Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
skullsmasher

New York Rangers

26 posts in this topic

Hate to say it but that team might be the real deal finally. 7 in a row and they seem deeper than I can ever remember them being. Thoughts? Is this a deep playoff running team? Tough to answer realistically without being biased for me..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gonna (hopefully and possibly) die out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

greattt....i hope not im sure im not the only guy who knows to many ranger fans

Edited by justdo3043

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have had possibly the easiest schedule in the entire league. Look at the teams they're played this year. Out of 16 games, I count maybe 3-4 hard opponents. Just wait till they hit real playoff teams.

EDIT: Yep: http://www.playoffstatus.com/nhl/easternsosag.html

The Rangers have had the 4th easiest schedule in the league thus far. For comparison, Devils have had the 7th hardest schedule. Plus I don't think that link includes tonight's games - ie, the Rangers playing the Islanders and Devils playing Boston. Rangers probably moved up a spot or two on easiest schedule list while Devils moved up on hardest schedule.

Edited by Amberite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have had possibly the easiest schedule in the entire league. Look at the teams they're played this year. Out of 16 games, I count maybe 3-4 hard opponents. Just wait till they hit real playoff teams.

I hate this 'schedule' argument with the Rangers, it's ridiculous. First of all, did they not beat the Canucks and Sharks (thought they beat the Kings too but that was an OT loss), arguably the two toughest teams they've played? Secondly, I guess people forgot or overlooked their Around the World odyssey to start the season. Going from Europe to NY to Western Canada and back is a joke...and they went .500 on a trip that made our nightmare trip to begin '07-08 that everyone complained about look like child's play.

Maybe it's just their usual October-November hot start, but it's certainly better than I thought they'd be at this point, partly because of the trip. And yes, they are better than they've been in prior years because of Richards and the young defensemen developing - and for all the bellyaching about how we miss Zajac, they've also done this without Marc Staal (their best d-man) btw.

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate this 'schedule' argument with the Rangers, it's ridiculous. First of all, did they not beat the Canucks, Sharks and Kings? Secondly, I guess people forgot or overlooked their Around the World odyssey to start the season. Going from Europe to NY to Western Canada and back is a joke...and they went .500 on a trip that made our nightmare trip to begin '07-08 that everyone complained about look like child's play.

Maybe it's just their usual October-November hot start, but it's certainly better than I thought they'd be at this point, partly because of the trip. And yes, they are better than they've been in prior years because of Richards and the young defensemen developing - and for all the bellyaching about how we miss Zajac, they've also done this without Marc Staal (their best d-man) btw.

Don't discount the "schedule" argument so easily. Take a look at the strength of schedule for both eastern and western coast teams:

http://www.playoffstatus.com/nhl/easternsosag.html

http://www.playoffstatus.com/nhl/westernsosag.html

Notice a pattern? In general, the teams at the bottom of the lists (ie, teams with easiest schedules) are the teams with a higher Self % (winning percentage) than the teams at the top of the lists. Yes, the Rangers beat a few good teams, but so does every team in the league (including the Devils). That doesn't discount the fact that out of their 16 games, maybe 4 were against real opposition. You provide a schedule like that to almost any team in the league, and you'll have a nice record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't discount the "schedule" argument so easily. Take a look at the strength of schedule for both eastern and western coast teams:

http://www.playoffstatus.com/nhl/easternsosag.html

http://www.playoffstatus.com/nhl/westernsosag.html

Notice a pattern? In general, the teams at the bottom of the lists (ie, teams with easiest schedules) are the teams with a higher Self % (winning percentage) than the teams at the top of the lists. Yes, the Rangers beat a few good teams, but so does every team in the league (including the Devils). That doesn't discount the fact that out of their 16 games, maybe 4 were against real opposition. You provide a schedule like that to almost any team in the league, and you'll have a nice record.

'Strength of schedule' is going to be very skewered after fifteen games because teams (like say, the Canucks and Sharks) can get off to slow starts. Besides, it's not as if they're squeaking by the majority of the time, they've won a few of these games fairly comfortably, and 10-3-3 is 10-3-3. WITHOUT their best defenseman and after an insane road trip.

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the rangers are not a good team, and are certainly not 'the real deal'. we'll see how they look with staal, but they're bad right now. tonight was an exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Strength of schedule' is going to be very skewered after fifteen games because teams (like say, the Canucks and Sharks) can get off to slow starts. Besides, it's not as if they're squeaking by the majority of the time, they've won a few of these games fairly comfortably, and 10-3-3 is 10-3-3. WITHOUT their best defenseman and after an insane road trip.

Come on, honestly, have you LOOKED at the games they've played? Here, let me do it for you, and I'll even bold the teams that are at least slightly good:

Kings (I'll barely give this - the Kings are almost a .500 team)

Ducks

Islanders

Canucks

Flames

Oilers

Jets

Maple Leafs

Senators

Sharks

Ducks

Canadiens

Jets

Senators

Hurricanes

Islanders

How can you look at that schedule and honestly think the Rangers are the "real deal"? That is like a who's who of the league's scrubs.

And here, take a look at our schedule thus far:

Flyers

Hurricanes

Kings

Predators

Sharks

Penguins

Kings

Coyotes

Stars

Maple Leafs

Flyers

Jets

Hurricanes

Capitals

Capitals

Boston

Notice a difference? So essentially, after 16 games, the Rangers have had 3 tough games, while we've had 13. Hmm.

Edited by Amberite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Strength of schedule' is going to be very skewered after fifteen games because teams (like say, the Canucks and Sharks) can get off to slow starts. Besides, it's not as if they're squeaking by the majority of the time, they've won a few of these games fairly comfortably, and 10-3-3 is 10-3-3. WITHOUT their best defenseman.

Actually, looking at their record, it's a case of the way the NHL separates wins and losses that makes teams look better on paper. The NYR are a 10-6 team in all reality just like the Devils are an 8-8 team.

I just hate how this league separates losses in OT/SO and "regualtion" losses in actual standings. Separating them is one thing as a stat, but completely eliminating them from the actual loss column is another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you look at that schedule and honestly think the Rangers are the "real deal"? That is like a who's who of the league's scrubs.

Are there really a lot of 'bad' teams in the NHL though? They haven't even played the Blue Jackets, who are one of the few truly hideous teams. With all the parity in this league, there's a lot of below average/average/slightly above average teams and just about all of the teams you named fall in that general category. So do the Rangers, for that matter...but if they were below average or 'not that good' they wouldn't be doing as well as they have been so far.

we say this every year until they eventually fizzle mid-to-late January

That's the Ranger cynic's best argument, not the arbitrary schedule one, which doesn't take into account the length of the road trip. They are a bit like the football Giants in that they do tend to start well...we'll see where they are by the halfway point.

Notice a difference? So essentially, after 16 games, the Rangers have had 3 tough games, while we've had 13. Hmm.

But your classification of what a 'tough' game is is a bit arbitrary. Are Dallas and Phoenix going to be considered tough games by the end of the year? I certainly didn't think they'd be one when the season started but they've both gotten off to good starts. What's a tough game, playing a team that made the playoffs last year? One that's off to a good start this year? Plus the Isles are the Rangers' main rival, I'd hardly consider those 'easy' games, no matter where both teams are in the standings.

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there really a lot of 'bad' teams in the NHL though? They haven't even played the Blue Jackets, who are one of the few truly hideous teams. With all the parity in this league, there's a lot of below average/average/slightly above average teams and just about all of the teams you named fall in that general category. So do the Rangers, for that matter...but if they were below average or 'not that good' they wouldn't be doing as well as they have been so far.

Yes, there are plenty of 'bad' teams. Parity is bullsh!t and you should know that by now. Bottom-dwelling teams are there for a reason, and that is that they suck and can't compete on a consistent basis against top teams. The Rangers haven't just played poor competition thus far, they're played some of the worst teams in the league (barring Blue Jackets, as you pointed out).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A winning streak in the first two months of the season means nothing when the playoffs start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, let's look at score tied Fenwick among these teams:

Kings - 48.2%

Ducks - 41.0%

Islanders - 49.4%

Canucks - 53.4%

Flames - 50.8%

Oilers - 48.3%

Jets - 50.3%

Maple Leafs - 49.3%

Senators - 50.4%

Sharks - 52.4%

Ducks - 41.0%

Canadiens - 52.9%

Jets - 50.3%

Senators - 50.4%

Hurricanes - 47.3%

Islanders - 49.4%

Score tied Fenwick isn't going to be overly meaningful because of the schedule issues - teams who've played the Rangers twice get a boost, for instance, since the Rangers have been so poor. But still, NJ:

Flyers - 50.3%

Hurricanes - 47.3%

Kings - 48.2%

Predators - 42.4%

Sharks - 52.4%

Penguins - 52.6%

Kings - 48.2%

Coyotes - 51.9%

Stars - 46.4%

Maple Leafs - 49.3%

Flyers - 50.3%

Jets - 50.3%

Hurricanes - 47.3%

Capitals - 54.9%

Capitals - 54.9%

Boston - (Damn, the site seems to have eaten it right as I went to get this info)

Anyway, point is, the Rangers are going to play tougher teams, and they're going to struggle unless Lundqvist is really good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rags have a good team...no doubt, but every year in late Oct/Nov into Dec they play great and seem to be a top team......then the holidays come and after new years they are spent and play .500 and go on a losing streak near the end of the season..........just watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rags have a good team...no doubt, but every year in late Oct/Nov into Dec they play great and seem to be a top team......then the holidays come and after new years they are spent and play .500 and go on a losing streak near the end of the season..........just watch.

I sure hope so...There is nothing I hate more than happy ranger fans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Philthy and Rangs are scary -- part of me is glad they're both closer to doing things right -- I mean at least there is a whiff of hockey in there. BUT the other part of me still has my hockey sensibilities offended because I just hate the heart of their system the very way I love the heart of the Devils system. In all honestly though I much prefer the entire league improving and playing the game as it should be despite the added competition.

To me the NHL is getting back to hockey in many respects and that can only be a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rags have a good team...no doubt, but every year in late Oct/Nov into Dec they play great and seem to be a top team......then the holidays come and after new years they are spent and play .500 and go on a losing streak near the end of the season..........just watch.

They have a very good coach in John Tortorella. He is an excellent team builder and if they buy into his system and his ways, this team can go far...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've definitely made themselves into a better team since ridding themselves of Gomez and Drury, without signing huge contracts to mediocre players, they put themselves in a better position no matter what else happens. They're defense, while young, is getting better, but without Staal, I think they'll falter eventually, as they really don't have anyone past Girardi who's truly proven themselves to be reliable.

As for their offense, it's far harder working and less buy a fading star player like than in past years. Adding Richards is definitely a boost for Gaborik who had a year even worse than Kovy's last year, but even with those two, the emergence of Stepan and Callahan being like a baby switched at birth that was meant for the Devils, yet somehow finding his way to the Rags, they're still lacking a bit as far in the department of top end talent.

So the bottom line for me is that they're a much better team than in the past, but they're still one or two steps away from being a "top tier" team in the Eastern Conference. We've all seen the Rags make hot starts and fall off as the year goes on and Torts wears on their minds, but I believe they can definitely make the playoffs this year, not in the top 4, but they can really challenge for the 5-8 spots.

My prediction: They make the playoffs, but it'll be a first round exit for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0