I guess but if they weren't expecting him to drive offense, why the hell take him? That's just idioticReferring to the open letter to fans from Gorton, Andersson falls into the "character" selection and signing. The kid was never being looked to drive offense, and bottom-six with leadership abilities are still in the offing.
I guess but if they weren't expecting him to drive offense, why the hell take him? That's just idiotic
Of course they hoped Andersson would drive offense. It was one of the highest picks the team had in recent memory up until then.Referring to the open letter to fans from Gorton, Andersson falls into the "character" selection and signing. The kid was never being looked to drive offense, and bottom-six with leadership abilities are still in the offing.
Really? Anything more than Anisimov / Callahan / Dubinsky seemed very ambitious for Lias — and I’m not talking about their good seasons.The truth is somewhere in the middle on this one. Andersson was viewed as a player to generate offense, he just wasn't viewed as guy who was going to be leading the team in that category.
The hope was that he could develop into a second line center in the mold of Horvat, or even what ROR was at the time. And that really wasn't an unfair expectation --- though there's always going to be that element that wants a home run swing with every pick.
Having said that, it's highly unlikely Andersson hits the ceiling the Rangers hoped for. Now it's more a matter of whether he can be a strong third line center.
Right, and I don't think it's unfair given he had one of the best U18 seasons in SuperElit history in 15-16 and then had a really strong SHL performance in his draft year. He absolutely had offense as a component of his game, and it's strange to see it totally evaporate since coming over here.The truth is somewhere in the middle on this one. Andersson was viewed as a player to generate offense, he just wasn't viewed as guy who was going to be leading the team in that category.
The hope was that he could develop into a second line center in the mold of Horvat, or even what ROR was at the time. And that really wasn't an unfair expectation --- though there's always going to be that element that wants a home run swing with every pick.
Having said that, it's highly unlikely Andersson hits the ceiling the Rangers hoped for. Now it's more a matter of whether he can be a strong third line center.
Right, and I don't think it's unfair given he had one of the best U18 seasons in SuperElit history in 15-16 and then had a really strong SHL performance in his draft year. He absolutely had offense as a component of his game, and it's strange to see it totally evaporate since coming over here.
I guess but if they weren't expecting him to drive offense, why the hell take him? That's just idiotic
I agree that with the Chytil pick that they were going for safe at 7 and homerun swing 21We were still a contender and his "NHL readiness" and NYR's lack of cheap prospect depth was probably a consideration at the time.
Them taking Chytil as a gamble/project with their 2nd first round pick was an indicator of that thinking.
Besides the fact, clairvoyance aside, who in the 2017 NHL draft out of the hundreds of players chosen post #7, is clearly a win that we missed? Robert Thomas? Necas? We nabbed the third in Chytil. Every other prospect is a bust or not even on NHL radars yet. 2017 is shaping up to be a terrible draft year and I'm sure not one of the 30 other teams in the league would say "Wow, Gorts, Clark, and Bobrov really screwed that one up."
IT> WAS> A> TERRIBLE> DRAFT> OUTDIDE> THE> TOP> SIX.
Yeash. I feel dirty for having to echo this so much.
I would take Callahand or Dubinksy. Easily.Really? Anything more than Anisimov / Callahan / Dubinsky seemed very ambitious for Lias — and I’m not talking about their good seasons.
That was my best-case scenario. I would take that as a base-case in a heartbeat, but when second line is the upside as of Draft Day ... oh boy. Callahan was one of my all-time favorite Rangers; still missing his leadership and physicality. He was a true soldier.I would take Callahand or Dubinksy. Easily.
I can still see Andersson having some reasonable scoring success in the NHL. I just don't see it being with the Rangers. Feels like more than just a situation where a prospect has stalled and I think it's better for the player and the team to part ways.
I would too. But to date I don't see any sign that he has the motor that either of them did. He lacks the will that Callahan had and he lacks the attitude that Dubinsky had.I would take Callahand or Dubinksy. Easily.
It is up to him to get noticed. My feeling is that the rebuild is being run very much like some of corporate America. Up or out.He's falling in the same category as Anderson is in: a guy who needs to find a way to be noticed (in a positive way). Figure out what kind of player you are, what you need to do to add value and do it.
If this guy had a goal for every aspect of hockey he's good at, he'd have as many goals as Henrik Lundqvist.
Good at everything and somehow bad at everything.Howden is big, strong, fast, intelligent and decently skilled... and yet he is atrocious at both ends of the ice.
I do not understand Brett Howden.
I will probably never understand Brett Howden.
Howden is big, strong, fast, intelligent and decently skilled... and yet he is atrocious at both ends of the ice.
I do not understand Brett Howden.
I will probably never understand Brett Howden.