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

Canucks trying to move 10th overall. Can the Rangers move from 20 to 10?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-14-2008, 09:44 PM
  #76
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,229
vCash: 500
Forget it, this move doesn't make any sense for us.

We cannot afford to start depleting our system to help another team.

Is one draft pick going to make up for the loss of Dubinsky, Cherepanov, and Dawes. because that is who we would have to give up.

Not worth it for a #10 pick. This is a deep draft and there will be PLENTY of solid players to take as deep as the 3rd round.

I'd ratehr keep our top prospects and add to them, not take away.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2008, 09:46 PM
  #77
Dredden
JT Miller
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Forget it, this move doesn't make any sense for us.

We cannot afford to start depleting our system to help another team.

Is one draft pick going to make up for the loss of Dubinsky, Cherepanov, and Dawes. because that is who we would have to give up.

Not worth it for a #10 pick. This is a deep draft and there will be PLENTY of solid players to take as deep as the 3rd round.

I'd ratehr keep our top prospects and add to them, not take away.
agreed. A draft pick is a draft pick... some will pan out to be a legit foward and others wont.

Dredden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2008, 10:32 PM
  #78
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
I don't see our needs matching up to be honest with.

Also, the way this draft is, in the long-run you might get the same kind of prospect at 20 that you would at 10.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2008, 10:41 PM
  #79
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rangernick23 View Post
agreed. A draft pick is a draft pick... some will pan out to be a legit foward and others wont.
I am a firm believer that you need to build through the draft.

And we have been.

Lundqvist, Cherepanov, Staal, Sanguinetti, Dubinsky, Dawes, Korpikoski, Callahan, Hillier, Zaborsky, among others.

We also signed Girardi and Wiikman as undrafted free agents.

With Gomez and Drury alone taking up 16 million, I feel we need to be ADDING to this group of young players, not taking away from it.

If anything, we should trade down to add a third draft pick in the top 51 (rather then 2 in the top 51) and with that we can add 3 kids that will be impact players in the NHL.

LA has been bad the last few years, but they were smart, and now they have a good young core in the NHL already, a solid group of prospects, and now they have 14 picks in this draft. 5 in the top 2 rounds alone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NHL_Entry_Draft

They are going to be VERY good in a couple of years. Hopefully we will be too.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2008, 10:57 PM
  #80
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
I am a firm believer that you need to build through the draft.

And we have been.

Lundqvist, Cherepanov, Staal, Sanguinetti, Dubinsky, Dawes, Korpikoski, Callahan, Hillier, Zaborsky, among others.

We also signed Girardi and Wiikman as undrafted free agents.

With Gomez and Drury alone taking up 16 million, I feel we need to be ADDING to this group of young players, not taking away from it.

If anything, we should trade down to add a third draft pick in the top 51 (rather then 2 in the top 51) and with that we can add 3 kids that will be impact players in the NHL.

LA has been bad the last few years, but they were smart, and now they have a good young core in the NHL already, a solid group of prospects, and now they have 14 picks in this draft. 5 in the top 2 rounds alone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NHL_Entry_Draft

They are going to be VERY good in a couple of years. Hopefully we will be too.
i agree with this one....although if someone falls i would rather pick them like tuebert or whoever.....if there isnt anyone there i would trade down and get the other 2 seconds

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2008, 10:58 PM
  #81
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post

We also signed Girardi and Wiikman as undrafted free agents.
That means, in essence, that we got them in 10th round out of 9. That is 260 players past 10th spot. Would you give up Girardi to move from #20 to #10?
I wouldn't.
Look, we got Hugh at what? #8. Did it help us?

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-14-2008, 11:20 PM
  #82
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,546
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
I am a firm believer that you need to build through the draft.

And we have been.

Lundqvist, Cherepanov, Staal, Sanguinetti, Dubinsky, Dawes, Korpikoski, Callahan, Hillier, Zaborsky, among others.

We also signed Girardi and Wiikman as undrafted free agents.

With Gomez and Drury alone taking up 16 million, I feel we need to be ADDING to this group of young players, not taking away from it.

If anything, we should trade down to add a third draft pick in the top 51 (rather then 2 in the top 51) and with that we can add 3 kids that will be impact players in the NHL.

LA has been bad the last few years, but they were smart, and now they have a good young core in the NHL already, a solid group of prospects, and now they have 14 picks in this draft. 5 in the top 2 rounds alone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NHL_Entry_Draft

They are going to be VERY good in a couple of years. Hopefully we will be too.
I feel like the Rangers should trade this upcoming draft pick in a package for an NHL player. Perhaps a Restricted Free Agent to be?

I said it in another thread and I'll repeat it in this one. With the lowered age of Restricted Free Agency and the Lowered age of Unrestricted Free Agency draft picks are not worth what they used to be.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2008, 01:39 AM
  #83
Turambar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 1,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post

With Gomez and Drury alone taking up 16 million, I feel we need to be ADDING to this group of young players, not taking away from it.
Did I miss something? Since when do those two take up $16mil?



Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post

If anything, we should trade down to add a third draft pick in the top 51 (rather then 2 in the top 51) and with that we can add 3 kids that will be impact players in the NHL.
Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here, but how can you say that 3 picks in the top 50 equals 3 impact players at the NHL level? It's very possible that none of those three picks pan out, and even more likely if none of them are in the first round. There is a reason for rankings, after all. The higher the pick, obviously the higher the likelihood that guy actually becomes an NHL player.

To me, you don't get an "impact" player outside of the Top 5 picks, in any draft. But again, maybe I'm just arguing semantics.

Turambar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2008, 04:05 PM
  #84
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubiDubiDoo View Post
First, I admit I was trying to steal a second round pick to grab jared staal.....
Secondly, Prucha and Backman are not crap, they are both nhl players which is more than you can guarantee with any draft pick after a top few each year.
Essentially the nucks drop 10 picks and pick up two guys that can step onto the roster... no one is giving up anything "great" for a number 10 pick..
The second rounder is the least of your issues here. Even if you take out the second rounder and make the Rangers throw in a 2009 first rounder, it's still not even.

And yes, Backman and Prucha ARE crap. That's why everyone in NYC wants to dump them. Why would you trade for them? Those players are a dime a dozen. You can sign players just as good for a million dollars or so.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2008, 04:07 PM
  #85
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0rac3 View Post
Rozi, Dawes, Prucha, 1st in 08, 3rd in 09

Canucks 1st in 08...
Rozi? Why don't we give up Adam Graves too?

Rosie is an unrestricted free agent. Why would someone pay for an unrestricted free agent?

I don't want to give up Dawes. He alone may wind up better than #10.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2008, 04:20 PM
  #86
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
The difference in talent isn't much, but Back/Pru are completely worthless. Players just as good can be signed for pocket change on the free agent market.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DubiDubiDoo View Post
I agree with just about everything you said, but i wasn't offering prucha and backman for the #10 pick, which i agree with you, wouldn't be a great deal for the canucks, but if you asked me if i'd trade the #10 pick for prucha, backman and the #20 pick i would say yes (if i could use a shifty 2nd or 3rd line winger ready to play this year and an nhl ready defenseman). My point being, whats the difference in talent between the 10th and 20th pick...not much in my eyes, and most likely neither are ready this year to play in the nhl. Your absolutely right that i didnt take the nucks needs into consideration though, i had no clue what they needed..

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2008, 04:24 PM
  #87
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
Yeah, Marleau for #10 IS delusional. Maybe something along the lines of Cullen and an early second rounder for a #10.


Quote:
Originally Posted by n8 View Post
Am I the only one who thinks this is delusional? It's a #10 pick. ONLY the #10 pick. It's a good draft but the juicy juicy players that command "impact" returns are in the top 6 IMO. Sure you might get yourself a Getzlaf pick at 10, but you might get that same pick at 20. If you're talking the 10th overal for Prucha, no way. But I don't think I saw anyone so delusional to propose that. #20 pick + Prucha. I think it would have been fair LAST summer but after Prucha's '08 season, I could easily see that as a "give us more" offer. If Vancouver wants Marleau, the going rate is usually your #1, a strong roster player, and a top prospect.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-15-2008, 04:36 PM
  #88
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
I wouldn't mind dropping down a few picks to the end of the round for a second rounder.

Instead of #20, I'd rather two or three high-risk, high-return players who'll fall to the very end of the first or may even later rounds and hope that one of them will eventually play on the first line.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
I don't see the Rangers being a fit for this deal with Vancouver.

Either stay at 20 and get a nice prospect or trade down and pick up a few more.

IMO, the Rangers go BPA at 20.


Last edited by Beacon: 06-15-2008 at 05:15 PM.
Beacon 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 06:58 PM.

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.