Roster Building Thread: Part VII (2023-24)

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I don't see how that is incorrect in most cases. If you put up 2 exactly equal prospects in terms of skill and everything, one gets 8 minutes on the 4th line, the other is getting 18 minutes on the 1st line, over an entire season, the guy getting the 18 minutes is likely to develop quicker.

But if you are talking a few minute difference, then yea it likely doesn't make much of difference.

The difference in development is more about who you play with, not how many minutes you play. And a lot of development happens outside games. It's just videogame logic that playing more minutes automatically means you develop faster.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

The difference in development is more about who you play with, not how many minutes you play. And a lot of development happens outside games. It's just videogame logic that playing more minutes automatically means you develop faster.

I think they kind of go hand and hand. The better players will be the players playing more minutes. Nobody is going to be developing much offense with 8 minutes with Tanner Glass on your side haha.

 

[IDvsEGO]

The difference in development is more about who you play with, not how many minutes you play. And a lot of development happens outside games. It's just videogame logic that playing more minutes automatically means you develop faster.

Do you have any examples of a player who got 4th line minutes developing faster than a player getting first line minutes?
Players need to be developed into the role you want them to develop into.

You want a scoring forward, well then you need to let them play that role.

You have players who can come into the nhl and slowly develop from the 4th line, but usually they’ve made the nhl for a reason other than offense, and thus they slowly add that component to their game.
But those guys also aren’t making the nhl at 18, they have seasons upon seasons to work out that game in lower leagues and getting their more physically mature body ready for the nhl.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Do you have any examples of a player who got 4th line minutes developing faster than a player getting first line minutes?

That was not the point I was making.

The difference in development is more about who you play with, not how many minutes you play.

Playing 1st line minutes is better than 4th line minutes, of course. But the bigger difference there is WHO they play those 1st line minutes with, compared to who they play the 4th line minutes with.

This all started with Chytil and the whole "2C vs 3C" stuff. Honestly, for a guy like Chytil there isn't much difference playing 2nd line minutes or 3rd line minutes as long as you have a balanced roster.

Players develop in all sorts of ways. You can't simply state "Well, let's play him 17 minutes a night and he will go from this to this in 2 years". That's video game logic. The real world doesn't work that way. It's far more nuanced. What kind of situation do they play in? Who do they play with? What zone starts do they get?

And development isn't linear. It's not a "one size fits all" thing. Some players develop better in a smaller role and then work their way up, rather than playing on the top line where they might be outmatched, while others benefit greatly from being thrown in the deep end, so to speak, playing with top players.

Also, this.

And a lot of development happens outside games. It's just videogame logic that playing more minutes automatically means you develop faster.

Practice and video sessions (Where they go over games, specific plays and review sequences) are massive contributors to a young player's development. Of course the NHL, and the Rangers in particular, do a very poor job showing us these processes outside the games. It would be great to get that kind of coverage if only to show people how complex pro sports is. How much time players spend on developing their game before they even step on the ice for warm-ups.

 

[Ruggs225]

That was not the point I was making.



Playing 1st line minutes is better than 4th line minutes, of course. But the bigger difference there is WHO they play those 1st line minutes with, compared to who they play the 4th line minutes with.

This all started with Chytil and the whole "2C vs 3C" stuff. Honestly, for a guy like Chytil there isn't much difference playing 2nd line minutes or 3rd line minutes as long as you have a balanced roster.

Players develop in all sorts of ways. You can't simply state "Well, let's play him 17 minutes a night and he will go from this to this in 2 years". That's video game logic. The real world doesn't work that way. It's far more nuanced. What kind of situation do they play in? Who do they play with? What zone starts do they get?

And development isn't linear. It's not a "one size fits all" thing. Some players develop better in a smaller role and then work their way up, rather than playing on the top line where they might be outmatched, while others benefit greatly from being thrown in the deep end, so to speak, playing with top players.

Also, this.



Practice and video sessions (Where they go over games, specific plays and review sequences) are massive contributors to a young player's development. Of course the NHL, and the Rangers in particular, do a very poor job showing us these processes outside the games. It would be great to get that kind of coverage if only to show people how complex pro sports is. How much time players spend on developing their game before they even step on the ice for warm-ups.

I think we can safely assume Gallant did t do any video sessions. And if he did, he probably didnt know how to analyze it

 

[bhamill]

That, and the notion that a player will automatically develop faster if he plays more.

Automatically? No. But in general, yes. Yes, the more a player plays, the quicker he likely reaches HIS potential. How is that mystical? Getting reps, getting responsibility, these are the norms for development in any sport. No? Now that's different than saying you can make a player better than he was going to be by playing him more, but denying opportunity is self explanatory, and it will hold a player back.

 

[MrAlmost]

I'm excited for training camp. I think the team will be much better with Lavi and staff. Now, whether the results are better I don't know. This is the Metro and it really doesn't ever seem to do anything but get better.

I think this will be a good season. Maybe worse results, but I think the team will be much more fun to watch.

 

[bhamill]

Playing 1st line minutes is better than 4th line minutes, of course. But the bigger difference there is WHO they play those 1st line minutes with, compared to who they play the 4th line minutes with.

This all started with Chytil and the whole "2C vs 3C" stuff. Honestly, for a guy like Chytil there isn't much difference playing 2nd line minutes or 3rd line minutes as long as you have a balanced roster.

Players develop in all sorts of ways. You can't simply state "Well, let's play him 17 minutes a night and he will go from this to this in 2 years". That's video game logic. The real world doesn't work that way. It's far more nuanced. What kind of situation do they play in? Who do they play with? What zone starts do they get?

And development isn't linear. It's not a "one size fits all" thing. Some players develop better in a smaller role and then work their way up, rather than playing on the top line where they might be outmatched, while others benefit greatly from being thrown in the deep end, so to speak, playing with top players.

Also, this.



Practice and video sessions (Where they go over games, specific plays and review sequences) are massive contributors to a young player's development. Of course the NHL, and the Rangers in particular, do a very poor job showing us these processes outside the games. It would be great to get that kind of coverage if only to show people how complex pro sports is. How much time players spend on developing their game before they even step on the ice for warm-ups.

Sure, especially learning from better linemates, that is opportunity.
Also though all things being equal, you don't think a player on, say the third line, would develop faster with 18 minutes a night rather than 10?

IMO Laf/Kakko need a few more minutes a night, preferably on the power play, and would be better off with skilled veteran linemates rather than on a line as three young players all trying to find their games...

 

[Mandar]

Sure, especially learning from better linemates, that is opportunity.
Also though all things being equal, you don't think a player on, say the third line, would develop faster with 18 minutes a night rather than 10?

IMO Laf/Kakko need a few more minutes a night, preferably on the power play, and would be better off with skilled veteran linemates rather than on a line as three young players all trying to find their games...

I think its more about what the player actually does with the minutes they are given. More ice time will be given to the players that make contributions and are noticeable on a consistent basis.

Even the player that gets only 10 minutes will be recognized and more valued if those 10 minutes are made valuable by the player. Giving some players 18 minutes or so from the get go can absolutely mean nothing in terms of development.

 

[Machinehead]

I'm not overly concerned about the Metro.

Carolina, Jersey, and Pittsburgh are playoff teams if they're healthy. The Islanders don't impress me. Everyone else is a non-factor.

The Rangers should easily be one of the top 4 teams and I doubt very highly that two wildcards come out of the other division.

 

[I Eat Crow]

I'm not overly concerned about the Metro.

Carolina, Jersey, and Pittsburgh are playoff teams if they're healthy. The Islanders don't impress me. Everyone else is a non-factor.

The Rangers should easily be one of the top 4 teams and I doubt very highly that two wildcards come out of the other division.

Truthfully I'm more worried about five teams from the Atlantic making it and only three from the Metro. The Atlantic is going to be a war zone. A lot of teams in the Atlantic improved this summer.

My way too early predictions look like this:

NJ
Carolina
NYR

Toronto
Florida
Tampa

WC: Boston, Buffalo

Truthfully there's a nonzero chance a team like Tampa or Boston misses this year. Detroit, Ottawa, and Buffalo are all going to be significantly better this year. It's going to come down to who can stay healthiest.

 

[Machinehead]

Truthfully I'm more worried about five teams from the Atlantic making it and only three from the Metro. The Atlantic is going to be a war zone. A lot of teams in the Atlantic improved this summer.

My way too early predictions look like this:

NJ
Carolina
NYR

Toronto
Florida
Tampa

WC: Boston, Buffalo

Truthfully there's a nonzero chance a team like Tampa or Boston misses this year. Detroit, Ottawa, and Buffalo are all going to be significantly better this year. It's going to come down to who can stay healthiest.

I could see Boston falling off the face of the Earth.

They were buoyed as it is by arguably the best goaltending season of all-time (and we know how consistent goaltending is), and their 1C is Pavel Zacha.

 

[bhamill]

I think its more about what the player actually does with the minutes they are given. More ice time will be given to the players that make contributions and are noticeable on a consistent basis.

Even the player that gets only 10 minutes will be recognized and more valued if those 10 minutes are made valuable by the player. Giving some players 18 minutes or so from the get go can absolutely mean nothing in terms of development.

If we are talking about vets and not a developing young player, then I agree. But with young guys you have to be willing to live with the growing pains and give them opportunity, even if they don't seize it as quickly as we all might like. Or not... but then we shouldn't be surprised at slower development. Can't have our cake and eat it too.

The bottom line is that giving an abundance of time and responsibility (such as power play time, better linemates) is not a guarantee that a player will reach his ceiling, but DENYING those opportunities is a pretty sure fire way of guaranteeing slower development.

 

[Flan the incredible]

Truthfully I'm more worried about five teams from the Atlantic making it and only three from the Metro. The Atlantic is going to be a war zone. A lot of teams in the Atlantic improved this summer.

My way too early predictions look like this:

NJ
Carolina
NYR

Toronto
Florida
Tampa

WC: Boston, Buffalo

Truthfully there's a nonzero chance a team like Tampa or Boston misses this year. Detroit, Ottawa, and Buffalo are all going to be significantly better this year. It's going to come down to who can stay healthiest.

I think this is pretty on point except Boston. Their forward group is mediocre at best after Pasta and March. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the other guys see a significant drop in production from last year. There only hope is the keep the puck out of the net because I can't see them winning high scoring games.

 

[NYRFAN218]

Truthfully I'm more worried about five teams from the Atlantic making it and only three from the Metro. The Atlantic is going to be a war zone. A lot of teams in the Atlantic improved this summer.

My way too early predictions look like this:

NJ
Carolina
NYR

Toronto
Florida
Tampa

WC: Boston, Buffalo

Truthfully there's a nonzero chance a team like Tampa or Boston misses this year. Detroit, Ottawa, and Buffalo are all going to be significantly better this year. It's going to come down to who can stay healthiest.

That's kind of how I see it shaping up too. While Pitt improved I'm not sold on them as a lock to get in. You have your top 3 in the Metro, the Penguins in their own category as a wild card (no pun intended) of sorts in terms of what they may do, and everyone else with some teams (Isles) obviously being better than others (Flyers). The Atlantic is interesting in that Toronto should take the division but after that you have 2 teams in Tampa and Boston that have been at the top for a bit that are significantly weaker but still playoff teams, a Florida team that barely made the playoffs and will also be weakened at the start of the year due to injuries, and a combo of teams that are on the rise in Detroit, Ottawa, and Buffalo.

The East is very wide open to me. There are a lot of very good and great teams and while I would rate Carolina and NJ as "better" than the Rangers currently, I also don't view either as in a class where they're significantly better and can't be beaten. I feel the same way about any team in the Atlantic as well. What I would say is while it may not be likely with Carolina and NJ there, it would be very important for the Rangers to win the division this year. Winning the division is the difference between possibly drawing one of those teams on the rise in Detroit, Ottawa, Buffalo, etc who may not be playoff ready yet and having to go through both Carolina and NJ before even reaching the Conference Final.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Not sure about a cliff dive for Boston. They have a top 5 coach in the league with a system that works, though a big cog of that system was lost to retirement, but we'll see.

Their roster breakdown reminds me of the early Tortorella Rangers. Decent depth and a star winger with no top center to speak of. Boston just needs to find someone who compliments Marchand and Pasta and they'll be just fine. I expect their historic goaltending to regress to the mean a bit but not fall out of the top half of the league.

Pittsburgh is a big wild card, yes. If Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Karlsson all play 70 or more games, they'll get in. No Guentzel until November or December doesn't help already. Wouldn't count on it though and I think they ultimately miss.

 

[Fitzy]

Saying they're the 2010 Rangers is an insult, not a compliment IMO. Tortorella got a lot more out of those teams than the sum of their parts.

We didn't really have a decent roster from 2008 to 2012 roughly. When McDonagh started to blossom and we added Rick Nash, things started to look better.

Early Torts you've got a 19 year old defenseman that didn't even become a PPQB in his long career forced onto our top unit because he was the only defenseman on the roster who could skate with the puck on his stick. For all Rozsival's strengths, he's got to be one of the worst PPQBs in team history.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Saying they're the 2010 Rangers is an insult, not a compliment IMO. Tortorella got a lot more out of those teams than the sum of their parts.

We didn't really have a decent roster from 2008 to 2012 roughly. When McDonagh started to blossom and we added Rick Nash, things started to look better.

Early Torts you've got a 19 year old defenseman that didn't even become a PPQB in his long career forced onto our top unit because he was the only defenseman on the roster who could skate with the puck on his stick. For all Rozsival's strengths, he's got to be one of the worst PPQBs in team history.

That's actually kind of my point. I think Montgomery will get more juice out of them than any other coach in the league.

 

[kovazub94]

Automatically? No. But in general, yes. Yes, the more a player plays, the quicker he likely reaches HIS potential. How is that mystical? Getting reps, getting responsibility, these are the norms for development in any sport. No? Now that's different than saying you can make a player better than he was going to be by playing him more, but denying opportunity is self explanatory, and it will hold a player back.

Faster - probably, better - arguable (unless we take very extreme views on ice-time between comparison bases)

 

[LOFIN]

Someone needs to ask Laf what's his number

 

[HonestGabe]

That's actually kind of my point. I think Cassidy will get more juice out of them than any other coach in the league.

You mean Montgomery. Cassidy is in Vegas

 

[I Eat Crow]

You mean Montgomery. Cassidy is in Vegas

Yup.

 

[Profet]

Someone needs to ask Laf what's his number

I swear to god if he says he ate horse meat on the advice of management I'm done with this org.

Ask Christian Dube about horses and he won't necessarily talk about the race track. He might discuss dinner.

''Horse meat,'' the Ranger center said today while describing his high-protein diet. ''It's pretty close to steak. It has a strong taste.''

Dube, 20 years old and in his second professional season, buys the meat in bulk from a butcher in Sherbrooke, Quebec. In building his weight over the summer to about 190 pounds from about 170...

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Someone needs to ask Laf what's his number

If he really put on 10 lbs of muscle, he needs to hook Panarin up with his supplier.

 

[Leonardo87]