HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Rangers' Top 20 Prospects POLL (#10) (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=77344)

bmoak 05-11-2004 09:56 PM

Rangers' Top 20 Prospects POLL (#10)
 
POLL IS CLOSED. PLEASE MOVE ON TO POLL #11.

Well Baranka just steamrolled everyone to claim #9, so let's move on to round out the top 10.

The Rangers' propsect rankings are as follows:

1) Fedor Tjutin
2) Henrik Lundqvist
3) Josef Balej
4) Hugh Jessiman
5) Thomas Pock
6) Petr Prucha
7) Maxim Kondratiev
8) Jarkko Immonen
9) Ivan Baranka

Who is the Rangers' #10 Prospect?

bmoak 05-11-2004 10:13 PM

Oops! I hit Moore when I wanted to vote Murray. C'est la vie.

I'm adding 5 players to the poll after this round. I've decided on Giroux-Helminen-Taylor-Walsh-Wiseman.

After #12 is chosen, I will add 4 more players, bringing the number of poll slots up to 12. I haven't decided on those 4. Right now, I'm looking at....

Roche (def)
Falardeau (prob)
Guenin (prob)
G Moore (maybe)
Potter (maybe)
Hollweg (low)
Reese (low)
Stals (low)
Kozak (low)

Anyone else? Please only name guys that you plan to vote for in the top 16.

In the meantime, rock the vote.

in the hall 05-11-2004 10:26 PM

close between Murray and Dawes, I'll go with Murray beacause he's in the show

Kubera55 05-11-2004 10:56 PM

Voted for Murray. Best blend of NHL readyness and fewest flaws left in his game. Murray isn't going to score 20 goals at the NHL level, but for what he is (3rd/4th line agitator/checker/enforcer) you couldn't ask for much more solidity.

I'd probably go with Dominic Moore after him . . .

Also, as long as we're adding G.Moore and Kosak to the list, I see little reason to leave off the pretty well regarded Helminin. Kosak's the only one I know anything about though (saw him play his AHL debut in Hartford, he was very impressive).

Rangers_23 05-11-2004 10:57 PM

Went with G Murray. Dawes has a higher upside but Murray is NHL ready.

Larry Melnyk 05-11-2004 11:15 PM

Personally, I put Murray BEHIND both Moore and Giroux...I've been thinking about MOORE and think this is where he should go...Great training camp for the Rangers, looked good in his short regular season stint and I think started playing well for McGill late in the season and during the POs once he got better linemates and adapted to McGill's game (or McGill finally started trusting his style of play)...Not as physical as Murray or Giroux, but still a good two way player with better offensive abilities (especially when compared to Murray)...

I go with Moore...And Giroux up next..

nyr5186 05-11-2004 11:46 PM

I've been voting for Murray ever since #7. He may not have the highest ceiling, but guys like him are underrated, especially come playoff time. He's got captain material in the future, he forechecks, he fights, he wins battles, he gives it his all every night for the team. Plus I think he's underrated offensively. He didnt finish much towards the end of the season, but you saw his rocket shot against Philly and he shows some slick moves once in a while. Anyone remember that little toedrag he made on a 2-on-1? Even though he didnt score, it was VERY pretty and something I'd expect out of Mario Lemieux, not a supposed '3rd line banger'. IMO, there's no reason why we cant see 15-20 goals a year from him in the future to go along with all his other attributes.

newf 05-11-2004 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rangers_23
Went with G Murray. Dawes has a higher upside but Murray is NHL ready.


funny more than one person voted for murray but said dawes has more potential. not to slam your opinion at all, but isn't potential the biggest characteristic of a "prospect"?

jmho

Rangers_23 05-12-2004 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newf
funny more than one person voted for murray but said dawes has more potential. not to slam your opinion at all, but isn't potential the biggest characteristic of a "prospect"?

jmho

It's debateable. Some prospects never reach their full potential. So I'm not sure if it is the biggest characteristic. All opinion based anyways.

Kubera55 05-12-2004 12:05 AM

Not at all. Potential, upside, what-have-you, is only one part of the equation. Factored in also has to be NHL-readyness, along with the probabilities of them ever even arriving in the NHL.

Murray is a perfect example. If he stays healthy and doesn't piss anyone off, he's basically assured an NHL career on the 'Dan LaCouture level'; i.e., a journeyman checker/agitator on the 3rd or 4th line. He may still develop into something better, but at the moment he's 90% ready to step in and do that job, right now.

Now, compare him to Dawes, Prucha, or even Jessiman. None of those three could hold down an NHL job on any line right now. In fact, with the possible exception of Prucha, who's been playing in the Czech mens league, none of them are likely even close. But they've all got the scorers touch, and physical skills and hockey sense that Murray can't match.

So how do you rate them? Just pile them all up ahead of him? Even if Murray's probably going to make the NHL 2 years before Dawes is even a consideration? Even if Prucha is still in Europe and unlikely to come to NA during a lockout next year, and Jessiman is dissapointing in the ECAC?

You can't go just on potential, or hard working, and improving, guys like Murray get the shaft. It has to be a mixture of upside and production.

BDubinskyNYR17* 05-12-2004 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubera55
Not at all. Potential, upside, what-have-you, is only one part of the equation. Factored in also has to be NHL-readyness, along with the probabilities of them ever even arriving in the NHL.

Murray is a perfect example. If he stays healthy and doesn't piss anyone off, he's basically assured an NHL career on the 'Dan LaCouture level'; i.e., a journeyman checker/agitator on the 3rd or 4th line. He may still develop into something better, but at the moment he's 90% ready to step in and do that job, right now.

Now, compare him to Dawes, Prucha, or even Jessiman. None of those three could hold down an NHL job on any line right now. In fact, with the possible exception of Prucha, who's been playing in the Czech mens league, none of them are likely even close. But they've all got the scorers touch, and physical skills and hockey sense that Murray can't match.

So how do you rate them? Just pile them all up ahead of him? Even if Murray's probably going to make the NHL 2 years before Dawes is even a consideration? Even if Prucha is still in Europe and unlikely to come to NA during a lockout next year, and Jessiman is dissapointing in the ECAC?

You can't go just on potential, or hard working, and improving, guys like Murray get the shaft. It has to be a mixture of upside and production.


Where is Walsh, Crabb, Hollweg, Helfenstein, Guenin, Martz?? I feel these prospects will surpise people. They have better stats than Falardeau.

Sunshine 05-12-2004 12:31 AM

With the possible exception of Guenin, the players you just mentioned are 3rd tier prospects. Don't get me wrong, I'd love for one or two of them to work out-Unfortunately, 9 out of 10 scouts project them as career AHL'ers.
For them to be in the 20-30 range shows how deep our system has gotten...
come June/July (post-draft), we'll have more than we could have ever managed-
Very exciting time for this organization.

BDubinskyNYR17* 05-12-2004 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunshine
With the possible exception of Guenin, the players you just mentioned are 3rd tier prospects. Don't get me wrong, I'd love for one or two of them to work out-Unfortunately, 9 out of 10 scouts project them as career AHL'ers.
For them to be in the 20-30 range shows how deep our system has gotten...
come June/July (post-draft), we'll have more than we could have ever managed-
Very exciting time for this organization.

I think Hollweg can be a good player like Matt Cooke.

Barnaby 05-12-2004 12:43 AM

I voted for Murray.... but I have a feeling Liffiton is falling too low. If he doesnt go by 12 then he's fallen way too far IMO.

So far the list seems to be coming out very good.

newf 05-12-2004 12:59 AM

good points, kubera

but it still seems to me that part of what makes someone like murray or ortmeyer dersireable is that they've proven themselves to some extent in the NHL. i see this as meaning that they've reached their potential - they have proven to be what we thought they might be. therefore they're not really prospects.

anyway, the pools make for good threads, and its nice to have some debate about hockey when the season is long over (at least for the rangers)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubera55
Not at all. Potential, upside, what-have-you, is only one part of the equation. Factored in also has to be NHL-readyness, along with the probabilities of them ever even arriving in the NHL.

Murray is a perfect example. If he stays healthy and doesn't piss anyone off, he's basically assured an NHL career on the 'Dan LaCouture level'; i.e., a journeyman checker/agitator on the 3rd or 4th line. He may still develop into something better, but at the moment he's 90% ready to step in and do that job, right now.

Now, compare him to Dawes, Prucha, or even Jessiman. None of those three could hold down an NHL job on any line right now. In fact, with the possible exception of Prucha, who's been playing in the Czech mens league, none of them are likely even close. But they've all got the scorers touch, and physical skills and hockey sense that Murray can't match.

So how do you rate them? Just pile them all up ahead of him? Even if Murray's probably going to make the NHL 2 years before Dawes is even a consideration? Even if Prucha is still in Europe and unlikely to come to NA during a lockout next year, and Jessiman is dissapointing in the ECAC?

You can't go just on potential, or hard working, and improving, guys like Murray get the shaft. It has to be a mixture of upside and production.


Barnaby 05-12-2004 02:12 AM

What day is the NHL draft?

I have June 27th in my mind for some reason...

majicpixie 05-12-2004 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barnaby
What day is the NHL draft?

I have June 27th in my mind for some reason...

It's June 26th-27th.

bmoak 05-12-2004 09:19 AM

I'd like to see 50 votes before I declare a winner and post a new poll.

Barnaby 05-12-2004 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by majicpixie
It's June 26th-27th.

Thanks :D

majicpixie 05-12-2004 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barnaby
Thanks :D

No problem! ;)

True Blue 05-12-2004 10:00 AM

How does Liffiton just manage to get forgotten about? He is a 19 year old, 2nd round pick by a org that knows what they are doing (Colarado) in what was a very deep draft. He plays a stay-at-home style that we crave. His skating is not horrible (for a stay-at home type). He is a very physical player. I think that he may be a better prospect than even Murray. Dawes is a long-shot, IMO. I love his speed and spunk, but his size is a VERY BIG issue. For all the accolades that players like St. Louis and Gionta get, there are just not that many Mighty Mites that make in in the NHL. Dawes does have talent and LOTS of speed, but is that going to translate into the NHL? We'll have to see. I certainly hope so.
Liffiton, on the other hand, has good size and is more than willing to use it. Dawes may have more talent, but I think that Liffiton is the more likely to make it in the NHL. For those of you that like Jake Taylor, how can you not like Liffiton? He is every bit as physical, though not as nasty, and is a better skater. I think that Liffiton will make Ranger fans very happy in the future.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 05-12-2004 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue
How does Liffiton just manage to get forgotten about? He is a 19 year old, 2nd round pick by a org that knows what they are doing (Colarado) in what was a very deep draft. He plays a stay-at-home style that we crave. His skating is not horrible (for a stay-at home type). He is a very physical player. I think that he may be a better prospect than even Murray. Dawes is a long-shot, IMO. I love his speed and spunk, but his size is a VERY BIG issue. For all the accolades that players like St. Louis and Gionta get, there are just not that many Mighty Mites that make in in the NHL. Dawes does have talent and LOTS of speed, but is that going to translate into the NHL? We'll have to see. I certainly hope so.
Liffiton, on the other hand, has good size and is more than willing to use it. Dawes may have more talent, but I think that Liffiton is the more likely to make it in the NHL. For those of you that like Jake Taylor, how can you not like Liffiton? He is every bit as physical, though not as nasty, and is a better skater. I think that Liffiton will make Ranger fans very happy in the future.

I voted for him.

bmoak 05-12-2004 10:37 AM

OK, I'm starting Poll #11 now.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16 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.