HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2003 draft class

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-03-2008, 10:16 AM
  #26
PEZLTJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pezville LTJ 24/7
Posts: 9
vCash: 500
Me and my friend have gone up to Hartford for the past few years to see a couple of games and I really have to say that Jessimen has been getting much better each year. In the first year he was in Hartford we couldn't believe how bad he was. He was totally lost. He has really been developing nicely and this past season he was leaps and bounds better than that first season. Sure he is taking a long time to develop but he was a long shot when they took him and he had some injuries that slowed him down.

PEZLTJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 11:16 AM
  #27
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PEZLTJ View Post
Me and my friend have gone up to Hartford for the past few years to see a couple of games and I really have to say that Jessimen has been getting much better each year. In the first year he was in Hartford we couldn't believe how bad he was. He was totally lost. He has really been developing nicely and this past season he was leaps and bounds better than that first season. Sure he is taking a long time to develop but he was a long shot when they took him and he had some injuries that slowed him down.
Good plan, take a longshot when we had absolutely nobody in our system.

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 05:37 PM
  #28
Hockey2000nyr
Registered User
 
Hockey2000nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 838
vCash: 500
i guess u can call him a high-risk high-reward pick...if he developed to the way they thought he could max out as we would all be praising sather for that pick. and when he was drafted they were drafting a project. they werent expecting him to be ready in just a few seasons, hes gonna wind up hitting his stride within the next season or two, and i guess u can say that as much as u doubt he could fulfill his potential to the max, its up to him as to how much further he progresses, the coaching staff have given him everything, now its up to Hugh to show us that picking him 5 years ago at number 12 overall was the right pick

Hockey2000nyr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 09:04 PM
  #29
Nemchinov13
Registered User
 
Nemchinov13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Gravesend
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 1,726
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bogans View Post
Why not look at the positive? At least we are the New York Rangers and might be able to sign some of these guys to big money free agent contracts in three years!! ****ing 2003.
It is positive only in a sense that we've gotten at least one NHLer (fringe one at that) from that draft. But in comparison to other teams - we've been trumped. Big time. As I've said before, every team has gotten a big impact/franchise player from the draft. Except for us. So, instead of being on par with the rest of the competition, we're one impact player behind them from the 2003 draft alone. That's not being negative, nor positive - it's being realistic.

Edit: Sign these guys to big money??? Welcome to the cap era, sir. With the way this team is structured, we'll be hard-pressed to find money for Marc Staal after his rookie deal expires. And Brandon.


Last edited by Nemchinov13: 06-03-2008 at 09:09 PM.
Nemchinov13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 10:49 PM
  #30
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
What board did that take place on? Because it certainly wasn't this one.
Clearly we have sharply different memories of the discussions that took place on this board in the two years after that draft. As they always are, the cheerleaders, fanboys, and Sather apologists were quite well represented in the discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
I was extremely underwhelmed with the Jessiman pick but I do not see what the problem was with waiting to see what happened.
Nor did I have such a problem. And now we have waited, so, far from beating a dead horse, the discussion is completely timely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
Speaking of our '98 1st rounder (the original "Wait-and-see kid") would Jessiman becoming a bottom six player on a terrible team constitute a "told-you-so" success as it did for Manny? Fingers crossed.
Only for those who have taken such a position. I've not, so I won't presume to speak to it, but are there many who have offered such?

We've discussed this before, so I'll simply repeat myself: if Jessiman can actually become a bottom six player, congratulations. He will have graduated from "bust" to "bad pick." Doesn't particularly matter to me which we call him; both reflect poorly on the current administration. This is especially true when we look at just how good the first round of that draft was.

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 10:53 PM
  #31
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Ah, the 2003 draft...the bleeding scab that has yet to heal, and gets picked at every year at this time.
And usually results in one of two reactions - people wanting to jump off a building or the HFBoards glimmer of optimism, cliched line that goes something like "{Player Name} is starting to come around, I think he could be a third/fourth line winger."

The latter is usually the kiss of death of which certain fans who just aren't willing to swallow the horse pill yet.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 10:54 PM
  #32
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PEZLTJ View Post
Me and my friend have gone up to Hartford for the past few years to see a couple of games and I really have to say that Jessimen has been getting much better each year. In the first year he was in Hartford we couldn't believe how bad he was. He was totally lost. He has really been developing nicely and this past season he was leaps and bounds better than that first season. Sure he is taking a long time to develop but he was a long shot when they took him and he had some injuries that slowed him down.
So at this rate we may have a prized fourth line winger by, say, 2010...give or take.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 03:11 AM
  #33
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,403
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Hey! Don't be ungrateful because summer POST-draft weeks mean we get to find out everyone's favorite seat at the garden, which players they liked as kids, or one of those 'for-fun-tell-us-about-yourself' threads.
I'm not knocking the post draft threads. We get fun stuff like ranking prospects as well. Last summer I think it was Jonathan who ran a EHM sim league for us that kept a lot of us sane. It's the pre draft threads that kill me. Everyone is going bonkers. Just wait till the Stanley Cup Finals are done. I think I will take a vacation from the boards until like 2 days before draft.

n8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 10:16 AM
  #34
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Clearly we have sharply different memories of the discussions that took place on this board in the two years after that draft. As they always are, the cheerleaders, fanboys, and Sather apologists were quite well represented in the discussion.
The cheerleaders, fanboys, and Sather apologists were SOS and rotating bunch of 14 year olds with less than 100 posts. And I doubt most were actually fans of the pick, more optimists responding to the huge number or posts calling Jessiman a bust before he could even leave the podium.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Nor did I have such a problem. And now we have waited, so, far from beating a dead horse, the discussion is completely timely.
That might be true, if there was actually something left to discuss. Five years may be needed to judge some draft picks, but not all of them. I could be mistaken but I do not remember Jeff Brown threads popping up around draft time 2001. Jessiman may not be playing in the UHL but it is obvious to anyone that he has not met any expectations and can be considered a bust. I can't remember the last time anyone defended the pick. Unless you mean people hoping Jessiman can turn a corner or the occasional "he is improving" update from Hartford. Hell I hope he turns into something, why wouldn't I?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Only for those who have taken such a position. I've not, so I won't presume to speak to it, but are there many who have offered such?
There was a thread (last year I think) lauding Manny for becoming a fringe player on one of the worst teams in the league. I got a kick out of it, and it always pops into my head when threads like this pop up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
We've discussed this before, so I'll simply repeat myself: if Jessiman can actually become a bottom six player, congratulations. He will have graduated from "bust" to "bad pick." Doesn't particularly matter to me which we call him; both reflect poorly on the current administration. This is especially true when we look at just how good the first round of that draft was.
As I have said before the only people that still care about the Jessiman pick reside on this board. The fairweather/bandwagon/casual fan probably doesn't know who the hell Jessiman is, and most of the rest do not care. Even among the die hards on this board that closely follow the draft you will probably hear more annoyance at the topic than resentment towards Sather for the pick. I think it reflects quite well that people have to look back half a decade to find something to really complain about.

Going back to Jeff Brown, not only did we not get a single player out of the entire '96 draft, but Jeff Brown is the only skater out of the first round to never even play a single game in the NHL! How did we ever survive?

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 10:23 AM
  #35
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,829
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Good plan, take a longshot when we had absolutely nobody in our system.
I think that is what it comes down to more than just Hugh Jessiman. The team was not in a position to take a shot on a bang or bust guy. At the time they needed to get a guy who they knew had the best chance of becoming an NHL player even if that meant getting a guy who's ceiling might have been lower than Hugh's.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 10:52 AM
  #36
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
Going back to Jeff Brown, not only did we not get a single player out of the entire '96 draft, but Jeff Brown is the only skater out of the first round to never even play a single game in the NHL! How did we ever survive?

The problem with that argument is that 1996 is considered a so-so draft; the 2003 draft was amazing in terms of 1st round talent. And, the truth is, Jeff Brown failing as a #1 pick is part of the reason that Smith found his way out of town. And, I'm not someone who routinely gets his short-hairs in a bunch over the Jessiman pick. The truth is, where the Rangers were at that time, it was fool-hardy to take a chance on a project such as Jessiman. Yes, it is easy, in hindsight for me to say that, as I was not one of the loud group of posters - Edge, TB, Dedalus...just to name a few that come to mind - who hated that pick from the moment the selection was made. (Frankly, I had more problems with the Montoya pick in 2004. But, that deserves another long-winded explanation, which, I'm not up for right now.)


Last edited by jas: 06-04-2008 at 11:00 AM.
jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 10:54 AM
  #37
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,829
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
The problem with that argument is that 1996 is considered a so-so draft; the 2003 draft was amzing in terms of 1st round talent. And, the truth is, Jeff Brown failing as a #1 pick is part of the reason that Smith found his way out of town. And, I'm not someone who routinely gets his short-hairs in a bunch over the Jessiman pick. The truth is, where the Rangers were at that time, it was fool-hardy to take a chance on a project such as Jessiman. Yes, it is easy, in hindsight for me to say that, as I was not one of the loud group of posters - Edge, TB, Dedalus...just to name a few that come to mind - who hated that pick from the moment the selection was made. (Frankly, I had more problems with the Montoya pick in 2004. But, that deserves another long-winded explanation, which, I'm not up for right now.)
They also picked at 22 in '96. And were two years removed from the Cup and were still a pretty consistent playoff team in 1996.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 11:02 AM
  #38
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
They also picked at 22 in '96. And were two years removed from the Cup and were still a pretty consistent playoff team in 1996.
That's true...but to say we survived, well, yes, the franchise didn't leave town. But, Smith was out of a job, as the lack of NHL talent drawn from his drafting was part of the reason the team went into decay, and Smith got canned.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 11:07 AM
  #39
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
The problem with that argument is that 1996 is considered a so-so draft; the 2003 draft was amazing in terms of 1st round talent. And, the truth is, Jeff Brown failing as a #1 pick is part of the reason that Smith found his way out of town. And, I'm not someone who routinely gets his short-hairs in a bunch over the Jessiman pick. The truth is, where the Rangers were at that time, it was fool-hardy to take a chance on a project such as Jessiman. Yes, it is easy, in hindsight for me to say that, as I was not one of the loud group of posters - Edge, TB, Dedalus...just to name a few that come to mind - who hated that pick from the moment the selection was made. (Frankly, I had more problems with the Montoya pick in 2004. But, that deserves another long-winded explanation, which, I'm not up for right now.)
It was a joke. If there is someone on this board that would actually complain about a draft that took place 12 years ago, then I fear we are truly beyond hope.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 11:07 AM
  #40
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,829
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
That's true...but to say we survived, well, yes, the franchise didn't leave town. But, Smith was out of a job, as the lack of NHL talent drawn from his drafting was part of the reason the team went into decay, and Smith got canned.
I'm not trying to condone the failure in drafting that year. I am adding on to what you were saying regarding Brown:

- It was a weaker draft.

- They picked 22.

- They had won a cup seasons before.

- They had made the playoffs consistently for close to a decade.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 11:10 AM
  #41
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
It was a joke. If there is someone on this board that would actually complain about a draft that took place 12 years ago, then I fear we are truly beyond hope.
Sorry, but I'm still pissed that Esposito gave up a #1 pick to Quebec, for the rights to hire Michel Bergeron as head coach...we could have had Jeremy Roenick, dammit.





jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 11:55 AM
  #42
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Sorry, but I'm still pissed that Esposito gave up a #1 pick to Quebec, for the rights to hire Michel Bergeron as head coach...we could have had Jeremy Roenick, dammit.




always wanted roenick as a ranger

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 03:41 PM
  #43
HAPPY HOUR
Registered User
 
HAPPY HOUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Sorry, but I'm still pissed that Esposito gave up a #1 pick to Quebec, for the rights to hire Michel Bergeron as head coach...we could have had Jeremy Roenick, dammit.




That trade made me want to puke too.

Don't think we'll ever again see a first rounder traded for the rights of a coach.

Anyone remember what # pick we gave up for Bergeron??

HAPPY HOUR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 04:19 PM
  #44
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAPPY HOUR View Post
That trade made me want to puke too.

Don't think we'll ever again see a first rounder traded for the rights of a coach.

Anyone remember what # pick we gave up for Bergeron??
Not sure.

Looking at the draft, Quebec had the #3 & #5 picks, so I'm guessing they traded up, cause our record had us drafting at about 10-13 range. They took Curtis Leschyshyn #3 & Dan Dore #5.

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 05:17 PM
  #45
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Not sure.

Looking at the draft, Quebec had the #3 & #5 picks, so I'm guessing they traded up, cause our record had us drafting at about 10-13 range. They took Curtis Leschyshyn #3 & Dan Dore #5.
The Rangers missed the POs that year, courtesy of John MacLean in Chicago. The pick was #5 overall.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 11:11 PM
  #46
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
The cheerleaders, fanboys, and Sather apologists were SOS and rotating bunch of 14 year olds with less than 100 posts. And I doubt most were actually fans of the pick, more optimists responding to the huge number or posts calling Jessiman a bust before he could even leave the podium.
my feelings at that time were it was way to early to judge the pick. I also liked the skill set a fully developed Jessiman was supposed to bring...it didn't work out...I'm sure I get more things wrong then right and I have no problem saying certain posters were 100% correct on this pick..(As i have in the past)

it's funny though at the time of the Jessiman selection this board was filled with Lundmark fans....It seemed like the same people that hated the pick (i think mostly based on one posters correct assesment that Getzlaf was the correct selection) loved Lundmark and were certain that Lundmark would thrive once he left the Rangers....Nobody is ever 100% correct...

When I joined this board the place was calling the GM "jackass" the coach was a buffon and I didn't see the point in all the whining and complaining I thought (and i was wrong) that the team deserved more time to prove what they were worth....Back in 2003 (FIVE FREAKIN YEARS AGO!!) I was supportive of Sather until Jagrs first game as a Rangers player. After the Ottawa debacle I've been pretty even in my assesment of the Rangers organization as as a whole. Sather has rebuilt the organization to respectabilty and looking back over the past 5 years the Jessiman move was his worst move (name another one that sticks out...Not signing Umberger FOUR YEARS AGO? maybe, although I think that's kinda nitpicking and certainly Umbergers back story in Vancouver and attitude in Hartford are reasons that always gets poo poo'ed for whatever reason) ... Sather takes the hits with the bad picks and gets zero credit for the good picks..always another interesting conundrum...

It's like the Jessiman threads turn into one giant "I told ya so" when in reality we all got screwed by the pick...


Last edited by Son of Steinbrenner: 06-05-2008 at 11:21 PM.
Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 12:38 AM
  #47
Draft Guru
Registered User
 
Draft Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,642
vCash: 500
There were HEAVY rumors Montreal wanted Jessiman with the #10 pick. Once they passed and took Kostitsyn, I knew we were in trouble. Gee, thanks Montreal!


Draft Guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 11:52 AM
  #48
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draft Guru View Post
There were HEAVY rumors Montreal wanted Jessiman with the #10 pick. Once they passed and took Kostitsyn, I knew we were in trouble. Gee, thanks Montreal!

i wonder why we did not select dustin brown, he is also a new york kid, was he on the rangers radar??

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 12:42 PM
  #49
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCallahan43 View Post
i wonder why we did not select dustin brown, he is also a new york kid, was he on the rangers radar??
Probably, but as it's been said, the potential upside of Jessiman was pretty massive.

I think we all know that there are about 8 or 9 guys who were picked later in the first round that year who we'd all love to have over Jessiman. We'll probably never know why the brass went after him over them.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 01:56 PM
  #50
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Probably, but as it's been said, the potential upside of Jessiman was pretty massive.

I think we all know that there are about 8 or 9 guys who were picked later in the first round that year who we'd all love to have over Jessiman. We'll probably never know why the brass went after him over them.
i wonder if jessiman paid the team just a joke

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:37 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.