View Single Post
06-29-2011, 09:24 AM
jas's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,636
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Ruotsalainen29 View Post
I too groaned with disappointment when the pick was made however I also understand why they picked him and we all need to have patience and allow McIlrath to grow as a player before he's declared a bust. It's tough seeing a guy like Fowler come in and contribute right away but players progress at different rates.

I'm excited to see him play if he can get himself into an exhibition game.
Here's what bothered me about that pick...I believe in BPA, and, to me, there were better value picks on the board at the time. You take BPA over need since, when you're dealing with developing players who may impact your club in 3-4 years time, your needs can vary in a shorter amount of time. I agreed with this year's philosophy, since, most draft pundits agreed that after the first 8 or 9 picks, BPA was going to vary depending upon the observer. Miller had been slotted anywhere from 9 to 30, and, since he fit the mold of what the Rangers like in a player, picking for need made since. To me, 2010, you had three potential players - Fowler, Tarasenko and Gormley, as well as Bjugstad - as players with higher value than a player like McIlrath. I never thought Gormley was a Ranger-type of pick, but, in the case of the other three players, you had PMD, a potential top six center, and a player in Tarasenko that many felt was among the top 3-4 best players in the draft. That was my problem with taking McIlrath at that spot. In my mind, (and I'm trying to remove any emotion about the pick I may have), McIlrath has to become an impact player to reach that kind of value. I've been very happy with Ranger drafts in the past 4-5 years, since Clark took over. For three straight years, they took the player I thought they'd take, and fit the Ranger mold. McIlrath is the one time I was out of sync with how I thought the Rangers would draft.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote