Speculation: Roster Building Thread : Part XVI (Playoffs or Retool?)

[Leonardo87]

​

​

Playoffs?​

​

​

​

Previous thread…

Speculation: - Roster Building Thread : Part XV (Light em up!)​

Click to read more...

 

[nyr2k2]

Amazing that we're not a perennial bottom feeder given that our owner sucks, our GM sucks, he can't make trades, he signs stupid contracts, our coaches sucks, they don't know how to develop players, our scouting sucks and we make so many bad picks, and our players suck.

 

[smoneil]

It's not just leash.

You can't keep sending them out there. No coach in the world is going to do that. Cuylle got promoted in the lineup and doesn't have a point since the Victorian Era.

We'd all like to know what the problem is but it's not leash. They're out there and they're f***ing up/doing nothing as much as any coach would let them.

That's actually exactly what you need to do with a top pick. I've said it before, but it bears repeating--it isn't so much leash as it is role. Guys who get drafted in the top few picks of the first round have spent the entirety of their careers as the guy. The one who puts the team on their shoulders. The one who is on the ice in all situations. The one who is put on for the last 5 minutes of the game because they NEED a goal. That's a mindset. It's a personality. To paraphrase the coach from The Replacements: Winners want the puck on their stick when the game is on the line. THAT'S why top picks get put out there over and over again even when they haven't earned it.

The Rangers did the opposite with Laf and Kakko. They put them on the 3rd and 4th lines. They would occasionally put them up on line 1 or 2 for 7 or 8 game stints, but the second the line didn't produce, they were bumped. They healthy scratched Kakko in the playoffs twice. They put them in a position they haven't been in since they were pee wee players--a role player. And for guys like that, that's confidence kryptonite.

With Laf, it at least sort of made sense, as he had Panarin and Kreider ahead of him having several career years (though I still think they should have sent him down if that was going to be the case). With Kakko? The team hasn't had a viable first line RW since the Buchnevich trade. Instead of stapling Kakko there and letting him work through his bumps, they brought in a rotating list of B-players (Copp, Vatrano, Reilly, sometimes Goodrow, Blais, etc etc etc) and aging vets (Kane, Tarasenko) rather than show an ounce of confidence in Kakko. Hell, as good as he was on D, they never even let him work into the PK.

Like I said, I don't necessarily think it was a mistake moving Kakko. By this point, he was never going to feel like this team had confidence in him. But it was the team that destroyed that confidence in the first place. You don't take a player with a Triple Crown pedigree and then try to make him elite at giving pony rides before letting him run a real race. If all they had were 3rd/4th line roles for him at MSG, then they should have sent him down. Better to develop that kind of player as "the guy" at a lower level than as nobody in the NHL. That's what Seattle knows that Drury didn't. It's not about an extra minute per game and PP time. It's about putting Kakko back into the position of having expectations--putting him in the role of being the reason they win or lose games. You rarely get that kind of drive outside the top of the draft, and you can't really teach it. You can crush it out of a guy though, and that's the main problem with the Rangers' "development."

 

[AirGut]

It's time for the New York Rangers to evolve

 

[kovazub94]

Amazing that we're not a perennial bottom feeder given that our owner sucks, our GM sucks, he can't make trades, he signs stupid contracts, our coaches sucks, they don't know how to develop players, our scouting sucks and we make so many bad picks, and our players suck.

It’s even more surprising considering stupid Dolan has so many ready and willing great GMs at his disposal at HFBNYR. Just pluck anyone and he’d have a SC champion dynasty in no time

 

[SA16]

That's actually exactly what you need to do with a top pick. I've said it before, but it bears repeating--it isn't so much leash as it is role. Guys who get drafted in the top few picks of the first round have spent the entirety of their careers as the guy. The one who puts the team on their shoulders. The one who is on the ice in all situations. The one who is put on for the last 5 minutes of the game because they NEED a goal. That's a mindset. It's a personality. To paraphrase the coach from The Replacements: Winners want the puck on their stick when the game is on the line. THAT'S why top picks get put out there over and over again even when they haven't earned it.

The Rangers did the opposite with Laf and Kakko. They put them on the 3rd and 4th lines. They would occasionally put them up on line 1 or 2 for 7 or 8 game stints, but the second the line didn't produce, they were bumped. They healthy scratched Kakko in the playoffs twice. They put them in a position they haven't been in since they were pee wee players--a role player. And for guys like that, that's confidence kryptonite.

With Laf, it at least sort of made sense, as he had Panarin and Kreider ahead of him having several career years (though I still think they should have sent him down if that was going to be the case). With Kakko? The team hasn't had a viable first line RW since the Buchnevich trade. Instead of stapling Kakko there and letting him work through his bumps, they brought in a rotating list of B-players (Copp, Vatrano, Reilly, sometimes Goodrow, Blais, etc etc etc) and aging vets (Kane, Tarasenko) rather than show an ounce of confidence in Kakko. Hell, as good as he was on D, they never even let him work into the PK.

Like I said, I don't necessarily think it was a mistake moving Kakko. By this point, he was never going to feel like this team had confidence in him. But it was the team that destroyed that confidence in the first place. You don't take a player with a Triple Crown pedigree and then try to make him elite at giving pony rides before letting him run a real race. If all they had were 3rd/4th line roles for him at MSG, then they should have sent him down. Better to develop that kind of player as "the guy" at a lower level than as nobody in the NHL. That's what Seattle knows that Drury didn't. It's not about an extra minute per game and PP time. It's about putting Kakko back into the position of having expectations--putting him in the role of being the reason they win or lose games. You rarely get that kind of drive outside the top of the draft, and you can't really teach it. You can crush it out of a guy though, and that's the main problem with the Rangers' "development."

If Seattle knows this then how come their own 4th overall pick only gets 13 minutes/game playing in a depth role down the lineup?

 

[effen]

I just can't with the amount of pontificating on forward development like anyone has any f***ing idea. It's a bunch of staring at results and retrofitting explanations of what amounts to shadowy forces conspiring against 21 year olds. Stop.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Re: Borgen not being a second pairing D-man on Seattle. Are we talking about just this year? I know he was good until a season or two ago. Plus once again being a solid defenseman is less likely to be a fluke than scoring a PPG on a heater by your line.

 

[turcotte8]

Playoffs or Retool?​

 

[SnowblindNYR]

If Seattle knows this then how come their own 4th overall pick only gets 13 minutes/game playing in a depth role down the lineup?

Only the Rangers are bad for prospects.

Playoffs or Retool?​

View attachment 963871

Caps last year.

 

[Clark Kellogg]

It's time for the New York Rangers to evolve

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Amazing that we're not a perennial bottom feeder given that our owner sucks, our GM sucks, he can't make trades, he signs stupid contracts, our coaches sucks, they don't know how to develop players, our scouting sucks and we make so many bad picks, and our players suck.

the previous GM somehow acquired some very special players that have covered up a lot of warts (Shesty, Panarin, Fox, and Zibanejad was good for like 3 years). Drury had nothing to do with that.

What picks have we made that are good?

Our coaches inarguably are trash. Gallant had back to back 110 points seasons and got to an ECF and everyone here agrees he sucks.

What we had was not sustainable and it wasn't good enough to begin with.

 

[NickyFotiu]

And it has been pretty successful hockey at that with the Blueshirts extending their point streak to seven games (5-0-2)

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

That's actually exactly what you need to do with a top pick. I've said it before, but it bears repeating--it isn't so much leash as it is role. Guys who get drafted in the top few picks of the first round have spent the entirety of their careers as the guy. The one who puts the team on their shoulders. The one who is on the ice in all situations. The one who is put on for the last 5 minutes of the game because they NEED a goal. That's a mindset. It's a personality. To paraphrase the coach from The Replacements: Winners want the puck on their stick when the game is on the line. THAT'S why top picks get put out there over and over again even when they haven't earned it.

The Rangers did the opposite with Laf and Kakko. They put them on the 3rd and 4th lines. They would occasionally put them up on line 1 or 2 for 7 or 8 game stints, but the second the line didn't produce, they were bumped. They healthy scratched Kakko in the playoffs twice. They put them in a position they haven't been in since they were pee wee players--a role player. And for guys like that, that's confidence kryptonite.

With Laf, it at least sort of made sense, as he had Panarin and Kreider ahead of him having several career years (though I still think they should have sent him down if that was going to be the case). With Kakko? The team hasn't had a viable first line RW since the Buchnevich trade. Instead of stapling Kakko there and letting him work through his bumps, they brought in a rotating list of B-players (Copp, Vatrano, Reilly, sometimes Goodrow, Blais, etc etc etc) and aging vets (Kane, Tarasenko) rather than show an ounce of confidence in Kakko. Hell, as good as he was on D, they never even let him work into the PK.

Like I said, I don't necessarily think it was a mistake moving Kakko. By this point, he was never going to feel like this team had confidence in him. But it was the team that destroyed that confidence in the first place. You don't take a player with a Triple Crown pedigree and then try to make him elite at giving pony rides before letting him run a real race. If all they had were 3rd/4th line roles for him at MSG, then they should have sent him down. Better to develop that kind of player as "the guy" at a lower level than as nobody in the NHL. That's what Seattle knows that Drury didn't. It's not about an extra minute per game and PP time. It's about putting Kakko back into the position of having expectations--putting him in the role of being the reason they win or lose games. You rarely get that kind of drive outside the top of the draft, and you can't really teach it. You can crush it out of a guy though, and that's the main problem with the Rangers' "development."

I challenge anyone who thinks this is “made up” to watch this highlight clip from Kakko’s first preseason game:



And then explain how it’s justifiable that 18 months after “the letter” the org is taking him off the PP in favor of Colin MFing Blackwell.

 

[Machinehead]

That's actually exactly what you need to do with a top pick. I've said it before, but it bears repeating--it isn't so much leash as it is role. Guys who get drafted in the top few picks of the first round have spent the entirety of their careers as the guy. The one who puts the team on their shoulders. The one who is on the ice in all situations. The one who is put on for the last 5 minutes of the game because they NEED a goal. That's a mindset. It's a personality. To paraphrase the coach from The Replacements: Winners want the puck on their stick when the game is on the line. THAT'S why top picks get put out there over and over again even when they haven't earned it.

The Rangers did the opposite with Laf and Kakko. They put them on the 3rd and 4th lines. They would occasionally put them up on line 1 or 2 for 7 or 8 game stints, but the second the line didn't produce, they were bumped. They healthy scratched Kakko in the playoffs twice. They put them in a position they haven't been in since they were pee wee players--a role player. And for guys like that, that's confidence kryptonite.

With Laf, it at least sort of made sense, as he had Panarin and Kreider ahead of him having several career years (though I still think they should have sent him down if that was going to be the case). With Kakko? The team hasn't had a viable first line RW since the Buchnevich trade. Instead of stapling Kakko there and letting him work through his bumps, they brought in a rotating list of B-players (Copp, Vatrano, Reilly, sometimes Goodrow, Blais, etc etc etc) and aging vets (Kane, Tarasenko) rather than show an ounce of confidence in Kakko. Hell, as good as he was on D, they never even let him work into the PK.

Like I said, I don't necessarily think it was a mistake moving Kakko. By this point, he was never going to feel like this team had confidence in him. But it was the team that destroyed that confidence in the first place. You don't take a player with a Triple Crown pedigree and then try to make him elite at giving pony rides before letting him run a real race. If all they had were 3rd/4th line roles for him at MSG, then they should have sent him down. Better to develop that kind of player as "the guy" at a lower level than as nobody in the NHL. That's what Seattle knows that Drury didn't. It's not about an extra minute per game and PP time. It's about putting Kakko back into the position of having expectations--putting him in the role of being the reason they win or lose games. You rarely get that kind of drive outside the top of the draft, and you can't really teach it. You can crush it out of a guy though, and that's the main problem with the Rangers' "development."

They stuck them in the bottom six initially and that may have had an adverse effect.

For at least a couple of years now, they are just letting them go out there. Lafreniere has been terrible for awhile now with all the bad habits coming back and there's been no ramifications. He just keeps playing.

You could say maybe more of a powerplay role, but he's one of the least effective powerplay players of the 21st century. Do you expect the coaches to go on a suicide mission? Do you expect them to magically get better going out there and just being awful?

Kakko started in that 1RW spot every year since the Buchnevich trade. He lost it every time. Letting him be a 4th liner playing 18 minutes for 82 games isn't going to make him better.

It's not just giving them a chance. We've done that. There's obviously further instruction that is not being relayed or reaching its destination.

"Just go out there and die" is what we're doing with Lafreniere and he's getting worse. That's obviously not it. It's a bad idea on the surface.

I think one potential problem is that we'll either strangle you or there's no standard whatsoever. There needs to be a middle ground.

 

[Machinehead]

I challenge anyone who thinks this is “made up” to watch this highlight clip from Kakko’s first preseason game:



And then explain how it’s justifiable that 18 months after “the letter” the org is taking him off the PP in favor of Colin MFing Blackwell.

He sucked. That's the justification.

We seem to be gravitating towards "let them suck." Again, Alexis Lafreniere.

The answer is to get them to not suck. Opportunity is not the answer. We've seen both of them at pretty much every possible spot in the lineup.

Something is wrong with the way this team plays. They wouldn't be good getting 40 minutes.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

He sucked. That's the justification.

We seem to be gravitating towards "let them suck." Again, Alexis Lafreniere.

The answer is to get them to not suck. Opportunity is not the answer. We've seen both of them at pretty much every possible spot in the lineup.

Something is wrong with the way this team plays. They wouldn't be good getting 40 minutes.

I don’t believe the line between “they suck” and their delicate confidence & trajectory was destroyed by an antiquated organization is as black and white as you believe it to be.

 

[Machinehead]

This is Kakko's rookie year.

It would have been borderline abuse to keep feeding this player minutes. It's not ice time.

You guys gotta get off that idea. It's a stinker.

 

[Machinehead]

I don’t believe the line between “they suck” and their delicate confidence & trajectory was destroyed by an antiquated organization is as black and white as you believe it to be.

Nobody is saying it is, but you can't just "work through" being nowhere near good enough. That's not development. It's looking for a simple answer for an issue that's not black and white.

 

[smoneil]

If Seattle knows this then how come their own 4th overall pick only gets 13 minutes/game playing in a depth role down the lineup?

Partly because Wright was a faller in a weak top of his draft year. And even then, they gave him a cup of coffee and sent him down to GET those top minutes in each of his first two seasons. Just because that's the best way to develop top talent doesn't mean that it is fool proof. They've also had him on the power play pretty consistently this season as well.

 

[Machinehead]

You're not going to find the answer looking at the lineup or TOI.

There's something wrong in the culture and the messaging.

The forwards are all assholes. Even the veterans who have "succeeded" all became more and more useless outside of putting up points, and it gets worse the longer they're here.

 

[smoneil]

They stuck them in the bottom six initially and that may have had an adverse effect.

For at least a couple of years now, they are just letting them go out there. Lafreniere has been terrible for awhile now with all the bad habits coming back and there's been no ramifications. He just keeps playing.

You could say maybe more of a powerplay role, but he's one of the least effective powerplay players of the 21st century. Do you expect the coaches to go on a suicide mission? Do you expect them to magically get better going out there and just being awful?

Kakko started in that 1RW spot every year since the Buchnevich trade. He lost it every time. Letting him be a 4th liner playing 18 minutes for 82 games isn't going to make him better.

It's not just giving them a chance. We've done that. There's obviously further instruction that is not being relayed or reaching its destination.

"Just go out there and die" is what we're doing with Lafreniere and he's getting worse. That's obviously not it. It's a bad idea on the surface.

I think one potential problem is that we'll either strangle you or there's no standard whatsoever. There needs to be a middle ground.

I don't think we disagree on this. I was pretty vocal on both Laf and Kakko that they should have been sent down in their first years. They weren't ready and we didn't need them at that point.

Another part of the issue is that the Rangers coaching has been awful. How many players now have said something to the effect of they never talk to the coach? Before that, it was Quinn trying to micro-manage everyone. This team hasn't had a good "teaching" coach in ages.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Re: Borgen not being a second pairing D-man on Seattle. Are we talking about just this year? I know he was good until a season or two ago. Plus once again being a solid defenseman is less likely to be a fluke than scoring a PPG on a heater by your line.

Borgen was never more than just a depth D-man.

 

[NYR Viper]

Side note for those trying to keep track, even if Hartford scratched Sykora and Chmelar, it wouldn’t necessarily mean that both players were involved in a potential Miller deal. It may have been a scenario where Drury offered ‘one of’ those guys and was waiting on the final decision.

Borgen was never more than just a depth D-man.

This isn’t accurate. He was a top-4 d-man the last two years in Seattle before they signed Montour and pushed him down. This year was not going well with a new coach and reduced role, that’s accurate, but he saying he ‘was never more than just a depth d-man’ isn’t true

 

[Machinehead]

I don't think we disagree on this. I was pretty vocal on both Laf and Kakko that they should have been sent down in their first years. They weren't ready and we didn't need them at that point.

Another part of the issue is that the Rangers coaching has been awful. How many players now have said something to the effect of they never talk to the coach? Before that, it was Quinn trying to micro-manage everyone. This team hasn't had a good "teaching" coach in ages.

Quinn had right idea in terms of holding people to a standard but he 1) Didn't follow through - the vets did whatever they wanted and 2) doesn't really know what he's doing at this level.

Gallant and Lavi are notorious for being babysitters. They're the kind of coach you hire to just stop yelling at a team that's ready to win a la AV. We were never really ready the way we needed to be.

This feels like a team that lacks guidance and is being run by veterans that are in over their head in that regard.

Drury plays tough guy this year but I'm not yet convinced that all that much has changed. They still do a lot of the same stupid shit on offense.