Frankly, I think the article has it reversed.
Andersson is the two-way pivot who probably doesn't center your top line, but can play in a bunch of different situations. If he develops, ideally, he's the type of player who isn't your most talented player, doesn't lead the team in scoring, isn't your flashiest player, and yet he's one of your most valuable members. When you talk about putting together winning teams, you looks for guys who are what the Rangers hope Andersson can someday be.
As for Chytil, it was about upside and unknowns. The talent was there, but there were more moving parts - growth spurts, confidence, experience, opportunity, assertiveness, youth. You're talking about a player who is almost a full year younger than Andersson. The general consensus was/is that Chytil's offensive ceiling is higher, but his probability of being an NHL player was seen as being not as "safe" as Andersson's odds.
The reality is that even the Rangers are still trying to get a better idea of just how good Chytil can become. Obviously they know he's talented, but you're also talking about a prospect who was younger than most and had even more ground to cover.
A few posts back I talked about the biggest advances in Chytil's game this season. In addition to being (substantially) bigger and stronger than he was a year ago, he's finding confidence and assertiveness to go with that size. Last year, Chytil was a 16/17 year old testing himself against grown men, in his home country, and learning whether he could hang with them. This year, Chytil is going out there and knowing he can not only hang with guys 10 years older than him, but that he can also outplay them.
