Business of HockeyState of the Rangers

Anthony DeAngelo shouldn’t be part of the future

and it has nothing to do with politics!

Back in 2017, the Rangers faced a decision on Derek Stepan.  While a productive player on Broadway, he was a divisive presence, with some asserting he didn’t put up enough points or provide enough jam down the middle for the money he was making.  His NMC was going to kick in after the Draft, so if the Rangers were going to move him, the time had come.  There were rumors the Rangers were after Elias Pettersson (seriously, how can you not swindle Jim Benning), but were unsuccessful in prying loose the No. 5 pick.

Ultimately, (as far as we know) the best deal on the table was from the Coyotes, with an offer of the number 7 overall pick and a young, high-upside defender named Anthony DeAngelo for Stepan and backup goaltender Antti Raanta. The deal was criticized at the time and rightfully so, it was a light return for a proven top 6 center and at worst, a rock-solid platoon netminder.

As we all know, the Rangers ultimately drafted Lias Andersson with that 7th overall pick.  Analysis of that selection is a discussion for another time, but so far, most of the best picks from that Draft came before Andersson.  The wild card in the deal was DeAngelo, a New Jersey native, who possessed sky-high offensive upside with defensive question marks and some alarming behavioral issues early in his career.

The Rangers banked on the upside and hopeful maturation of a young player and have used his development to create some positive value back in that trade.  DeAngelo has blossomed offensively in New York and provided a dangerous offensive element to the blue line.  Unfortunately, DeAngelo should not be considered a part of the long-term future of the rebuild.   Let’s break down why…

Profile

Madison Square Garden is littered with the remains of high-end offensive defensemen with serious defensive flaws that were unceremoniously shipped or let walk; Keith Yandle, Kevin Shattenkirk, Dan Boyle, Michael Del Zotto, etc., and that is just in the past few years.  Ranger fans think they want the puck moving powerplay quarterback, but time and time again, the lack of defensive ability ultimately torches that player’s good will with the fan base and they ultimately exit.

Make no mistake, DeAngelo is the most extreme example of this.  His defensive ability is almost non-existent, and his offense has carried him through the entirety of his tenure in New York.  The defense is currently a tire fire, so there is not a lot of spotlight on these issues, but once it returns to respectability, fans are going to turn.

Contract

DeAngelo recently turned 24 and is playing out the last year of non-arbitration eligibility.  He will have those rights next year and was reportedly unhappy about playing on a $925k contract after a solid season last year.  He will undoubtedly be looking for a raise.

Looking at contract comparables (per CapFriendly), the most comparable contracts for DeAngelo are Brandon Montour, Michael Matheson, Brady Skjei and Travis Sanheim.  Montour signed for 2/$6.775m ($3.387m cap hit), Matheson for 8/$39m ($4.875m cap hit), as we all know Skjei inked a 6/$31.5m contract ($5.25m cap hit) and Sanheim is signed for 2/$6.5m ($3.25m cap hit).  That puts the comparables in a fairly binary place: 2-year bridge deal for $3 million and change, or a long-term investment for 6-8 years in the $5 million range.

The Rangers do have a little bit of money coming off the books with Kreider and Fast eligible for UFA status this July, but it is not until after next season where they really see the savings, with Lundqvist, Staal and Smith coming off the books.  While you are losing $6.5m from Kreider and Fast, those guys need to be replaced or re-signed at higher rates.

Additionally, you lose about $2.5m off of the buy-out hit for Dan Girardi but give back $4.5 in the Shattenkirk increase.  The net salary loss going into next season is about $4.5 million, while needing to replace Kreider and Fast and owing raises to or replacing Brendan Lemieux and Ryan Strome.   This doesn’t leave a ton of room for DeAngelo’s presumed demands.

Performance

From a purely offensive perspective, DeAngelo is having another fine season.  He has 19 points in 26 games and has taken notable steps forward in patience and poise in the offensive zone.  He obviously gives quite a bit back defensively, as his +/- is 0 even with all that production.

Graph via Sean Tierney

Now, we all know that +/- is a borderline useless stat, at best, so let’s dig a little deeper.  Looking at the advanced statistics that DeAngelo seems to enjoy deriding, his xGF (expected goals for/60) is underwater by almost half a goal per 60, as you can see from the above chart.  He is giving all that offense right back in his own zone.

Graph via Sean Tierney

Staying on the theme of advanced stats, they tend to show that even part of his offense is a mirage.  The above chart is almost comical in its exaggeration of DeAngelo’s expected goal differential v. reality.  Coincidentally, DeAngelo personally came after our own Rob Luker before Thanksgiving for pointing out Ryan Strome’s massive discrepancy in shooting percentage since joining New York, but those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.  DeAngelo’s career shooting percentage is 5.6%.   This season: 14.3%.  Regression is likely coming.

Other Prospects

Taking a look at the current Rangers blue line, Jacob Trouba isn’t going anywhere after signing a seven-year deal.  Adam Fox has been a revelation thus far and Brady Skjei may be unmoveable unless Seattle is obliging.  The Rangers have a glut of defensive prospects on the way, with high-ceiling players like K’Andre Miller, Nils Lundkvist and Joey Keane.  They also have Matthew Robertson, Yegor Rykov, Ryan Lindgren and Libor Hajek at or near the NHL-level.  That’s a lot of competition.

Obviously, not all prospects pan out, but to reasonably expect 3 or 4 of that group of 7 to be adequate NHL talent isn’t that much of a reach.  None of this is counting the possibility the Rangers are gifted a high-end defenseman in this year’s Draft.

Conclusion

So, where does this leave us? We have a player entering his age 25-season that would command a decent cap hit versus his overall value to the team.  He has an all-offense profile, which is at the moment buoyed by an artificially high shooting percentage. There are a wealth of quality prospects coming up behind him and in a fully rebuilt team, would be, what? A third- pairing guy who sees time on the powerplay? At $3-5m per year?

The most ironic thing is that his wholesale rejection of the advanced statistics movement actually hurts him worse.  His best-case profile is as an analytics darling who can drive possession and shot differential while minimizing his defensive shortcomings.

Honestly, I believe at this point it would be best to look to move DeAngelo at the deadline or at the Draft, hopefully to a team who has bought his inflated offensive value as the new normal and dreams on a guy finally hitting his upside.  The return could vary, but a combination of future financial savings, risk abatement and received future value make him an integral piece to the rebuild, albeit via trade.   Given all the factors discussed above, I don’t see any way he is a part of the future.

Tags
Show More

61 Comments

  1. Wrong!
    Please advise what current RHD do we have that can be an offensive defenseman?

    Still waiting . .

    1. Uhh Fox?
      I like DeAngelo alot, but it’s all about managing resources in the NHL and he’s a 3rd pairing RD on this team going forward (Trouba and Fox are and will continue to be higher on the depth chart). You just can’t pay a 3 RD $3-5M in a hard cap world.
      His value is high and the Rangers will look to see what they can get for him. I’ve advocated trying to find a solid top 4 LD that a team would trade for DeAngelo straight up. The Rangers badly need balance in their defense corp.

      1. Justin isn’t wrong either. They are committed to Trouba already. Fox is better. They have a ton of RHD prospects that will be cheaper.

        1. Fox has yet to lead the breakout and score at the current rate of Tony D. We all fall in love with the new shiny toy, but I would not say Fox is a replacement for Tony D just yet. A bridge contract still makes Tony a good value.

          1. I agree. Let’s keep Tony has he has become a very good all round player who also plays with an edge!!

        2. A better approach might be “I support Justin’s position and here is why.”

          Just flat-out saying Justin is right is also flat-out saying that anyone who disagrees with Justin, or you, for that matter is wrong.

          If the author of every article or post on this or any sports blog was always right, then what’s the point of having a blog where topics are debated?

          Sorry but….

          1. I am always right.

            In all seriousness, I think you read too deep into my agreement with Justin. All of this is opinion based.

            Personally, I’d prefer they keep DeAngelo and just move Trouba or Fox to the left side. Handedness be damned, play the best players. They will figure it out.

          2. “A better approach might be “I support Justin’s position and here is why.”

            Just flat-out saying Justin is right is also flat-out saying that anyone who disagrees with Justin, or you, for that matter is wrong.”

            Actually what Dave did was what you recommended and not what you accuse him of. In a mere 24 words, he gave three reasons why Justin was right. That is hardly the we are right because we are right approach.

            I frequently disagree with Dave, but he does a lot of work here and produces a lot of content and we should not criticize him for how he states his opinions – it is just too damn much work to always try to tiptoe around everyone’s feelings.

            ************

            It should be pointed out that the current Ranger team is ridiculous. We have three RH defensemen and only one is killing penalties. The upshot is the #2 RH defenseman on the PK is being carried as a forward. How crazy is that? All three players have a similar offensive bent. It makes sense to replace one of the trio by someone who is a better fit. Because of the contract situation, keeping Fox is far more practical than keeping ADA, regardless of who is better.

  2. You’re going to get raked over the coals for this article, but I agree with you. Not in all the details, but in the overall point, that Tony should be moved. I like him, as a player, and he seems to have …mmm … mellowed a bit. Despite that, as you said, he’s almost certainly going to be redundant on the Rangers’ D in the near future (Fox is the better D man going in either direction, Nils Lundkvist seems to have at least some of his offensive skill, and more on the defensive side, and then there’s Keane, Reunanen, and Rykov). He’s going to command, and deserve, a BIG raise in his next contract, which the Rangers definitely can’t afford. Better to move him while he’s still a hot commodity, IMHO.

  3. Certainly agree that he’s not the long term answer and I would lose it if he was given a Skjei-like contract. I would, however, be totally fine with a 2 year $3m-$4m per year deal before letting him walk as he hits his UFA years. While the prospects should turn out great, I’m not sold that enough of them will be able to hold down full time NHL roles within the next two years. That puts a lot of pressure on the kids that probably isn’t needed yet.

  4. oy vey! I mean Brady and Justin both smell pretty bad right now!!! fox is sly but so was Brady his first season too!!

    we are cursed with D problems like the flyers are with goalies!

    Jane, Jane, somebody stop this crazy thing!!!!

  5. Tony D is going to get a well deserved bridge deal. At 925k this year he is an absolute bargain, even if he doesn’t score another point the rest of the season. Unless you’re trading him for a bonafide number 2 center or big fast no nonsense winger the return is not going to be worth it because Tony D. is gonna go to another team and excel. Maybe you revisit trading him in another 2 years, in which case his worth will be even greater. His level of play is only going up. The defense prospects are a few years away anyway so what’s the rush to get rid of him? For what? A 2nd or 3rd rnd pick? No thanks. Tony is the real deal. If they’re going to trade anyone it should be Kreider and Fast. Both of whom are expendable. I like both players but Fast has hands of stone and Kreider just isn’t consistent enough.

    1. great read! Kreider at 7 mil per, uh, no way. Love Quickie, but, what you said. TDA is, for my money, a guy you should absolutely want to keep.

      1. No way they should pay Kreids 7mil. Look at that guy on Vegas who scored the first two goals played last night. He played like his ass was on fire and could’ve had 3 or 4 goals in the first ten minutes! THAT’s how Kreider should be playing night after night. I’m still bewildered how Tuch only had two goals coming into last night!

      2. Okay, so we can all agree to keep him at a very decent raise with a 2 year contract? You don’t “rid yourself” of an obvious offensive talent such as Tony D. He should be called Tony O! (For offense) Anyway, no guarantees from any of the kids coming…..his value would only rise and honestly, I like him very much on this team. And, if ANYONE will be flipped to the left D, it should be Tony, as he has already stated he limes playing the off side.

    2. They aren’t a few years away and right now there is a player in Hartford who has a ton of upside and is able to fill that spot. Players who have the puck a lot give the puck away a lot? OK so players who have the puck too much also get lots of secondary assists and have nicer point totals than they really impact the game. He gives the puck away and can’t take it away. He plays no one physically. He’s awful positionally. He is a one trick pony and if there are any gms out there who are as confused as you seem to be then they need to sell him now. Asap.

  6. Dear Justin
    Player, position, ability, contribution and salary offer a value proposition. Based on the play of our current defenders. Fox and Lindgren probably have the highest value, followed by Tony D. The “value Prop” changes when players get better (or worse). It also changes when contracts change. It could be said that Trouba even has a lower value prop than Stall at the moment, based on his high salary.

    While the Tony D value prop will change with his new contract, we still will have a need for a RH defenseman who has speed and offensive skill. We can bring in young RH defensemen with a much higher value prop (post new Tony D contract), but will they provide the skills Tony currently has? I would suggest moving Skjei and using that money on Tony D, which would give us young but experienced RH defense to the team.

  7. the Rangers have won one Stanley Cup in the past 80 years (counting this season). In Tony DeAngelo (highly Mickey Mouse of you to refer to him by his full name when you know, like we all do, he goes by Tony, set the tone for the entire read) we have a Brian Rafalski-esk D man. He actually has a skill set that can be a much needed ingredient in the pursuit of a championship. Which is something most people actually have no clue how to attain (a championship that is). These are the same people who say “Messier can’t be the coach”, um, Messier is worth betting on (again I refer you to 80 years, one cup). And, DeAngelo absolutely passes the eye test when watching him play all 200′ of the ice. It’s NOT TDA that’s stuck on the ice in his own zone because he lacks the skill to clear the zone, very rarely anyways. This guy is a special talent. I’d pick him WAY before any other D man on the Rangers, along w/ Fox. This guy actually is a championship ingredient. But, you write for and about the Rangers, I wouldn’t expect you to know what that looks like.

    1. Tony D’s NHL teams have won 66 of the 158 NHL games he’s played in. Do you realize how this whole championship thing works? Usually you’re supposed to win more than you lose, for starters.

      I like Tony DeAngelo as a player, but easy on the hype here: the guy is excellent offensively, terrible defensively, and hasn’t played a minute of postseason hockey in his career. Far from a championship ingredient.

    2. This is a joke. It’s actually scary to see this opinion. I pray the team doesn’t have anything resembling this view

  8. think ADA’s value is max to move at the deadline to a playoff bound team looking for some offensive punch on the blue line. i think his trade value at the draft is pretty low. either way, it was a mistake to give brady more than a bridge deal and it will be a bigger mistake with ADA. someone will make that mistake, and i agree with justin on this one, i hope that it will not be the rangers.

  9. Interesting points Justin.
    Personally I, like Bobby G, would like to see him signed at a reasonable bridge deal level for 2-3 years. And then when the bridge deal expires, we will have a far better picture of Fox’s abilities and whoever else we have in the system that plays the right side.
    Right now we have lots of “potential”, however, Tonny D plays for us now. He without a doubt has matured, and he very well may improve on his defense. He has shown that he can skate and shoot and contribute offensively with a little bit of meanness.
    All that being said, it comes to what he can bring back in a trade. And this is where management earns their money.
    Let us all remember we are still rebuilding so there’s is a lot for management to consider. But because of the fact we are still rebuilding we aren’t forced into prematurely trading the likes of Tony D before we fully evaluate the other talent we have in our system.
    I’ll respectfully disagree with Justin and my vote is for a bridge deal at a reasonable salary.

    1. If he would sign a bridge deal at a reasonable salary we wouldn’t need this conversation. I think after his holdout this autumn that, to him, this year IS his bridge deal, and at this age he will be looking to secure his future with the next deal.

  10. Yes, there is some money coming off the books next year, Justin. But I think you forgot about Shattenkirk’s $6mil hit. And if you want to sign Lemieux then I guess ADA has to go. I’m not sure if the Rangers see him in the long term, but a RHD who might score 20 goals SHOULD bring back a haul. I just don’t know how he is viewed around the league as a mature, disciplined hockey player.

  11. Kreider: not in future plans
    Andersson: not in future plans
    DeAngelo: tons better than the pylons, Staal and Smith..Tony D not happy at how he has been treated by leadership and will look to cash in elsewhere.
    Fox: A keeper
    Lindgren: A keeper
    Hajek: could use some seasoning in AHL
    Skjei: Seattle bound
    D’Miller: will be an impact defensive player
    Strome: I would move him at the deadline
    Georgiev: Will be moved at the deadline
    Rangers have many decisions to make after the conclusion of this season, but it’s not until the following season where we will see some serious cap relief……

  12. Justin: I disagree with the claim that Tony’s offensive numbers are inflated this season. When he was back for good last season he got better and better offensively as the season progressed. On top of that, he is hands down the best transition D man they have. So, I think you overstate your case unnecessarily in that regard. It seems that it will come down to finances and the cap, not performance that will influence the front office the most when it comes to DeAngelo.
    I would prefer to keep Tony if possible because a player with his offensive skills are not easy to find. He has gradually become a better defender too. Defending can be taught and improved upon more easily than skating and the skills necessary to shoot and pass the puck.
    While the numbers game with the cap might force the Rangers’ hand, I hope that they might find a way to retain him.

  13. Both Trouba and Fox are ahead of TDA–well Fox will be–if he is not there already. The guy will be too expensive for a third pair/PP guy who bleeds shots 5X5. Finding a free agent 3rd pair RHD or trading for one is not impossible.

  14. The player asks to go by Tony. Too much to ask of you? Any thoughts on why NYR are paying a 39 year old goalie $8.5M in the midst (at best) of a rebuild?

    1. Why are the Rangers playing a 30 year old $4.25 million defenseman as a forward in the rebuild?

      Why are they playing a 32 year old $5.7 million, one-eyed defenseman in a rebuild?

      Perhaps it’s because they needed bodies to fill out the roster. Perhaps it’s because you do the right thing to your franchise goaltender. Perhaps this year doesn’t matter that much and you want Hank as a mentor to Georgiev and as a stopgap to the actual next goalie: Shesterkin.

      Perhaps broadening your mind to the grey area that is life is too much to ask of you?

      1. Still think they should have kept Shatty and bought out Smith…I know they needed to free up the money for Panarin and Trouba, but I would have kept Shatty and tinkered somewhere else.

      2. Mr Insightful, (since you choose to go the denigration route on this blog) name a team with a top five paid goalie that has won the Cup since 2005. Spoiler, you won’t be able to. Also, the oldest alternative player you mention is seven years younger and paid nearly $3M less than Mr. L.

        IT’S A REBUILD.

    2. That contract was signed long before the team went into rebuilding mode. It’s been stated over and over again the player has no interest in leaving. That’s his choice as he has a no movement clause in his contract.

  15. I would agree with the title, but almost none of your reasons.

    I think the glut of high-end prospects on the blueline and his contract alone are enough to dangle him out there. Sure, I’d like him on the team if he took maybe a 2-yr deal at a reasonable price. I just don’t see that happening after this past summer. They backed him into a corner, so he’s not going to be nice on term or dollars and will most likely try to make up some lost opportunity on his next deal.

    I’d move him for those reasons alone…

  16. It’s hard to challenge your premise here, but I have to say I like the grit he brings to the team. He’s kind of an anomaly. (did any of the other offensive D man clock Okposo?) but I believe we will trade him. Especially with Keane and Lundkvist waiting in the wings. There’s also this kid named Hunter Skinner who’s having a pretty solid season in the OHL. But I am not sure it’s the right move to make. Agree we need more Defensive D me.

    You are on to something important here. We have a lot of good prospects. If there is such a thing; we have too many.The right side is over committed and the left side D will also be over committed even after Staal and Smith’s contracts expire. I see Lindgren as a fixture with Fox. I believe the team is also committed to Hajek. Then there is Sjkei. But Miller is coming and so is Robertson. So what gives on the left side.?Never mind Rykov, Reunanen , Nico Gross all of a sudden finding his way. Some of these prospects will need to be traded. There simply won’t be room for all of them .

    As far as this years draft. we should be targeting forwards. Particularly centers. I think we are pretty deep on Defense now. Unless we are planning to trade some D men for forwards our draft picks this year should geared towards improving our pool of forwards.

    Agree Kreider and Fast will need to be replaced. Morgan Barron seems to be an option for at least one of those 2 players. and I won’t be surprised if Puljujarvi is a Ranger at some point next year. Not sure what his contract would look like. but Barron’s will be on an ELC.

  17. I’m waiting for Rainman, Forrest Gump, and the Three Stooges to give their input, they are so bright.

    As for me, I like Tony, and would be in the corner of trying to give him a bridge deal that’s workable!

    1. Agreed Walt. A lot of what ifs in this article and comments.The prospects are still prospects. They have never played a game in the NHL and may not live up to the hype. DeAngelo is good right now. It would be a Ranger move to trade him.

  18. A few numbers that paint a different picture. There are 166 defensemen in the NHL who have played 20+ games. If you add hits plus blocks, 152 of these players have 40+. Eight more are in the 30s. DeAngelo is at 29. He has 28 giveaways and 5 takeaways.

    He is very good at carrying the puck, but obviously he also has weaknesses.

    Incidentally, the Ranger PP has been essentially equally effective with ADA, Trouba, and Fox.

    1. Players with lots of giveaways are often top players, because top players have the puck a lot. Not sure how that reflects badly on DeAngelo, when Drew Doughty, Erik Karlsson, Mat Barzal, and Erik Karlsson are leading the NHL in giveaways with totals above 40.

      Feel free to cherry-pick more stats, and draw inaccurate conjectures from them.

      1. Last name should be David Pastrnak on that list of top 4 in the NHL in giveaways, not a repeat of Karlsson.

  19. I saw this headline before and decided to wait, ponder, and then answer now.

    Here’s the thing, from the defensive blue line to the opponents’ zone, ADA is one of the best in the league. That’s a fact. He’s also putting up pts at almost an elite level for a D man. Great on the PP. He’s also a complete disaster in his own zone.

    So what will it take to keep him? I say a 2 year, $3M per bridge contract. He has arbitration rights so if he puts in for $5M per and the Rangers put in for $1M per, so they cut the difference at $3M per. THE RANGERS CAN ALWAYS TRADE HIM DURING HIS CONTRACT.

    There are prospects coming, all sound great, but totally unproven. Why get rid of a proven offensive D man? And what would you get for him? Not fair value, that’s for sure, based on ADA’s production, which is progressing as he plays more NHL games.

    The “scenario” that I see for trade, is packaging him and Georgiev to let’s say Carolina, Vegas, or Toronto, potential playoff teams that need help on the back end.

    Georgiev is going at some point, we need to get used to that idea. But I am having trouble with dealing ADA, right now, with no proven D men behind him to replace him NOW. Keeping him for next year buys the Rangers time to see what the D prospects look like, and how ready they are for the NHL.

    Can the Rangers afford him? I think so, even if the Rangers sign CK with an extension. Staal would have to be bought out or LTIR’d, for sure. Smith demoted or traded, if possible. G’s cap hit is almost nothing, while Shatty’s cap hit is $6M. Strome would have to go. But I do think that the Rangers can sign both CK and ADA, if they want to, which is the $1M question. If the Rangers want to.

    1. Bridge deal is for sure the way to go with ADA. Unless Kreds camp has come back down to earth with their contract demands, I think the Ranger organization should cut their loses and move him at the trade deadline.

      1. CK is playing like Zuc did last year at this time of the year, like a player that knows he’s being traded.

        Shame because he could be a difference maker.

  20. well shockingly another Justin article I categorically disagree with (at least in the short term). nils may need AHL time and keane – can we see him play an nhl first before we anoint him the next karlsson?

  21. ADA is excellent on offense and his defense is far better than Staal, and Hajek, and also better than Skjei. Your take is bad.

    1. I agree – As a former defenseman myself, I can assure everyone here he is not even remotely the “trainwreck” defensively that the writer and other commentators allege. He is an undersized defenseman and has issues defending the bigger/stronger players in the NHL, but he is a strong competitor with a good stick and excellent skating. He will never be Drew Doughty, but he is a solid 4th or 5th defenseman on a playoff team. Trade him for cap reasons or because you can gain value, but for the original poster to say he is a bad defender just shows me you do not have the ability to evaluate NHL defenders.

  22. There are problems with all of these “So-and-So should be traded” articles. They’re based on pure guesswork, regarding (1) what it will cost to keep the player (has anyone here spoken to Tony, or his agent about that?), (2) what other teams are willing to offer in exchange for him (who here is in contact with all of the other teams’ GM’s?) and (3) what other deals the Rangers are considering (who here has Gorton’s phone number and speaks to him regularly?). As far as I’m concerned, EVERY player on any team is available for trade AT THE RIGHT PRICE. Connor McDavid has mentioned that he’s getting tired of losing in Edmonton, so who would the Rangers put on the table if Holland gave Gorton a call about that? (Similar things have happened, Tavares sandbagging the Islanders, Ottawa giving us Zibanejad and a draft pick for Brassard, hell, go further back and we got a young McDonagh for a washed up Gomez, didn’t we?). Right now, Tony is a promising young D-man who we might be able to keep, but I”d trade him in a New York minute for a talented young center with some size, or even for a player with similar talents to his with a left handed shot.

  23. Honestly this is refreshing to see written in public in any setting whether it’s pro media or blog posting but it’s something that to me is a very important iq test. The frightening and unsettling thing is that the coach is on the wrong end of this iq test but there is still plenty of time to see what the gm does, and if JD is properly involved in the process going forward… Keeping things moving in the proper direction.

    Simply put if you think Deangelo is a player the team should be moving toward with on defense, you don’t really seem to care about the improvement of the team in the coming years. First and foremost there is a major problem with the team and their decision making because the coach is not good at personnel management and is lost on the management of putting his players in positions where they can most succeed and therefore benefit the team. Coming off last years result, the coach said the team needed to get more physical and play tougher in their end especially in front of the net. That is completely correct. Which is why it made complete sense that in an off-season where the team added Adam Fox and Trouba, they made Deangelo a take it or leave it offer and were prepared to go into the season without him. Yet the coach not only put him on the team ahead of Lindgren (he may have left Rykov and Lindgren off the team in favor of Deangelo if Rykov was healthy… Not that we know what is wrong with him). Not only that, but Deangelo can’t play the pk and as a backup plan, has a defenseman playing forward so he can fill in on defense in situations where Deangelo can’t. As you said he’s abysmal on D. It’s incredibly alarming that fans seem confused about what defensemen should be doing. When a defenseman gives up the puck three times as often as he takes it away, doesn’t play the body in any situation, is scared of contact, is scared to block shots….this player is the opposite of Dan Girardi who was just rightly celebrated for his daily sacrificing of his body, and isn’t good enough on offense to rationalize the way the coach utilizes him in place of better players. First Neal Pionk and now Adam Fox. The question is how does a player who was barely on the roster going into the year, affect the roster so much at this point. He gets lots of secondary assists and pops in a goal here and there and fans are confused because he can skate well. No matter if he can actually play defense. Plainly the team is not better with him on it over a stable 2 way defensemen with a bigger hockey iq and a more physical game…

    Which brings me to the last point….Trouba, Skjei, Fox, Hajek,….. And possibly… Probably Lindgren have jobs going forward. In the next year or two… And during this year in the case of Keane, the Rangers have Miller, Lundkwist, Keane, Rykov and Robertson as very ready to join the team defensemen. To give Deangelo a contract is a massive mistake should they do so. The Stepan trade was bad then and worse now. He was an underrated Ranger and as is often the case, misidentified by the fans as anything but a massive positive for the team and a reason and contributor to their massive playoff success over more than half a decade. Jeff Gorton has traded jt Miller and Derek Stepan for awful returns. That doesn’t however mean he shouldnt be actively and constantly trying to trade Deangelo so he can sell high. The team has ready made replacements and should be able to get a good return for a low cost offensively capable defenseman. He can benefit another team that doesn’t have better players now and in the future. As the Rangers do.

    1. Deangelo is a good player and I can tell you forwards love when he’s out there because they know he has the ability to first find them and also enough skill to get them the puck in stride, which is very important for team flow throughout the game, he makes forwards feel confident that somethings gonna happen when he’s out there and that’s a team win in itself. Look at the play he made tonight putting the puck on a plate for Panarins goal, bread man knew he had a goal as soon as he saw Deangelo with the puck because he knew he was getting that pass. This guy is a top 4 D and he has years to become a better defensive defenseman, which he will over time. Trust me the forwards definitely know his value he brings, he’s not going anywhere. Same things were said about Brian Leetch when he first came into the league, not comparing him to Leetch, but I’m saying they’re the same type of D at the same age.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button
Close
Close
Skip to toolbar