Latest posts by Mike Valvano (see all)
- For Rangers' Rookies, a Timeshare at Center Might be the Answer - 09/27/2017
- Weighing an Andreas Athanasiou Offer Sheet - 09/12/2017
- Measuring Shattenkirk's Power Play Impact - 08/30/2017
McCabe. Del Zotto. Boyle. Yandle. Shattenkirk.
The Rangers’ have failed over and over since Jaromir Jagr to find a power play maven, and Kevin Shattenkirk is the newest experiment. We won’t know until probably November how Alain Vigneault plans to use the newly signed Shattenkirk entirely, though we can make a strong assumption that he’ll slot right in as captain Ryan McDonagh’s right-side partner. But, immediately, we’ll see what impact he can have on the Rangers’ power play.
Measuring the impact is tricky, but the question, “How much better can the Rangers’ power play get?” is a worthwhile one.
With McDonagh serving as the quarterback of the power play, averaging 3:05 PP TOI/GP last season, the Blueshirts’ man-up squad finished the season tied for tenth-best in the NHL at 20.2%. There’s an unquestioned belief that the Blueshirts will improve on that number—fair enough, considering Shattenkirk’s skillset—but the improvement might not be as substantial as Rangers fans tend to believe.
The St. Louis Blues have been a strong power play team, but not an elite one during Shattenkirk’s reign. Given the Rangers’ solid numbers last year, it’s hard to imagine Shattenkirk having much transcendental power in New York. Over the last four post-lockout seasons, Shattenkirk has averaged 3:09 PP TOI/GP and just over 24 power play points per season with the Blues. During that time, the Blues finished 7th in 2013-14 (19.8%), 4th in 2014-15 (22.3%), 6th in 2015-16 (21.5%), and 8th in 2016-17 (21.3%). Dating back to Shattenkirk’s rookie season, they’ve never finished a regular season producing at better than the 22.3% clip they did in 2014-15.
There’s no arguing the overall strength of that unit, but the Blues have failed to really challenge the league’s elite man-up units. The consistency is worth noting, and having a top-ten unit is great, but for the power play to give the Rangers the extra juice they need to contend for the Cup, it needs to be elite. It’s fair wonder whether or not Shattenkirk can bridge the gap.
There are a handful of players—predominantly snipers—in the league who you can argue single-handedly make a power play dangerous and the names shouldn’t be surprising; Alex Ovechkin, Sidney Crosby, Steven Stamkos, Brent Burns. But Shattenkirk doesn’t really fit in that company. Instead, he falls in line with the guys who succeed by allowing the talent around them to thrive. Kris Letang, Mike Green, and, for comparison’s sake, Derek Stepan.
Since Shattenkirk isn’t going to be the devastating shooter that the Rangers’ power play needs, his impact might be smaller than conventional wisdom suggests. He’ll make the unit better with his offensive-zone vision alone, but it’s tough to say that he packs the punch necessary to be the catalyst for an elite unit, especially since he hasn’t before.
Compounding on this is the fact that, quite simply, the Rangers don’t generate a high volume of power plays. The uptempo, contact-averse style that Vigneault prefers simply doesn’t lend itself to a consistent flow of man-advantage opportunities. Last season, the Rangers finished tied for 23rd with 233 attempts while over the last three seasons, cumulatively, the Rangers are tied for last in the league with 691 opportunities.
So, therein lies the rub in signing a guy who’s only certain value comes on the power play; the low number of chances facilitates a negligible difference in goals.
Assuming Shattenkirk’s presence boosts the Rangers to a 24.5% success rate (Buffalo’s league-leading mark last year), and the Rangers earn 240 advantages, the Rangers would tally 59 power play goals and improve on last year’s mark by 12. Assuming 230 attempts and 21.3% (St. Louis’ rate last year), the Rangers would tally just 49 goals. Split the difference and we’re looking at another seven or so goals.
Is that an improvement that makes the Rangers any stronger in the standings? Does that win you more than another game or two? More importantly, does another handful of power play goals compensate for the fact that Shattenkirk isn’t an elite top-pair defenseman, should he struggle with the defensive responsibilities that McDonagh’s partner will necessarily assume?
There aren’t many good answers to these questions. There’s a chance that Mika Zibanejad and J.T. Miller can find the net consistently from the dots to really make the man up unit hum, but a marginally better power play is probably the most realistic scenario, since it was already a strong unit last year anyway.
Where the extra goal or two will matter is in the playoffs. Last year, the Rangers’ power play converted at an anemic 7.7% against Montreal and Ottawa who, to their credit, had great penalty killing units. And, as in the regular season, the Rangers struggled to get opportunities as they finished seventh out of eight teams to make the second round in opportunities. If his tenure here is going to be a success, Shattenkirk should and, really, must do that in the playoffs where a single goal can be the difference between joy and pain.
It’s worth noting that, even in a small sample size, Washington’s power play was almost 2% better in the playoffs than in the regular season with Shattenkirk running the point.
Perhaps, too, another way to evaluate Shattenkirk’s presence on the power play is more abstract. We’ve seen in recent years that, with the Rangers’ objection to fighting, teams have felt comfortable taking liberties and being overtly aggressive because they didn’t fear New York’s man up unit (ironic, considering the Rangers’ low PP totals). Even if the total goals scored is negligible, Shattenkirk may be able to make the Rangers’ power play a more consistent threat and allow the team to capture momentum, rather than allow a strong penalty kill to do so for opponents.
Fear is powerful and keeping opponents on their heels is what the Rangers thrive on when their four-line attack is rolling. Barring a monumental rise in power play goal totals, maintaining that pace with the man advantage, particularly in the postseason, may be where Shattenkirk sets himself apart from some of his predecessors.
- offensive impact:not improving the defensive zone play
the ratio to watch.
hopefully he can boost the PP enough. Although his even strength offensive numbers are comparable to dead legs Dan, his strength is on the man advantage. If he can outproduce his replacement by 15 - 20 points, not counting what he contributes on the pp that wont show up on the scoresheet, youre talking an extra goal for every 1/3 games.
That's going to do two things - give us more leads, and give us bigger leads. Hopefully we dont see as many games with the Rangers pinned in their own zone the entire period trying to protect a 1 goal lead.Interesting OP. Calibrating expectations accordingly.
But the expectations calibration for me is more a team thing than a live-and-die by Shattenkirk thing. I guess my thinking is kind of in the mode of what American Jesus said.
But TBH I am more concerned about how the team holds up to strong pressure in the defensive zone and how it holds a lead when the opponent decides they better pull their finger out.
The recent Rangers teams now share a sense of reaching sight of the summit. But the last part of the climb is the hardest. My gut tells me we are not really all that much closer than we were during the Ottawa series. There's more team engineering — or stepping up on the part of certain players — to be done.Anecdotally? Minimal. Rarely does one player drastically shake up a special teams unit.This is super interesting.
Last season, the Rangers finished tied for 23rd with 233 attempts while over the last three seasons, cumulatively, the Rangers are tied for last in the league with 691 opportunities.
One way to judge the Shattenkirk signing is within the context of the little known advanced stat, Replacement Over Girardi (ROG). Shattenkirk's ROG % is 10,000 Sun Units. When you take Girardi's buyout savings from Shattenkirk's contract, you get, "of course we're fucking better off".
I can't really argue with much of what you wrote though, Mike. I think Shattenkirk has to be evaluated in how he's part of the defensive overhall and we won't really know that until we see how the match ups shake out. Still, you point out he's been historically worth about 24 points on the power play, he'll also put up another 25 or so points at even strength as well.