HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Brule vs Johnson (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=114775)

Barnaby 11-22-2004 04:13 AM

Brule vs Johnson
 
Ok, the Rangers land the #2 pick in the draft so Crosby is gone. Who should the Rangers take at #2? The consensus seems to be Gilbert Brule, but American born Jack Johnson is flying up the charts!

I'll take Jack Johnson from my limited prospect knowledge. He sounds like the new Brian Leetch minus some offense, plus some hitting. If we are going to base our system on the Devils then we need a #1 d-man who can be a horse. We obviously need a franchise forward as well, but Johnson is too good to pass up IMHO.

What do you guys think?

Bird Law 11-22-2004 04:17 AM

It's such a toss up now but I still take Brule and somehow hope to trade for the #3 pick! hahaha

Kubera55 11-22-2004 07:05 AM

I'd probably trade down and take Johnson.

It's the stupid move, but I can't get this feeling out of my head that Johnson is just 'supposed' to be a Ranger.

Of course, I felt the same way about Komisarek a few years ago. I'm still bitter.

I'm going to be one dissapointed puppy when some other team gets him.

Blueshirt13 11-22-2004 07:42 AM

I think Johnson is flying up the charts. Not only is he physical but he is also very solid offensively. He doesn't have tremendous size (he's listed as 6'0") but he plays a bigger game. I would put him as a smaller version of Pronger.

From what I have read, Brule sounds like a Joe Thornton type player. He is physical, crashes the net and plays a bigger game than his size would suggest.

Personally I would love to get either one of them but think if we are building from the net out, Johnson would be the best choice. It's not too often you can add as complete of a defenseman as he is. There aren't too many elite defensemen in the league and down the road I see him as being one of them.

NYR469 11-22-2004 08:55 AM

i REALLY like johnson and would LOVE to see him in a rangers uniform...i see johnson and brule as 2 and 2a

i'd be thrilled to get either but after his play at the 4 nations i'd give a slight edge to johnson...but there is still alot of season left and the difference is pretty small

True Blue 11-22-2004 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blueshirt13
I think Johnson is flying up the charts.

From what I have read, Brule sounds like a Joe Thornton type player. He is physical, crashes the net and plays a bigger game than his size would suggest.

The thing is that there is a Russian and a Czech defensemen (can't remember their names, but isn't the Russian kid supposed to be nicknamed "the Russian tank"?) that coming into this year were rated ahead of Johnson. What I am getting at is that Crosby may be #1 & Brule may be #2, but Johnson may not be the next best available choice (defenseman or othewise).
As for Brule, comparing him to Thorton may be unfair. He will never have the body that Thorton does. He will never have the sheer size. Yes, Brule can play a scrappy game, but he will never be the wrecking ball center that Thorton is.

Levitate 11-22-2004 08:58 AM

rangers really couldn't go wrong with either of the...franchise forward vs. franchise D-man...and they need both

i might lean a little towards johnson though...i think he'd really pull the rangers D together and be the "crown jewel" in a very solid defense.

NYR469 11-22-2004 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue
The thing is that there is a Russian and a Czech defensemen (can't remember their names, but isn't the Russian kid supposed to be nicknamed "the Russian tank"?) that coming into this year were rated ahead of Johnson. What I am getting at is that Crosby may be #1 & Brule may be #2, but Johnson may not be the next best available choice (defenseman or othewise).
As for Brule, comparing him to Thorton may be unfair. He will never have the body that Thorton does. He will never have the sheer size. Yes, Brule can play a scrappy game, but he will never be the wrecking ball center that Thorton is.


the 2 guys that you are thinking of are kindl and anikeenko and johnson is a LOT better then both of them...

kindl came over to play in the OHL and has struggled and is falling in the ranking and anikeenko has nose-dived down the rankings. so those 2 are dropping and johnson is sky-rocketing...

johnson is a top 3 pick, kindl will be lucky to hold onto a top 10 pick and anikeenko seems destined to fall out of the top 20...

NYR469 11-22-2004 09:13 AM

really johnson and brule are so close that it comes down to whether you think we need a forward or a dman more...imo we need BOTH a #1 center and #1 dman, but does it matter which order you get them??

on one hand you can say that we already have a pretty deep defense and you could do alot worse then having tyutin as the #1 guy, so brule fills a bigger need...but on the flip side going with the theory that you build from the net out johnson would really upgrade and solidify the defense in front of montoya/blackburn/lundqvist. at that point we'd be all be set in net and on the blueline...

Onion Boy 11-22-2004 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubera55
I'd probably trade down and take Johnson.

It's the stupid move, but I can't get this feeling out of my head that Johnson is just 'supposed' to be a Ranger.

To be honest I have the exact same feeling. We need a clear cut number 1 D prospect. Johnson has that potential, is American, and is going to play in the NCAA next year, all charactistics the Rangers like to see in their picks.

The only comment I disagree with is that we should trade down to get him. If hypothetically we had the 2nd overall pick we should just take him since alot of people seem to think he's up there with Brule. Trading down to, say, 4 may be too big of a drop to still land him.

Of course things change over the season, but if Johnson is still on the board when we pick, we have to take him.

True Blue 11-22-2004 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR469
on one hand you can say that we already have a pretty deep defense and you could do alot worse then having tyutin as the #1 guy, so brule fills a bigger need...but on the flip side going with the theory that you build from the net out johnson would really upgrade and solidify the defense in front of montoya/blackburn/lundqvist. at that point we'd be all be set in net and on the blueline...

Like him as we all do, Tyutin is NOT a #1. If we are lucky, he will develop into a dependable #2 (a la Ohlund). What the defensive future needs is a true #1. Pair said #1 with Tyutin, Kondratiev, Baranka & Pock, and you have a hopefull semblence of top 2 pairs. After that, we can all hope for Lampman, Liffiton, & Taylor to produce a 3rd pair D-man.
They will not all make it, but it does give us a deep defensive prospects. Providing that there is a league at all.

Onion Boy 11-22-2004 10:28 AM

Even though I was not thrilled with drafting Montoya at the time, it's nice to know that our goaltending is solid. Drafting Johnson would instantly make the same true for the defense. How many teams can boast that much potential both in goal and on the blueline?

Levitate 11-22-2004 10:32 AM

IMO you don't particularly NEED a true #1 blueliner as long as your overall D is good and solid...but it certainly helps a lot. i don't think tampa had anyone i'd consider a real #1 guy but they got the job done

Kodiak 11-22-2004 10:36 AM

I like both of these prospects a lot, but I'm leaning towards Johnson at this point. At this point, we lack top notch forward and defensive prospects. Both Brule and Johnson are obviously top notch, but I'd lean towards Johnson for a couple of reasons. First, a successful team is built from the net out. We're set in goal, and we have a nice crop of D prospects, but a stud d-man would really solidify things. Second, d-men take longer to develop than forwards. We're still likely to have a very high pick in 2006. It might make more sense to take the d-man now and the forward next year so that they should be ready to become impact players at about the same time.

But really, no one is making any pick without the interviewing/fitness regimenting portion of scouting. It may come down to that in the end.

nyr7andcounting 11-22-2004 10:39 AM

I would like to have 6 #1 defenseman in my lineup if I could. Take Johnson, if he is the best defenseman. There are plenty of ways to get a forward in this league, even a top one, a la Messier 10+ years ago. We drafted Richter and Leetch and built around that, then we added the top forward when the time came. The same should be done now.

Kodiak 11-22-2004 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levitate
IMO you don't particularly NEED a true #1 blueliner as long as your overall D is good and solid...but it certainly helps a lot. i don't think tampa had anyone i'd consider a real #1 guy but they got the job done

I agree with that. Calgary didn't have a #1 d-man either. That had 5 guys that could log a good amount of time and still be effective. But a #1 d-man is a very nice luxury to have.

NYR469 11-22-2004 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levitate
IMO you don't particularly NEED a true #1 blueliner as long as your overall D is good and solid...but it certainly helps a lot. i don't think tampa had anyone i'd consider a real #1 guy but they got the job done

they won without a true #1, but how many teams that are consistantly at the top don't have a true #1??

there are always exceptions, teams that win without an elite goalie (red wings won with osgood), teams without an elite dman, teams without good special teams, etc but just because it is possible to win under those circumstances that doesn't mean that you should build that way...

simply put the better the defense is the better chances you have of success year after year

NYR469 11-22-2004 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue
Like him as we all do, Tyutin is NOT a #1. If we are lucky, he will develop into a dependable #2 (a la Ohlund). What the defensive future needs is a true #1. Pair said #1 with Tyutin, Kondratiev, Baranka & Pock, and you have a hopefull semblence of top 2 pairs. After that, we can all hope for Lampman, Liffiton, & Taylor to produce a 3rd pair D-man.
They will not all make it, but it does give us a deep defensive prospects. Providing that there is a league at all.

I agree that tyutin isn't really an elite #1 which is why i said that 1 of the big needs is a #1 dman...but tyutin is closer to a #1 dman then lundmark & immonen are to being #1 centers.

so while i see a need for a #1 guy and pushing tyutin/kondratiev down to the 2nd pair instead of the 1st pair would be a HUGE upgrade to the blueline, but we also need a #1 center and probably a #1 winger...so do you upgrade the defense first, or do you say that we're 'ok' with tyutin as the top guy for now and upgrade the forwards?

Prucha73 11-22-2004 11:04 AM

I would probably take Johnson over Brule.

Son of Steinbrenner 11-22-2004 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prucha73
I would probably take Johnson over Brule.

why what are you reading about each player? From what i have read brule is the handsdown second pick in the draft but i haven't watched either guy play so my mind is not made up.

Anthony Mauro 11-22-2004 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodiak
But really, no one is making any pick without the interviewing/fitness regimenting portion of scouting. It may come down to that in the end.

This may not be the part that decides who we take. Both guys seem like guys with the same work ethic and dedication to getting better. It wouldnt suprise me to see both of these guys in similar physical shape come time for the combine.

On the other hand, Johnson may win the pyschological test over Brule. Johnson is a pretty good interview, while others say that Brule is lacking in that area.

Onion Boy 11-22-2004 02:23 PM

Maybe its just me, but I think its worth reiterating the Rangers' penchant for drafting both Americans and NCAA players.

AG9NK35DT8* 11-22-2004 05:52 PM

well pretty tough options.I really think J.Johnson would be awesome here a #1 d-man for the club, but NYR is in need of top 1st/2nd line scoring talent.So I would say go for Brule, Cause he is most needed.NYR I think is looking ok with young D prospects so it can hold for the 2006 draft to pick a big time d-man.

Prucha73 11-22-2004 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barnaby
Ok, the Rangers land the #2 pick in the draft so Crosby is gone. Who should the Rangers take at #2? The consensus seems to be Gilbert Brule, but American born Jack Johnson is flying up the charts!

I'll take Jack Johnson from my limited prospect knowledge. He sounds like the new Brian Leetch minus some offense, plus some hitting. If we are going to base our system on the Devils then we need a #1 d-man who can be a horse. We obviously need a franchise forward as well, but Johnson is too good to pass up IMHO.

What do you guys think?

BTW, how do you expect to get 2nd overall pick? By trade?

AG9NK35DT8* 11-22-2004 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prucha73
BTW, how do you expect to get 2nd overall pick? By trade?

Prucha you dissapear for a while, you use to be so soft and kind now you are a raging animal......What the hell happened to you bro, your psycho man :lol:

Prucha is tearing this whole board a new one, your an animal


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:33 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.