The Kids Are Alright?

[Br4d]

The Rangers have 47 goals out of line 3 right now.  Lots of teams would be good with that.  Yeah the kids should be scoring a bit more but given the time and opportunities they receive they are definitely doing the job they are being asked to do.

[Phil]

26 minutes ago, Br4d said:

The Rangers have 47 goals out of line 3 right now.  Lots of teams would be good with that.  Yeah the kids should be scoring a bit more but given the time and opportunities they receive they are definitely doing the job they are being asked to do.

 

 

Pretty disingenuous argument to just roll them into the heavy production of the top-six guys as though they're doing anything more than a fraction of the heavy lifting.

[Pete]

2 hours ago, Br4d said:

The Rangers have 47 goals out of line 3 right now.  Lots of teams would be good with that.  Yeah the kids should be scoring a bit more but given the time and opportunities they receive they are definitely doing the job they are being asked to do.

Lots of teams don't have a #1OA, #2OA and #18OA on their third line, for lots of teams with picks that high, they'd love to deploy them against the other team's 3rd line and not the best defensive players in the league.

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Pete

[Br4d]

How many teams in the NHL have more goals out of line 3 than the Rangers?

 

Just a question.

 

You can argue that the kids should be playing in the top 6 and getting PP time but the reality is that for most of their time with the Rangers they have not gotten that kind of exposure.  People tend to rise to the challenges you put in front of them and line 3 isn't a particularly big challenge.

 

Also the coach is a vet's coach.  He's always going to go to the vets over the kids if given a choice and now he has a roster full of vets to do that with.

[BrooksBurner]

9 minutes ago, Br4d said:

How many teams in the NHL have more goals out of line 3 than the Rangers?

 

Just a question.

 

You can argue that the kids should be playing in the top 6 and getting PP time but the reality is that for most of their time with the Rangers they have not gotten that kind of exposure.  People tend to rise to the challenges you put in front of them and line 3 isn't a particularly big challenge.

 

Also the coach is a vet's coach.  He's always going to go to the vets over the kids if given a choice and now he has a roster full of vets to do that with.

I thought the kid line looked pretty damn good last night. They are frequently the best forechecking line for the Rangers, cycling the puck and maintaining possession in the OZ. Their production should be higher for the chances they generate, which is becoming a tired trope. Their performance together is effective from a standpoint of putting pressure on the opposition though.

 

This discussion should probably be it’s own topic though @Moderators

[Pete]

21 minutes ago, Br4d said:

How many teams in the NHL have more goals out of line 3 than the Rangers?

 

Just a question.

 

You can argue that the kids should be playing in the top 6 and getting PP time but the reality is that for most of their time with the Rangers they have not gotten that kind of exposure.  People tend to rise to the challenges you put in front of them and line 3 isn't a particularly big challenge.

 

Also the coach is a vet's coach.  He's always going to go to the vets over the kids if given a choice and now he has a roster full of vets to do that with.

They all played themselves onto the third line.

[Phil]

54 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

I thought the kid line looked pretty damn good last night. They are frequently the best forechecking line for the Rangers, cycling the puck and maintaining possession in the OZ. Their production should be higher for the chances they generate, which is becoming a tired trope. Their performance together is effective from a standpoint of putting pressure on the opposition though.

 

This discussion should probably be it’s own topic though @Moderators

 

Done.

[Br4d]

54 minutes ago, Pete said:

They all played themselves onto the third line.

 

They played themselves onto the third line because the Rangers had established stars ahead of them on line 1 and 2, with the exception of Kakko.

 

GG made the decision last season that they were deferring to often to those established stars and he put them on their own line, line 3, after which they certainly played a more coherent game and did well in the playoffs.

[Albatrosss]

3 hours ago, Phil said:

 

 

Pretty disingenuous argument to just roll them into the heavy production of the top-six guys as though they're doing anything more than a fraction of the heavy lifting.

what does this have to do with the OP?

[Phil]

I'd need to look at broader data to support it, but I'm not sure they're giving the Rangers a ton of value. They're fine, but other clubs are probably getting more from their third lines.

[NYR2711]

41 minutes ago, Phil said:

I'd need to look at broader data to support it, but I'm not sure they're giving the Rangers a ton of value. They're fine, but other clubs are probably getting more from their third lines.

I don't know, they seem to give other teams issues in the offensive zone. They are making chances for themselves, a lot of them, but are having issues in finishing, whether its good goaltending or blocked shots or shots going wide, but they are still producing chances. I would like to see maybe Kakko moved off that line for a talented veteran player to help maybe get their game going a little more, but they always seem to be in the offensive zone. I think they need to shoot more.

[RichieNextel305]

They’ve turned into a hard, grinding line to play against.

 

Is that why we drafted them? Is that what we hope they become? No and no. I hope for more from them in the future.

 

But for now? For this playoff run? With the Top-6 being what it is? I’m okay with it.

[RJWantsTheCup]

All 3 of them need to learn how to finish better.

[RangersIn7]

It’ll come.

 

[Phil]

30 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

They’ve turned into a hard, grinding line to play against.

 

Is that why we drafted them? Is that what we hope they become? No and no. I hope for more from them in the future.

 

But for now? For this playoff run? With the Top-6 being what it is? I’m okay with it.

 

Yeah, this is probably a better way to look at it. I think my problem is I can't look past the fact that two of them went first- and second-overall, respectively, and I'm being made to feel like I should just be happy because they're playing effective two-way hockey.

 

It's a me thing, I guess, but I just really have a tough time looking past what they were supposed to be, so it makes accepting what they are more difficult.

[Pete]

2 hours ago, Br4d said:

 

They played themselves onto the third line because the Rangers had established stars ahead of them on line 1 and 2, with the exception of Kakko.

 

GG made the decision last season that they were deferring to often to those established stars and he put them on their own line, line 3, after which they certainly played a more coherent game and did well in the playoffs.

They went into this season with 2 wing spots open for Kakko / Laf / Kravtsov to play their way into.

 

Weeks ago traded for Tarasenko and Kane.

Edited March 24, 2023 by Pete

[Phil]

10 minutes ago, Pete said:

They went into this season with 2 wing spots open for Kakko / Laf / Kravtsov to play their way into.

 

Weeks ago traded for Tarasenko and Kane.

 

They went into this season with more than just two spots open, they cleared the decks expressly to give Kakko and Kravtsov the runway they needed to take those spots. One's since been traded and the other is back on the third line.

 

Opening night lineup was Kreider, Zib, Kakko and Panarin, Trocheck, Krav.

[BrooksBurner]

12 minutes ago, Pete said:

They went into this season with 2 wing spots open for Kakko / Laf / Kravtsov to play their way into.

 

Weeks ago traded for Tarasenko and Kane.

And Tarasenko they should do what they can to keep. There is no way they should be going into next year with Kakko at the top of the depth chart.

 

And yes, I realize that means they hard ball Chytil and trade Goodrow, or trade Chytil. Tarasenko keeps this team a legit contender for the next 2 years, and I would say he has probably 3-4 years left of high level hockey in him.

[Phil]

3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

And Tarasenko they should do what they can to keep. There is no way they should be going into next year with Kakko at the top of the depth chart.

 

And yes, I realize that means they hard ball Chytil and trade Goodrow, or trade Chytil. Tarasenko keeps this team a legit contender for the next 2 years, and I would say he has probably 3-4 years left of high level hockey in him.

 

Agreed. I posted it a bit ago, but I've completely shifted into the mindset that all the kids, all of them, are getting bridged or getting traded. No one has shown so much to warrant anything better. I've no desire to be locked into Chytil for five plus years or Miller for eight, etc. They have time. Use it.

[Ozzy]

5 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

And Tarasenko they should do what they can to keep. There is no way they should be going into next year with Kakko at the top of the depth chart.

 

And yes, I realize that means they hard ball Chytil and trade Goodrow, or trade Chytil. Tarasenko keeps this team a legit contender for the next 2 years, and I would say he has probably 3-4 years left of high level hockey in him.

 

Yup...Tarasenko is exactly what we needed.  Guy is a legit force!

[Tomas Sandstrom]

58 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yeah, this is probably a better way to look at it. I think my problem is I can't look past the fact that two of them went first- and second-overall, respectively, and I'm being made to feel like I should just be happy because they're playing effective two-way hockey.

 

It's a me thing, I guess, but I just really have a tough time looking past what they were supposed to be, so it makes accepting what they are more difficult.

I hear ya, this is my internal struggle also.

 

The way I see it, once they fired JD and Gorton, to me, that signaled the end of the build and the start of "Win Now".  In Win Now mode, by definition, you do not prioritize developing the kids and putting them in the best position to grow.  Does that totally excuse the lack of goal scoring from 1OA, 2OA, and 18OA picks?  No.  However, to say it has nothing to do with it is also not correct.  The truth lies somewhere in between.

 

Fact:  If they had more PP time, and 1st or 2nd line minutes, they would probably score more.

 

Also Fact:  The way this team is currently built, and given that they are aiming to win the cup this year, they are not being asked to carry Line 1 or 2 scoring burden.  

 

Now, you can argue all day about this or that, but these are the facts.  

 

At the end of the day, I come back to the fact that these are still 21 (LAF) and just turned 22 year old (Kakko) kids.  We've seen more bursts of scoring from Chytil, but he's also older with more time.  And he was the old whipping boy until he had those hot steaks.  Now it's just Kak and Laf getting whipping boy treatment.  

 

I agree that you want more from 1 and 2 overall picks.  

 

But, at least for the next year or 2, there's still time, still room to grow and improve.  

 

I think the prudent course of action is to be patient, take what you can get from them through the end of this season, and let's see what happens next year.  

 

Personally, I hope all 3 kids remain on the team, at least into next year, and I hope they get expanded roles next year to see if they can grow.  I am hoping being around guys like Vlad and Kane, will rub off and they learn a thing or 2 about goal scoring.

[Pete]

39 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

And Tarasenko they should do what they can to keep. There is no way they should be going into next year with Kakko at the top of the depth chart.

 

And yes, I realize that means they hard ball Chytil and trade Goodrow, or trade Chytil. Tarasenko keeps this team a legit contender for the next 2 years, and I would say he has probably 3-4 years left of high level hockey in him.

I just don't see any way because I think he's still an $8M/yr player.

[Tomas Sandstrom]

One more thought...

 

A lot of times, it's not about ability, rather it's about atmosphere, coaching, and ultimately, confidence.  

 

I am having a real hard time trying to determine if these guys just can't score consistently, or if there are other factors at play here.  I'm honestly not sure.  Because they have had opportunities on the top lines, and they really didn't produce consistently.  But, at the same time, all the yo-yoing between lines has to also mess with confidence, especially in young players.  

 

I am holding out hope that before this season is over, we see some sparks.  Preferably in the playoffs.  Hoping this line stays together, keeps working hard, and has some sustained success as the Rangers battle through the playoffs.  I think we all sort of viewed Chytil differently after his strong playoffs last year.  And we've seen some flashes also this year, but not as consistently as we'd like.  Hoping we get similar from Kak and/or Laf this year.  

Confidence is crucial to build towards consistent success.

[Scott]

that's just it though for Chytil 340 games in and he's advanced all the way up to "flashes" which are a whopping 20 goals and 39 points so far in his 5th season and I'm sure without checking still pretty awful in the dot. Personally I think that's passed the line where you are what numbers say you are. 

[BrooksBurner]

14 minutes ago, Pete said:

I just don't see any way because I think he's still an $8M/yr player.

Banks on him wanting to be here, plus buying lower AAV by giving term. He’s 31. Who’s giving him more than like 4 years? So give him 6…