Early mistakes cost Rangers, fall to St. Louis

October 11, 2017, by

Photo: Getty

The Rangers couldn’t overcome a pair of early mistakes, as St. Louis topped the good guys by a score of 2-1. A gaffe in the first 15 seconds by Brady Skjei and then another by the Nick Holden/Steven Kampfer duo later in the first doomed the Rangers, as the talented and stingy St. Louis Blues put the kibosh on any scoring chance. After the first period, the game itself wasn’t all that exciting, as St. Louis clamped down and didn’t give much.

A lot of credit goes to Mike Yeo on this one, who made necessary adjustments after the first period to help fight the aggressive Rangers. The solution was more aggressiveness, as the Blues pressured the puck carriers and passing lanes. This forced the Rangers to play dump and chase, a style to which they are not suited. In the end, it was Yeo’s adjustments that helped the Blues win this game.

On to the goals:

Blues 1, Rangers 0

Brady Skjei made an ill advised pass to JT Miller while under pressure. The pass was into Miller’s skates and prompted a turnover. Jaden Schwartz then drew all three Rangers forwards to him while Skjei went to cover Shattenkirk’s man, leaving Carl Gunnarsson all alone in front. Schwartz found him, and it was an easy goal.

Rangers 1, Blues 1

Another powerplay goal. Kevin Shattenkirk put a soft wrister on net, and Pavel Buchnevich made a great little pass to Mika Zibanejad on the rebound. Zibanejad put it into the empty net.

Blues 2, Rangers 1

Steven Kampfer failed to clear the zone, resulting in a turnover. Then Nick Holden gave Paul Stastny all the room in the world to cut back to the slot for the shot, which went wide. Brayden Schenn got to the puck and banked it off Hank.

Blues 3, Rangers 1

Jaden Schwartz empty netter.

Score Adjusted Corsi

The Rangers did a good job in this game of limiting chances against St. Louis, however it’s worth nothing that St. Louis led for the entire game. They adjusted after the first and really stifled the Rangers offense, which led to more outside chances. It wasn’t until the third when the Rangers started getting more shots, but that was while the Blues were holding on to their lead. All in all, not overly terribly, but the Rangers never felt like they had any sustained flow.

Scoring Chances

The Rangers did a phenomenal job of limiting the quality chances by the Blues, however it was mistakes that cost them. There’s only so much you can do against a great team when you give up two early goals and can’t generate anything sustained. Doesn’t help that Carter Hutton played very well, either.

The odd thing here is that outside of the glaring mistakes in the first period, the team itself played a relatively even game. They didn’t give up many chances, both in quality and quantity. However both Kampfer and Holden had poor games. So it makes you wonder what’s next for the Rangers. Will they play their best lineup? Or will AV continue to rely on what worked 10 years ago?

"Early mistakes cost Rangers, fall to St. Louis", 5 out of 5 based on 2 ratings.
Categories : Game Wrap-ups


  1. Richter1994 says:

    I’ve been a Ranger fan since 1965, I can’t remember there being so long of a stretch of Ranger seasons of having forwards that can’t get 2nd chances nor rebounds past the goalie. “One and done” seems to be the mantra of their offense the last few years. I mean they get chances but it’s just one chance on that particular play. If you cannot convert 2nd chances or rebounds in this NHL, with the way goalies now play, then you’re going to have trouble scoring goals. Period.

    That being said, that line up, wow. AND, it was an absolute joy to see the Holden/Kampfer pairing getting a regular shift with under 10 minutes left in the game and the Rangers needing offense to tie the game. The pairing that basically has negative possession stats were out there with the Rangers down a goal.

    If I were the coach? Shatty, McD, and Skjei rotate the last 5-6 minutes and Zib gets double shifted. Of course suiting up 3 anchors is our coach, forgetting the fact that the entire league is going in the opposite direction. So continue to sit Smith and DeAngelo because AV doesn’t like their mistakes, he likes Staal’s, Holden’s, and Kampfer’s mistakes.

    And stop with the BS of “showcasing” Holden. You want to up his trade value? Then don’t play him. Besides, the rest of the league already knows how bad he is.

    • Itsapowerplaygoal says:

      Totally agree on second chance issue! I have said the same thing for the last 5 years.

      Bad D-man deployment.

      AV=not smart.

      • Rangers Rock says:

        How dare you, we are marching to 100 points this year again. There is no better coach in the league! So says E3.

        • upstate tom says:

          by the way, who didn’t get his team ready to play again ?? hmm, oh, AV !!!

          • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

            Of course it’s on AV. It obviously has nothing to do with the players. It never does.

            Current standings…

            Rangers Players 1-0-0
            AV 0-3-0

        • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

          Actually, I said we would fall short of 100 this year and drop to about 95. We are a borderline playoff team—at best. Not because of the coach per se but because we don’t have enough talent. Our weakness at center has become more glaring each game.

    • Ray says:

      In truth, you could have written something like this two weeks ago (and did). Games are decide by goals. +/- and points may not predict the future, but they do predict the past. The Rangers are 1-3 because they have five ES goals in four games. Defensemen have scored four points, two by Marc Staal and none by Kevin Shattenkirk. They have two goals, again, one by Staal. Staal is +2 and Holden, Kampfer are even. The five good defensemen are a combined -11 (and only -2 belongs to Smith).

      It’s only four games and there is huge sample error here. I don’t think for a minute that Marc Staal is as good an even strength defenseman as Ryan McDonagh. But he has been the best Ranger defenseman so far this season (at ES) – and he may really be better than Shattenkirk (again ignoring the PP).

      Yet so much of the diatribe here is about AV playing the wrong guys. In other words, we are unhappy that the team is losing and we are blaming things on what we thought was wrong in the first place, actually criticizing AV for giving too much responsibility to his most effective defenseman.

      Please don’t bother with pointing at that +/- is a bad stat. +/- is poorly calculated, yes, because of EN goals. However, team +/- does correlate with winning, while possession stats don’t.

      BTW, Zibanejad has half as many ES points as Staal. Only Miller (3), Kreider, and Zuccarello have as many. Unfortunately, this team was assembled to have a great power play and that seems to be what it has.

      • Richter1994 says:

        Good points on this post bro. But here’s the flaw in alluding to fans’ reactions to things.

        The main issue is that we have one of the best goalies in the history of the game. He has, in almost all of his games in his career, made more high danger saves than most other goalies in the league, on a game by game basis. In effect, he bails out his team time and time again.

        So now you point to +/- and here is the flaw. Some D men are “luckier” than others. So if, let’s say Marc Staal, gets the “benefit” of Henrik making saves on his “gaffes” then, on paper and in the stats, Marc played a “good game.” That’s based on the simplistic stats we have used for years, and why +/- is extremely flawed.

        On Sunday, the Kampfer/Holden pairing produced unGodly bad possessions stats. Not even NHL quality. But yet, there they were, getting important minutes last night. Kampfer was even paired with McD in the 3rd for a while. And, according to Jan Levine, Kampfer actually got more even strength time through 2 periods than McD, Shatty, and Skjei did. I mean how is that possible.

        Quite simply, and for the millionth time, Staal, Holden, and Kampfer should not even be on the Rangers. They are not NHL quality defensemen, only their coach “makes them” NHL players by dressing them and playing them.

        I don’t know if you get to games, but trust me, you get to see the full calamity that is those 3 and how unbelievably awful they are. And if you think sitting DeAngelo and Smith for these is “playing the right guys” then it will not matter what I say, or anyone else for that matter.

    • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

      That first paragraph is brilliant, and I 100% agree. We dont have guys with enough talent or with that “finishing” mentality that great scorers have. This team is simply not that good.

  2. James Carr says:

    Rangers have 5 goals in 3 games at home. The defense, lineup and coaching won’t matter unless someone other than zibby starts scoring

  3. King Sieveqvist ! King Sieveqvist ! King Sieveqvist ! says:

    D got worse since last year … Sh@ttenkirk wasn’t worth it …. Good on the PP that’s it

    • Hatrick Swayze says:

      Well I certainly don’t agree with that statement….

      • King Sieveqvist ! King Sieveqvist ! King Sieveqvist ! says:

        Oh yeah I forgot … He throws the body around when Gallegher is on the ice …. Lol

  4. SalMerc says:

    Our team is based on multiple scoring lines with speed that continue to come at you. If the opposition figures out a way to stifle our game in the neutral zone, we just don’t have the “dirty” players who work the boards or take a beating in front of the net.

    The defense overall wasn’t terrible, other than the errors pointed out above. This debacle is more about the lack of a strong center than bad defense.

  5. Bobby B says:

    Watched Rangers loose to Blues, Watched Vegas Knights best Arizona. Vegas will win a Cup before the Rangrrs do. Unbelievable!

  6. Mintgecko says:

    -The Rangers are short a top 4 D man, Staal is like a Band-Aid, It’ll get wet and fall off during a bad scenario.

    -the Rangers are also lacking a legit 4c, I think everyone is shuffle outside their original roles due to Chytil and Andersson not being here. DD should be the 3c with Vesey and Nash. The 2nd line should have been Hayes between Zucc and JT then Grabner should skate on the 4th line. If they had a real 4c than someone like Hayes and his line could get split defensive duties.

    • D C says:

      DD is not good. I’m over that reclamation project. Guy has no business being on the 2nd PP unit over Hayes, give me a break.

      • Mintgecko says:

        I’m a huge Hayes fan and I beg to differ on that one. If DeAngelo doesn’t make the official cut or if they ever decide to take off Mcd from the PP permanently than Hayes over any addition starting with Vesey who has zero business playing on that PP. I think him and DD could really set it off together if Hayes plays the middle slot like Bergeron does for those bump passes that could feed Nash and JT down low.

  7. Mythdoc says:

    I actually believe the team, with its size and stamina, is better suited to a dump and chase, crash the net style than a rush style. Other than Zuc and Zib, who do we have who is able to pick a net corner and hit it? Vesey can’t hit the broad side of a barn right now. Hayes? Nash’s shot has deteriorated. Kreider? Miller? Grabner? These are not rush style players, in spite of the speed some of them have.

    • Mancunian Candidate says:

      Kreider, Grabner, and Nash score 75% of their goals off breakaway/rushes. Not sure how you can call them anything other than players who produce offense off the rush–Kreider never sets up and shoots the puck, neither does Grabner, and Nash has always been a breakaway specialist.

      • Matt R says:

        According to TSN, Kreider is actually statistically the best deflection player in the NHL and leads the NHL in deflection/tip goals since 2014 – I am not sure if I am allowed to, but I could post the TSN article talking about it. So, I am not sure this is completely accurate, but agreed on Nasher and Grabs.

    • Mintgecko says:

      Eh that’s not really true because the overall speed of this team fits that rush style. Kreider and JT alone fit that dump and chase style but 1. Kreider plays with 2 players that fit the script of AV’s system so he should be alright. If you watch how JT owns a shift compared to Hayes than you might be saying something but don’t underestimate Hayes finesse game that he brings along with his speed that fits the style of play that AV likes, it’s why the coach is very high on him. The kid covers more ice with the puck than any of those names with the question mark next to it.

      • Mythdoc says:

        They can score off two on ones, but so can any plausible nhl top nine player. Nash is the only one of the players I mentioned who can score with any percentage on a breakaway. If the defense takes rushes away you need guys who can score in traffic. I don’t think the team has ever really tried to play a possession style and I think they would be better suited to it than you think, after learning it.

        • Ray says:

          It is actually hard I think to win a Cup with a rigid offensive style. You have to beat four teams in the playoffs and that is four times with different strengths and weaknesses. Suppose you play a team that can easily keep up with you, but is vulnerable to a dump and chase. Than you win by exploiting their weakness. OTOH, of course, you don’t want to dump and chase against a team that plays against that well.

          • rglv says:

            That is a very good point, unfortunately AV is not capable to adjust during the games, and has proven that time and time again…

  8. Bloomer says:

    The Ranger squad overall hasn’t come out of the gate ready to play this season. It’s time for a reset. Smith if he not hurt needs to get back in the lineup for Kampfer. Delangelo will get another opportunity when the defense can sort their shit out.

    Yes the Rangers forwards are having a tough time scoring. They will have to work through it they are a young group. Next up is cbj

  9. Rangers Rock says:

    The goal that was not accessed to the Blues was bogus. I replayed it from the first angle and to me, it was a goal. They did not replay that angle afterward.I have it on my phone.
    I am now not happy with McD. His play sucks. He is no captain.

  10. David Hes says:

    Say it over and over. It is unfathomable how this coach keeps getting away with ruining this hockey team. Won’t SOMEBODY, like perhaps Gorton, please show him the door? I am ok with losing with our best personnel, but we have yet to see that, both in terms of who sits out and who dresses and deployment in different situations. Retaining this coach is a horrible injustice to Rangers fans who pay a lot to go to the games.

    I am sick and tired of having this coach sabotage this team. The only way to stop it is to STOP SPENDING MONEY till he is dismissed. He is stubborn, arrogant and stupid. A lethal combination for a successful coach in any sport.

  11. flatbush says:

    Lots of valid discussion here about “on the rush ” or dump and chase. Dave made a valid point that the Blues took away the lanes and nullified the speed on this rush orientated team. Last night another Dave, Maloney, said there is nothing wrong with a little old time hockey. Pay the price to make a play. So the Rangers had to dump and chase which is not what the team is built upon. Others correctly pointed out the amount of opportunities certain player get on breakaways. This once again supports the fact that this team is built to play fast. That’s a favorite saying of AV. My analysis over several years is that the team only hears rush, pretty plays, speed etc and therefore knows one way to play. You would think with all this speed we would be great on the forecheck. Why not. I think the answer is partly missing some old time hockey as per Maloney. All our forwards are cut essentially in the same mold with a few exceptions. If we are too stubborn to add a new wrinkle we will be good but not good enough as usual. I’m so sick of hearing how were missing one or two pieces. How stupid. People are going wild that Shatty was a big missing piece. OH yeah. Champions can play it with blinding speed and skill, they also have grit and some old time hockey,, take the hit to make a play. Its a team game . getting a big piece only works if the team can play it any which way. The big piece by itself will not by itself make the difference.

    • Stevesse says:

      Did you notice the third period. That’s exactly what they did and it generated many scoring chances. It seems they only do that when they are losing and desperate. Otherwise,this team plays pretty.