I was browsing around trying to see how Hugh was progressing and came across this article.
This article lists the best/worst value picks first among active players and then by all time. What do you guys think of Hugh being listed as one of the top five worst value picks among players active?
Sorry if this has already been posted - the article is from 6/25.
Yeah when it is all said and done he will probably be a bust. Considering where he was picked and his draft year classmates that are already succesful Nhlers like Parise, Getzlaf, Vanek and on and on and on. However. It doesn't matter considering all the talented young players we have ahead of him. It happens to everyone. Some bust. Some don't and some surprise.
You can make up for bad first round picks sometimes with great later round ones. There's a bit of luck involved with that though. Look at all the chances that teams had to pick Henrik--or Prucha.
I don't care about a bad pick here or there, but it is very cool to see Hugh walking around the city. I've seen him twice near the Union Square area already this summer.
The only thing that keeps me from getting frustrated about this pick is that I rationalize it to myself that he was drafted in different era. With the old rules he would have been able to power through the clutching and grabbing. With the new rules, his skating is far too poor to keep up. If I think of anything else but that and who we could of had, I get sick to my stomach.
You can make up for bad first round picks sometimes with great later round ones. There's a bit of luck involved with that though. Look at all the chances that teams had to pick Henrik--or Prucha.
I don't necessarily think that has occured though. Yes, Henke was a great find, but the lack of definitive top-6 talents is still being felt by the organization. Think of how great the system would have looked had the Falardeau and Jessiman picks had been different.
With the new rules, his skating is far too poor to keep up. If I think of anything else but that and who we could of had, I get sick to my stomach.
It has nothing to do with his skating and everything to do with his hockey sense. He skates well for a large player, but he just doesn't "see" the ice well enough. He's got good physical skills (not just talking about his size), but he just doesn't know how to use them.
Maybe he puts it together some day. It wouldn't surprise me to see him in the NHL at some point playing on a bottom line at least. Someone will give him a shot if the Rangers don't.
We should make a new board rule. You mention the name Jessiman, and you get a warning. A second mentioning should result in a 6 month ban - followed by a lifetime. That's the one pick that will irk me for years. Even hearing the name Getzlaf or Parise hurts!
Look at the first round, there is only one other player who hasn't played in the NHL, yet. Brian Boyle and that is because he just finished college. The 2003 draft class may have been the deepest ever, not the time to take a high-risk pick.
I don't necessarily think that has occured though. Yes, Henke was a great find, but the lack of definitive top-6 talents is still being felt by the organization. Think of how great the system would have looked had the Falardeau and Jessiman picks had been different.
Vey true, but i was happy that we gave up a 1st to get Pavel Bure...which led us to having a 2nd pick as our 1st and ended up with Fardelaeau at 33rd. It was just unfortunate the way Bure ended up... he did have a great start with us though (12 in 12?) so giving upt he 1st didnt seem so bad.
Fardeleau was a terrible pick but atleast he wasnt 10th overall or something.
I'd like to know who Florida picked wth our pick that year??? that might change my opinion!!!
Who wrote that? EJ Hradek? I'm not even reading it but if it was him, than he's an anti-Ranger *******.
__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB "Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
Sestito still on the make a wish tour. - rholt168
I still think that Jessiman has time to become a decent player.
While his offensive instincts may not be there, as has been mentioned, his skating for a big man is about average, and the good thing is that Defence can be taught.
If he's willing to change the approach to his game, become a solid 3rd/4th line winger that can patrol the boards, get in on the forecheck and play some defence, he could be a useful player.
Just not sure he's at that place in his head where he's even thinking about that.
This is a very "hindsight is 20/20" article. Hradek mentions Briere should have been chosen 4th overall instead of Volchkov, Colin White should have been drafted 6th overall. No one in their right mind makes those picks at that time!
Just not sure he's at that place in his head where he's even thinking about that.
Honestly, he's probably just trying to do whatever he can to make it. He had success last year when he just played a simple, physical game. Start with that, and it'll get him to the NHL eventually, and then maybe the other stuff will come.
I don't care about a bad pick here or there, but it is very cool to see Hugh walking around the city. I've seen him twice near the Union Square area already this summer.
I fired down shots of Jameson with him Callahan and Liffiton after a game last year. All good guys. Would love to see him make a statemnt during training camp, but I just don't think the NHL is in the cards for him...at least with the Rangers anyways. Maybe if the guy was traded to a team with a lesser farm system he would get a chance to crack the lineup. At this point in his career, that might not be the worst thing that could happen for the guy. How old is he now?
Gut related answer: Errr let me check.....Si, looks like, probably is worst value in round #1.
PC answer: He hasn't developed to an NHL ready player, maybe can put it together in Hartford, he needs time. He was a project pick in the total sense of the word, not just a power forward that needed time to develop.
I feel so much better...
Last edited by gaglinefan: 07-24-2007 at 10:03 AM.
Reason: Duh me
anti-Ranger bias ....you can find ALOT worse picks than a #12 overall pick being a bust .....how about Alexander Daige?
Off course you can. However, the point on Jessiman, as it always has been, was that the pick was a reach at 12 and there were more sure things on the board at that time. Players like Daigle and Lawton, you cannot fault management for taking.
I don't necessarily think that has occured though. Yes, Henke was a great find, but the lack of definitive top-6 talents is still being felt by the organization. Think of how great the system would have looked had the Falardeau and Jessiman picks had been different.
I agree we blew it and would be much better off with a Getzlaf instead of Hugh. Falardeau's draft was a lot weaker. That pick is easier to blow off because of it. Hugh's was pretty strong. At least the Islanders didn't do great with Nilsson either. Then again though it looks like we were absolutely lucky this year with Cherepanov being around for us in another fairly weak draft. It seems like everyone sooner or later blows it big time. Some just do it more than others. We finally have some potential for top liners--Anisimov, Dawes, Cherepanov, Dubinsky, Korpikoski, Bourret, Pyatt.
Off course you can. However, the point on Jessiman, as it always has been, was that the pick was a reach at 12 and there were more sure things on the board at that time. Players like Daigle and Lawton, you cannot fault management for taking.
Even as a reach at #12, Hugh was still considered a first round pick. The Rangers weren't entirely alone in thinking he was worth taking early in the draft.
So even as a reach, he's still bombed pretty badly and everyone has been proven wrong about their original assessments of him.
Taking Hugh when we did was a mistake, regardless of hindsight. It was silly to roll the dice on a high risk/high reward pick that early in a deep draft with so many "more sure" things.
Even as a reach at #12, Hugh was still considered a first round pick. The Rangers weren't entirely alone in thinking he was worth taking early in the draft.
A first round pick? Sure, but most publications and mocks had him going at the tail-end of the first round, not the first-half.
Quote:
So even as a reach, he's still bombed pretty badly and everyone has been proven wrong about their original assessments of him.
Lev, don't take this as an "I told you so", but if you recall, leading up to the draft, once the rumors started to surface, most around here were screaming against picking him at 12. Not when there were so many more sure-fire things (if such exist in any draft, even one as deep as that one) available as well. Most so-called "experts" were scratching their heads. Most around here, were complaining pretty loudly as well.
If the Rangers were picking in the 25-30 range that year, sure one could take a swipe at Project Hugh. But at 12, there were a bevy of pretty much universally acknowledged better choices available.
Sure, since the Jessiman & Falardeau drafts, Sather (whether it was him or Maloney or whomever) seems to have turned his drafting forture around. But make no mistake, the mistakes of those two particular choices are still being felt today.
