Jan
11

Marc Staal out indefinitely with post concussion symptoms

January 11, 2017, by

marc staal

Per Larry Brooks, Rangers defenseman Marc Staal is out indefinitely with post concussion syndrome. Staal has struggled with concussions since getting hit by his brother Eric into the boards about five years ago. Staal’s head hit the boards awkwardly, which caused the concussion.

Obviously this is not good news for the Rangers and for Staal, as Staal was having a relatively dependable bounce back year. He seemed to have clicked with Nick Holden to form a somewhat dependable second pairing.

Injuries have plagued Staal, and definitely zapped some of the potential. Without concussions and with two functional eyes, Staal was a can’t miss defenseman. Now he’s simply serviceable. What could have been.

Categories : Injuries

42 comments

  1. Agentsmith says:

    Maybe we can lift Ryan up from the graves.

  2. SalMerc says:

    Ouch! Looks like Clendening plays more, but we still have Klein & Girardi. Makes that move for a defenseman a bit more of a pressing concern.

    • Sieveqvist ! Sieveqvist ! Sieveqvist ! says:

      Stick a fork in em , he’s done …. hopefully he’s ok health wise , not a fun situation to be in ( had my fun smacking my head more then a few times ) … he’s been overly cautious since returning from his brothers hit …. Nash same thing … The head is a funny thing after it takes its lumps.

  3. Richter1994 says:

    Being a concussion sufferer, unfortunately you do not know if this ever goes away or it takes less and less to suffer another. Marc will probably be out a long time. Hope he gets well.

    What once appeared to be a D corps that was the envy of the league, is now in shambles. This now means that G and KK MUST stay in the line up.

    • Sieveqvist ! Sieveqvist ! Sieveqvist ! says:

      Whoops , this was to go here
      Stick a fork in em , he’s done …. hopefully he’s ok health wise , not a fun situation to be in ( had my fun smacking my head more then a few times ) … he’s been overly cautious since returning from his brothers hit …. Nash same thing … The head is a funny thing after it takes its lumps.

      • Richter1994 says:

        Unfortunately, both G, Staal, and probably KK are “done” physically.

        I think Nash still has some play in him but the groin thing is a big red flag for me due to his age and wear and tear. I said that at the beginning and it does appear to be a lingering situation.

  4. Reenavipul says:

    Call Graves up to play 3rd pair, Holden 2nd pair. Right side 76-4-(8&5)
    LTIR Staal and bury him til playoffs, bank cap credits and keep the team together with duct tape & bailing wire until trade deadline.

    • Al Dugan says:

      Yeah, that’s what we need. 2 Rookie D’s in the lineup. Let me ask, Reen, have you actually seen Graves play? And is their any indication in past interactions with AV and the NYR brass that they would ever do such a thing? (Not the least of it is season still has half of it to go)

      • Reenavipul says:

        I’ve seen Graves play at TC & Hartford, the most recent look was last month at Hershey.

      • Reenavipul says:

        The team is making the playoffs, being the 7th seed is probably the best slot: so playing two rookies for 6 weeks before the trade deadline makes no difference to their playoff chances.

        They will need to know if the kid can hang(and I think he can) because it will make the other decisions more obvious.

        This is cap management essentials 101 in a hard cap era.

      • Richter1994 says:

        Yes, because what we have is so stellar. We feel better when long time vets make rookie mistakes? Just sayin my friend.

        This is the same narrative for Clendening or McIlrath or Diaz or Hunwick or whomever. It’s what is out on the ice that makes fans what these types of players to get a shot at playing, not that they are so wonderful themselves.

        Yeah, what’s out on the ice now is THAT bad.

        • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

          Richter, Reenav–

          I understand what you are saying, but it is not AV ‘s job to some how prove to us fans whether these on-the-margins players are worthy of more time. It’s like some of you think we are in some jury box, we need to see the evidence, and then once WE have decided, then AV should act accordingly.

          I’m being facetious obviously, but you all have to understand that there is much that goes on behind the scenes that we NEVER see. We have no idea how these players perform in practice. We have no idea what the pro scouting reports say about certain players. Sometimes, a player can shine in a short sample of games but that may be simply all he is capable of doing.

          McIlrath was decent in his short sample in NY. Yet, when he was put on waivers, NO ONE wanted a physical, right handed defenseman with a booming shot? Ever stop to think that MAYBE, there was a reason? And that there is a reason now he can’t even crack the Panthers lineup?

          Maybe there’s a reason that this is Clendening’s sixth organization in 2 1/2 years. Another RH defensemen who can move the puck and help the PP? How was he a FA and the Rangers able to sign him for bubble gum money?

          Now, that being said, you can never underestimate an athlete’s will to prove the skeptics wrong, grow and improve. That could most definitely happen with McIlrath, Clendo or anyone else. You never know. Necessity is often the mother of invention.

          I just don’t subscribe to the notion of “what the heck, just play them”. Unless the team’s personnel evaluators feel they are ready for that role. I just don’t personally feel this burning need to have them prove it to me.

          • Reenavipul says:

            So the anchoring bias is in our lying eyes. Got it.

            • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

              So you’re saying you know more than the players? Got it.

              • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

                Oops….I was responding to the wrong thread. I meant to say “you know more than the player personnel professionals on all 29 other teams”. Got it.

              • Reenavipul says:

                There’s maybe 10 teams that are good at player personnel evaluation.

                When your D stinks, it shouldn’t be injuries that forces AV to go to the next man up theory.

              • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

                Relative to the other teams, perhaps you’re right. Relative to us layman fans, I suspect those other 20 teams have forgotten more about how to evaluate NHL talent than most any of us have ever known.

                You’re incredibly knowledgable. No doubt. But having been in locker rooms, interviewed coaches and GMs, and have as a personal friend and mentor a HOF GM (not hockey), I’m pretty confident in saying that 99.9% of the time, the folks who do this for a living know what they are doing….relative to us fans.

              • Reenavipul says:

                I’ve been in locker rooms and gyms since I was a lad in multiple sports at multiple levels and it’s all the same: the only times it matters is if you have two bad apples in a feedback loop or your captain is not much of one.

                It’s a tertiary concern at best. So what we see on the ice is the primary driver and my seats are right where the scouting staff is or should be(sometimes theirs are worse at the NHL level than at lower levels.)

              • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

                That’s all nice. And as I said, you clearly know your stuff and I respect your opinion. But saying having seats close to the ice is akin to Sarah Palin saying she knows about Russia because she can see it from Alaska. 🙂

                We are all just fans. It is highly improbable that any of us could hold a candle to any team’s ability to accurately assess NHL level talent.

              • Reenavipul says:

                You would think so, yet Dan Girardi plays every night.

          • John B says:

            “We have no idea how these players perform in practice. We have no idea what the pro scouting reports say about certain players. Sometimes, a player can shine in a short sample of games but that may be simply all he is capable of doing.”

            Ok, here in lies the crux of the argument: We KNOW that the current product on the ice is NOT NHL level. We know that certain players are failing on large national and local TV level samples. In all the samples provided none of the other options have directly passed the puck to the single best goal scorer in the NHL today, or other opposing players, as frequently as the players they’d replace. So you’re solution is to keep trotting them out there and never give someone a chance to prove they’re better because they are stuck with scrapheap training time in practice?

            “Maybe there’s a reason that this is Clendening’s sixth organization in 2 1/2 years”

            So tired of this. Clendening was a 36th overall draft pick (2nd round) but he’s not capable of anything cause other organizations said so.

            Buch is a 3rd round draft pick but he’s the key to our season and defense!!!

            See the hypocrisy in your argument? Buch 3rd Round, Clendening 2nd Round. Moved by such stellar talent evaluators as Vancouver and Edmonton (33%), moved by Chicago (draft team) for a better prospect (robbing Vancouver at that), moved for key pieces that brought a Stanley Cup and moved because of organizational depth. So tired of people making it sound like he was a 9th round draft pick.

            • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

              “the current product on the ice is not NHL caliber”. Sorry, that’s a huge overstatement. I doubt ANY legit NHL talent evaluator would agree with that premise. Does the defense need improving? Absolutely? Is there a case to be made to play Clendening more? Possibly. But again, why have NONE of the prior five teams saw fit to do so?

              I never said Clendo is definitely not capable. I’m simply saying that the NHL talent evaluation community is luke-warm on him at best.

              As for your comparison to Buch and their relative draft position, that makes no sense. McIlrath was a first round pick and now is barely able to crack an NHL roster. We operate in the here and now. McIlrath was waived and no one wanted him. Clendo was released and there was little interest. If the Rangers cut Buch today, you think there wouldn’t be HUGE interest in him?

              Again, I am NOT saying Clendo can’t play or shouldn’t play more. But the team is winning. They are hardly at the bottom of the league in goals allowed. There is more time now for legit practice time to make adjustments. I’m neither for nor against it. I’ve just learned that making a big deal over playing marginal players is usually a waste of time. It rarely changes anything in terms of the end result.

              • John B says:

                “the current product on the ice is not NHL caliber”. Sorry, that’s a huge overstatement. I doubt ANY legit NHL talent evaluator would agree with that premise.

                Are you seriously debating that the NY Rangers defense corps is icing 3 players, now two, who don’t even hack the AHL level now? Again Dan Girardi and Marc Staal are in the bottom 10 defenseman in the NHL for players over 510 minutes played. Klein is just outside the top 20. Girardi has singlehandedly sunk McD down to his level statistically. Look at the numbers for the team when Girardi, Staal and Klein are on vs off. The team plays significantly better, gives up less shots against, less scoring chances against, and has a lower expected goals against mark and a higher expected goals for mark.

                NHL anaylists, bloggers, and from the evidence of other teams attacking the three of them all seem to be in concurrence that Girardi, Staal and Klein are completely non-effective hockey players.

              • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

                I have not heard that analysis from any legit source, or even seen that visually myself. I think they have clearly struggled at times and it’s certainly a weakness that needs to be addressed, I agree. But if the defense were barely AHL quality as you are suggesting, how can we possibly be among the top teams in the league at the moment? Our goaltending has been good but hardly great. Our forwards have been injured and the goal scoring has tapered off.

                What you are saying seems to be a bit of a non sequitur.

              • John B says:

                “I have not heard that analysis from any legit source, or even seen that visually myself.”

                Boomer Gordon on the Power Play on NHL Radio, Travis Yost from TSN Hockey, various NHL network analysts, even late but Larry Brooks is jumping on the bandwagon saying theres no excuse they should be playing as much. I think he gets a lot wrong but even Lambert at Puck Daddy and Greg W over there have detailed how bad they are.

                I don’t know how much more visual evidence you need to see. Watch them, they’re bad. Look at the numbers, they’re bad.

                McDonagh w/ Girardi xGF60 2.49 xGA60 2.7 and a Corsi of 44%
                without Girardi: xGF60 3.04, xGA60 1.77 and a Corsi over 53%.

                Half a goal more, a full goal less.

                The people who “defend” Girardi, Staal and Klein are running out of believable excuses. No one is questioning their effort, no one is saying they aren’t trying or doing their best.

                They are now terrible hockey players that are sinking the ship. And as for the whole standings stuff, the goalies ARE bailing out these players almost nightly. As Richter1994 pointed out, look at the goalies body language regarding the play in front of them. Sadly we expect our goalies to be in God-mode to balance things out. The goalies are playing at an excellent level and we’re complaining that we’re not getting God-mode goaltending. Needing God-mode goaltending is the sign your defense sucks. They’re standing on their head, and we’ve still given up the 9th most 5×5 goals against. The Rangers goalies are basically being forced to be Joe Montana/Dan Marino/Tom Brady all rolled into one super player behind a 5 man pee wee offensive line, and the fans complaining they cant complete a pass.

    • Richter1994 says:

      Yep, I agree pal, it’s about time that Graves gets a long look.

  5. Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

    When it comes to all this, remember, we know nothing. It could be, God forbid, a Michael Sauer situation and he’s done. Or, since he was out the previous two games and then of course the bye week, perhaps he’s already close to a return.

    According to Brooks, apparently he did not need to go through the NHL concussion protocol after the injury happened. He has been working out. And he has NOT been ruled out for practice tomorrow or for the game on Friday. So this could be a very short term thing that does not require LTIR.

    • Reenavipul says:

      Nobody says indefinitely if he has a hope in hades of playing Friday or Saturday.

      • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

        Not to split hairs here, but the definition of “indefinitely” is “not certain in amount or length”. Dave’s usage is correct, and your interpretation that this is a longer term issue is not necessarily correct.

        If you read Larry Brooks’ story, he does not use the word indefinitely. He says Staal’s “status is unclear” and that it is “unknown….whether he will be available for Friday’s game….” Those are his exact words.

        I would agree that playing this week is a highly unlikely outcome (as would be the other extreme I mentioned of the Sauer-like outcome), but the point is we don’t know, and therefore any discussion of LTIR is premature.

  6. Peter says:

    I hope it is a short term situation. Many of my clients have suffered from concussions and the injury is one that is tricky to deal with for many. I am sure all wish him a speedy recovery from the condition. He’s a tough guy, so he must be feeling it.

  7. Ranger11 says:

    What a bad break once again for Staal. The guy has had a rough road at times. I thought he was having a pretty good year too. What I don’t understand is how is he working out if he has a concussion? I thought you weren’t supposed to do anything like that with a concussion. If he is out for any length of time this could get very interesting. Let’s hope it brings good things for Clendening if Staal is out for a while.

  8. Walt says:

    This is no fun, and I have to agree with E3, let’s hope it’s not Mike Sauer all over again. Concussions are tough to deal with, and they have some long term implications. I remember Keith Primeau dealing with the symptoms after his forced retirement, having to stay in dark rooms, the headaches, ect. Bottom line, I do hope for a speedy recovery for Marc…………….

  9. John B says:

    To echo the sentiments as a human being, I feel for Marc Staal and hope he’s not in a Sauer or Al toon like arena of post-concussion.

    It makes no sense to allow this news out. I think the pieces of a puzzle are there that explains it from a business side for both. Staal isn’t the same and doesn’t take the body since the hit from Eric. I think Staal realizes the extreme limitations that are placed on him now with the concussions and the eye. I can see a possible scanerio where he, his agent and the Rangers have agreed to let this get out, in the beginning of moving Staal to LTIR. He gets his paycheck, organization gets cap relief and a roster spot. Do I think this is what’s going on? Most likely not. Is it possible however? Well all know in time I guess

  10. BobbyB says:

    Concussions are of grave concern, look no further than Eric Lindros, for a 2 or 3 year stretch he might have been the most intimidating and talented player to ever lace up the skates. Concussions reduced him to a shell of the player he once was. Best wishes to Staal.

  11. joe719 says:

    Is it just me, or are some people jumping the gun here? He’s out indefinitely with concussion symptoms, but hes working out? Some here are characterizing this as career ending, but not severe enough to go though the League’s concussion protocol steps? That doesn’t sound odd to you? Methinks there might be some here rushing to judgement only to get some LTIR and snare that stud defenseman they crave. Not point fingers, but………….

    • John B says:

      My opinion, it is just you. The leagues concussion protocol starts in game. Staal was never removed from the game by the “eye in the sky”. To use Lundqvist as an example, he was pulled from the game in Dallas. He passed there, but there is nothing to say against him having acute onset of symptoms now.

      None of us know how Marc Staal is feeling. Listening to Tom Waddle the other day on the radio, I hope he’s not feeling like that. Waddle admitted that he has no memory of his one playoff touchdown reception from the concussion he suffered earlier in the game. I hope Staal isn’t going down the Lindros, Lafontaine, Al Toon, Mike Sauer, Mike Richter route.

      From a business perspective, and that’s what this is, the player, agent, and team need to do their due diligence to determine what is best for the player first and the organization second.

      That’s all anyone has said. Please note that order, player first organization second. Literally no one, scanning this thread, has said anything about trading for another player to replace him. Only that business is business, and it has to be explored. Do I personally feel it’s going down the LTIR route, no.

      • joe719 says:

        All I’m saying is that some of the posts here immediately referenced Michael Sauer; based solely on a vague newspaper article by Larry Brooks. We have NO concrete information as of this writing as to the extent of the injury or how long he is going to be out. I’m sure the team is doing their “due diligence,” nobody is questioning that. I am questioning how some are talking about LTIR without so much as a word on the situation from mgmt. Go back and read some of the posts, not just mine. Some have gone so far as to bring up guys forced into retirement as comparison—based on nothing other than a newspaper report. Just a little to quick for me to start jumping to conclusions.

        • John B says:

          It’s not really jumping to conclusions. Concussions are a serious life altering injury. Life. Devils advocate, if Staal has relapsed into post concussion symptoms again, after what are normal hockey hits, isn’t that a HUGE red flag? Think about that. This entire year, Staal hasn’t been on the receiving end or the giving end on any hit that you could point to and say “right there”.

          And probably he main reason? No one trusts management. All these organizations refrain from using the word concussion now, listing them as the vague “upper body injury” or the flip side “lower body injury” for knees. Hell, the Carey Price injury was a more closely guarded secret last year than the Normandy invasion. Teams don’t normally leak or provide information like this. Hence mistrust of management.

          • joe719 says:

            Fine—everything you say might be true. BUT WE DON’T KNOW THAT IT IS, YET! That’s all I’m saying. There is NO concrete evidence, that I am aware yet, other than a newspaper report. It is nothing more than jumping to conclusion—and some people here seem to be doing that with relish.

  12. 43 says:

    Dave’s wording could be more specific. While indefinite means indeterminable amount of time, and not a long time, it’s connotation and typical usage in terms of injuries and, say, a band taking an indefinite hiatus, means long-term and without any relatively soon prognosis for return. Thus the “jumping the gun” stuff.

  13. Pas44 says:

    I feel for him, shame his own brother has caused his career path to go off course some. Remember Michael Sauer… geeeeese

    business wise, is it out of left field for the organization to ask him to hang it up? is it legal, how can this unfortunate injury impact the decisions that need to be made?

    anyone?

    LGR!

    hard week for Ranger fans…

Leave a Reply