Thread: Prospect Info: Rangers Prospect Poll: #3
View Single Post
Old
01-09-2013, 01:32 PM
  #54
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
This is a terribly unfair argument. No team can draft the guy who years later turns out to be the best player of all those available. Imagine if your boss held you to this standard: if someone ever does a better job than you, then you are a miserable failure and he will never forgive you.

And I don't want to hear from people who say that you wanted Tarasenko from the start. People tend to imagine things that didn't actually happen or Tarasenko was merely one of a several players you mentioned. I don't even care if you were actually right about Tarasenko. You were wrong the other 95% of the time. Where are all the players who whined about us drafting Stepan instead of Jared Staal or Kirill Petrov?

Since 2004, our scouting staff did a better job than any other team's when taking the draft position into account. While not every pick will become a Hall of Famer, overall the record is phenomenal and all the whining that they didn't choose the best player every time is preposterous.
If at my job, there was a conventional way to do my job and an unconventional way, and I did it the unconventional way and screwed up, I'd probably be in trouble. Conventional wisdom says at #10 when your team has little top end forward talent and are bursting at the seems with good D-men, you go with the forward with high end talent, over a guy that might be a top 4 guy some day. Really, crease clearing were nice in the dead puck era. But let's say he becomes a decent player. What's his ceiling? Will he ever be better than McDonagh, Staal, or Girardi? He's a top 4 guy at best. Everyone except the Rangers thought Teresenko was the much better prospect.

SnowblindNYR is online now   Reply With Quote