Speculation: Roster Building Thread VI (2019/2020)

[duhmetreE]

With Howden the production is not there nor do you see the flashes of skill out of him. You see a strong work ethic yet he's often out of position. With Chytil last season you saw things to make you think he has potential to be a strong player. Two of those goals when rushing down the side and cutting in front. Good hands with the puck. But he's not strong enough yet and needs to be more engaged. You don't get that with Howden. You get a guy who put up a decent amount of points for his role without doing much to show that it's something he can do consistently and he had one of the lowest shot rates in the league. He did nothing this preseason to show he deserves to be on the team and frankly did nothing last preseason to do so either. There's no reason he at 20/21 years old shouldn't be in the AHL trying to get better (not his fault he is not). As a whole his performance last year was atrocious and it's done nothing to make me think he will be an NHL player. Andersson's was bad also however he looked far better in this preseason and showed some real improvement- real strong on the boards, good positional play, lots of nice plays with his stick in passing lines and the like.

Chytil has good hands with the puck? From what dimension are you watching him play? 2 good plays in 75 games = will be a good player

2 bad months + 3 GOOD months = Bad player. He was arguably one of our better players the first 2 months of the season... but lets conveniently forget about that. Yes, he hit a wall in the middle and was playing poorly. He was snake bitten for a minute and couldn't buy a goal.. he was playing like a rookie or something... what a loser.

 

[TheDirtyH]

But here's the thing. Let's assume for a second it's all on me. Let's play devil's advocate and say I'm biased, arrogant, resistant to change and misguided on my approach about Howden. At the end of the day, there are a number of people who see it as well and are commenting on it.

So in the end, it's not just a "me" thing. Others have noticed a pattern when it comes to the subject of Howden. Others have noticed how it mirrors past examples. It's not a unique concept that I've brought to the table. It exists with or without me.

This whole board is obsessed with 'bias' and 'narrative.' Universally, every discussion dissolves into this meta-commentary on the discussion itself and people lose track of what's actually been and is being said about the topic at hand. They'd rather discuss how it's being talked about, and then everyone has to pick a side rather than producing any meaningful evaluations on the players, the games, the roster makeup, etc.

I have not been saying you have a bias. I've been saying that much of the disagreement has been circling around your calling out a bias rather than taking the evaluations and commentary at face value.

 

[Fitzy]

Why is no one discussing the Hajek-Fox pairing? Putting two rookies out on defense together is a pretty controversial move, I'd ague more so than the differences between the third and fourth lines.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Why is no one discussing the Hajek-Fox pairing? Putting two rookies out on defense together is a pretty controversial move, I'd ague more so than the differences between the third and fourth lines.

I think because the collective has already made up their minds that based on their limited viewings of him, Fox is a stud and therefore putting two rookies on the pairing isn't a concern.

Just spit balling here.

 

[Raspewtin]

I don't love the idea of two rookies together but I don't have a better idea so I've buckled up for it. Kinda cool Quinn is willing to try it though.

 

[Machinehead]

Here's the thing though, within the context of Howden, I've said the following:

1. His mid-year last season was abysmal.
2. He should've gone down to the AHL.
3. His performance has both good and bad.
4. His preseason was middle of the road, maybe bottom middle.

If that's a chub for a player, than I need some pills, because it's a pretty pathetic one.

I don't LOVE Howden. I just don't have the pitch forks out, nor do I go out of my way to take a shot while not doing the same for others who performed on the same level, or worse.

I'm perfectly open to changing my mind, and have even said "We'll see how things go."

So you're accusing me of too completely different things here. On the one hand, I'm middle of the road and milquetoast, and on the other hand I'm close-minded and biased about players.

Well which one is it? Because the comments I just gave you above doesn't indicate that I have some kind of pro-Howden agenda. That or I'm dreadful as an advocate on behalf of a player.

In this case, I think you're far more displeased with Howden than I am pleased with him.

Look, let's forget Howden for a second. I just think sometimes you're mean. When you talk about usual suspects, and scripted responses, and others lacking the experience that you have, it comes off as mean. And as someone who has against the grain opinions (and has been wrong before, guilty as charged) I take some of these comments personally.

You're a good poster but I think you've been particularly dismissive as of late of criticisms of the team. I've spoken at length about the danger of writing any criticism at all off as "oh well we're rebuilding" and I think we're seeing that play out on the boards recently.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

I think I would have more a tendency to believe that there wasn't a bias, if it wasn't a subject that people really go out of their way to emphasize. It's disproportionate and it goes back to already arriving at a conclusion and then commenting to back it up.

For the people who are commenting on Howden, many of their feelings have been frequent and vocal for a while. So it's really a continuation of that narrative, as opposed to reacting to what they see and also reacting to other scenarios. They aren't ignoring those other topics because they are in some agreement that said players shouldn't be here, it's because it takes them away from a narrative they are really trying to hammer home.

Beyond that, the "general agreement" defense doesn't really stick for me personally because I do see posts about other players losing out because of Howden. And frankly, in many cases, the people making these comments don't agree that those guys shouldn't start the season in the NHL.

But here's the thing. Let's assume for a second it's all on me. Let's play devil's advocate and say I'm biased, arrogant, resistant to change and misguided on my approach about Howden. At the end of the day, there are a number of people who see it as well and are commenting on it.

So in the end, it's not just a "me" thing. Others have noticed a pattern when it comes to the subject of Howden. Others have noticed how it mirrors past examples. It's not a unique concept that I've brought to the table. It exists with or without me.

Why can't it just be the obvious answer? The organization views Howden's ceiling as a 3rd/4th line center and he's where he needs to be in his progression so he starts the season with the big club as their 3rd/4th line center. I think they view Chytil as a top 6 center/wing who's not quite where he needs to be so he starts the year in Hartford. Howden didn't start camp between two top 6 wings, Chytil did.

 

[Edge]

This whole board is obsessed with 'bias' and 'narrative.' Universally, every discussion dissolves into this meta-commentary on the discussion itself and people lose track of what's actually been and is being said about the topic at hand. They'd rather discuss how it's being talked about, and then everyone has to pick a side rather than producing any meaningful evaluations on the players, the games, the roster makeup, etc.

I have not been saying you have a bias. I've been saying that much of the disagreement has been circling around your calling out a bias rather than taking the evaluations and commentary at face value.

Well that's the whole point. There's really not a ton of meaninful evaluation of a guy like Howden being done by the people who aren't crazy about him. They've already arrived at that conclusion.

And the evidence to support said conclusion often lacks evidence, context, accurate comparisons to similar players, and a balance of evidence to support and disprove certain statements.

• So if someone thinks Howden has been out-muscled on plays, his positioning has left much to be desired, and made defensive gaffes. That's fair.
• But if someone thinks that Howden's play has been worse than players who didn't make the team, and even some who did, that's debatable - depending on the context.
• If someone isn't a fan of how Quinn uses Howden, that's fair. But if you just like Chytil better and think he should've made the team despite doing less with more, that's not as fair.
• If someone is going to call out Howden for everything, but not do it for other players. That's going to get people's attention. Especially if it's been done in the past with different players

Now, all of these comments are well within someone's right to do. No one is saying they can't, or even shouldn't do so.

However, the flip side is that people making those comments have to understand that people are going to push back when they notice something that feels blatant. That's somewhat inevitable, especially if the person making the comments ups the ante or the frequency.

 

[Machinehead]

I don’t either, but the post of mine I re-quoted above was on the same page as posts you made. It’s not like you weren’t active around the same time.

Anyway, I also re-quoted it to show you where I’m coming from on this.

Well, don't think I'm being dismissive with a short response, it's just that I've beaten it to death.

Yes, coaches IMO take players who are consistently very bad over players who are sometimes good because they value consistency. It's a problem across hockey and for whatever reason, seems to just be a hockey thing. Again, just my opinion.

So you're really not wrong. I just fundamentally disagree with the approach a lot of coaches take and it's far from just a Rangers problem. That doesn't mean I can't ask the Rangers to be better.

 

[Machinehead]

You see the irony in your statement, right? Especially considering your response to @Tawnos?



If there is anyone on this board who is willing and able to have a civil discussion without going up hyperbole mountain, it is @Edge.

Sure, I've been guilty of misbehaving myself.

 

[TheDirtyH]

Well that's the whole point. There's really not a ton of meaninful evaluation of a guy like Howden being done by the people who aren't crazy about him. They've already arrived at that conclusion.

And the evidence to support said conclusion often lacks evidence, context, accurate comparisons to similar players, and a balance of evidence to support and disprove certain statements.

• So if someone thinks Howden has been out-muscled on plays, his positioning has left much to be desired, and made defensive gaffes. That's fair.
• But if someone thinks that Howden's play has been worse than players who didn't make the team, and even some who did, that's debatable - depending on the context.
• If someone isn't a fan of how Quinn uses Howden, that's fair. But if you just like Chytil better and think he should've made the team despite doing less with more, that's not as fair.
• If someone is going to call out Howden for everything, but not do it for other players. That's going to get people's attention. Especially if it's been done in the past with different players

Now, all of these comments are well within someone's right to do. No one is saying they can't, or even shouldn't do so.

However, the flip side is that people making those comments have to understand that people are going to push back when they notice something that feels blatant. That's somewhat inevitable, especially if the person making the comments ups the ante or the frequency.

I can't think of one poster here who rails on Howden's play who hasn't done the same thing to Chytil or Andersson. I don't draw a hard line on adv. statistics one way or another, but the most critical posts of Howden usually use those to back them up. Other posters, today even, have given their takes in the manner you're describing.If it's a matter of being flippant, hyperbolic, or shallow in commentary, that doesn't make Howden a whipping boy--it makes him like most every player who's ever played for the Rangers.

Just a case in point, his thread had no comments between early May and Saturday. It's all ramped up bc, as I've suggested, roster decisions came around and there is plenty of disagreement about where Howden should be playing.

 

[will1066]

I don't know where to put this, but my question is:

Why is our bye week the second week of the season?

 

[Edge]

Look, let's forget Howden for a second. I just think sometimes you're mean. When you talk about usual suspects, and scripted responses, and others lacking the experience that you have, it comes off as mean. And as someone who has against the grain opinions (and has been wrong before, guilty as charged) I take some of these comments personally.

You're a good poster but I think you've been particularly dismissive as of late of criticisms of the team. I've spoken at length about the danger of writing any criticism at all off as "oh well we're rebuilding" and I think we're seeing that play out on the boards recently.

Look, I'm not going to lie, I can be very, very direct.

I'm all for criticisms and make my fair share of them. But what you perceive as being middle of the road, is me approaching a situation with a lot of unknowns and variables. We're not at a point where we have a lot of answers. However, we do have a ton of questions.

I don't have the answers. You don't have the answers. Management doesn't have the answers, but they're working to get some.

But there are certain things that warrant criticism and concern, and there are certain things where we're pushing it a little. At some point, everything can't be a concern. At some point there is an element of having to wait and see what happens.

I've expressed concern about Trouba, Panarin, and Kreider from contact perspectives. I've also expressed concern about raising the bar too high for guys like Chytil, Andersson, Fox, Hajek, and even Miller. So at the end of the day, I'm not here to shill for the Rangers. Been there and done that.

Right now, line combinations are fluid and flexible. It's not a death sentence. If people have concern, that's fine. I get that. But those combinations don't mean coaches are stupid and blind, or that certain guys didn't deserve to make the team, or that this is how things will look in 2 weeks, 2 months or 2 years. Yeah, I get the questions. But let's wait for some answers before we go into critique things.

A lot of times we're looking over the engineers shoulder worrying about every single design aspect and the reality is we barely have the house frame up.

Now, as the building process continues, and the toilet is put in the middle of the kitchen, then we have a legit beef. But it's a long process, none of these things are final decisions yet. We haven't even played a single shift of the season yet.

 

[Edge]

I can't think of one poster here who rails on Howden's play who hasn't done the same thing to Chytil or Andersson. I don't draw a hard line on adv. statistics one way or another, but the most critical posts of Howden usually use those to back them up. Other posters, today even, have given their takes in the manner you're describing.If it's a matter of being flippant, hyperbolic, or shallow in commentary, that doesn't make Howden a whipping boy--it makes him like most every player who's ever played for the Rangers.

Andersson yes, Chytil no.

And again, I think part of the challenge is the people doing it don't realize they're doing it. To them it's just like every other player. To those around them, it's something noticeably different. They don't see the pattern, or discrepancy, which is why it repeats. As a result, there's confusion when the inevitable push-back comes.

 

[Machinehead]

I don't know where to put this, but my question is:

Why is our bye week the second week of the season?

They always seem to do something incredibly stupid with our schedule in particular.

 

[Trxjw]

Howden is certainly not an established NHL player and he didn't really do enough in camp to make the team.

He's here because Chytil was worse and there's nobody else.

He didn't? How much of training camp did you get to watch?

 

[Machinehead]

Look, I'm not going to lie, I can be very, very direct.

I'm all for criticisms and make my fair share of them. But what you perceive as being middle of the road, is me approaching a situation with a lot of unknowns and variables. We're not at a point where we have a lot of answers. However, we do have a ton of questions.

I don't have the answers. You don't have the answers. Management doesn't have the answers, but they're working to get some.

But there are certain things that warrant criticism and concern, and there are certain things where we're pushing it a little. At some point, everything can't be a concern. At some point there is an element of having to wait and see what happens.

I've expressed concern about Trouba, Panarin, and Kreider from contact perspectives. I've also expressed concern about raising the bar too high for guys like Chytil, Andersson, Fox, Hajek, and even Miller. So at the end of the day, I'm not here to shill for the Rangers. Been there and done that.

Right now, line combinations are fluid and flexible. It's not a death sentence. If people have concern, that's fine. I get that. But those combinations don't mean coaches are stupid and blind, or that certain guys didn't deserve to make the team, or that this is how things will look in 2 weeks, 2 months or 2 years. Yeah, I get the questions. But let's wait for some answers before we go into critique things.

A lot of times we're looking over the engineers shoulder worrying about every single design aspect and the reality is we barely have the house frame up.

Now, as the building process continues, and the toilet is put in the middle of the kitchen, then we have a legit beef. But it's a long process, none of these things are final decisions yet. We haven't even played a single shift of the season yet.

I get all that, that's fair.

It's just that right now, we're up against the cap and we suck at center.

Being an expensive team that sucks at center sums up 80 years of Rangers hockey, so I fully understand why people are jumpy right now and I think they need their space to vent.

Unironically, your patience is admirable but most people aren't going to make it through the entire rebuild without giving their opinions.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Look, let's forget Howden for a second. I just think sometimes you're mean. When you talk about usual suspects, and scripted responses, and others lacking the experience that you have, it comes off as mean. And as someone who has against the grain opinions (and has been wrong before, guilty as charged) I take some of these comments personally.

You're a good poster but I think you've been particularly dismissive as of late of criticisms of the team. I've spoken at length about the danger of writing any criticism at all off as "oh well we're rebuilding" and I think we're seeing that play out on the boards recently.

I think a lot of people are dismissive of criticisms of the team... because we haven't even played our first regular season game yet. Considering the roster overhaul that we have had I really don't understand how anyone can be more than lightly skeptical at this point. Also, when you consider that a large portion of the issues with this team (Staal, Smith, and to a lesser extent Strome) will hopefully be remedied as the rebuild progresses and their contracts expire, I kind of find it hard to chalk it up to anything other than "oh well we're rebuilding" at the moment.

If a person/fan looks hard enough at anything, negative can always be found. I think given the different direction our organization has recently taken, for some of us it is hard to be pessimistic or even begin lobbing criticisms while our rebuild is in progress and there hasn't been this much optimism surrounding our organizations future in a long, long time.

I tend to be an eternal optimist and as the season progresses, maybe I will be the one coming to terms with reality instead of the other way around. We shall see where this season takes us.

 

[Machinehead]

He didn't? How much of training camp did you get to watch?

All of it and he wasn't good.

We can debate Howden's place on the team and certainly the idea that it's really not a huge deal at this point, but I'm just not seeing the notion that he was good in camp. Don't see it at all.

 

[Trxjw]

All of it and he wasn't good.

We can debate Howden's place on the team and certainly the idea that it's really not a huge deal at this point, but I'm just not seeing the notion that he was good in camp. Don't see it at all.

You watched all of training camp or you watched all of the preseason games? There's a pretty large difference between the two.

 

[kovazub94]

Look, let's forget Howden for a second. I just think sometimes you're mean. When you talk about usual suspects, and scripted responses, and others lacking the experience that you have, it comes off as mean. And as someone who has against the grain opinions (and has been wrong before, guilty as charged) I take some of these comments personally.

You're a good poster but I think you've been particularly dismissive as of late of criticisms of the team. I've spoken at length about the danger of writing any criticism at all off as "oh well we're rebuilding" and I think we're seeing that play out on the boards recently.

You’re kidding, right? I often amazed at the amount of patience @Edge is showing in his responses to the hottest takes, illogical positions barely based in reality and fully ignored contexts.

 

[UnSandvich]

He didn't? How much of training camp did you get to watch?

I can't speak for Machinehead, but all i saw from Howden this pre-season was him looking out of place with better linemates. I didn't see any sort of "gelling" like I did from Lias & Lemiex or Buch & Panarin.

The only things i've seen thus far from Howden, last year or this pre-season, that are truly-NHL quality are his effort & skating

 

[True Blue]

Let's play devil's advocate and say I'm biased, arrogant, resistant to change and misguided on my approach about Howden.

And those are your good virtues. Are you done giving yourself these platitudes?

 

[Edge]

I get all that, that's fair.

It's just that right now, we're up against the cap and we suck at center.

Being an expensive team that sucks at center sums up 80 years of Rangers hockey, so I fully understand why people are jumpy right now and I think they need their space to vent.

Unironically, your patience is admirable but most people aren't going to make it through the entire rebuild without giving their opinions.

I fully expect opinions. My hope is that we can maintain perspective as well.

Yes, we're up against the cap. There's no getting around that.

W're up against the cap because we just signed an $8 million a year defenseman and a $10 million+ forward. We also didn't move our $5 million winger, despite our efforts. Personally, I was not a proponent of going down the Panarin and Trouba --- particularly the former. I was okay with the cost of the latter, despite concerns that he wasn't quite what fans thought they were getting.

I also wasn't a fan of having to buy out Shattenkirk. So there are a number of moves I'm not crazy about. I've been vocal about those moves and everyone has an idea of where I stand on those issues.

Having said that, some of those concerns are tangibles. Real money, real contracts, real expectations, a good understand of the player, etc. I think that's a little easier to have concerns about.

Other things are less tangible and more unknown. Topics like our younger players, line combinations, etc. Those are going to be more fluid, or at least they should be.

Internally, I try to discern between the tangible and intangible.

We're going to have our work cut out for us. We have a lot of holes in this lineup and I've never been one to buy into best case scenarios where every player is healthy, productive, living up to their potential and had chemistry. That's why I think this is a lottery team again.

However, it is worth noting that we will have a significant amount of contracts coming off the books after this season. Kreider, Namestnikov and Strome will pay for the raises we need to give younger players and give us some breathing room.

I go into this season expecting a long season. An important season, but a long one. I think I'd be more concerning about the cap situation if I felt like we were a team that had a legit shot at a Cup and our hands were already tied. We're not, and I never really saw us as buyers this year.

 

[Machinehead]

You watched all of training camp or you watched all of the preseason games? There's a pretty large difference between the two.

I haven't been to any practices if that's what you're implying but I've never bought into the notion that players who suck during games are doing all of these positive things in practice.