HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   A different slant on our upcoming draft (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=74022)

True Blue 04-26-2004 03:18 PM

A different slant on our upcoming draft
 
So we're sitting with 2 firsts and 4 or 5 2nd's (depending on Umberger). As already discussed, it's these 6 or 7 picks that will determine our rebuild. It's already been said that doing one's homework is critical. While no one has any idea of what will be done , I think we can actually quantify what the picks can be as a whole.
Here's my musings. Despite my misgivings about anything that has to do with Jackass, I have to admit that at least as far as our defense goes, the future looks decent. I'd even venture as far as to say that with Rachunek, Tyutin, Baranka, Pock, Kondratiev, Liffiton, & Lampman in the fold, we have the basis for a pretty good defense. What is need is a another pure crease-clearer to go along with Liffiton.
From the forwards, prespective, what we have is a plethora of 3rd/4th line prospects in Ortmeyer, Moore (both of them), Betts, Murray, Kozak. We DO have a pretty good 2nd line prospect in Balej (though one can hope that he surprises us all and becomes a top liner). I still lump Lundmark into the same category as a future 2nd liner. Jessiman, while a project, is another prospect that we hope will be a top 2 line player. I think that signing Umberger is critical in that it will give us another top 2 line prospect.
As far as goalies go, right now we have Blackburn, Lundquist, and Labarbera. Labarbera we all hope can be better than what he has show in the NHL so far. Danny needs time after surgery, but the reports are good. And Lundquist is supposed to be the goods.
So, here is how I see it. Providing that Umberger is signed and no other trades are made, that gives us 6 picks in the first 2 rounds. Unless Barker falls to #6, it seems that LAdd or Shremp are the probabel choices, giving us another top 2 line prospect. After that, with the 2nd 1st rounder, I would go for defense, Valabik, Thelen, and Green come to mind. Maybe if Pinnuealt is still there with our 2nd 1st roudner, I would take him and then hope that Green is there in the 2nd. I see nothing wrong with using one of the 2nd rounders on a goalie like Schwartz if he's there. I doubt Montoya will be.
So, essentially, my 6 picks are broken down like this
4 forwards
1 defenseman
1 goalie
I think that IF thse picks are used wisely, then Jackass has a real chance at restocking the farm. We have a pretty good basis for a future defense in place already. Another talented defenseman can be used to augument that. Another goalie to go with what we have and 4 forwards (including our pick at #6, unless Barker falls) to enchance the top lines.
Lots of possibilities, but the chances to greatly improve the club for the rebuild is there.

Bird Law 04-26-2004 03:29 PM

They should REALLY look at Fistric in the 2nd round...

gkrangers 04-26-2004 03:46 PM

I want Olesz, Schremp, Ladd, or Wolski...

Well, I want all 4, but I would settle for two :)

Fletch 04-26-2004 03:48 PM

Most picks...
 
will address an area of concern. This team is weak on top 6 forwards (as you mentioned), and that includes left wings, right wings and centermen. This team, while the defense looks decent from a prospect perspective, is lacking Leetch's replacement in the long run. Still missing that top-end guy. Of course, it's still missing a top-end guy on the defensive defenseman side too.

gkrangers 04-26-2004 03:54 PM

Ahem...Fedor Tyutin....not the offensive dynamo Leetch was (and we'll never see another anyway, the game has changed too much). Gonna be a #1 dman tho..

E-Train 04-26-2004 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue
What is need is a another pure crease-clearer to go along with Liffiton.

I would consider Jake Taylor to be a pure crease clearer and he is a right handed shot on top of that. He is a year older than Liffiton and was a regular on a quality college program.

The future D looks very solid especially if Sather adds a few more in the first two rounds in June.

Bluenote13 04-26-2004 04:40 PM

I'd like to see us pickup at least two defensemen - one offensive, the other defensive. One of Fransson, Lepisto, Rogers or Wharton & one of Tesliuk, Valabik, Lyamin, or Fistric. Thats assuming we take a forward with our first pick.

I'll go more in-depth when i post my draft preview in June. :D

DarthSather99 04-26-2004 05:53 PM

I'd like to pick Lauri Tukonen at #6 ....... Speed, Size and skill ...

Janerixon 04-26-2004 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluenote13
I'd like to see us pickup at least two defensemen - one offensive, the other defensive. One of Fransson, Lepisto, Rogers or Wharton & one of Tesliuk, Valabik, Lyamin, or Fistric. Thats assuming we take a forward with our first pick.

I'll go more in-depth when i post my draft preview in June. :D

im gonna agree with bluenote
id like to see 4 forwards and 2 defensemen
id pass on a goalie (in the top 2 rounds) because we have blackie and lundqvist as future netminders and since we will probably get a goalie for the short term, hopefully a younger one in cloutier or khabi

that being said we should take ladd with the #6 pick unless barker falls to us, if we get ladd id pick a defensemen with leafs pick, valabik if hes available or schultz and then look for an offensive minded d-man later in the 2nd round

in the hall 04-26-2004 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E-Train
I would consider Jake Taylor to be a pure crease clearer and he is a right handed shot on top of that. He is a year older than Liffiton and was a regular on a quality college program.

The future D looks very solid especially if Sather adds a few more in the first two rounds in June.

I saw Taylor a month ago and he didn't impress. He is slow footed, prototypical over thought of big guy.

RangerBoy 04-26-2004 06:47 PM

If the Rangers use all 6 or 7 picks in the first two rounds,I will be disappointed.

The Rangers should be aggressive in making deals.

They should use #26 and the two high 2nd round picks(#36 and #37)to move up in the first round or use the a couple of 2nd's to pick up another 1st round pick

They would still have 2 or 3 remaining 2nd round picks

Sitting back and just letting the draft come to you is foolish

Moving up to get a higher ranked player by using the excess picks is the way to go

The Rangers need impact players and not just be satisfied with collecting depth

rnyquist 04-26-2004 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
If the Rangers use all 6 or 7 picks in the first two rounds,I will be disappointed.

The Rangers should be aggressive in making deals.

They should use #26 and the two high 2nd round picks(#36 and #37)to move up in the first round or use the a couple of 2nd's to pick up another 1st round pick

They would still have 2 or 3 remaining 2nd round picks

Sitting back and just letting the draft come to you is foolish

Moving up to get a higher ranked player by using the excess picks is the way to go

The Rangers need impact players and not just be satisfied with collecting depth


but we're not really in position to gamble, its not like we're montreal or washington and we're stacked, we have next to ZERO prospect depth, we can't afford a gamble like Brendl and Lundmark its crippled our depth by putting so much faith in 2 guys. Yes i know, different situation but on the same hand we're in the same place. By being agressive we may not acctually improve. Its easy to argue that getting 2 top 10's is the best way but what if both bust and the guy we wanted to take with the 26th pick becomes the next Havlat?. IMO we're not in a depth to gamble, we need the most we can get and thats all the picks, i think we'd be better off dealing the spare parts like poti and what not to move up, even if its a minimal move. IMO we'd do really well drafting a top line forward with the #6, maybe move up and get Olesz (sather loves to gamble) and then take another forward with the toronto pick and then get Tesliuk in the 2nd round and who knows from there, lets find a sleeper, get Rockwell on the phone, who knows, but being aggressive may not be the best thing.

Son of Steinbrenner 04-26-2004 07:19 PM

i saw taylor a few times this season and he looked fine to me. i think he played an awful playoff game thats all. he is a project but when he gets into the organzation in a few years he will be a better defenseman than purinton is now. i like him but wtf do i know

dedalus 04-26-2004 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
Sitting back and just letting the draft come to you is foolish

Moving up to get a higher ranked player by using the excess picks is the way to go

Depends on your viewpoint. If you accept the premise that the great majority of drafted players never have NHL careers, it's easy to argue that by maximizing your volume of picks you maximize your chances of landing NHLers.

The Rangers moved up to get a higher ranked player in Pavel Brendl. Was that the way to go?

Janerixon 04-26-2004 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dedalus
Depends on your viewpoint. If you accept the premise that the great majority of drafted players never have NHL careers, it's easy to argue that by maximizing your volume of picks you maximize your chances of landing NHLers.

The Rangers moved up to get a higher ranked player in Pavel Brendl. Was that the way to go?

this team has alot of holes, the biggest being a lack of 1st and 2nd line offensive minded players (we currently have only balej and jessiman who i can honstly say are 1st or 2nd line or nothing)

im not for trading up unless there is a player that renney or sather feel this team needs to get, if radulov or someone else falls to say 15th pick or so, id be willing to trade the pick we got from the leafs and a 2nd rounder to try and move up, maybe even poti

but this is not the deepest of drafts and id rather take 6 shots than 5 unless there is someone that we just need to pick

besides after the first ten picks depending on who is drafted the amount of top tier 1st or 2nd line prospects is slim picking

rnyquist 04-26-2004 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janerixon
this team has alot of holes, the biggest being a lack of 1st and 2nd line offensive minded players (we currently have only balej and jessiman who i can honstly say are 1st or 2nd line or nothing)

im not for trading up unless there is a player that renney or sather feel this team needs to get, if radulov or someone else falls to say 15th pick or so, id be willing to trade the pick we got from the leafs and a 2nd rounder to try and move up, maybe even poti

but this is not the deepest of drafts and id rather take 6 shots than 5 unless there is someone that we just need to pick

besides after the first ten picks depending on who is drafted the amount of top tier 1st or 2nd line prospects is slim picking


Ya like you said unless a guy like Radulov slips to 15 then i'd be willing to deal up,

bmoak 04-26-2004 08:41 PM

The funny thing about this draft is, as loaded as we are for the first two rounds, we only have 4 picks total after that.

rnyquist 04-26-2004 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmoak
The funny thing about this draft is, as loaded as we are for the first two rounds, we only have 4 picks total after that.

thats fine, i'll talk loaded in the 1st 2 rounds over loaded in the latter rounds

charliemurphy 04-26-2004 08:55 PM

This year's draft is thin, I wouldn't mind a couple of 1st rounders in 05'.

Bird Law 04-26-2004 09:09 PM

Fistric Fistric Fistric Fistric!!!

vbox81 04-26-2004 09:16 PM

Quant vs. Qual
 
That's the biggest debate this team needs to decide: do we want to gamble on getting less higher-ceiling picks or throw as many darts as possible.

If we keep all the picks, you have to think that some of the picks in the 2nd round will be head-scratchers (ie Jessiman) where they are boom or bust types (or off-ice issues like O'Sullivan had). Predicting the forward/dman ratio should be meaningless at this point of we have 5 picks in the 2nd round.

I would say that trading the 26th and 2nds (or even 1 2nd and Poti?) for a Top 10 pick would be smart in this draft due to the extreme drop in talent level. Remember: since we have so many damn picks, do we really need 5 more 3rd liners? I'd rather take 3 of them if it means 1 more possible top 6 forward, but that Top 6 forward needs to be damn near a mortal lock.

nyr5186 04-26-2004 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rnyquist
but we're not really in position to gamble, its not like we're montreal or washington and we're stacked, we have next to ZERO prospect depth, we can't afford a gamble like Brendl and Lundmark its crippled our depth by putting so much faith in 2 guys. Yes i know, different situation but on the same hand we're in the same place. By being agressive we may not acctually improve. Its easy to argue that getting 2 top 10's is the best way but what if both bust and the guy we wanted to take with the 26th pick becomes the next Havlat?. IMO we're not in a depth to gamble, we need the most we can get and thats all the picks, i think we'd be better off dealing the spare parts like poti and what not to move up, even if its a minimal move. IMO we'd do really well drafting a top line forward with the #6, maybe move up and get Olesz (sather loves to gamble) and then take another forward with the toronto pick and then get Tesliuk in the 2nd round and who knows from there, lets find a sleeper, get Rockwell on the phone, who knows, but being aggressive may not be the best thing.

What are you talking about? The Rangers farm system is stacked with depth. Thats undebateable. What it lacks is top end potential, especially at forward. Other than Jessiman and Balej (and Umberger*), I dont see anybody with a solid chance at becoming a huge offensive contributor in the future. With six picks in the first two rounds, you have to be aggressive and get guys you think have the potential to be bigtime players. I'd rather draft the guy with the higher upside but with more question marks than the guy who's more of a sure thing but only expected to be a role player. I figure that if you take five big gambles, you're likely to have a few blossom into great players and a few become busts. IMO, considering the state of this team and its lack of top end potential, thats much better than taking five 'safe' picks and being left with an abundance of 3rd/4th liners (which we already have).

charliemurphy 04-26-2004 10:01 PM

Any order you wish. The RW's of the future are: Jessiman/Balej/Prucha/Ortmeyer
IMO...I think Sather should find out what it would take to land Spezza (Lundmark/Poti/Dunham(eat that contract) and 2-2nd rounders in 04' should do it).
Umberger or #46 pick in 04' draft? I rather take the chance on RJ Umberger.
Speeza/Umberger centering 2 lines for the future should speed up the rebuild process.
Who knows?
Ladd at #6 could turn out to be a top line LW.

RangerBoy 04-27-2004 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rnyquist
but we're not really in position to gamble, its not like we're montreal or washington and we're stacked, we have next to ZERO prospect depth, we can't afford a gamble like Brendl and Lundmark its crippled our depth by putting so much faith in 2 guys. Yes i know, different situation but on the same hand we're in the same place. By being agressive we may not acctually improve. Its easy to argue that getting 2 top 10's is the best way but what if both bust and the guy we wanted to take with the 26th pick becomes the next Havlat?. IMO we're not in a depth to gamble, we need the most we can get and thats all the picks, i think we'd be better off dealing the spare parts like poti and what not to move up, even if its a minimal move. IMO we'd do really well drafting a top line forward with the #6, maybe move up and get Olesz (sather loves to gamble) and then take another forward with the toronto pick and then get Tesliuk in the 2nd round and who knows from there, lets find a sleeper, get Rockwell on the phone, who knows, but being aggressive may not be the best thing.

I'm not talking about trading two NHLers in Dan Cloutier and Niklas Sundstrom,a 1st round pick and 3rd round pick to move up.

It's not a great draft.Probably one of the weakest since 1996.Do you know how many second round picks do not make it?

Montreal and Washington are stacked in high end talent.You just made my point.
HIGH END TALENT

I'm talking about trading second round picks

True Blue 04-27-2004 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
I'm talking about trading second round picks

All of this talk about moving up or collecting another first rounder without trading our own 1st rounder or by simply including Poti is ridiculous. NOBODY is giving up a first round pick for Poti. NO ONE. NO ONE is giving up their first round pick for a pair of 2nd round picks. NO ONE is trading their top 10 pick for our 25th (or whatever # it is that the 'Leafs have) and another 2nd rounder or 2. As some of you have said, this draft does not have great depth, so why would anyone trade their higher picks for our lower ones?
And as for the draft, yes it does not have great depth and is percieved to be weak. HOWEVER, like any other year, there ARE players to be had here. Like Edge has been preaching, one just has to do one's homework. The way some of you guys are making is sound is that this draft will yeild a handlfull of NHL players and the rest will go by the wasteside. Every draft yields players. There will be star players who are chosen after the first 10 picks. There will be top line players who are picked after the 1st round. It is Sather's job to find them. The fact that this is a weak draft cannot be used as an excuse for not landing the impact player or 2 or 3 that we need. Sather choose to have the firesale THIS year and not last year. If this was last year's draft, most here would be doing the jig becuase of the amount of picks in a "good" draft year. Now, everyone seems to have this opinion that after the first 5 players, everyone else is a career 4th liner. Just do your homework.
THIS is the bed that Sather made. So THIS is the draft that he has to work with. That's it. He has to work this draft as he did the fire-sale.....as if his job still depends on it.
There is no doubt that the #6 pick HAS to become a top 2 line player. Be it Ladd or Schremp. If Barker drops, that has to be a no-brainer to take him, but barring that, whichever person Jackass picks, HAS TO be an impact player. This is one of the reasons I am harping on the signing of Umberger. With such a dearth of top line prospects, how can Jackass afford NOT to sign him? Right now, we only have Jessiman, who is HUGE prospect. After that, all we have to offer as far as potential top 2 line players are Balej and Lundmark. Umberger would make a big difference, IMO. He is clearly a top 2 line talent. He has to be given a shot to prove it or fail doing it. But I do not see how he can be let go to possibly become a top 2 line player on another team.
Between Rachunek, Pock, Tyutin, Kondratiev, Liffiton, and Lampman, we have a pretty good base for a future defense. But another one or 2 defenseman is needed to really make this into a top core.
Nabbing 3 or 4 forwards, one or 2 defenseman, and maybe a goalie can go a long way to making this rebuild work. Just have to do your homework.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:58 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.