While the New York Rangers continue to figure themselves out, the team has been anything but boring. Along with watching the games, we can see this reflected statistically. We’re going to take a look at how the Rangers stack up against the NHL when it come to pace.
The New York Rangers have been involved in several exciting games so far this season, even if they haven’t emerged victorious in many of them. This is reflected in the traditional stats as per NHL.com, the team is averaging 31.5 shots for per game (15th in the NHL, higher rank is better) and 34.8 shots against per game (T-4th in the NHL, higher rank is worse).
Taking a look at advanced stats, namely shot attempts (shots on net, missed shots and blocked shots) aka Corsi, we can see that this trend is reflected here as well.
The graphic above on the right (5v5 “Pace”) shows how the teams in the NHL stack up when it comes to “Pace” during 5 on 5 play. Here, Pace is a team’s number shot attempts for per 60 minutes of ice time plus its shot attempts against per 60 minutes.
Here we can see that the Rangers are among the league leaders in this particular category. The four teams ahead of them, The Toronto Maple Leafs (16 points), Pittsburgh Penguins (14 points), San Jose Sharks (15 points) and Chicago Blackhawks (15 points), are among the league leaders in this young season. (Standings point values accurate after conclusion of games on 10/30).
As with all statistics, context is key. This is where the graphic on the left comes into play.
Pace only indicates how lively or exciting a particular team tends to be. Here, the definition of lively or exciting is how many shot attempts are taken by BOTH teams in a game. Therefore, having a high Pace, as the Rangers do, is not necessarily a good thing.
Ideally, the Rangers would be taking more shots than allowing. As noted by the NHL.com stats mentioned above, and reflected in the ‘Team Shot Rates’ graphic above on the left, this is not the case.
Per Corisca.Hockey, where the data for the Shot Rate chart is sourced from, the Rangers are allowing 57.93 shot attempts against per 60 minutes of ice time (2nd in the NHL, higher rank is worse) while only generating 49.19 shot attempts for per 60 minutes of ice time (16th in the NHL, higher rank is better).
What does this all mean?
While statistics are useful in presenting and analyzing events that have already occurred, their true value comes in applying those trends to try to predict future results.
12 games is not that large of a sample size but it does seem to indicate that the Rangers are in store for many more eventful games. They are coming out on the losing side of the shot attempt battle, and more importantly, the final score. Should the trend continue, the Rangers will be expected to lose many more of these eventful games.
This makes sense as the Rangers, being a rebuilding team, are not expected to be serious playoff contenders.
The roster construction reflects this as well. While the forward group is focusing on speed and skill with an active fore-check, the defense is still a work in progress. The Rangers under David Quinn are changing their defensive philosophy so it’s unsurprising that there are warts showing 12 games into the season.
Additionally, the defensive corps lacks a true number one defenseman since Ryan McDonagh was traded to the Tampa Bay Lightning.
These trends also indicate there is more than one way to win and lose in the NHL. On the opposite side of the Pace chart are teams like the Nashville Predators (18 points) and Boston Bruins (16 points). Their low Pace is driven by their trademark stifling defense whereas conversely, the Blackhawks and Sharks’ high Pace is driven by their high octane offense.
This trend is certainly worth keeping an eye on as the season progresses and Quinn continues to mold the roster. Will the defense continue to surrender numerous attempts and chances? Could the young offense firing on all cylinders drive the pace even higher? All the analytics in the world cannot truly predict the future but it appears the Rangers will be anything but boring.