations for how much players are going to improve away from AV are totally unrealistic.
I think the view that Pionk did great and DeAngelo did poorly is one that illustrates the problems with evaluating players, especially somewhat "bubble" players. Pionk passes the eye test, gets praised highly for it, has poor underlying numbers. DeAngelo has good underlying numbers, but doesn't pass everyone's eye test. People are generally harder on him.
And I like Pionk, but...I think people are being too quick to overlook the stats that say he struggled quite a bit defensively with the minutes he was given. Still plenty of time for him to develop into a good player and all but we shouldn't ignore the things that say he has some issues as well.
e: the thing about Smith being out of shape is kind of a BS excuse IMO. Yeah maybe he wasn't in his best shape, but the ultimate problem wasn't with his fitness on the ice, it was he could not keep himself from trying to do everything like he was a star player. He's capable of games now and then where he'll just dominate, but he keeps trying to chase those games and the vast majority of the time he just can't play like that. Instead he turns pucks over, makes bad decisions, etc. He needs a coach to keep him reigned in and to play within his abilities on a consistent basis.
And I like Pionk, but...I think people are being too quick to overlook the stats that say he struggled quite a bit defensively with the minutes he was given. Still plenty of time for him to develop into a good player and all but we shouldn't ignore the things that say he has some issues as well.
e: the thing about Smith being out of shape is kind of a BS excuse IMO. Yeah maybe he wasn't in his best shape, but the ultimate problem wasn't with his fitness on the ice, it was he could not keep himself from trying to do everything like he was a star player. He's capable of games now and then where he'll just dominate, but he keeps trying to chase those games and the vast majority of the time he just can't play like that. Instead he turns pucks over, makes bad decisions, etc. He needs a coach to keep him reigned in and to play within his abilities on a consistent basis.
Last edited:
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
I think Smith’s fitness is a big issue. His first instinct is to skate the puck out of trouble and his escapability is a big factor in how often he’ll be successful in doing so. The decision making will be an issue, but if the quickness is there, he’ll get away with a lot more.
He did not excite me for some reason, maybe if he plays very physical and agitates players similar to Avery then I am interested, otherwise I don't think he was much future here.
Rangers ftw
Registered User
- May 8, 2007
- 2,387
- 435
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
Yeah the Rangers were shooting at like 0.0001% when he was on the ice. It happens. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t playing well, at all.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,868
- 40,383
Lays
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2017
- 13,559
- 12,630
Who hacked your account, @Machinehead or @silverfish??
Seriously though, I agree with you. TDA shouldn’t be underrated and Pionk shouldn’t be overrated. Pionk to me is a 3rd pairing D with potential to go up. I love him in that capacity and role. TDA is a mess, but like I’ve said numerous times, he really seems like one of those kids that you make your own bed with. There is zero reasons to — not — expect him to solidify his game if he is given patience. But he must get those games/seasons.
I think TDA puck tempo is underrated. I love that. There is zero hesitation from his side to just put tempo into the passing game on the point by making simple passes when needed. He executes fast. He can be spectacular when needed. This is rare and a great ability. No hangups like the older generation PPQBs offers. Should be useful!
eco's bones
Registered User
It's a fair assessment of all concerned. Again the roster is kind of depleted and we're putting players in situations above their experience/skillset. We're calling guys 1st liners or 1st pairing who really aren't--who are playing those roles but can't consistently play to the level of those roles.
DeAngelo has to do better than 8 points in 32 games. His offensive abilities are much better than that. Maybe Quinn and the new coaching staff will make a big difference for him. Defense IMO is the hardest position to learn and offensive minded guys tend to take more chances but they also have to get to a level where they're somewhat reliable at doing both offense and defense. I suspect Tony got away with things in the CHL that he's gotten burned for in the pros. He needs to accentuate his strengths of offense and he needs to balance out his game by being more reliable defensively.
The idea he is going to be the next Coffey is not going to happen.
Richard Banger
Mamba Mentality
silverfish
got perma'd
Yes, it me. Youngest VP in Dunder Mifflin history. Tried to reach for the stars and fell hard. Now I'm back as a temp, taking names of all the people who wrong me when I make my way back to the top.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
How long does he have to solidify his game, though? He's going to be 23. This is basically a make-or-break season for him.
I think DeAngelo still has second pairing upside with a very outside chance of a Shattenkirk-like game, but he's got a ton of work to do to get there.
He's more Andy Delmore than Kevin Shattenkirk right now at this stage of his career. He should improve, but I don't think we're going to see a ton of revisions in his game.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
Mac n Gs
Gorton plz
- Jan 17, 2014
- 22,590
- 12,855
To play Devil’s Advocate, he’s not saying he’s going to be Paul Coffey. He’s saying that he has a history of driving play and being successful throughout juniors and has shown that he performs well when he’s surrounded by better talent, like in Tucson and Syracuse.
He had a bad start to the year here, but he did very well after his second call up. He was one of the better scoring dmen in Hartford (0.45 ppg) and he was a good powerplay qb with 6 PPA in 29 games. Sproul and Gilmour had 11 and 12, respectively, but each had 15-20 more games played than Tony.
I agree with what Jon said about the second-pairing ppqb upside, and I think it may even have the potential to be a bit more than that. All of his underlying metrics show that he was a player that drove possession and had quality passing leading to better scoring chances in the offensive zone. If I had to deploy him, I’d give him heavy 5v5 and PP usage rather than PK in an effort to maximize his offensive output.
Just as general question, why do people think Pionk has more offensive potential than ADA? I like Pionk’s game a lot and think he handled himself decently well for a kid that was thrown straight to the wolves, but I didn’t see anything that suggests he’d pace for 40 points like he did in his NHL stint.
He had a bad start to the year here, but he did very well after his second call up. He was one of the better scoring dmen in Hartford (0.45 ppg) and he was a good powerplay qb with 6 PPA in 29 games. Sproul and Gilmour had 11 and 12, respectively, but each had 15-20 more games played than Tony.
I agree with what Jon said about the second-pairing ppqb upside, and I think it may even have the potential to be a bit more than that. All of his underlying metrics show that he was a player that drove possession and had quality passing leading to better scoring chances in the offensive zone. If I had to deploy him, I’d give him heavy 5v5 and PP usage rather than PK in an effort to maximize his offensive output.
Just as general question, why do people think Pionk has more offensive potential than ADA? I like Pionk’s game a lot and think he handled himself decently well for a kid that was thrown straight to the wolves, but I didn’t see anything that suggests he’d pace for 40 points like he did in his NHL stint.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
No, he said, and I quote, "At the time I thought he legitimately had Paul Coffey-level upside and I still think he does."
It's a laughable statement worthy of scorn. The idea that ADA has Paul Coffey-level upside is hilarious. To STILL think ADA has that upside after it's been shown to be abundantly clear that he does not is somehow even funnier.
- Status
