Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Rangers Buyout Kevin Shattenkirk


Phil

Recommended Posts

Well everyone's been talking about how Chytil was the better draft pick. I thought he was terrible. He was the perfect candidate to play in Hartford FOR THE WHOLE SEASON. The fact that Hartford was a miserable place to develope was why Chytil kept getting ice time. We'll never know if Anderson got the same treatment as Chytil if he would have had a better year. Towards the end of the season both Chytil and Andersons picked up. Maybe not in the stats but with the eye, Chytil picked up his physical game and Anderson picked up his 200 ft game. Last season was really not a good gauge of a rookie performance because of the plethora of factors the team and coach faced. This is the season we should be able to scrutinize how our youngins respond after their respective tastes last year.

 

I disagree highly. He was very up and down, but was moved around position wise. I think he works best as a center and kinda showed that later in the season.

 

I can see game changing talent in him. I think he definitely got coddled and favored, but I think the coaching staff sees the talent in there. My guess is that they don't see it in Andersson, or maybe there's an attitude problem?

 

I can't understand why he wouldn't be just handed a regular spot on such a bad team over the last 2 seasons. If he's the future and was so ready... How is he not playing over the scrubs that forced him to the stands and Hartford?

 

The last two seasons the Rangers have shown that they are willing to work with young players and give them longer leashes than we have been used to seeing. Andersson didn't get that treatment. I just find it odd...

 

Hopefully I'm overthinking it and they extend him that privelage this season. I'd be really happy to have some serious top 6 depth that is young.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thats the whole point with Andersson. He only ever got stuck on the 4th line and people expected him to be Crosby because he was selected 7th in the draft.

 

At seasons end Andersson didn't even get to play center on the 4th line. He was moved to wing if I remember correctly. He couldn't take a spot from Nieves, much less get a spot higher in the lineup.. Guess the roster was just THAT GOOD....?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm, 2100 points in 2600 games doesn't equal over a ppg. Each one scored over 1000 points and played more than 1300 games. Is that better? Never dominated seasons? They both have an Art Ross trophy to their name and Henrik won a Hart as well. How are you seriously trying to argue they weren't good?

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Fine, they were GOOD. Just not THAT good to set them as a benchmark. I'm sure if I looked I can find plenty of comparables for some other generations where people would not think of such players as benchmark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine, they were GOOD. Just not THAT good to set them as a benchmark. I'm sure if I looked I can find plenty of comparables for some other generations where people would not think of such players as benchmark.
Sure, sure, sure. They're 65th and 73rd in points in the history of the league, but they're not that good.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And never elivated any mediocre players game. Never dominated seasons. Never won. Way to combine two players point totals to equal over a ppg. Logical.
Never elevated a mediocre player's game?

 

Alex Burrows was and undrafted bottom 6 winger who scored 4 straight 25+ goal seasons with the Sedins. When their point totals dipped, his plummeted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right on the money. If someone wants to criticize the pick, because they used it on a player whose ceiling is as a middle six forward; totally fair. However if you are criticizing the player because he hasn't had a 25 goal season at 20 years old, and is therefore a "bust", you really don't know what you are talking about.

 

25 goals season? nobody is asking for that nor expecting it, he had a whopping 2 goals one of them off his taint. He's a helluva lot closer to a bust than a 25 goal scorer. Earn the increased ice time, earn not playing on the fourth line and show significant progress or continue to show next to nothing and turn out to be that bust afterall. It's not too late to go either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 goals season? nobody is asking for that nor expecting it, he had a whopping 2 goals one of them off his taint. He's a helluva lot closer to a bust than a 25 goal scorer. Earn the increased ice time, earn not playing on the fourth line and show significant progress or continue to show next to nothing and turn out to be that bust afterall. It's not too late to go either way.

 

That's fine and dandy, just apply it to all of the young players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 goals season? nobody is asking for that nor expecting it, he had a whopping 2 goals one of them off his taint. He's a helluva lot closer to a bust than a 25 goal scorer. Earn the increased ice time, earn not playing on the fourth line and show significant progress or continue to show next to nothing and turn out to be that bust after all. It's not too late to go either way.

 

Feel like I am talking in circles here. You can't really call him a bust or say he is close to being a bust, because he has never really been given a role or a full time opportunity. Please make an objective, statistics driven argument about how Brett Howden had a better camp last year? Make the same argument about outside of a 19 game window, where Howden has been more productive than Andersson? If you can't, by your logic Howden is much closer to being a bust because he is a year older and has been given that consistent role at the NHL level.

 

The reality is likely that they are both NHL players who need more time to develop by being given consistent minutes. If either is still struggling to crack an NHL roster at next year's training camp, yeah then I think you can start throwing around the bust label.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feel like I am talking in circles here.
You're not, but you're also not really being objective in the same way you're asking others to be...And you're cherry picking.

 

You can't really call him a bust or say he is close to being a bust, because he has never really been given a role of a full time opportunity.
No one said he was close to being a bust. What was said was he was closer to a bust than a 25 goal scorer...And the 25 goal marker was one that you introduced for hyperbole. You also haven't really stated what Andersson has done to warrant being given anything at all? I know what you're gonna say, "Howden sucked, yada yada..." but I'll get to that in a second.

 

Please make an objective, statistics driven argument about how Brett Howden had a better camp last year?
It's silly to ask for statistics driven argument for things that happen in training camp. For one thing, unless you're going to look back at pre-season box scores and add up stats, they're not readily available. On top of that, it's impossible to gauge the quality of competition in pre-season games when teams could be dressing their AHL team or guys on PTO.

 

Make the same argument about outside of a 19 game window, where Howden has been more productive than Andersson? If you can't, by your logic Howden is much closer to being a bust because he is a year older and has been given that consistent role at the NHL level.The reality is likely that they are both NHL players who need more time to develop by being given consistent minutes. If either is still struggling to crack an NHL roster at next year's training camp, yeah then I think you can start throwing around the bust label.
The bold is certainly accurate and probably the only salient point. The rest of it is pretty much a straw man, like the section above. Howden is 6 months older, not a year. He was picked at 27, not 7. While people don't want to act like draft position matters, it most certainly does. People try to make siloed or obscure contrarian arguments on how many picks go on to play in the NHL and are productive vs draft position....yet everyone shot their load when we won the lottery...So yea, it matters.

 

Back to Howden...When it seems like players who don't deserve ice time are getting a role over a player who you think does, you have to look at what's happening off the ice. There is no question that ADA was better than Pionk and Shattenkirk last year. But ADA has well documented off ice issues that Quinn is not dealing with. So ADA sits. Chytil, at times, sits. Howden sat. You really have to ask yourself what Lias is doing off the ice (or not doing) that he can't beat out Brandan Smith for a 4th line role on this team.

 

That speaks volumes as to what Quinn feels he's getting from Andersson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, sure, sure. They're 65th and 73rd in points in the history of the league, but they're not that good.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

With Patrick Marleau at #53, Jarome Iginla at 34..... I mean, is it that big of an accomplishment being #65 and 73 as far as being an NHL great? Mark Recchi is #12. NHL benchmark player? I mean.... he was good..... Point totals aren't everything (I know ..oldest hockey message board phrase ever)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're not, but you're also not really being objective in the same way you're asking others to be...And you're cherry picking.

 

No one said he was close to being a bust. What was said was he was closer to a bust than a 25 goal scorer...And the 25 goal marker was one that you introduced for hyperbole. You also haven't really stated what Andersson has done to warrant being given anything at all? I know what you're gonna say, "Howden sucked, yada yada..." but I'll get to that in a second.

 

It's silly to ask for statistics driven argument for things that happen in training camp. For one thing, unless you're going to look back at pre-season box scores and add up stats, they're not readily available. On top of that, it's impossible to gauge the quality of competition in pre-season games when teams could be dressing their AHL team or guys on PTO.

 

The bold is certainly accurate and probably the only salient point. The rest of it is pretty much a straw man, like the section above. Howden is 6 months older, not a year. He was picked at 27, not 7. While people don't want to act like draft position matters, it most certainly does. People try to make siloed or obscure contrarian arguments on how many picks go on to play in the NHL and are productive vs draft position....yet everyone shot their load when we won the lottery...So yea, it matters.

 

Back to Howden...When it seems like players who don't deserve ice time are getting a role over a player who you think does, you have to look at what's happening off the ice. There is no question that ADA was better than Pionk and Shattenkirk last year. But ADA has well documented off ice issues that Quinn is not dealing with. So ADA sits. Chytil, at times, sits. Howden sat. You really have to ask yourself what Lias is doing off the ice (or not doing) that he can't beat out Brandan Smith for a 4th line role on this team.

 

That speaks volumes as to what Quinn feels he's getting from Andersson.

 

I think I am being very objective here, by posting links that back-up the positions that I am taking compared to throwing out sentences like "Andersson's effort is shit" like you have some insight into what his effort in practice is like as if you were his strength & conditioning coach. As for cherry picking, I don't really feel like I am doing that either. If you are saying that in the context that I didn't point out how mediocre he played when he was sent back down to Hartford, or how that one really great game last pre-season was followed by a bunch where he was less than noticeable, I completely acknowledge that he needs serious work on parts of his game. I apologize if it came off that I was looking at his development as only "glass half full".

 

It's not silly to ask for a statistics driven argument if someone is criticizing one player for a lack of development when a similar player was given the 3rd line center spot. I completely get what you are saying about the the quality of competition being invariable, but how then would you make an argument about one having a considerably better camp? The eye test? You are also spot on about what we don't see when the coaches make their evaluations. In the one year of Quinn, I am more comfortable than most regarding his commitment to development versus his predecessor's.

 

Without cluttering this debate too much farther, let me simplify what I am saying: It's too early to label Andersson a bust. That's all. If you can agree with that fundamental point, I don't think that there is alot that we disagree on. As you said, draft position absolutely matters. If Andersson and Chytil flip flopped draft positions, I don't think there would be a peep about his development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I am being very objective here, by posting links that back-up the positions that I am taking compared to throwing out sentences like "Andersson's effort is shit" like you have some insight into what his effort in practice is like as if you were his strength & conditioning coach. As for cherry picking, I don't really feel like I am doing that either. If you are saying that in the context that I didn't point out how mediocre he played when he was sent back down to Hartford, or how that one really great game last pre-season was followed by a bunch where he was less than noticeable, I completely acknowledge that he needs serious work on parts of his game. I apologize if it came off that I was looking at his development as only "glass half full".

 

It's not silly to ask for a statistics driven argument if someone is criticizing one player for a lack of development when a similar player was given the 3rd line center spot. I completely get what you are saying about the the quality of competition being invariable, but how then would you make an argument about one having a considerably better camp? The eye test? You are also spot on about what we don't see when the coaches make their evaluations. In the one year of Quinn, I am more comfortable than most regarding his commitment to development versus his predecessor's.

 

Without cluttering this debate too much farther, let me simplify what I am saying: It's too early to label Andersson a bust. That's all. If you can agree with that fundamental point, I don't think that there is alot that we disagree on. As you said, draft position absolutely matters. If Andersson and Chytil flip flopped draft positions, I don't think there would be a peep about his development.

But, that's not what happened...

 

There was never a scenario where we draft Chytil at 7 and Andersson at 19(?). The Rangers getting fortunate with Chytil means the alternative scenario is Chytil at 19 plus something "better" at 7.

 

Also, not sure why you keep going back to camp. I believe the point was that the popular opinion was that Andersson had the better camp and Howden got the spot anyway. My point would be... If that's the case... There's a reason for it. Things we don't see or here (of which there are many).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, not sure why you keep going back to camp. I believe the point was that the popular opinion was that Andersson had the better camp and Howden got the spot anyway. My point would be... If that's the case... There's a reason for it. Things we don't see or here (of which there are many).

 

My understanding, and to be fair this could a total fabrication in my mind, was that they made the decision that Andersson would be better served starting the season as 1c in Hartford rather than as a bit part with the Rangers. And that was a good decision imo. He did well in that first stretch of the season, going around a ppg clip and playing all situations. Then they sort of abandoned this idea the moment they needed a plug on the 4th line. That probably wasn't a good idea, and it is likely a better move would've been to call up a guy like Beleskey or Gettinger and leave Andersson where he was until they were prepared to try him out in a more prominent role. Instead, they went with a next man up approach that helped neither Andersson or the team.

 

I think that's the challenge when you have a young team. You have to find the perfect intersection between not handing out roles, making players earn their ice time and giving young players a platform to succeed. I don't think playing Andersson 8 minutes a night with poor players is giving him a platform to succeed. It's the same with Chytil. The stats support this. Chytil drowned on the 4th line. Playing with good players he was one of the better play drivers on the team, with pretty outstanding fancy stats. Getting this right isn't easy, but it's important. Some guys respond to tough love, some guys need an arm around the shoulder. Some will relish the challenge of working their way up from the 4th line, others will play within themselves.

In my opinion, unless they feel Andersson is ready to take on the role as 3c I think the right move is to play him in Hartford. I'm not suggesting they just give him the role. He has to show up in camp. But I think he's the kind of guy who needs a bit of job security. And I don't think he has the game to stand out on the 4th line. In a perfect world he does well in camp and they tell him "look, you're going to be our 3C", and play him on a settled line with decent players in the Namestnikov/Strome mould. Give him the shot, and he'll sink or swim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That list is bad. Fleury?

Drury signing was worse than he Gomez deal.

 

Hard to compare pre-cap busts with cap casualties, too.

you right,but we had so many bad contracts and over the hill moves ,top five is kind of hard to figure out,or we can make two different list and still be hard to figure out who should be top five on both list
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not though lol. The draft is ripe with 2nd round players who do what you're describing. We took that at 7.

31 players have played more than 100 NHL games from the 2012, 13, 14, 15 second rounds. That's fewer than 10 a year and includes a bunch of guys who are bottom roster filler, defensemen and goalies. The number of forwards who have scored 20 goals in a season from that group is 2 (Bertuzzi, Aho). There's really nothing to suggest that anything after the first round is "ripe" with 20-goal, two-way players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you right,but we had so many bad contracts and over the hill moves ,top five is kind of hard to figure out,or we can make two different list and still be hard to figure out who should be top five on both list

 

I can't remember where I heard/read this, but I recall it being on a podcast. Sorry for the rust on this, then.

 

The overwhelming odds are that big free agency deals end in buyout or trade. It's something like 60% within 4 years for deals over 5 years in length.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 players have played more than 100 NHL games from the 2012, 13, 14, 15 second rounds. That's fewer than 10 a year and includes a bunch of guys who are bottom roster filler, defensemen and goalies. The number of forwards who have scored 20 goals in a season from that group is 2 (Bertuzzi, Aho). There's really nothing to suggest that anything after the first round is "ripe" with 20-goal, two-way players.

 

What was your filter here? I got 28 players drafted in rounds 2-7 in 2012 alone who either have or should shortly crack 100 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You added 5 rounds lol. Talking specifically about the 2nd round.

 

Hah! I should read more carefully.

 

I think the overall point stands though - if Lias is a two-way center with no offensive upside, you could absolutely get that in the later rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hah! I should read more carefully.

 

I think the overall point stands though - if Lias is a two-way center with no offensive upside, you could absolutely get that in the later rounds.

Sure, but the discussion was if he's also a ~25-goal scorer.

If Andersson can score 25ish goals, 50ish points, be a pain to play against, shut down an opposing center, kill penalties, and avoid Callahan's injuries that would be great. Especially relative to the rest of his draft year.

 

We can go back and forth about whether or not he can ever score 25 goals, but that's not really the point here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but the discussion was if he's also a ~25-goal scorer.

 

 

We can go back and forth about whether or not he can ever score 25 goals, but that's not really the point here.

 

Ah. Small N there; highly unlikely you get that player beyond round 1. It happens, but not commonly.

 

It's all overblown at this point, though. He's right at the spot where he SHOULD be making the transition properly to the NHL. It's fair to say this is a big season for him and for his future, and it's probably fair to start throwing around the B word if he can't get it together this year. Not quite yet though.

 

This is a big year for damn near every player picked after Elias Pettersson in that draft, though. Lots of very interesting talents, lots of very questionable players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah. Small N there; highly unlikely you get that player beyond round 1. It happens, but not commonly.

 

It's all overblown at this point, though. He's right at the spot where he SHOULD be making the transition properly to the NHL. It's fair to say this is a big season for him and for his future, and it's probably fair to start throwing around the B word if he can't get it together this year. Not quite yet though.

 

This is a big year for damn near every player picked after Elias Pettersson in that draft, though. Lots of very interesting talents, lots of very questionable players.

Yea, agreed with next year as an important season, but even still, it's not like he has to produce.

 

I don't think people consider Brayden Schenn a bust, and he didn't score 20 goals until 5 years after he was drafted. Lias could go 10-20 and be right where he should be in his development, but some will simply look at that and think he's a bust. Valli made a good point that Cally was 23 when he entered the league, and that's important. Lias has higher expectations because of his draft status, but that doesn't mean they should be impatient with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...