Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: 2017 NHL Draft / Pick #7 - Lias Andersson (C)

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is pretty similar to any workplace situation.

Let's say you have an internship with an organization and want it very much to secure a full time position with them. If they say you have to start on a particular day but you have a concert tickets that you've been looking forward to but won't be able to attend now. Would you bring it up? I'm sure that if Lias insisted the Rangers would've accommodated but he likely decided not to go there.
 
What is the timetable for his injury rehab? When is he likely to get in the lineup? WHERE is he likely to be in the lineup?
 
Hopefully after the road trip, but our games are not getting any easier, and he should be 100% healthy before he get his debut including some full training sessions with the team.
 
pld459666 said:
He'll probably do very well in game one and all the expectations will go through the roof, then he will hit a wall and people will start to piss on him.
Click to expand...
I'm gonna predict the opposite and say he has a slow first few games, then turns it on but no one wants to recognize he's playing well because he wasn't good in the first few
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brooklyn Ranger
NYR Viper said:
You're too rational for this board. Be gone evil spirit
Click to expand...
Why aren't we allowed to set high-standards for a 7th OA pick? And an older 7OA pick, at that.

I wouldn't have issue with anyone being discouraged about his projection if he's anything less than a 0.5 point-per-game player in the AHL.

Should clarify that I wouldn't necessarily be discouraged if that happened, but people who would be shouldn't be attacked for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HatTrick Swayze
silverfish said:
Why aren't we allowed to set high-standards for a 7th OA pick? And an older 7OA pick, at that.

I wouldn't have issue with anyone being discouraged about his projection if he's anything less than a 0.5 point-per-game player in the AHL.

Should clarify that I wouldn't necessarily be discouraged if that happened, but people who would be shouldn't be attacked for it.
Click to expand...
I think you're taking it too seriously.

I read it as that both of them stating that the rational thing to do would be to...you know...wait for a larger sample size than two weeks worth of games in the AHL, especially coming off an injury.

No attacks here or saying people can't have discouraged opinions, the way I read it.
 
Irishguy42 said:
I think you're taking it too seriously.

I read it as that both of them stating that the rational thing to do would be to...you know...wait for a larger sample size than two weeks worth of games in the AHL, especially coming off an injury.
Click to expand...
Meh. When it comes to LA and how people on this board 'treat him', I'm cautious.

It seems that no one is actually "rational" when it comes to LA. Either you defend him incessantly, or you hate him. Already quite a polarizing figure.
 
silverfish said:
Meh. When it comes to LA and how people on this board 'treat him', I'm cautious.

It seems that no one is actually "rational" when it comes to LA. Either you defend him incessantly, or you hate him. Already quite a polarizing figure.
Click to expand...
Him playing his first AHL games while coming off a serious injury sure won't help.

I'm already bracing myself for the bad hot takes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mac n Gs
Irishguy42 said:
Him playing his first AHL games while coming off a serious injury sure won't help.

I'm already bracing myself for the bad hot takes.
Click to expand...
Sure, but they'll be equally shit if he comes out and puts up four points in his first two games, and we'll enjoy a thread of OH BUT I BET MITTELSTADT WOULD HAVE 10 POINTS ALREADY. Or some stupid, defensive, overcompensating variation of.

Find the middle ground, the truth. Which is essentially this when it comes to LA:

1. He was a reach.
2. Being a reach doesn't mean he's already a bust. That is stupid.
3. The Rangers expected an NHL ready player when they decided to take LA.
4. Clearly, he is not NHL ready.
5. This ****ed the Rangers C depth this season, banking on him.
6. All things considered above, he is having a very nice year when he plays.
7. However, it's important to keep in mind that he is an older prospect, and is playing his D+1 season at the age of 19.
8. All hot takes off of limited data are stupid and wrong.

Thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HatTrick Swayze, kovazub94, Pavel Buchnevich and 2 others
silverfish said:
Why aren't we allowed to set high-standards for a 7th OA pick? And an older 7OA pick, at that.

I wouldn't have issue with anyone being discouraged about his projection if he's anything less than a 0.5 point-per-game player in the AHL.

Should clarify that I wouldn't necessarily be discouraged if that happened, but people who would be shouldn't be attacked for it.
Click to expand...
I mean this isn’t wholly unrealistic when you go back and look at U20 player performance in the AHL the past few years. Factor in some time for his injury/adjustment to smaller ice and then make evaluations. I don’t see any reason he shouldn’t be held to the same standard as players like Vrana, Fiala, Roslovic, Kapanen, Colin White, etc.

Hell, Kostin is 7 months younger and is a 0.35ppg player in the AHL. I don’t think that’s setting the bar too low to clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silverfish
There are two players from the 2017 draft to play 10 or more NHL games, pick #1, and #2

There are 11 players from the 2016 draft who have played 42 games or more (half a NHL season)
13 players who have played 20 or more NHL games.

If the Rangers expected him to be NHL ready, and play the whole NHL season for them, that was a reach even for an "older" draftee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: belford222
silverfish said:
Sure, but they'll be equally **** if he comes out and puts up four points in his first two games, and we'll enjoy a thread of OH BUT I BET MITTELSTADT WOULD HAVE 10 POINTS ALREADY. Or some stupid, defensive, overcompensating variation of.

Find the middle ground, the truth. Which is essentially this when it comes to LA:

1. He was a reach.
2. Being a reach doesn't mean he's already a bust. That is stupid.
3. The Rangers expected an NHL ready player when they decided to take LA.
4. Clearly, he is not NHL ready.
5. This ****ed the Rangers C depth this season, banking on him.
6. All things considered above, he is having a very nice year when he plays.
7. However, it's important to keep in mind that he is an older prospect, and is playing his D+1 season at the age of 19.
8. All hot takes off of limited data are stupid and wrong.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

And this is all pure speculation and opinion that is being deemed as fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: belford222
I would like to remind people that LA was a reach of maybe 6 spots, Chytil was a reach from the 2nd round and nobody is complaining about him because he is doing great. They are both great prospects and there are things to be excited about for both of them.
 
All I know is it seems like our brass was banking on him being NHL ready, at least on the 4th line for starters. Signing DD was "so called insurance" and yes, we were scrambling from the moment Vegas took Lindberg.
I wouldn't wanna have to NOT have our Rangers in the PO's in like forever, but at this point it just seems that we would be much better off selling and restocking getting that extra rest (as we have played nearly the most games in the NHL for 10 years now) and coming out like gangbusters next year.
Again.....still want to make PO's, it's just that......
 
silverfish said:
I'm open to hearing counter-arguments to any of those points.
Click to expand...

That's the point, we can argue all of those points as they are opinion based.

Here let me try:
1) he wasn't a reach
2) Again, not a reach
3) I disagree with this. They gave him a shot to make the team, as an 18 year old he wasn't ready.
4) He wasn't to start the season, why is this clear?
5) How do you know they were banking on him? They had 4 centers going in to the season + Miller on the roster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alluckks and UnSandvich
NYR Viper said:
That's the point, we can argue all of those points as they are opinion based.

Here let me try:
1) he wasn't a reach
2) Again, not a reach
3) I disagree with this. They gave him a shot to make the team, as an 18 year old he wasn't ready.
4) He wasn't to start the season, why is this clear?
5) How do you know they were banking on him? They had 4 centers going in to the season + Miller on the roster.
Click to expand...
It’s been reported multiple times that the team was hoping he’d been NHL ready as a cheap C option. I believe Brooks said it in his article about Lias from a few days ago.

Why is expecting about 0.5 ppg a bad thing? Go look at scoring numbers from U20 players in the AHL the past few years. I’m saying this as a huge Lias homer too
 
NYR Viper said:
That's the point, we can argue all of those points as they are opinion based.

Here let me try:
1) he wasn't a reach
2) Again, not a reach
3) I disagree with this. They gave him a shot to make the team, as an 18 year old he wasn't ready.
4) He wasn't to start the season, why is this clear?
5) How do you know they were banking on him? They had 4 centers going in to the season + Miller on the roster.
Click to expand...
1. He was. According to every single ranking that I've seen.
2. See 1.
3. This is probably more speculation than fact, but I think the story of what actually happened serves my point better than the counter-point. I'd imagine you could feel the same way. Also, let's cut it out with this 18 year old stuff. He's been 19 since October.
4. He wasn't to start the season, that was very obvious. And he still probably isn't now.
5. Did you look at the names of the centers that they brought in to camp? Do you see the center-depth on this team right now? Did the Rangers use their 7OA on a 'safe', older, center? Do the math? Maybe I'm reading between lines that aren't there, but I'm not willfully ignoring them, either.
 
Mac n Gs said:
It’s been reported multiple times that the team was hoping he’d been NHL ready as a cheap C option. I believe Brooks said it in his article about Lias from a few days ago.

Why is expecting about 0.5 ppg a bad thing? Go look at scoring numbers from U20 players in the AHL the past few years. I’m saying this as a huge Lias homer too
Click to expand...

The team hoping he is ready and assuming he is ready are 2 different things. It's also speculation on the part of Brooks and not to be taken as fact.

I am not arguing with the possible point totals. I'm hoping he does well. I am mainly arguing the fact that the types of posts I was quoting are the reason people take polar opposite viewpoints. Someone takes a stance on the far left, and the other side feels it must take a stance on the far right in order to try and balance out the conversation. It happens regularly on this site and int he real world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: belford222
NYR Viper said:
The team hoping he is ready and assuming he is ready are 2 different things. It's also speculation on the part of Brooks and not to be taken as fact.

I am not arguing with the possible point totals. I'm hoping he does well. I am mainly arguing the fact that the types of posts I was quoting are the reason people take polar opposite viewpoints. Someone takes a stance on the far left, and the other side feels it must take a stance on the far right in order to try and balance out the conversation. It happens regularly on this site and int he real world.
Click to expand...
Not being able to admit that he was a reach puts you on the far-left, or the far-right, whatever it is on your spectrum.

Me calling him a reach isn't me calling him a bust.

I guess that's the problem. Everyone thinks they are the middle. Myself included in that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom