HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   NEW IMPROVED Rangers' Prospect Poll #11 (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=89099)

bmoak 07-05-2004 09:09 AM

NEW IMPROVED Rangers' Prospect Poll #11
 
And Murray rounds out our Top 10.

Rangers' Propsect Rankings:

1) Fedor Tjutin
2) Alvaro Montoya
3) Josef Balej
4) Hugh Jessiman
5) Henrik Lundqvist
6) Lauri Korpikoski
7) Maxim Kondratiev
8) Tomas Pock
9) Jarkko Immonen
10) Garth Murray

Who is the Rangers' #11 prospect?

BobMarleyNYR 07-05-2004 11:02 AM

OK, Darin Olver should not even be a choice until #40!

Onion Boy 07-05-2004 11:31 AM

Prucha is free-falling down that list pretty rapidly. That said, I picked Baranka. :D

xander 07-05-2004 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobMarleyNYR
OK, Darin Olver should not even be a choice until #40!

can you atleast consider the fact that maybe there's a reason he was drafted were he was before totally writing him off?

jas 07-05-2004 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xander
can you atleast consider the fact that maybe there's a reason he was drafted were he was before totally wiriting him off?

Yeah, somehow, leading your college team in scoring, and averaging almost a point per game, as a freshman, no less, apparnetly holds no water. :dunno:

jas 07-05-2004 11:52 AM

BTW, I chose Baranka, due to the fact that I think he is physically more prepared to reach his upside in the NHL. A 6-2, 200 lb physical defenseman is more equipped to deal with the physical demands of the league.

barnaby63 07-05-2004 12:02 PM

How the hell is Murray a better prospect than Prucha? How?

Kodiak 07-05-2004 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barnaby63
How the hell is Murray a better prospect than Prucha? How?

For the same reason that Balej was voted in higher than Jessiman: he may have a lower ceiling, but we know he'll play in the NHL and make an impact.

nyr5186 07-05-2004 12:54 PM

Went with Prucha. He already has international experience playing with and against legit NHL talent. Ceiling is too high not to take him.

On another note, Helminen should be on this list by now. I'd consider voting for him in the next few spots.

in the hall 07-05-2004 01:01 PM

Helminen deffinitely should be on this list. I'm voting for Baranka, imo 3 or 4 spots late.

Potted Plant 07-05-2004 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barnaby63
How the hell is Murray a better prospect than Prucha? How?

How? Prucha is probably even-money to even BE an NHL player at this point. He's shown a lot of promise, but no one knows how his game will translate to North America. Prucha has a high top end, but all we have are some snippets of information to make us think there's much to him. He is undersized, which limits his game at this level. Some small players have made it, but to be something beyond average, you have to have some special skills and heart.

Murray, on the other hand, is going to be an NHL regular at this point. I voted for him as high as #8 or #9 I believe. Murray may never be on a scoring line, but he is showing signs that he will be a contributor in the league for many years. Three years from now, Garth Murray will be an established NHL player. With Prucha, his future is a lot more uncertain.

To me, the only way you can say that Prucha is a better prospect than Murray is to thoroughly devalue Murray's contributions. To say Prucha is ahead of Murray, one must give little or no account to checking line type players. I think that's a mistake.

Potted Plant 07-05-2004 02:45 PM

BTW, while I voted for Baranka, this is a place where Dom Moore should be getting some love, at least over guys like Jonasen or Dawes.

jas 07-05-2004 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighlyRegardedRookie
BTW, while I voted for Baranka, this is a place where Dom Moore should be getting some love, at least over guys like Jonasen or Dawes.

The problem with Moore (or the perception of him) is that, at least from what I've read, he's a tweener, in that he's not skilled enough to be a #2 center, and he's not big and physical enough to be a checking, third-line center. In the case of Dawes and Jonasen, there is the belief that, if they reach their upside, they can both be second line players.

Barnaby 07-05-2004 03:05 PM

Went with Prucha.... he has nice upside and is very interesting.

truewithoutclue 07-05-2004 03:30 PM

I'm not sure what defines a prospect here. Fedor is obviously a part of the big team next year as is Balej and Murray. So I'm not sure I would consider them prospects.

I would think prospects are players that have to take a spot on the big club. I believe Murray, Fedor and Balej have spots on the team. Can't say if they will lose them but right now they have spots and have played NHL games. Pock can be a prospect based on only playing 6 games and the fact he's on defense where he is less likely to have a spot compared to forward on this team.

I'd probably say our top 10 would be


1) Alvaro Montoya
2) Maxim Kondratiev
3) Hugh Jessiman
4) Henrik Lundqvist
5) Lauri Korpikoski
6)Prucha
7)Wiseman
8) Beranka
9) Tomas Pock
10) Jarkko Immonen

Wiseman has proven too much at the AHL level not to be in the top 10. Don't know what else people want from him. He's improved the past 2 years in the AHL and didn't look out of place in his short time up on the big club. Considering Kondratiev made the Leafs as a defenseman to start the year I'm not sure how he isn't up near the top. He has lots of upside and he is thought to be pretty close if not NHL ready.

Rangers_23 07-05-2004 03:32 PM

Prucha for the 3rd time now. Maybe I'm just drinking too much of the koolade but I think he has a better chance to be an impact player than anyone that is left.

truewithoutclue 07-05-2004 03:36 PM

"The problem with Moore (or the perception of him) is that, at least from what I've read, he's a tweener, in that he's not skilled enough to be a #2 center, and he's not big and physical enough to be a checking, third-line center. In the case of Dawes and Jonasen, there is the belief that, if they reach their upside, they can both be second line players"

I'm hoping Moore improves a lot next year. I was not impressed watching him in the AHL playoffs. Seems he makes a lot of mistakes.

Vaive-Alive 07-05-2004 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas
The problem with Moore (or the perception of him) is that, at least from what I've read, he's a tweener, in that he's not skilled enough to be a #2 center, and he's not big and physical enough to be a checking, third-line center. In the case of Dawes and Jonasen, there is the belief that, if they reach their upside, they can both be second line players.

The problem with all NYR Prospects is that they are NYR prospects ;). Few vacancies in the line-up = very limited exposure.
Moore definitely has 2nd line potential - hobey baker candidate, strong leadership skills, has outperformed many of the guys on your list ahead of him in Hartford ( look at the stats ). You state size might be an issue, and yet Dawes has a better chance? I agree that Jonasen could develop out of his still very raw shell into a solid power-forward at the NHL level, but at present he has half the skillset that Moore has - perhaps he'll continue to improve ( as he has with his transition to the north american game in Tri-City ).

I'd take Moore before Dawes and Jonasen - in fact I'd put Moore ahead of Murray. However, thats my perception ;).

truewithoutclue 07-05-2004 03:59 PM

"I'd take Moore before Dawes and Jonasen - in fact I'd put Moore ahead of Murray. However, thats my perception"

That's pretty bold considering Dawes explosive performance at the WJ. There was a reason he made that team. He's really good. He also did just show up there. He dominated and dominated in the final game.

jas 07-05-2004 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaive-Alive
Few vacancies in the line-up

Well, since March 9, when veteran bodies began flying out of here, and the fact that the Rangers have yet to sign a single UFA, that is hardly an excuse anymore.

jas 07-05-2004 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaive-Alive
Moore definitely has 2nd line potential - hobey baker candidate, strong leadership skills, has outperformed many of the guys on your list ahead of him in Hartford ( look at the stats ). You state size might be an issue, and yet Dawes has a better chance?

From both what I've read, and what many people who have watched more regularly have said, he projects to a third-liner. If you disagree, fine. But, that's not what most people have said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaive-Alive
I'd take Moore before Dawes and Jonasen - in fact I'd put Moore ahead of Murray. However, thats my perception ;).

In the case of Dawes, he would appear to have a more natural talent for putting the puck in the net. As for Jonasen, coming over from Sweden, immediately bring named captain, and then playing well in the playoffs, at least says to me that this is a kid to keep an eye on. Once again, he's not closer to the NHL yet, but, it appears that his upside, if he reaches it, is higher. And, that is what I've based my vote upon.

BobMarleyNYR 07-05-2004 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xander
can you atleast consider the fact that maybe there's a reason he was drafted were he was before totally writing him off?

Yup... reason: connections.

ginner classic 07-05-2004 05:16 PM

How does Korpikoski slide down that far?

Potted Plant 07-05-2004 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobMarleyNYR
Yup... reason: connections.

That's stupid. How does drafting the guy do any favors for Walt Kyle? It may explain why they initially saw the guy. It may explain why they think he has the mental goods to make it. But it doesn't explain why they think he has talent, or what good it does to either Kyle or the Rangers if it was truly a wasted pick.

Now, I've said that we shouldn't consider the guys we just drafted after the first round simply because we lack information on them, and I stand by that, but it's just silly to think that connections are the only reasons he was drafted.

Ola 07-05-2004 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighlyRegardedRookie
How? Prucha is probably even-money to even BE an NHL player at this point. He's shown a lot of promise, but no one knows how his game will translate to North America. Prucha has a high top end, but all we have are some snippets of information to make us think there's much to him. He is undersized, which limits his game at this level. Some small players have made it, but to be something beyond average, you have to have some special skills and heart.

Murray, on the other hand, is going to be an NHL regular at this point. I voted for him as high as #8 or #9 I believe. Murray may never be on a scoring line, but he is showing signs that he will be a contributor in the league for many years. Three years from now, Garth Murray will be an established NHL player. With Prucha, his future is a lot more uncertain.

You are rigth that its hard to predict how a player will handle the transformation to the NHL but that can also be said about players like Jessiman, Immonen and Kondratiev among others. And Prucha isnīt exactly a midget, like Dawes :) , at 5ī10. He is always going to be a ligth weigth, he is around 170 now but is not stocky built so he will probably not add more then 10 lbs.

Its hard to be objective when polls like this are made and Murray is also a fav. of mine. He has allot of skill and hockey sense for a "checker" but needs to add some footspeed. Comparing him with Prucha is difficult. However if I were to compare Prucha with a simular player, Balej, I wouldnīt put much space between the two of them. Atleast not in Balejs favor. Balej has two inches and 15 lbs on Prucha but Petr is a much more slick skater and has shown that he can get the job done against bigger defensemen. IMO, and Iīve seen both players play allot I would say that Josef has bigger upside but that Petr probably have a bigger chance of making it, or atleast beeing more of a safe pick. There isnīt many snipers like Balej who makes it. Balej isnīt strictly a one way player but he wonīt be useful if he isnīt scoring at atleast a 25-35 goals per season rate on a 1st or 2nd line. Prucha is a dynamo in the Zetterberg/York mold and is a great complement player. He has world class speed and agility and can take the puck up ice like the best of them. He is restless on the forecheck and effective around the bords. He has a great nose for the net with a complete set of skills around it(hand eye coordination&instincts ect.). Prucha would be a great fit on any line.

My top ten would be
1. Montoya - Higest celling...
2. Tyutin - Doesnīt have a higher upside then Prucha but Dīs ranks higher IMO.
3. Prucha - Upside=Kouivo Downside=York/Zetterberg
4. Balej - Upside=Hejduk Downside=journeymen
5. Lundqvist - Not a natural to the same extent as Montoya. Best in Europe...
6. Jessiman - Has together with Korpikoski allot more to prove...
7. Murray - Priceless combination of attitude and instincts.
8. Korpikoski - Unproven but scouts love him, havenīt seen him play.
9. Kondratiev - Coachable, great attitude. Allaround but could improve his skating.
10. Immonen/Pock - Both deserves to be on a top 10.. =)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:58 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.