View Single Post
Old
06-18-2008, 09:00 AM
  #7
bagh
Registered User
 
bagh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 545
vCash: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
I have to say that I don't think Robak makes sense for the Rangers. Sanguinetti-lite, really? Does that really help fill their organizational holes at this point? The hole that Robak would fill is already filled by Sanguinetti, and the Rangers would be better served looking at a hard hitting defenseman (like was mentioned over and over) or a skilled winger, IMO.

I just kind of feel like if you're drafting for organizational needs, like the article says over and over, then you don't draft a redundant part. Yes, I know the next point is that maybe Sanguinetti doesn't pan out, or "you can't have too many of this type of player", but skilled wingers are a pretty weak spot for the Rangers too at this point. If a big defenseman isn't available, I'd look winger first, and then to a puck moving defenseman.

It's just kind of this feeling that the Rangers have a guy in Sanguinetti with a ton of offensive skill, and who's made some great strides in the deficient areas of his game, and then to go out and draft an inferior version of that player with more questionmarks (especially more on offense, jesus, his numbers aren't even close to Sanguinetti's and he has at least the same level of questions about his defensive and physical play) in an allegedly deep draft...eh, I'd like to pass.

edit: Basically the scouting reports on Robak remind me of Backman. Someone who's billed with offensive skill, doesn't manage to put up a lot of points though. Is big, but not terrible physical, and is hit or miss in his own end with the potential to be solid. And I'm not sure another Backman is really what the team needs.
No offence to the writer of the article, but to me thier analysis always seem a bit sketchy. I mean they did have us taking Maxin Mayorov in the first round last year.

bagh is offline   Reply With Quote