HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

2003 draft class

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-08-2008, 05:03 PM
  #51
Oilers Chick
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Oilers Chick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Philly in April 2014
Country: United States
Posts: 5,963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vakar Lajos View Post
While I don't think Hugh will be anything close to Bertuzzi or anything of the sort, a lot of people forgot he lost a whole year of hockey due to injury.
I'll add this to what you said... he also was not playing at his highest level (or even close to it) when he returned to Dartmouth's lineup. The thing that has always puzzled me is why didn't the Rangers just keep him at Dartmouth for another year to allow him time to heal and get back into development mode instead? It wasn't as if the Rangers were going to lose his rights if they did.

I just feel that, in this particular case given the circumstances, Jessiman and the Rangers would've been better served had he been able to stay another year at Dartmouth. I think Jessiman would've been better prepared for the physical (especially) demands of the pro game and the Rangers might have already been able to bring up, even for a few games.

Oilers Chick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2008, 06:02 PM
  #52
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 Oilers Chick View Post
I'll add this to what you said... he also was not playing at his highest level (or even close to it) when he returned to Dartmouth's lineup. The thing that has always puzzled me is why didn't the Rangers just keep him at Dartmouth for another year to allow him time to heal and get back into development mode instead? It wasn't as if the Rangers were going to lose his rights if they did.

I just feel that, in this particular case given the circumstances, Jessiman and the Rangers would've been better served had he been able to stay another year at Dartmouth. I think Jessiman would've been better prepared for the physical (especially) demands of the pro game and the Rangers might have already been able to bring up, even for a few games.
I always strongly disagreed with that believe about Hugh.

Jessiman, even before his injury, was struggling. People forget that EVERY time they mention the injury. Starting with rookie camp, the team USA try-out camp and right into his first sophmore games. Hugh looked completely outmatched, and simply put, lacking in hockey sense.

It's a problem that has followed him for the better part of half a decade at this point and I think the whole injury thing has been used as a crutch/excuse for people who simply misevaluated his potential and skills.

Hugh is what he is, and at 24 that is evident with the best case scenario pegging him as a fourth liner. Let's not kid ourselves that another year of College at "powerhouse" Dartmouth was going to change that.

The thing that frustrates me the most about Hugh, aside from my five-year old feelings about the pick, is the amount of excuses handed out for selection and subsequent development. They range from unsubstantiated reports of teams right behind us aiming to draft him (which my own inquiries have not validated) to injuries, to linemates/playing time to crossing fingers about developing a fourth line winger. At some point we either have to be realistic about Hugh or we're going to start sounding like over-protective parents who can't handle the truth about their child.

Hugh was a risk that didn't pan out, simply put. Even if he makes it, he won't have been worth it and no injury, program, etc. was going to change the fact that his hockey sense is very limited and the Rangers made a mistake taking him where they did.

Five years later I've come to terms with that and no longer make myself sick over about possible other selections (which insanely enough seems to have been literally every single one of the top 33 picks, and an amazing 56 of the top 68 picks). I've moved on, but I'd like to at least be able to call a spade a spade without having to justify why it's a spade or find some deeper meaning as to how it could've been something else.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2008, 08:52 PM
  #53
geisenNYR
Registered User
 
geisenNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 243
vCash: 500
Looking at this draft class is depressing. We took Jessiman over some guys who are already top scorers (Getzlaf, Parise, Mike Richards, Corey Perry) and some good upcoming d-men (seabrook, Brent burns)

geisenNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2008, 11:07 PM
  #54
Oilers Chick
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Oilers Chick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Philly in April 2014
Country: United States
Posts: 5,963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
IHugh is what he is, and at 24 that is evident with the best case scenario pegging him as a fourth liner. Let's not kid ourselves that another year of College at "powerhouse" Dartmouth was going to change that.
Maybe, maybe not. We'll never know. It certainly couldn't have hurt. I'm not saying nor implying that he would've become the next Jaromir Jagr (skill-wise) or was going to be better than his Dartmouth counterpart Lee Stempniak, who was taken WAY later in the same draft and is doing just fine with the St. Louis Blues thank you very much. But my biggest complaint has been for some time about the Rangers' handling of their collegiate picks is, they pull them out at the wrong time....usually too early.

If you look at teams such as the San Jose Sharks for example, they don't pull kids out until they're ready and the kids aren't necessarily always saying yes right away either. For example, the Sharks originally wanted Matt Carle to leave DU (University of Denver) after his sophomore year. He felt that that just wasn't the right time for him and declined, opting to return to DU for his junior year. So what happened? The Sharks got a better, more prepared defenseman in return and all he did was win the Hobey Baker Award and led the nation in defenseman scoring.

Now I'm not saying that every collegiate player's scenario is going to play out like Carle's, but a number of NHL teams are finding out that there are benefits to allowing a player to stay one more year (provided that he's not a senior) in school.

Oilers Chick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2008, 07:09 PM
  #55
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 Oilers Chick View Post
Maybe, maybe not. We'll never know. It certainly couldn't have hurt. I'm not saying nor implying that he would've become the next Jaromir Jagr (skill-wise) or was going to be better than his Dartmouth counterpart Lee Stempniak, who was taken WAY later in the same draft and is doing just fine with the St. Louis Blues thank you very much. But my biggest complaint has been for some time about the Rangers' handling of their collegiate picks is, they pull them out at the wrong time....usually too early.

If you look at teams such as the San Jose Sharks for example, they don't pull kids out until they're ready and the kids aren't necessarily always saying yes right away either. For example, the Sharks originally wanted Matt Carle to leave DU (University of Denver) after his sophomore year. He felt that that just wasn't the right time for him and declined, opting to return to DU for his junior year. So what happened? The Sharks got a better, more prepared defenseman in return and all he did was win the Hobey Baker Award and led the nation in defenseman scoring.

Now I'm not saying that every collegiate player's scenario is going to play out like Carle's, but a number of NHL teams are finding out that there are benefits to allowing a player to stay one more year (provided that he's not a senior) in school.
Problem is that Hugh really wasn't developing at Dartmouth. He pretty much plateau'd at the level and that was before the injury as well.

Personally, I think the Rangers knew they had their work cut out for them and figured that any shot at would come from developing him in their minor league system. The system they've developed has actually done a pretty good job of getting some forwards to the show including Dawes, Callahan, Dubinsky and having guys like Korpikoski, Byers, etc. knocking on the door.

To me, the injury/extra year of college just seems like a cop out. One last attempt at an explanation for something that didn't seem to be going right from the get-go.

Edge 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 08:14 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.