HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Jessiman... (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=56909)

Fletch 02-29-2004 09:36 AM

Jessiman...
 
The Blueshirts also intend to speak with Hugh Jessiman as soon as his sophomore season concludes at Dartmouth, with the intention of signing him to a contract and getting last June's No. 1 into Hartford as quickly as possible.

[from the Post].

Could be quite interesting if we could see him this season - anybody know when Dartmouth's season ends?

DarthSather99 02-29-2004 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
The Blueshirts also intend to speak with Hugh Jessiman as soon as his sophomore season concludes at Dartmouth, with the intention of signing him to a contract and getting last June's No. 1 into Hartford as quickly as possible.

[from the Post].

Could be quite interesting if we could see him this season - anybody know when Dartmouth's season ends?

Great, now that Sather has to be held accountable for saying that he'd rebuild the Rangers, and hasn't, he's going to go nuclear with the rebuilding program. Sign anybody young so that it will look like he's rebuilding, even if THAT player isn't ready for the next step. Jessiman needs another year at college before he heads for Hartford at the age of 20. He'll ruin all of our prospects before he's done.

AJ1982 02-29-2004 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarthSather99
Great, now that Sather has to be held accountable for saying that he'd rebuild the Rangers, and hasn't, he's going to go nuclear with the rebuilding program. Sign anybody young so that it will look like he's rebuilding, even if THAT player isn't ready for the next step. Jessiman needs another year at college before he heads for Hartford at the age of 20. He'll ruin all of our prospects before he's done.

I agree, I think he needs another NCAA season. He hasn't really dominated the level yet, and he needs work on defense. This kid should be a keeper but ideally he should probably be a 4 year NCAA player and then spend a couple years in the minors. Big men just take longer to develope usually and I don't think Jessiman is an exception to that.

RANGER#11 02-29-2004 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJ1982
I agree, I think he needs another NCAA season. He hasn't really dominated the level yet, and he needs work on defense. This kid should be a keeper but ideally he should probably be a 4 year NCAA player and then spend a couple years in the minors. Big men just take longer to develope usually and I don't think Jessiman is an exception to that.

I also agree. I have seen him play a couple games this year and he is comeing along nicely but he realy dose need another year NCAA. The great Sather will sign him this summer and step him right up to the big club where he will get 2min a game.

RangerBoy 02-29-2004 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarthSather99
Great, now that Sather has to be held accountable for saying that he'd rebuild the Rangers, and hasn't, he's going to go nuclear with the rebuilding program. Sign anybody young so that it will look like he's rebuilding, even if THAT player isn't ready for the next step. Jessiman needs another year at college before he heads for Hartford at the age of 20. He'll ruin all of our prospects before he's done.

The Rangers need to get Hugh Jessiman out of Dartmouth College and ECAC college hockey.The Rangers have been talking about getting Jessiman out of Dartmouth since at least December.He will not improve playing against the Harvards,Yales and Clarksons of the world.They're going to ruin him like they ruined Fedor Tyutin by letting Tyutin return to Russia last season instead of having him play another season at Guelph.Stop with the drama!!!

Montreal took Chris Higgins out of Yale after two years of college hockey and as a 20 year old.Jessiman needs to learn the pro lifestyle and play against better competition.They have a quality coaching staff in Hartford with Ryan McGill and Nick Fotiu.

True Blue 02-29-2004 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
They're going to ruin him like they ruined Fedor Tyutin by letting Tyutin return to Russia last season instead of having him play another season at Guelph.Stop with the drama!!!

I'm sorry, WHAT??? They ruined Tyutin by not having him play when he is not ready? Have you seen him play? I have. Does not really look like he is ruined. If fact, having him play in Russia and Guelph when he was not ready for the NHL, looks like about the smartest thing the Rangers org has done in a long, long time.
I agree that Jessiman is clearly not ready for the next step. He needs at least another year in college and then no less than one year in Hartford.

DarthSather99 02-29-2004 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
The Rangers need to get Hugh Jessiman out of Dartmouth College and ECAC college hockey.The Rangers have been talking about getting Jessiman out of Dartmouth since at least December.He will not improve playing against the Harvards,Yales and Clarksons of the world.They're going to ruin him like they ruined Fedor Tyutin by letting Tyutin return to Russia last season instead of having him play another season at Guelph.Stop with the drama!!!

Montreal took Chris Higgins out of Yale after two years of college hockey and as a 20 year old.Jessiman needs to learn the pro lifestyle.

The Rangers lost Tytuin last year because of a Sather brain fart. Sather thought he could send Tytuin to Hartford and tried but in doing so activated some clause with the Russian team that owned his rights. If Sather would have just sent him to Guelph where he belonged everything would have been fine. Another year of North American type Hockey. He HAD to go to Russia because of Sather's mishap.

If Jessiman was dominating his college peers then I'd agree with you. He's not. Keeping him at Dartmouth is the right thing to do. Do you want another Blackburn/Malhotra/Lundmark type situation where a player is kept on a team to show the media/fans "look we have young guys on the roster". Then they are nailed to the bench hindering their progress. Wake up and smell the coffee.

L.I.RangerFan 02-29-2004 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
They're going to ruin him like they ruined Fedor Tyutin by letting Tyutin return to Russia last season instead of having him play another season at Guelph.Stop with the drama!!!

I believe RangerBoy was trying to be sarcastic with his comment but his punctuation made it seem like a statement instead of a question.

Change it to this and you can see the sarcasm.

They're going to ruin him like they ruined Fedor Tyutin by letting Tyutin return to Russia last season instead of having him play another season at Guelph?????

MisterUnspoken 02-29-2004 12:37 PM

Whats teh difference if he plays in Hartford or in Dartmouth? isnt the competition a little stronger in the AHL. I'd like to see if he can acclimate to the tougher conditions, in fact it might suit his game better.

Servo 02-29-2004 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
The Rangers need to get Hugh Jessiman out of Dartmouth College and ECAC college hockey.The Rangers have been talking about getting Jessiman out of Dartmouth since at least December.He will not improve playing against the Harvards,Yales and Clarksons of the world.They're going to ruin him like they ruined Fedor Tyutin by letting Tyutin return to Russia last season instead of having him play another season at Guelph.Stop with the drama!!!

Montreal took Chris Higgins out of Yale after two years of college hockey and as a 20 year old.Jessiman needs to learn the pro lifestyle and play against better competition.They have a quality coaching staff in Hartford with Ryan McGill and Nick Fotiu.

Yeah, nothing good has ever come from the ECAC. They haven't produced players like Joe Niewendyk, Martin St. Louis, Adam Oates, Todd Marchant, Craig Conroy . . . oh wait, they have. You might have missed all of last year but the best team in the country (and by FAR the best defense in the nation) came from the ECAC only to be screwed out of their NCAA Final appearance by a bogus no-goal call. And the "Harvards...of the world," namely Harvard, was in the top 14 last year, like Colgate is this year.

You think Jessiman can't improve playing these teams? Well, Jessiman hasn't done squat against the Cornell defense (2 assists in 4 games over the last two years, one of which was on an empty netter), other than make obscene gestures at the fans. If he can't make it happen against the best ECAC defense, what's he going to do against the Devils? If he can't handle the fans at Lynah Rink, what's he going to do at the Garden when it gets nasty? He has plenty of room for improvement playing in the ECAC, and frankly he needs it before he signs a pro contract. He needs more maturity, more development, and God forbid, and Ivy League education. The notion that NHL quality players can't develop in the ECAC is pure garbage.

AJ1982 02-29-2004 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterUnspoken
Whats teh difference if he plays in Hartford or in Dartmouth? isnt the competition a little stronger in the AHL. I'd like to see if he can acclimate to the tougher conditions, in fact it might suit his game better.

The competition is a lot tougher in the AHL I'd say, the thing is that Hugh is still improving at Dartmouth and he's not dominating the ECAC yet. Jump a player up a level when he's not ready and you could do more damage than good. Hugh is a big strong power forward, he's still putting on weight, these types of players take longer to develope normally. Why rush him into the pros, at any level, when he has other options available?

AJ1982 02-29-2004 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Servo
Yeah, nothing good has ever come from the ECAC. They haven't produced players like Joe Niewendyk, Martin St. Louis, Adam Oates, Todd Marchant, Craig Conroy . . . oh wait, they have. You might have missed all of last year but the best team in the country (and by FAR the best defense in the nation) came from the ECAC only to be screwed out of their NCAA Final appearance by a bogus no-goal call. And the "Harvards...of the world," namely Harvard, was in the top 14 last year, like Colgate is this year.

You think Jessiman can't improve playing these teams? Well, Jessiman hasn't done squat against the Cornell defense (2 assists in 4 games over the last two years, one of which was on an empty netter), other than make obscene gestures at the fans. If he can't make it happen against the best ECAC defense, what's he going to do against the Devils? If he can't handle the fans at Lynah Rink, what's he going to do at the Garden when it gets nasty? He has plenty of room for improvement playing in the ECAC, and frankly he needs it before he signs a pro contract. He needs more maturity, more development, and God forbid, and Ivy League education. The notion that NHL quality players can't develop in the ECAC is pure garbage.

And more recently Erik Cole, Patrick Sharp and Chris Higgins. Yes these guys left early but if they'd stayed all 4 years I'm fairly sure they'd be as, if not more successful than they are right now. The ECAC gets a bad wrap as a weak league but that's primarily a misconception. Certainly the CCHA, WCHA and Hockey East are stronger at the moment but the ECAC is no slouch.

Pooh 02-29-2004 03:03 PM

as long as he is getting ice time, wouldnt you want him to be playing at the highest level possible?

Barnaby 02-29-2004 03:40 PM

My question: You go back into the draft last year, and have the same spot. Do you take Jessiman or Parise?

AJ1982 02-29-2004 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pooh
as long as he is getting ice time, wouldnt you want him to be playing at the highest level possible?

Nope, I'd want him at the place that was best for his development. I'm not a big believer in moving players up to a level they may not be ready for yet.

Pooh 02-29-2004 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJ1982
Nope, I'd want him at the place that was best for his development. I'm not a big believer in moving players up to a level they may not be ready for yet.

whats your definition of 'ready' then? Jessiman has good size and is leading his team in scoring as it is. I agree, there is no point in bringing him to hartford if he will be overmatched, but that doesnt seem like it would be the case.

Edge 02-29-2004 06:51 PM

there is more to hockey than the amount of numbers someone puts up.

if that were the case, Bob Maudie would have been a star center {if you dont know him, not feel ashamed}.

There is also defense {Which still isnt too hot} and more importantly there is the transition game and mental speed in which a player operates and Jessiman needs to develop that more. He was overmatched in the rookie camp and i see a similar situation in the AHL. This kid is a big project and i can tell the team is gonna sign him out of pressure to produce something which is EXACTLY why i was against drafting him in the first place. He is gonna need time and this team refuses to give it.

Jessiman has big league talent but it's like building a house, if you want it done with quality, it's gonna take longer.

the kid is not ready, he doesnt dominate defensive systerms, and right now his biggest asset is that he is bigger than everyone else, when the competition gets bigger he's not going to be able to handle it yet.

They need to give him at least another year in college before moving him up.

The ECAC is getting knocked big time but these guys know what they are doing. they dont have the name recognition of michigan or Boston University, but they arent some crappy little program like people are parroting back now {no one said it before they read it in a newspaper or two, now everyone is an expert on the ecac}.

moving this kid would be a big mistake.

Bluenote13 03-01-2004 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge
there is more to hockey than the amount of numbers someone puts up.

if that were the case, Bob Maudie would have been a star center {if you dont know him, not feel ashamed}.

There is also defense {Which still isnt too hot} and more importantly there is the transition game and mental speed in which a player operates and Jessiman needs to develop that more. He was overmatched in the rookie camp and i see a similar situation in the AHL. This kid is a big project and i can tell the team is gonna sign him out of pressure to produce something which is EXACTLY why i was against drafting him in the first place. He is gonna need time and this team refuses to give it.

Jessiman has big league talent but it's like building a house, if you want it done with quality, it's gonna take longer.

the kid is not ready, he doesnt dominate defensive systerms, and right now his biggest asset is that he is bigger than everyone else, when the competition gets bigger he's not going to be able to handle it yet.

They need to give him at least another year in college before moving him up.

The ECAC is getting knocked big time but these guys know what they are doing. they dont have the name recognition of michigan or Boston University, but they arent some crappy little program like people are parroting back now {no one said it before they read it in a newspaper or two, now everyone is an expert on the ecac}.

moving this kid would be a big mistake.

I agree, leave him be, don't start to give this kid an idea that he's 'close' to being an NHL'er. Hugh's a project, like you said Edge, we knew he would need time to develop even before we picked him.

I will say this - he hasn't reacted well to the special attention he's gotten this season now that he's a marked man. Teams have been able to contain Hugh. Most of his points have come on the PP, an aspect of his game that has actually gotten better. I hope he gets one more year at least at Dartmouth.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 03-01-2004 09:41 AM

Typical from this organization. When he was drafted, Maloney and Renney were both saying that this pick is for the future and he would not be rushed. Now he going to be rushed to give the fans a glimpse of the youth and to save this franchise. What's the point of whether he plays in Hartford or Hanover next year as it relates to the Rangers. This team is at least two years away. Jessiman is at least that as well.

Fletch 03-01-2004 09:58 AM

'Cause if he's in Hartford...
 
he can be monitored and screwed with more closely by the Rangers organization and its fans.

True Blue 03-01-2004 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pooh
whats your definition of 'ready' then? Jessiman has good size and is leading his team in scoring as it is. I agree, there is no point in bringing him to hartford if he will be overmatched, but that doesnt seem like it would be the case.

There's more to being ready than having good size. Hugh was not ready at the rookie camp. He has been unable to adapt to being the man that other teams are targeting, and this is in a league when he is MUCH bigger than anyone else. What happens when he is NOT the biggest boy on the block?
Why rush the kid? He cannot possibly even come close to helping the Rangers right now. Bringing him in just to show the world that there indeed are some young prospects is ludicrous. He needs AT LEAST another year or 2 of college and then another full year in the AHL.

Edge 03-01-2004 12:04 PM

this ladies and gentlemen was exactly what i feared when we drafted him. this team can't handle a project the size {no pun intended} of hugh jessiman.

on a personal note {unrelated} Ryan Getzlaf, one of my fav's from last year was the last cut from ducks camp, is having a very nice year and might just be ready to play in the NHL next season.

my "keep an eye" on player for 2004 is his linemate, Andrew Ladd. Very underrated kid whose only backer seems to be CSB. Meanwhile Schremp keeps getting hype despite being a relative disappointment this year. Well politics is politics.

Bluenote13 03-01-2004 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge
this ladies and gentlemen was exactly what i feared when we drafted him. this team can't handle a project the size {no pun intended} of hugh jessiman.

on a personal note {unrelated} Ryan Getzlaf, one of my fav's from last year was the last cut from ducks camp, is having a very nice year and might just be ready to play in the NHL next season.

my "keep an eye" on player for 2004 is his linemate, Andrew Ladd. Very underrated kid whose only backer seems to be CSB. Meanwhile Schremp keeps getting hype despite being a relative disappointment this year. Well politics is politics.

Getlaf - I didn't like him very much last year, but he has improved dramatically IMO. His skating got alot better, that was his downside for me going into the draft last year.

Ladd - I'm not so sure we see eye to eye on this guy. Doesn't matter, we're going to be drafting #5 or higher, at the worst we draft at #7 and I say thats too high for Ladd. I can think of 10 players I'd take before him. Just not enough skill. I'd take Berti before him, similar player, if it wasn't for his prior injuries that worry me.

If we pick at #4-#6 i'd go for either Schremp/Radulov/Barker/Wolski. After that it's one of the big D-men : Green/Valabik/Smid/Thelen/Meszaros/Schultz - whoever the scouts decide is the best from that group.

NYR469 03-01-2004 01:23 PM

we've discussed this many times and for me the question always comes down to how much would he really benefit from another at dartmouth playing against ecac teams...

and i tend to lean toward making the jump to the AHL as being the best thing for his development HOWEVER the big sticking point remains the fact that he isn't even close to be nhl ready...

can the rangers really be trusted to avoid the temptation of rushing him and leave him in hartford for the full year??

he'd need atleast 1 full year in hartford before even thinking about bring him up and the last thing we want would be for them to make him the 'poster child' for a rebuild like they did with malhotra...so while making the jump might be good for him, i'm starting to lean toward leaving him in school another year to avoid the temptation...

of course ideally sather will be fired and a competent gm will be brought in who will take away this concern

NYR469 03-01-2004 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barnaby
My question: You go back into the draft last year, and have the same spot. Do you take Jessiman or Parise?

imo absolutely nothing has changed because we picked jessiman based on what we think he will be 5 or so years down the road, NOT what he is today...

if you wanted parise over jessiman at the time of the draft that is fine cause parise is an excellent prospect, but if you were in favor of jessiman at the time than there is no reason to change that cause we knew he'd be a projected and wasn't going to be ready for a few years...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 AM.

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.