Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XIII

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Why would he? Aside from their nationality, they have nothing in common. Kravtsov is already a defensively responsible player who is all over the ice
Click to expand...
I did not really mean specifically, probably should have said what if any player they draft or trade for plays like Buch or has traits they are not a fan of.

Seems like some teams try to figure out ways to maximize the asset even if there are some traits that make them unhappy.
 
If they are not trying to change him, they are trying to get him to sleep walk to 70 points?

I don't know, I get some players likely have more to give, but on the flip side if it's not there it's not there. What the team does with them from that point I'd think makes a pretty big difference in what they can get back for that player on the trade market, or what they can get out of them by using them even if they do not love their total game.
 
Off Sides said:
I did not really mean specifically, probably should have said what if any player they draft or trade for plays like Buch or has traits they are not a fan of.

Seems like some teams try to figure out ways to maximize the asset even if there are some traits that make them unhappy.
Click to expand...

Well I think the Rangers are arguably trying to maximize Buch. The disagreement probably comes down to approach. In this particular case, there's a difference of opinion as to whether a benching is the best way to get the message through.

That's a pretty standard debate, even among coaches and hockey people --- tough vs. nurturing, and to what degree. Then you factor in how different people respond to different to different approaches.
 
Off Sides said:
If they are not trying to change him, they are trying to get him to sleep walk to 70 points?

I don't know, I get some players likely have more to give, but on the flip side if it's not there it's not there. What the team does with them from that point I'd think makes a pretty big difference in what they can get back for that player on the trade market, or what they can get out of them by using them even if they do not love their total game.
Click to expand...

I think they are trying to see if it is there or not.

At 23, I don't think it's as clear cut as it is when a player is 25 or 26.

But while we express concerns about the team sending mixed signals, I tend to see that more on these boards.

We want the kids to be pushed, we want them to achieve their best, and be driven, and we want someone who communicates with them. But on the flip side we don't like it when they don't respond, or they underachieve, or they get benched.

Then we want to just throw them out there, let them be, or settle for what they are.

Yeah, we can leave Buchnevich along and let him but what he is. But then we can't bitch when he's not making a difference when the games have high stakes.

We really can't have it both ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Walter t, bernmeister, pld459666 and 5 others
Off Sides said:
If they are not trying to change him, they are trying to get him to sleep walk to 70 points?

I don't know, I get some players likely have more to give, but on the flip side if it's not there it's not there. What the team does with them from that point I'd think makes a pretty big difference in what they can get back for that player on the trade market, or what they can get out of them by using them even if they do not love their total game.
Click to expand...

It's not about getting him to score more, it's about getting him to engage more, to battle harder on the boards, backcheck harder, drive the net more, and to do it consistently. If he does those things, an increase in points is likely to follow, but even if it doesn't, he will be still be more of an asset to the team than he is now.
 
Edge said:
Well I think the Rangers are arguably trying to maximize Buch. The disagreement probably comes down to approach. In this particular case, there's a difference of opinion as to whether a benching is the best way to get the message through.

That's a pretty standard debate, even among coaches and hockey people --- tough vs. nurturing, and to what degree. Then you factor in how different people respond to different to different approaches.
Click to expand...

I am not totally disagreeing with you, at some points last season Buch was playing like a legit top line player, but I think there were still parts of his game that were lacking, and I think no matter what there always will be.

I have yet to see that this season from him, and really its difficult for me to think that AV could get that sporadically out of him and Quinn can not. I mean difficult in terms of if that is how this is going to go it's going to be a long, long rebuild trying to get both talent and full on effort(or whatever) and I am one of the few who thinks a rebuild takes longer than 3 years or whatever.
 
I think the expectations of Buchnevich are just too high. He's a good player. He's been a good player. It is highly unlikely is will ever be anywhere near a point per game player. Just plug him in the lineup give him real ice time (17-18 mins) on the top line and take the 50-60 points he will likely provide. He has never really been a huge goal scorer throughout his career and at the rate he shots he likely won't be one.

Despite how "bad" he's been so far he is still 5th on the team among forwards in points/60 at 5v5 ahead of everyone but Kreider/Howden/Zucc/Fast. And it's not like his lack of engagement on the boards or whatever is killing them defensively. He and Kreider are the only forwards on the team to have been on the ice for more GF than GA each of the last 3 seasons.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NewLife and Off Sides
Gardner McKay said:
Straight up? No. I don't see it with Puljujarvi. He has the talent but something is missing. Puljujarvi + 2nd, maybe.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I think if the Rangers were going to make that deal they'd want a lottery ticket to hedge their bets against in the event Puljujarvi doesn't pan out.

I'm not as sour on JP as a lot of people seem to be but he's definitely a project. Lots of question marks there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gardner McKay
I'd take 50-60 points out of Buch and be happy. Same for Spooner, Namestnikov, Zuccarello.

I get they want core players that are perfect or more towards their ideal but there are going to be like what, maybe two or three of them on the team at any one time? Did Zucc's spunk or Torts tough love really get him to where he is or did he just have natural talents that showed through more once caveman hockey was done being preached?
 
Off Sides said:
I am not totally disagreeing with you, at some points last season Buch was playing like a legit top line player, but I think there were still parts of his game that were lacking, and I think no matter what there always will be.

I have yet to see that this season from him, and really its difficult for me to think that AV could get that sporadically out of him and Quinn can not. I mean difficult in terms of if that is how this is going to go it's going to be a long, long rebuild trying to get both talent and full on effort(or whatever) and I am one of the few who thinks a rebuild takes longer than 3 years or whatever.
Click to expand...

I don't think he'll ever be a high-motor player who leaves it all on the ice. But I also think the goal is not to create perfect players, but better ones. So, in that sense I am firm believer in not letting the perfect get in the way of the good, or the better for that matter.
 
Off Sides said:
I'd take 50-60 points out of Buch and be happy. Same for Spooner, Namestnikov, Zuccarello.

I get they want core players that are perfect or more towards their ideal but there are going to be like what, maybe two or three of them on the team at any one time? Did Zucc's spunk or Torts tough love really get him to where he is or did he just have natural talents that showed through more once caveman hockey was done being preached?
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that Buch isn't a 50 or 60 point player, nor is Spooner or Namestnikov.

I think Buch is a 40-45 point player right now, and the goal is to get him to a 50 or 60 point level.
 
Edge said:
I don't think the value will drop to zero, but I do think the Rangers are trying to figure out if they have a legit top six forward on their hands, or more of a placeholder.

I also think while the in-game results have to matter more than the practices, we also have to be careful about focusing too much on points as the only barometer of success --- especially when it comes to long-term planning.

In the case of the Rangers, the idea is to keep the cream of the crop for themselves, and move other guys to fill other areas. With some of these younger talents, I think they're trying to determine who is going to fall into which category. With regards to Buchnevich, I think they see the potential to be one of the cream of the crop players for them and that's what they are trying to push for.
Click to expand...

See I feel the Rangers already think they have a legit top six forward but are trying to figure out if he's the kind of top six forward they believe they can "win with", one that fits whatever sort of gritty lunch pail group Quinn and Gorton envision.

Which probably means Buchnevich will be an odd man out eventually. I just hope he plays enough to be productive (or is traded sooner rather than later) so he retains his value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Sides
Gardner McKay said:
Straight up? No. I don't see it with Puljujarvi. He has the talent but something is missing. Puljujarvi + 2nd, maybe.
Click to expand...
I'd do Buchnevich and Tampa's conditional pick for him and Edmonton's 1st this year.

Puljujarvi's value is super low right now.
 
McRanger said:
See I feel the Rangers already think they have a legit top six forward but are trying to figure out if he's the kind of top six forward they believe they can "win with", one that fits whatever sort of gritty lunch pail group Quinn and Gorton envision.

Which probably means Buchnevich will be an odd man out eventually. I just hope he plays enough to be productive (or is traded sooner rather than later) so he retains his value.
Click to expand...

It's funny, I don't get the desire for a lunch pail type approach from Buch. I think the Rangers are just looking for more of what Buchnevich has shown capable of doing.

But I do agree that there is a lot of determining who might be a core piece, and who might be along for the ride.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RGY and Go Away Staal
Edge said:
It's funny, I don't get the desire for a lunch pail type approach from Buch. I think the Rangers are just looking for more of what Buchnevich has shown capable of doing.
Click to expand...
I think it's an attempt to see what he brings if he's not getting points. Is there other value there or he going to be like a Marcel Hossa—a guy who will need to provide offense in order the rationalize keeping him in the lineup.
 
I don't get the obsession with Puljujarvi at this point.

I freely admit that he was a hell of a prospect in 2016, but this now the third straight season where's been underwhelming.

I know there's a tendency to place the blame on Edmonton, and that's justified, but this is a kid who probably started slipping even before the draft if we want to be honest.

There was a time he was considered the second best prospect in that draft. Then he was neck and neck with Laine. Then Laine pulled ahead. Then it got to the point that even Dubois was picked ahead of him. I also have a sinking feeling that if the Rangers had managed to acquire the fourth pick in the draft, they probably would've still gone with Keller. (My God, can you imagine the **** storm on here?)

He wasn't impressive in the AHL, he hasn't been terribly impressive in the NHL, and the price on him is still going to be pretty high based on the pedigree and the draft position.

Even at a reasonable price, I have yet to see a kid who looks like an NHL star. I don't think a simple change of scenery does it for him.

This isn't a kid who is having a hard time simply making the transition from the AHL to the NHL, this is a kid whose path away from stardom has been somewhat concerning for a while.
 
Edge said:
I think the problem is that Buch isn't a 50 or 60 point player, nor is Spooner or Namestnikov.
Click to expand...

Edge said:
...
I think Buchnevich, right now, could probably sleepwalk his way to 20 goals and 50 points if the Rangers just let him go. But does that make a winning player? Does is get the most out of his talents? Is that a long-term recipe for success? ...
Click to expand...


I think the goal is, they want him to play more in the system, or more "be in the way" or whatever vague phrase they are using.


Overall I think the Rangers trying to have the whole roster play one way is just likely to lead down the same path where they are predictable and when countered by the coaching of the other team they become ineffective and are unable to adapt.

Which is the same thing that happened with Torts and AV, they just got there differently
 
very disappointed that its come to this with buchnevich. dont get it.

this was supposed to be his year and yet hes been scratched, ineffective and even disinterested at times.

bummer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LORDE
Off Sides said:
I think the goal is, they want him to play more in the system, or more "be in the way" or whatever catch vague phrase they are using.


Overall I think the Rangers trying to have the whole roster play one way is just likely to lead down the same path where they are predictable and when countered by the coaching of the other team they become ineffective and are unable to adapt.

Which is the same thing that happened with Torts and AV, they just go there differently.
Click to expand...

But that's the funny thing, I think Quinn is giving a lot of forwards the latitude to do their thing. Zucc doesn't play like Hayes doesn't play like Kreider doesn't play like Howden doesn't play like Buch.

In Buch's case, I don't think there's been any complains about styles or playing "my way" from Quinn. The comments and direction have been pretty loud and clear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom