Revisiting the Rangers' Even Strength Shooting
With the draft still a few days away, it's a good time to look at a favorite topic of mine, even strength shooting. On average, nearly 80% of the game is played at even strength, so the ability to get shots on goal in this situation is of paramount importance. To illustrate that point, over the past four seasons, three of the Stanley Cup champions have finished 1st or 2nd in the league in SF/60, while three of the runners-up finished in the top 10. (The Pittsburgh Penguins are the exception in both cases, finishing in the bottom half of the league in both years)
As I showed last year, league wide the talent distribution does not change very much from year to year. From 2007-08 to 2009-10, forwards got approximately 7.5 SOG for every 60 minutes, while defensemen got on average 3.5 SOG per 60. On top of that, the forward group shoots about 9.6%, while the defensemen convert about 4.3% of their shots. Let's compare that to this year's data (as usual, stats courtesy of the venerable Gabe Desjardins of behindthenet.ca)
| ESS/60 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | ES SH% | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
| Forwards | 7.214 | 7.497 | 7.513 | 7.442 | Forwards | 9.640% | 9.647% | 9.529% | 9.457% | |
| Centers | 6.677 | 6.880 | 7.103 | 7.066 | Centers | 9.490% | 9.416% | 9.104% | 9.318% | |
| Wingers | 7.597 | 7.905 | 7.796 | 7.722 | Wingers | 9.735% | 9.780% | 9.796% | 9.552% | |
| Defensemen | 3.377 | 3.325 | 3.478 | 3.654 | Defensemen | 4.249% | 4.306% | 4.421% | 4.107% | |
| Total | 5.655 | 5.800 | 5.887 | 5.923 | Total | 8.332% | 8.402% | 8.313% | 8.134% |
While shooting overall continued to trend up, shooting percentage took a dip from the last few years. This is very likely due to the increase in shots from the defense, which are obviously of a lower quality than those coming from the forwards. So how did the 2010-11 NY Rangers measure up? Data after the jump.
I start with the forwards:
| NAME | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | Thru 29G | 2010-11 | SH% |
| BOYLE | 9.657 | 8.027 | 8.638 | 9.251 | 10.953 | 8.25% |
| DUPONT | 10.772 | 0.00% | ||||
| AVERY | 8.338 | 9.306 | 9.146 | 9.350 | 9.841 | 2.22% |
| GABORIK | 11.941 | 9.496 | 9.105 | 9.615 | 9.553 | 10.87% |
| CALLAHAN | 9.006 | 11.030 | 8.411 | 8.954 | 8.873 | 8.20% |
| ANISIMOV | 6.349 | 6.870 | 7.414 | 8.552 | 9.27% | |
| WEISE | 0.000 | 8.451 | 0.00% | |||
| DUBINSKY | 7.876 | 8.263 | 6.942 | 5.920 | 8.152 | 11.18% |
| FEDOTENKO | 6.115 |
7.743 | 8.266 | 8.831 | 7.884 | 7.21% |
| WOLSKI | 8.113 |
7.317 | 7.931 | 7.750 | 9.65% | |
| ZUCCARELLO | 7.579 | 6.67% | ||||
| PROSPAL | 8.060 | 6.912 | 6.624 | 7.530 | 15.91% | |
| STEPAN | 6.663 | 7.518 | 12.59% | |||
| LEAGUE AVG | 7.448 | 7.497 | 7.513 | 7.593 | 7.442 | 9.46% |
| FROLOV | 6.925 | 5.909 | 7.062 | 7.152 | 7.436 | 9.38% |
| KOLARIK | 7.160 | 0.00% | ||||
| DRURY | 7.480 | 7.131 | 6.853 | 6.257 | 4.17% | |
| CHRISTENSEN | 8.620 | 7.483 | 5.458 | 5.031 | 4.920 | 13.21% |
| PRUST | 5.230 | 5.073 | 4.237 | 4.585 | 12.16% | |
| NEWBURY | 4.471 | 0.00% | ||||
| WHITE | 4.519 | 5.374 | 5.349 | 4.802 | 3.831 | 12.50% |
| GRACHEV | 4.076 | 2.964 | 0.00% | |||
| BOOGAARD | 1.815 | 2.881 | 4.318 | 2.463 | 2.408 | 25.00% |
| WILLIAMS | 0.000 | 0.00% |
*Note Wolski's total includes data with PHX
I once again have included the previous years numbers to see for comparison's sake. The column 'Thru 29G' is exactly, that, it's the data I had when I looked at these numbers in December.
The name that immediately jumps out is also the name at the top of the list. Brian Boyle's amazing turnaround has been discussed at length all season, and this is just more evidence of how much he has grown. While he has always been above average by this metric, his well documented skating lessons translated to a brilliant season in getting shots. This increase helped make up for the fact that he had a below average (by league standards) shooting percentage. If he finds a way to improve that mark, he may just be able to sustain his 20 goal seasons.
As a whole, the Rangers team showed remarkable progress in this metric. While last year only four players managed an above average total, this year eight regular contributors were clear of the mark, not including half-season players Mats Zuccarello, Vinny Prospal and Wojtek Wolski. Unfortunately, this did not translate to goals, as the Rangers increased from 149 goals at 5v5 last year, to 150 this year.
Moving on to the defense:
| NAME | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-2010 | Thru 29G | 2010-11 | SH% |
| GILROY | 3.979 | 3.985 | 4.626 | 5.45% | ||
| MCCABE | 3.18 | 4.109 | 3.987 | 4.317 | 4.23% | |
| LEAGUE AVG | 3.324 | 3.325 | 3.478 | 3.540 | 3.654 | 4.11% |
| STAAL | 3.284 | 3.422 | 2.727 | 3.003 | 3.130 | 1.30% |
| DEL ZOTTO | 2.584 | 2.767 | 2.872 | 0.00% | ||
| GIRARDI | 4.576 | 3.412 | 3.685 | 2.154 | 2.468 | 3.28% |
| SAUER | 2.255 | 2.270 | 2.424 | 4.26% | ||
| MCDONAGH | 2.295 | 4.00% | ||||
| EMINGER | 3.925 | 2.714 | 2.182 | 1.276 | 1.405 | 9.52% |
| ROZSIVAL | 3.455 | 3.489 | 2.570 | 1.419 |
The Rangers' defense has a lot of strengths, putting the puck on net at even strength is not one of them. They were all as a group better than they had been at the 1/3 point of the season, but still considerably below average. The exception to that, as you see, was Matt Gilroy. Gilroy takes a lot of heat from fans, but he is really the best offensive threat that they have from the blueline. Not only was he the most frequent shooter this past year, but his shooting percentage was also the highest aside from Steve Eminger's 2 goals on 21 shots. If the team does not plan on adding a veteran puck mover, they would be wise to keep Matt around, as even a 'head on straight' Michael Del Zotto has yet to show a consistent ability to put the puck on net.
At this point, I must remind everyone that this is just one metric. Among the league leaders like Jeff Carter (12.92) and Rick Nash (12.66) also exists Ales Kotalik (12.02) and Jack Skille (12.55). Guys well below average include Henrik Sedin (5.66) and David Krejci (6.02). It's merely a reminder that if you believe the team needs more scoring, having guys that can get shots on goal is a good place to start.
57 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great stuff as usual.
A couple of observations. Avery needs to just give up on those shots from the top the left face off circle.
WW’s numbers don’t look that bad but can we realistically expect much more than that? Only can hope that his work with Underhill produced the same results as it did with Boyle.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 21, 2011 6:39 AM EDT reply actions
Well
1) I don’t see why you would want Avery to give that on-the-rush shot up. It creates a rebound and a positive movement towards goal, which is the point of the game. It’s not a bad shot at all.
2) WW’s shooting numbers are low because he has always been a possession-type forward. You’re right about the shooting numbers, but what he should be looking to improve is his shooting percentage – there is room for growth there.
3) While it was good to see Boyle improve, he clearly noted himself that it was his skating that improved, not necessarily his shooting. With better skating and balance, he was able to get into better positions, thus allowing him to shoot and (subsequently – because of his natural talent) score more. This also came with an opportunity of ice time, as I showed back in December.
Sorry Paris, this wasn’t meant to single you out, but your comments just got me thinking is all.
Blueshirt Banter - Muddling in Mediocrity - Fantasy Hockey Scouts
US Soccer/Red Sox Supporter
1) I don’t see why you would want Avery to give that on-the-rush shot up. It creates a rebound and a positive movement towards goal, which is the point of the game. It’s not a bad shot at all.
There was at least 20 times this year he could’ve taken two more strides and made that shot much more dangerous.
With better skating and balance, he was able to get into better positions, thus allowing him to shoot and (subsequently – because of his natural talent) score more.
This ties exactly in to your 2nd point, Wolski improving his skating should allow him to do the same, which will subsequently improve the shooting percentage.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 8:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
On Avery, sure he could have gotten closer if you look at it situational, I’m talking about the strategy in general.
On Wolski, I hope exactly the same improvement happens. He’s been considered soft, as Boyle has been/still is to an extent, and has a frame that should allow him to hold his own in critical areas of the ice.
Blueshirt Banter - Muddling in Mediocrity - Fantasy Hockey Scouts
US Soccer/Red Sox Supporter
1. Problem is is rarely does create a rebound. Most often its a shot in the bread basket. And shown by his sh% he does not have a shot to score from there. I get the whole ‘get pucks to the net’ but the game has also turned into more of a possession game. Why give up possession for a 2.2% chance of scoring?
2. My point on WW was that he seems to be on par to his past seasons so it wasn’t like his game as a whole took a big crap last year or he had a single contributing factor that would suggest the reason for a poor season. You look at Gabby and can immediately see that he has not been getting the pucks to the net as he had in the past. I believe last year he had a crazy sh% that was just not sustainable.
3. Agree on that. What this data doesnt show is quality shot or shots from prime scoring positions. But yeah Boyle was able to get to those by using his new speed and size. something I would hope to see from WW.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 21, 2011 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions
What this data doesnt show is quality shot or shots from prime scoring positions.
If I ever get around to watching the last two Bruins-NYR games of the year, I’ll have the scoring chance/shot data put together. Definitely this summer sometime.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions
George, hope you didn’t think I was criticizing your work. Just meant that shots themselves don’t paint the whole picture as I am sure you will agree.
And as pointed out below there is that factor of ‘luck’ that I know is difficult to quantify.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 21, 2011 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t think at all…just letting you know that I’m aware of the deficiency, and want to attempt to address it where I can down the line.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Why give up possession for a 2.2% chance of scoring?
I’m in favor of any move that improves the statistical chance of scoring.
What this data doesnt show is quality shot or shots from prime scoring positions.
Because of the speed and nature of the game, shot quality in hockey (particularly the NHL) is a hotly contested topic when it comes to statistics. While some good work has been done, the general thought as it stands is that shots from “quality” scoring areas are still subject to the other parts of the game that allow shots from “not so” quality scoring areas still go (i.e. luck, deflections, etc.).
Blueshirt Banter - Muddling in Mediocrity - Fantasy Hockey Scouts
US Soccer/Red Sox Supporter
still go in*
Blueshirt Banter - Muddling in Mediocrity - Fantasy Hockey Scouts
US Soccer/Red Sox Supporter
Then you should be in favor of him not taking that shot, getting it deep, waiting for his teammates or a screen.
Taking low percentage shots and giving up possession is a losing formula.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 21, 2011 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
The lack of a FINISHER (Gaby included due to a down year) really puts the pressure on the D to be more involved in the offense. George, I think this analysis clearly shows that without those FINISHERS up front that having offensive D is a priority. Getting Richards probably solves the 5 on 5 scoring and the PP resulting in less need of participation from the D on the offensive end. Great analysis George.
I think if anything, this shows leaning on your defense for goals is a bad idea, at least at even strength.
A league average season for a defensemen, getting 15 min/game at ES, will score just 3 even strength goals, a forward will get 14 with the same ice time. So it’s basically unrealistic to ever expect your defense to make up for a forward (even accounting for the fact only 26 forwards even got 15 min per game at ES). On the power play it’s a little more likely that a defenseman can make up the difference.
Richards, however, does not solve a lack of ‘FINISHER’. So I’m not sure where he comes in within that context.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 8:57 AM EDT up reply actions
It shouldn’t stop defensemen from taking shots, though (see Detroit and Vancouver).
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 21, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Finishing & Richards
Simple explanation: Richards is more of a playmaker, as typically only a third to half of his points scored per season are goals.
Advanced stats explanation: While Richards does drive the play somewhat, his shooting percentage is nothing spectacular (i.e. “finisher”) and requires a good amount of shots for him to increase his number of goals.
Also on a side note (only really to George I guess), I’m kind of worried about his PDO coming into this season. It’s very high, and could regress easily (meaning if he faces different competition shots may or may not go in as frequently).
Blueshirt Banter - Muddling in Mediocrity - Fantasy Hockey Scouts
US Soccer/Red Sox Supporter
I seriously worry about what Richards's QoC here.
And this could really be it’s own post, but….
I don’t worry much about that total PDO when changing teams. He had a on ice .929 sv%, which was 4th on Dallas, but would’ve been just 7th for the Rangers. Hank inflates a PDO when you get average shooting. So that portion I think could easily translate.
On the other side, his 10.7% on ice shooting percentage would normally be a concern, but he’s carried a 10% for three years now, which means he might just be pushing that number similar to the way a goaltender does. Further, his PP shooting percentage was down this year (11%, when previous he’d been 13-14), and he himself only converted 6 of 107 PP shots on goal. So I think at least from the percentages angle, he should be able to maintain.
If Torts goes power v power (or it’s matched up that way on the road), that’s where you’ll see the dip. Combined with age, I think 70-75 points is probably realistic. Expectations, of course, are 100, so get ready for lamenting!
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions
George, the “finishing” comes into play by Richards putting players like Gaby in a better position to score. This team all too often has to drop a pint of blood to score a goal. Players like Richards create chances and opportunities without the grind factor involved. That’s where I’m coming from on this part. As for the D, our D’s inability to help forwards out has contributed to the overall lack of scoring. if they were better at it then it would have helped. But I do agree the D can never compensate for the forwards inability to finish.
If Richards can change non-finishers in to finishers, then is it really a finisher we lack, or is it the ability to get better shots that we’re lacking?
I’d argue quite strongly it’s the latter. Richards will certainly help that, but so will progression with age.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I would say, and I am not in favor of the big FA contracts anymore, that Richards is a “must have” as he is exactly what they need. I truly believe that with him and the younger guys getting better that they can compete. Their D is really solid now with Erixon in the line-up. Of course we need a healthy King.
FA contracts
Are pretty much a given in today’s NHL. The question is whether you’re giving them to the right player(s). But for better or worse pretty much every team has one and that includes retaining your own players before they hit unrestricted FA.
by MyFavBaseballSquadron on Jun 21, 2011 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Totally agree. We do not currently have what Mr. Richards has to offer.
by Richter1994 on Jun 21, 2011 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Good point
You basically explained everything I would have it I had time… I’m at my new job trying not to get caught here haha. The Hank point is key but what you said about expectations is what kills me about Free Agent signings here… the expectations are just flat out unrealistic.
While the 10%, like we agree, is in general concerning, it is always nice to see consistency.
Blueshirt Banter - Muddling in Mediocrity - Fantasy Hockey Scouts
US Soccer/Red Sox Supporter
Is there a way to correlate even strength shooting to point production because Step, Boyle, Anisimov, Avery and Dubinsky all increased their shooting from December to the end of the season and I was wondering if it reflects their point production over that same period
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
I can certainly compare them, I doubt there’s a correlation though. Dubinsky in particular was on such an early season heater, that even increasing his shooting wasn’t enough to offset the obscene shooting percentage he had.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions
Hmm
I would like to think there would be one, but I guess we’ll see (let us know George if you could). More pucks on net should theoretically mean more points, but thats a very raw statement.
Blueshirt Banter - Muddling in Mediocrity - Fantasy Hockey Scouts
US Soccer/Red Sox Supporter
More 5v5 scoring ner®Rrxt year
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 11:41 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
hard to post and poop at the same time
Gabby will rebound and be somewhere between two years ago and this past year. Cally and Dubi should play a few more games. Anisimov should continue to improve and Stepan should be steady. Only downside risk is Boyle reverting, but I think Avery will pick up any slack on overall basis.
If you throw Richards in the mix I think they can add 20-25 more 5v5 goals next year. Where would that rank them league wide based on this years team totals?
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 11:46 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
20 more takes them from T-15th (2011) to T-3rd.
25 takes them to T-2nd.
28 takes them to 1st.
I don’t think Richards is worth 25 5v5 goals, but maybe he’s worth 10, which would put them top 10. The progression of the kids would have to do the rest.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
I think progression of kids + Richards gets them the 20-25.
Call me crazy, but if that were to happen and the PP improved only slightly..this team could be a 4/5 seed. I’m not sure where all my optimism is coming from, I need to go back and watch 3rd period and overtime of Game 4 versus Caps to ground myself.
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 12:05 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I’d rather gargle with sewer water than re-watch any portion of Game 4.
"To everybody else we're underdogs, but we go in thinking we can handle any team in the NHL."
Brandon Prust, #8, New York Rangers
Interesting comment by Gordie over at Gross’s site, he said that not having MDZ in the lineup hitting him with long passes is what hurt Gabby’s game.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 21, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I felt like mid-way through the 2009-10 season, opposing teams had that long pass read perfectly, and it was intercepted more often than not.
"To everybody else we're underdogs, but we go in thinking we can handle any team in the NHL."
Brandon Prust, #8, New York Rangers
Valid point but that means they had to defend against the long pass so that should open space elsewhere.
With very little threat from the back-end, teams could cheat a bit more.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 21, 2011 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
And that was the big gripe with MDZ, him forcing the long pass when it was being defended against. He needed to take the safe breakout and pick his spots with the long pass.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 21, 2011 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd love to see the statistics of how many shots on goal and misses
the Rangers players had
"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"
The data is there on btn. The Rangers aren’t really any better or worse than any other team in that regard.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
ok thanks smurf
"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"
by feslenraster on Jun 22, 2011 7:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Probably equal to the number of shots they put directly into the chest of the opposing goalie. During that bad losing stretch that included games against NJ/Detroit/Atlanta.. they were really pressing and putting it in the bread basket.
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 12:09 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
smurf, would you prefer richards to spezza or stastny? personally, i feel like I may even prefer spezza or stastny. Spezza is a great even strength scorer even on a bad team against tough opponents. Stastny likewise took on tough opponents, not to mention is young and still improving. Additionally, both of the contracts would be shorter term and incur less risk. Thoughts?
I’ve been saying Spezza for a while now since Ottawa publically put him on the block. Personally, I think Spezza is the better move for the contract situation alone. While it wouldn’t take any assets to get Richards (just sign him), once you get him you have to get rid of a forward to make room. We could easily make a trade with Ottawa for Spezza and keep all of our core players.
Seriously depends on the cost to acquire either. The biggest advantage to Richards is he only costs cap space.
All 3 are good fits for the roster. Richards is the best playmaker, Spezza the best goal scorer, and Stastny’s one who may still have another peak.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions
on this team, which do you think we need more of? Playmaking or goal scoring
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
Flip a coin.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Though I will say of those 3, I would most want Spezza. I just think OTT is going to ask for a ton for him.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions
If you trade for Spezza..
How much cheddar is he making on current deal and will he need a new deal or extension in the next few years?
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 6:59 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Richards is plan 1A, 1B and 1C in my book. A distant 2nd would be Stastny..which I’d give up Anisimov, MDZ and next years 2nd round pick. I’d pass on Spezza, I consider him to be an enigmatic talent. Not interested.
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 7:04 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Spezza's contract is a monster shit sandwich to choke down.
2008-2015: 7 year(s), $49,000,000 (UFA)
Known Clauses: NTC
2008-09: $7,000,000 / $8,000,000
2009-10: $7,000,000 / $8,000,000
2010-11: $7,000,000 / $8,000,000
2011-12: $7,000,000 / $8,000,000
2012-13: $7,000,000 / $8,000,000
2013-14: $7,000,000 / $5,000,000
2014-15: $7,000,000 / $4,000,000
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 7:09 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
So basically, he has 4 years left at $7m, the same basic deal everyone is giving Richards (actually, short a year)
Spezza’s last 4 seasons: 280 GP, 110-169-279 , 105 PP points, 809 SOG (13.6 sh%)
Richards’ last 4: 282 GP, 88-190-279, 116 PP points, 985 SOG (8.9 sh%)
Spezza QoC (on OTT) – 10th, 7th, 3rd, 2nd
Richards QoC (on TB/DAL) – 4th, 2nd, 9th, 11th
Spezza’s pointless streaks (min 4G)
2011) 7game 2010) 6 game 2009) 5game 2008) none
Richards pointless streaks (min 4G)
2011) none 2010) none 2009) 4game, 6games 2008) none
Spezza’a been prone to one streak a year where he’s ‘invisible,’ while Richards had 3 of 4 clean years.
The difference, to me, is negligible, and thus I would take the younger of the two, price permitting.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 21, 2011 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Spezza is prone to missing games, playing 60/62 last two seasons.
Has missed 14 or more games in four of the past six seasons.
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 9:17 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Stastny..which I’d give up Anisimov, MDZ and next years 2nd round pick.
Just crazy.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Jun 22, 2011 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m assuming it would take any of our tier 1 players (dubi, cally staal, kreider, thomas etc). I think Stastny would be a cheaper option in the trade market
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
Stastny has three years left on his deal.
2009-2014: 5 year(s), $33,000,000 (UFA)
2009-10: $6,600,000 / $6,600,000
2010-11: $6,600,000 / $6,600,000
2011-12: $6,600,000 / $6,600,000
2012-13: $6,600,000 / $6,600,000
2013-14: $6,600,000 / $6,600,000
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 21, 2011 7:12 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Only what’s on BTN, which is average distance. There are some out there smart enough to extract the coding from ESPN/NHL’s game day trackers that has each shot location. I am not.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 22, 2011 8:36 AM EDT up reply actions
ugh. looking at Spezza's contract makes me puke
I’d really rather not pick him up for prospects. Let’s just sign Richards and be done with all the silly rumors.
"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"
The contract we would sign Richards to would be longer and more $ per year than Spezza’s.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!

by 























