Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLIV

[Avery16]

Selanne didn't even light it up when he was in his early 40's. How the hell would he be better now that he's 50?

Selanne had 80 points in 73 GP at age 40.

 

[True Blue]

I think he is an ideal 4th line player providing energy, speed, forecheck, and a sub 1 mil cap hit for the foreseeable years

Would prefer a bit more energy and a bit more snarl from that position.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Panarin Zib Kakko
Laf Strome Buch
Kreider Chytil Kravtsov
Lemieux Howden Gauthier
McKegg

Our biggest strength up front is having 2 lines with elite talent by separating Panarin and Zibanejad. Why throw that away?

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Selanne had 80 points in 73 GP at age 40.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Would prefer a bit more energy and a bit more snarl from that position.

We all would. I just don't see that player in the organization at present. And to add that player through FA will cost a fair bit as those players are rare.

 

[Trxjw]

Selanne had 80 points in 73 GP at age 40.

And he had 27 points in 64 games at age 43. So sure, if you completely ignore reality and the very obvious downward trend in his early 40's, then he would absolutely be a great 2nd liner at age 50. Makes complete sense.

 

[True Blue]

We all would. I just don't see that player in the organization at present. And to add that player through FA will cost a fair bit as those players are rare.

Definitely on first and probably on second. Unfortunately. And don't want Lemieux to play on the 4th.

 

[effen]

Would prefer a bit more energy and a bit more snarl from that position.

I think there will be a push to add more of those two attributes in a top-9 player (or two?) by sacrificing someone better who lacks them. It'd be nice if Gauthier could handle some of that but you can't put your eggs in that basket. It'll probably be painful. A Strome might get you someone pretty ok, while a Buch would get you someone really good and a Kakko could get you someone extremely good.

If we're left with Gritty McGrits on the 4th line that's not really gonna help when the higher lines are getting shoved around unless you overslot them.

 

[ETTER DE]

In that scenario, the Rangers also save $1.1m on the cap. That would be helpful

Think Arizona is trying to move players so they can sign Hall and still be under the cap limit. Trading Grabner for Smith will not help

 

[bobbop]

This a new topic, and I'd love to hear from folks like Amazing Kreiderman, Bobbop, etc -- but one thing that really bothers me is the measurables we choose to judge prospects on this board.

Currently we use point totals, ice time, advanced stats etc, but they seem more appropriate as measurements once someone is established in their career. I'd like us to come to a consensus on a way to judge the kids' adjustment to the NHL -- so we can get on the same page about where kids like Howden, Kakko, Kravtsov, Miller are at in their development.

Ideally, input from anyone who knows NHL scouts or coach would be great, as there is likely already some standard process. (or should be). Sans that, we could crack our own rating system that rates players adjustment to NHL, say, on 30 point scale. And then giving players updated ratings every quarter of a season. Here's my best crack at it:

Every player receives a 1-5 rating in each of the following 6 categories:

Physical adjustments:
- Strength development (1-5)
- Skill development (1-5)
- Skating development (1-5)

Mental adjustments:
- COACHABILITY (1-5) - How quickly is a prospect able to implement coaches feedback into their game (this is not something we can really glean from afar)
- SITUATIONAL RECOGNITION (1-5) - How well is a prospect processing the pro game (aka Hockey sense)? This category is meant to focus on a player's situational recognition. The moments in the game that occur outside of systems/coaching.
- INVOLVEMENT (1-5) - Finally, how involved is the prospect in the play shift-by-shift? Are they having an impact or are they floating/lost/behind?

Are there more categories that I've left out?

Should some categories be weighted more than others?

To test this out, let's try a few players. (these are just my own evaluations, so disagree as you will) The hardest part is figuring out what the top rating (5) means. For now 5 is just an average full time NHL player. As such my ratings are likely a little off, but even with that, the system still basically works.

Kakko - Strength 3.5, Skill 3.5, Skating 2, Coach 4, Sitch 3, Involvement 3 = 21/30
Guathier - Strength 5, Skill 3.5, Skating 5, Coach 3.5, Sitch 3, Involvement 4 = 24/30
Howden - Strength 2.5, Skill 3, Skating 4, Coach 5, Sitch 3.5, Involvment 4 = 22/30
Kravtsov (AHL) - Strength 2, Skill 4, Skating 3.5, Coach 3.5, Sitch 3.5, Involvement 3.5 = 20/30
Fox - Strength 4, Skill 5, Skating 5, Coach 5, Sitch 5, Involvment 5 = 29/30
Lindgren - Strength 4, Skill 4, Skating 5, Coach 5, Sitch 4, Involvement 5 = 27/30
Andersson (just comparison) Strength 3, Skill 3, Skating 2, Coach 2.5, Sitch 2, Involvement 2 = 14.5/30

If we adjust these numbers every 2-4 times a season, you will quickly see if a player is progressing or not. My guess is 21 or 22/30 is the likely cut-off for a kid to get a regular shift in NHL/Rangers. But by year 3 they need to be as close to 30 as possible

Thoughts?

I'm probably the wrong guy to ask here. I don't care as much about ratings as what I see with my own eyes.

I look for a) hands, b) skating ability, c) hockey sense and d) ice time. If you have hands you can score. Scoring is the toughest thing to identify and find in hockey. If you can skate, you can find a role if you have other reasonable skills. In both cases, it may take time but if the player has the resolve, I'm good giving them a continued chance. Ice time is my barometer of does a coach have confidence in a player, is the player outworking the others on the roster and is there a visible commitment. Players who don't check these boxes, grab the bench.

I can do 20-80 and have done it in the past but at this point, I watch the player I'm focusing on over and over and draw my opinion. And I don't just watch highlights.

 

[bleedblue94]

Would prefer a bit more energy and a bit more snarl from that position.

I would suspect then that you will be paying more for your 4th liners.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Definitely on first and probably on second. Unfortunately. And don't want Lemieux to play on the 4th.

I don't either. That's a large reason why I'm willing to let Fast walk.

 

[True Blue]

I think there will be a push to add more of those two attributes in a top-9 player (or two?) by sacrificing someone better who lacks them. It'd be nice if Gauthier could handle some of that but you can't put your eggs in that basket. It'll probably be painful. A Strome might get you someone pretty ok, while a Buch would get you someone really good and a Kakko could get you someone extremely good.

If we're left with Gritty McGrits on the 4th line that's not really gonna help when the higher lines are getting shoved around unless you overslot them.

For the various reasons that I have outlined and do not need to regurgitate again, I ultimately think that Buchnevich will be the one left without a chair when all the music stops and his return will be used to diversify the skill that exists in the line up.

 

[True Blue]

I would suspect then that you will be paying more for your 4th liners.

Your suspicions are not wrong. More than likely a move via trade will be done to bring some of that to the lineup.

 

[True Blue]

I don't either. That's a large reason why I'm willing to let Fast walk.

A bit of a cringe, but yeah. He is an excellent third line player but may cost more than Gorton is willing to spend and some changes are still needed.

 

[Thirty One]

Selanne didn't even light it up when he was in his early 40's. How the hell would he be better now that he's 50?

Honestly, I think he could win some awards if he plays when he's 60.

 

[Avery16]

 

[Avery16]

And he had 27 points in 64 games at age 43. So sure, if you completely ignore reality and the very obvious downward trend in his early 40's, then he would absolutely be a great 2nd liner at age 50. Makes complete sense.

Outlier

 

[Avery16]

"The only thing I would say if I talk to Quinny the coach would be, ‘Listen, you have to make a decision who you’re going to play,' " Davidson said during a virtual chat with season-ticket holders last month. "The first round is a best-of-five (series) to get into the playoffs. We have to go with who you think is going to give us the best chance to win. That’s what this is about."

 

[Gospel of Prospal]

Uhhhhhhhhh...Igor. It shouldn't even be a discussion.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

It isn't a discussion on who will play, they are trying to be polite to Hank and the fanbase, Igor will be in the net, it would be an asinine decision if not.

 

[McSauer]

If there's one thing we know about this coach, it's that he will ride the best goaltender as far as he can.

Igor is up for it.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

It isn't a discussion on who will play, they are trying to be polite to Hank and the fanbase, Igor will be in the net, it would be an asinine decision if not.

The only way I would play Lundqvist is if he promises to retire after the season is over

 

[Thirty One]

If the schedule is really the first 4 games in 5 days, I would start Lundqvist Game 2.

 

[Avery16]

Why is Eichel trending on NYC twitter?