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

THN: Rangers a 1st round loser at the draft?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-23-2008, 01:28 PM
  #26
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
So Holland's an idiot for signing Rafalski last offseason. He's completely redundant with the likes of Lidstrom on the team. Moronic move. Of course the Stanley Cup might disagree with that logic. Like you only need one d-man that moves the puck and has offense. And we have exactly zero puck moving d-men beyond Sanguinetti, who is still not an NHLer. Gonchar and Whitney didn't really help Pittsburg too much either, right? Rafalski and Niedermeyer certainly wasn't a winning formula in Jersey.

OK, going by this guy's logic, our immediate need is a scoring winger, right now. Who was available at 20 that will be a scoring winger for us right now? You don't know what you'll need in 3 or 4 years when the picks around 20 finally pan out, you can't plan like that. Maybe in the NFL you can draft on immediate needs but they play immediately.

And sort of the same lines of Singin's logic, what if we sign 3 or 4 scoring wingers this offseason, does drafting a scoring winger then become a bad choice? This is the type of mentality that will say drafting Montoya was bad because we had Lundqvist.

DutchShamrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 01:51 PM
  #27
ThisYearsModel
Registered User
 
ThisYearsModel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 6,898
vCash: 500
TSN------all the Canadian-based franchises are brilliant. The US-based franchises are stupid. Kind of like Kevin Lowe congratulating himself for drafting Canadian kids. Same old stuff for him.

ThisYearsModel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 02:06 PM
  #28
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYLine88 View Post
Kinda agree with them. Before the draft I said taking Del Zotto would be a mistake so I see where they are coming from. I also felt we had enough good young talent where we didnt have to pick the BPA and could go for a need (which is also why I wouln't have minded us trading down a bit)...

But when the draft was all said and done I was happy with the pick. So now we just wait and see happens now that we have two offensive dmen in the system.

yeah, i agree with them to a point as well. i wouldnt call us "losers" by any stretch of the imagination, i think we got a very good player, i just think we should have gone a different way.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 02:11 PM
  #29
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,863
vCash: 500
Awards:
What I don't get is the thinking that just because the Rangers have Sanguinetti that they fine and all set when it comes to a puck-moving offensive defenseman. Especially when Sanguintetti has not even challenged for a roster spot (I'm not saying that he should have or that he is behind schedule).

For a team that has been looking for a puck-moving, offensive defenseman since Brian Leetch was traded, I find it hard to view Del Zotto as redundant.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 02:14 PM
  #30
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
What I don't get is the thinking that just because the Rangers have Sanguinetti that they fine and all set when it comes to a puck-moving offensive defenseman. Especially when Sanguintetti has not even challenged for a roster spot (I'm not saying that he should have or that he is behind schedule).

For a team that has been looking for a puck-moving, offensive defenseman since Brian Leetch was traded, I find it hard to view Del Zotto as redundant.
its not just that, its that Marc Staal may be the only really and truly steady dependable defenseman we have. Girardi and Tyutin are good, but they arent dependable all the time. i know you cant always have 100% dependable guys out there, but Sanguinetti AND Del Zotto are both suspect at best in their own zone, I think the genuine need for a stopper, and a heavy hitter shoudl weigh more than the need for a puck mover. If you want a puck mover, we could have kept Hutchinson in the roster. Why didnt he make it? because he stinks in his own zone.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 02:57 PM
  #31
Tuxman
 
Tuxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugerya View Post
So Holland's an idiot for signing Rafalski last offseason. He's completely redundant with the likes of Lidstrom on the team. Moronic move. Of course the Stanley Cup might disagree with that logic. Like you only need one d-man that moves the puck and has offense. And we have exactly zero puck moving d-men beyond Sanguinetti, who is still not an NHLer. Gonchar and Whitney didn't really help Pittsburg too much either, right? Rafalski and Niedermeyer certainly wasn't a winning formula in Jersey.

OK, going by this guy's logic, our immediate need is a scoring winger, right now. Who was available at 20 that will be a scoring winger for us right now? You don't know what you'll need in 3 or 4 years when the picks around 20 finally pan out, you can't plan like that. Maybe in the NFL you can draft on immediate needs but they play immediately.

And sort of the same lines of Singin's logic, what if we sign 3 or 4 scoring wingers this offseason, does drafting a scoring winger then become a bad choice? This is the type of mentality that will say drafting Montoya was bad because we had Lundqvist.
or leetch and zubov

Tuxman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 03:23 PM
  #32
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,456
vCash: 500
Tuxman...

thanks for stealing my post (I'm going to post it anyways)...

like the last time the Rangers won the Stanley Cup - with two quality puck-moving defensemen on the top two defensive pairs who also manned the PP point (interestingly enough, like Lidstrom and Rafalski, there was a lefty and a righty).

Singn' - not only hasn't Sangs challenged for a roster spot, his offensive numbers in his short stint in Hartford thus far tell us that he still has a ways to go before he's an NHL regular if ever, of course).

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 03:56 PM
  #33
DubiDubiDoo
Registered User
 
DubiDubiDoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Garden City, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,927
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DubiDubiDoo
Let me explain why this article was written by an ass clown...

Del Zotto was a bad pick because we have Sanguinetti...

If we had drafted a scoring winger, it would have been a bad pick because we have cherepanov...

If we drafted a Center, it would have been foolishness because we have gomez and drury and dubinsky....

If we drafted a goalie it would have been, what are the rangers thinking, they just gave Lundqvist 7 million a yr!!!!

The article writer obviously thinks our biggest need is an upgrade on the 4th line, its fine that most of the media and league hate us, I can live with that, I just think thats plain as day terrible journalism...

DubiDubiDoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 04:07 PM
  #34
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,149
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
yeah, i agree with them to a point as well. i wouldnt call us "losers" by any stretch of the imagination, i think we got a very good player, i just think we should have gone a different way.
This pick reminds me of the Montoya pick. Good value where he was but wasn't really what we needed. Yeah the NHL club needs this kind of dman but I doubt Del Zotto makes the team this year. Sather thinks we need an offensive dman why wasn't Pock given any chance at all this season? That is what we signed him for when he finished college no and resigned him again last summer? Instead he rots in the minors after being told he will play when resigning. And don't give me that bs that Pock is terrible defensively, half the guys who did spot work on the blueline last season weren't defensive masters themselves, atleast Pock will shoot from the point on the PP.

What will make this pick even more stupid is if the Campbell rumors are true. Why draft Del Zotto when u have Sangs on the way, Staal has more offense than he showed so far, and Pock signed if your going to sign Campbell for 5 or more season? I doubt he wants anything less than 5 years.

I think those Campbell rumors are 100% BS.


EDIT: Wow I just seen the other thread about us talkin to Campbell, I really don't know why Sather wants to give this guy so much money. This is not a good move with us still having a bunch of guys to sign. Our blueline is going to be even more soft next season. Goodluck Hank!


Last edited by Radek27: 06-23-2008 at 04:14 PM. Reason: Doh!
Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 04:08 PM
  #35
schmieder44
Registered User
 
schmieder44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 291
vCash: 500
The article is just plain wrong. BPA was IMO Del Zotto. I seem to remember Leetch and Zubov working quite well on the same team, just not the same line. PP would be fine.

schmieder44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 05:01 PM
  #36
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,420
vCash: 500
i think del zotto will become a good overall defenseman in 2-3 years.....has good size and just needs to work on his positioning and picking his spots...that is stuff that can be easily fixed

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 05:10 PM
  #37
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,456
vCash: 500
Radek...

have some patience...most anyone picked in the draft at that spot won't be in the NHL for 2-3 years. Even if Campbell signs for, let's say four years, that could be perfect timing for Del Zotto. Also, it never hurts adding assets. We don't know how Sangs will work out, if at all, and if he and Del Zotto work out, great - if there's too many bodies, there's no shortage of teams looking to add PP point men and puck-moving defensemen and I'm sure there's teams looking to unload wingers - perhaps for cap purposes or whathaveyou. The point is you stockpile the team with the most young assets as possible. It would be nice if there was a chart of every position and how it's going to be filled over the next 10 years, but this is an imperfect world and there are no crystal balls. There are alwys deals that can be done. If the Rangers feel this guy is a sure-fire NHLer and was their best bet at getting a sure-fire NHLer, then in their minds they acquired something of value, which is never a bad thing.

As for Pock...he wasn't that good offensively either. He played extensively with Jagr's unit and wasn't putting up the points. He had his chance and didn't show that he can put up points at the NHL level.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 05:32 PM
  #38
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
Let me add and re-iterate: Our immediate need is a scoring winger but no one left at #20 is going to play this year, be it forward, defenseman or goalie. You cannot support the bad pick rationale with the current needs logic, no one beyond the 7th or 9th pick is playing this season. It's moot.

DutchShamrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 05:40 PM
  #39
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugerya View Post
Let me add and re-iterate: Our immediate need is a scoring winger but no one left at #20 is going to play this year, be it forward, defenseman or goalie. You cannot support the bad pick rationale with the current needs logic, no one beyond the 7th or 9th pick is playing this season. It's moot.
i think our immediate need is a heavy hitting defenseman. the elite scoring winger is in our system right now, Cherepanov. We have zero heavy hitters. Staal MAY be that guy, but im not sure i can see him laying out Phaneufian hits. Sauer might be that guy as well, but he needs to stay healthy, and needs more time in the minors.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 07:27 PM
  #40
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...nd-losers.html

Retarded article mainly because they are criticizing us for taking the BPA rather than drafting based on need.

Even though we NEED defenseman!

Let them know how you feel. I know I did. Stupid ass article.
Idiots. Each of them (Ryan and Rory).

You have to have two guys who can work the point. How many defensmen are on the ice during a Power Play? Two!! That's right!

Not to mention that it's certainly an advantage to have two of these type of guys, on on your First Line and one on your Second Line; for a dangerous one...two punch.

Anyone remember Leetch and Zubov? Remember how they worked their magic?


These blog writers are idiots.

You know who's a loser? Some dorks who write blogs and consider themselves experts.

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 07:33 PM
  #41
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
i think our immediate need is a heavy hitting defenseman. the elite scoring winger is in our system right now, Cherepanov. We have zero heavy hitters. Staal MAY be that guy, but im not sure i can see him laying out Phaneufian hits. Sauer might be that guy as well, but he needs to stay healthy, and needs more time in the minors.
i agree that the system needs a big hitting defenseman...however unless one falls pretty far they arent available in the 20's.....even carlson was iffy in that area.....IMO i would rather go for an offensive defenseman as it seems like most teams dont let those guys hit UFA

p.s. yes i know last year rafalski and campbell and redden this year, however that is after they get HUGE signing bonuses....i think finding a physical defenseman would be easier to add to a second pairing

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 08:21 PM
  #42
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,456
vCash: 500
inferno..

considering Prucha has the most NHL goals among signed wingers for the Rangers, that's an area of desparate need. We can point to Dawes and Cally, but neither has played a full NHL season and Cally may be no more than a third liner. You can point to Chere, but of course he still hasn't play in the NHL and the depth is quite weak currently. A hard-hitting defenseman would be great. Of course, in today's NHL, puck-moving defensemen are a bit more in need, unfortunately for us fans of the big hit.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 08:29 PM
  #43
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,420
vCash: 500
also, IMO Gaulton and the second third rounder seem like physical d-man....it seems like the rangers filled all their needs in this draft, as it goes past the first round

del zotto- puck mover, ppqb, smooth skating

stepan- by the time he is ready for the nhl he will have added weight and he is a natural goal scorer who is moving to wing......big bodied goal scoring winger

grachev- big bodied battling winger with some offensive potential

krudatek- mobile physical defenseman

gaulton- hard-nosed defenseman who has good potential and can lay big hits....

hard-hitting/physical defenseman(2)
big bodied winger with scoring ability(2)
puck moving defenseman, which is needed in todays nhl(1)

i think that although they didnt get the most pressing need in the first round they picked the BPA while filling needs along the way

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 08:49 PM
  #44
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,305
vCash: 873
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...nd-losers.html

Retarded article mainly because they are criticizing us for taking the BPA rather than drafting based on need.

Even though we NEED defenseman!

Let them know how you feel. I know I did. Stupid ass article.
I persoanlly don't disagree witht he article. It points out what our biggest need in the system was and that was a goal scoring threat and after this draft, we are still in need of a goal scorer.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 08:54 PM
  #45
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,305
vCash: 873
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DubiDubiDoo View Post
Let me explain why this article was written by an ass clown...

Del Zotto was a bad pick because we have Sanguinetti...

If we had drafted a scoring winger, it would have been a bad pick because we have cherepanov...

If we drafted a Center, it would have been foolishness because we have gomez and drury and dubinsky....

If we drafted a goalie it would have been, what are the rangers thinking, they just gave Lundqvist 7 million a yr!!!!

The article writer obviously thinks our biggest need is an upgrade on the 4th line, its fine that most of the media and league hate us, I can live with that, I just think thats plain as day terrible journalism...

Until CHerry comes across the pond I'm not sure that we can rely on him as a viable and legit option as our goal scorer.

The fact is he may never come over and while he says all the right things today, we'll have to wait and see how the new Russian league developes and hope that they don't offer him millions per season to stay whereas he'd just be making less than a million a year here.

Bottom line is that what we have is a double unknown, first is that he's a prospect with work ethic issues and 2nd is that he may never come over.

Getting a NA Continent kid pretty much ensures that you get him in 2-3 years.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 08:56 PM
  #46
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
I persoanlly don't disagree witht he article. It points out what our biggest need in the system was and that was a goal scoring threat and after this draft, we are still in need of a goal scorer.
i disagree, grachev and stepan i think will become good players...i like that they both have size and scoring ability...although they didnt add a superstar i like what they did with drafting 2 possible second line or higher scorers

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 09:03 PM
  #47
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,859
vCash: 500
The guy I speak with on a regular basis felt the Rangers made a good select where they were picking at #20.I respect his opinion more than some guy from the Hockey News.



Last edited by RangerBoy: 06-23-2008 at 09:13 PM.
RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2008, 11:00 PM
  #48
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 Jonathan. View Post
This is yet another reason to believe that THN has completely lost all credibility as a hockey source.
I think it's been that way for a while now.

Same with Red Line. If Woodlief were half as good at scouting as promoting himself and his "expertise over the other people who 'parrot' what he says" he'd be taken a bit more seriously.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2008, 08:03 AM
  #49
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
I persoanlly don't disagree witht he article. It points out what our biggest need in the system was and that was a goal scoring threat and after this draft, we are still in need of a goal scorer.
Yeah, but even if we drafted a scoring winger, the Rangers would still need a scoring threat on the big club because no one is playing this year from the 20 slot. It's a weak complaint.

DutchShamrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2008, 08:42 AM
  #50
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,659
vCash: 500
I think it's fair to disagree with the pick, I know I wasn't thrilled about the idea of drafting another defenseman before the draft started. But I think it's a bit too much to claim the Rangers are big losers on draft day because of the Del Zotto pick, based soley on the fact that they have another puck moving defenseman in the system.

Maybe you disagree with the pick, maybe it's kind of "eh", but they're not big losers in picking up a very talented player in the number 20 spot.

and honestly, looking at how they drafted this year and last year, the Rangers are obviously shooting for some forwards with 2nd line talent when they don't see any obvious first liners. Stepan and Grachev this year, Campbell and Hagelin last year, Anisimov and Hillier the year before...the Rangers have done a pretty decent job in spreading things around and trying to take some shots at talented guys who could be legitimate 2nd liners if things pan out. If you don't have a surefire 1st liner in the first round, why pass up on an extremely talented defenseman just to draft a 2nd liner?

Levitate 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 09:44 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.