New York RangersVerified account@NYRangers3h #NYR Numbers Update: Michael Kostka – 4 Matthew Lombardi – 45
Steve Zipay@stevezipay · 2h Ryan Malone says he plans to skate witj NYR rest of week, has been speaking to Slats, hopes to prove himself Stephen@StephenCLorenzo · 4h Ryan Malone out here skating with #NYR at practice facility
I would love to see Kreider on the Brass/Zucc line. Find out once and for all if the guy is real. He is a better Pouliott I think. More speed and better around the net...he likes to hit now...that could be very interesting. Hope they listen.
Larry Brooks @NYP_Brooksie33m As expected, #NYR have signed Ryan Malone....Believed 2-way deal, $700,000 NHL Low risk, stands in front of the net on the PP, has skills and is huge and has a major mean streak, replaces Boyle's size on the 4th line
Much better than Pou, will give Brass and Zucc alot of skating room with his size, speed and toughness
Hopefully he beats out Glass for the LW spot and Glass is sent to the minors like what happened with Asham.
you know if you omit the characters "'s #4" in that last post the sentence takes on an entirely different meaning
Absolutely astonishing that this team did nothing to improve at center. We have an unbelievable void at the most prolific scoring position, and the everyone wonders why this team doesn't score goals?
I don't know about this. Stepan is a borderline #1 center. Yes, he isn't a true #1 in the way that Crosby or Toews is, but not every team has one of those guys, and the only way to get one of those guys is to have one of the first picks in the draft or trade for one. Neither is going to happen, so Stepan's as good as it will get at the #1 center position for the Rangers. Brassard is what he is. Good #3 center who provides excellent offense. He's good to score you 40-50 points a year and he's good on the PP. Moore's still there as the #4 center. We all know what he is, and he's very good at his role. What's missing is a #2 center. The reason why the Rangers didn't sign one is because that's what they expect JT Miller to be in the future. At some point, you just have to give the kid a spot where he's not just filling in because of an injury or playing out of position. Its very hard to develop in that role. You give him a guaranteed spot and let him grow into the #2 center role. I think the Rangers are hoping that three or four years down the road that Stepan's the #1, Miller's grown into the #2 role and Brassard is still the #3 center. Losing Brad Richards isn't a big loss. They will miss his points this year, but thats all he was good for. Down the road, JT Miller can be much better in that #2 center role than Richards would have been if he wasn't bought out.
Traverse City tournament starts tonight. Duclair and Hayes are the players to watch out for. Hayes is playing at center on the top line. Duclair at LW on the second line.
Really? Among Centers last season Derek Stepan Ranked: 26th among points (57) A Putrid 55th in Goals scored (17) FYI Both Richards and Brassard had more goals Maybe he isn't taking enough shots then? His 199 Shots ranked him 9th among centers. This gave him a mind-boggling 8.5% shooting percentage, ranking him 145th AMONG CENTERS The beauty of this is that those shots that miss everyone/everything and smash off the glass don't even count as shots on goals!!! His percentage is even lower when taken into consideration. Want to know why this team doesn't score? Look at your "Boarderline #1 Center". He can not score.
Even though Hackett never responded to this when I originally posted it, I was hoping he had at least read it and absorbed the information, but I guess not. ------ You're still using goal scoring statistics to evaluate a playmaker. It's just silly cherry picking on your part to try and justify a wrong opinion. But if this is the hill you want to die on, all we have to do is look back to the previous season to see where Stepan fell in these ranks. 10th among all centers (23rd overall) in shooting percentage 6th (18th overall) in goals. By the way, as someone who advocated trading Stepan+ for Ryan Kesler, you'll get a kick out of this one: First 4 NHL seasons: Stepan: .25 goals per game, 11.4 shot percentage Kesler: .16 goals per game, 9.6 shot percentage When you combine that with his playmaking (15th in assists this year, 12th last year), and defense (very positive relative corsi for % despite facing toughest matchups among all NYR forwards), he's a pretty damn good hockey player.
I'll respond to it right now: The number one criticism of this team last year was they do not score enough goals. Our "#1" center last year had the stats I reported above. He plays the most prolific scoring position on the ice, but does not score. Therefore you have two choices: 1) Get a better #1 Center 2) Accept him as a "playmaker", and not expect any scoring from that position. I have chosen option 1, you have chosen option 2. What other response could I possibly give you? Furthermore, your quote "very positive relative corsi for % despite facing toughest matchups among all NYR forwards" is not accurate; Please see: Boyle, Brian and Hagelin, Carl.
The point of the post was to show you how silly it is to use a volatile statistic like shooting % in such a small sample size like one season. The year before he was top 10 among all centers in goals scored and shooting %, so clearly he is a bonafide #1 center. See how ridiculous this is? And anyone should and would prefer to have a better #1 center, but we both know that's not where this discussion stems from. It comes from http://forums.theganggreen.com/thre...fseason-thread-13-14postseason.68195/page-726 So the two choices seem to be: 1) Derek Stepan is a good hockey player 2) Derek Stepan is not a good hockey player What does this mean? Among all NYR regular forwards last year, he was first in corsi relative to competition and second in quality of competition.
Easy choice to me: 1 by a landslide. He flat out sucked last year, and was the worst scoring first line center in the league. Pretty silly to use a volatile statistic like corsi in such a small sample size like one season
