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

Good Job Drafting, Slats!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-28-2008, 03:19 PM
  #1
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,244
vCash: 500
Good Job Drafting, Slats!

I have been out this week, so here're my thoughts on the draft.

At the draft, I heard people whine that we are drafting small forwards.

Excuse me, but what are our options?

In the second or third rounds, we can go for a big guy who'll likely max out on the third line.

The other option is to draft Christian Dube/Marc Savard types, smallish players with a lot of talent and hope some of them will become stars, knowing that the majority will never see the NHL.

Now, I'd love to get someone who's 6-foot-5 230 pounds who skates like Bure, stickhandles like Kovalev, passes like Gretzky, shoots like Al McInnis and fights like Stu Grimson (and can play the net too), and be so polished that he's guaranteed to make the NHL immediately, but unfortunately those players aren't available in the second round.

Seriously people. What do you expect in the second or third round? There's a reason the guy wasn't drafted by any team in the first round.

If a player is available after that first round, he must have some deficiencies.

So would we rather get a player who has a lot of talent and not much size, or the reverse?

I prefer talent. Mike Tyson on skates will never get us the Stanley Cup. A couple of Marc Savard types might.

And that's why we need to keep on drafting high-risk, high-return players.

Sather did an excellent job this draft. The players may or may not work out. But the idea behind drafting the high risk, high return players is exactly what we need.

Some of them will surely fail. But we'll be better off getting one first liner than 4 third liners.

P.S. I'm the guy who's always critical of Slats, especially of his drafting ability. Check my past comments. But when he deserves credit, I want to give it to him.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
I don't think we'll ever be bad enough with Henke back there to be a team that gets a top 5 pick. Nor do I think we'll have the assets or the willingness to give up a huge package for a Kovalchuk.

I think you're going to see a team whose offensive future is heavily dependent on Cherry becoming an 80 point forward/35+ goal scorer. It's a risky way to build your offense, but that's where we're at.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 05:09 PM
  #2
TheZherdev
Registered User
 
TheZherdev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
actually grachev could become that power forward that we need.

TheZherdev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 05:23 PM
  #3
BwayBshirt
Registered User
 
BwayBshirt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: My NY State of Mind
Country: United States
Posts: 3,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
I have been out this week, so here're my thoughts on the draft.

At the draft, I heard people whine that we are drafting small forwards.

Excuse me, but what are our options?

In the second or third rounds, we can go for a big guy who'll likely max out on the third line.

The other option is to draft Christian Dube/Marc Savard types, smallish players with a lot of talent and hope some of them will become stars, knowing that the majority will never see the NHL.

Now, I'd love to get someone who's 6-foot-5 230 pounds who skates like Bure, stickhandles like Kovalev, passes like Gretzky, shoots like Al McInnis and fights like Stu Grimson (and can play the net too), and be so polished that he's guaranteed to make the NHL immediately, but unfortunately those players aren't available in the second round.

Seriously people. What do you expect in the second or third round? There's a reason the guy wasn't drafted by any team in the first round.

If a player is available after that first round, he must have some deficiencies.

So would we rather get a player who has a lot of talent and not much size, or the reverse?

I prefer talent. Mike Tyson on skates will never get us the Stanley Cup. A couple of Marc Savard types might.

And that's why we need to keep on drafting high-risk, high-return players.

Sather did an excellent job this draft. The players may or may not work out. But the idea behind drafting the high risk, high return players is exactly what we need.

Some of them will surely fail. But we'll be better off getting one first liner than 4 third liners.

P.S. I'm the guy who's always critical of Slats, especially of his drafting ability. Check my past comments. But when he deserves credit, I want to give it to him.
totally agree. i hinted the same thing in another thread. i love the fact that sather went for guys whom scouts have said have the skill to make it. not just drafting big bodies or "character guys".

BwayBshirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 05:37 PM
  #4
Ash
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 48
vCash: 500
Sorry, I'm not annoyed or anything, just a bit confused. Where does my comment play into all of this?

Ash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 05:55 PM
  #5
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,027
vCash: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
Sorry, I'm not annoyed or anything, just a bit confused. Where does my comment play into all of this?
woah, settle down. why so defensive?

__________________


Rangers Unlimited
Hockey Graphs
Brian Boyle is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 06:09 PM
  #6
Ash
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 48
vCash: 500
More confused than defensive. I don't the guy meant any harm at all. Just confused as to how my post relates to his, that's all.

From what I've seen from his posts, Brooklyn is a good guy.

Ash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 06:11 PM
  #7
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
You can not give the guy kudo's for this draft for atleast another 4 years. What if every guy turns into a bust? And from the way it seems Del Zotto wasn't even our guy at that pick so who knows. He fell into Slats lap just like Staal did.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 07:11 PM
  #8
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
You can not give the guy kudo's for this draft for atleast another 4 years. What if every guy turns into a bust? And from the way it seems Del Zotto wasn't even our guy at that pick so who knows. He fell into Slats lap just like Staal did.
You can give him kudos know. Give him kudos for making smart picks. Obviously you don't know how anything will wind up, but the initial impression a lot of people walked away with is that Slats made sounds choices.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 07:45 PM
  #9
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 nyr2k2 View Post
You can give him kudos know. Give him kudos for making smart picks. Obviously you don't know how anything will wind up, but the initial impression a lot of people walked away with is that Slats made sounds choices.
Hey remember during that Rangers inside the draft special? Remember that with Maloney giving the fist pump for the Korp pick? Well I remember some major scout telling our guys big kudos for drafting Ken Roche. How did that turn out? Darin Olver was also a guy on here we were all like huh? Then we forced ourselves into thinking he is gonna be somethin. Not drinking anymore Sather kool aid, had enough. To be honest I think the only thing we got outa this draft is Zotto and Grachev. The rest all have huge question marks. Gotta see how they do atleast a year before kudo's are given. Thats just my opinion though.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 08:31 PM
  #10
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash View Post
Sorry, I'm not annoyed or anything, just a bit confused. Where does my comment play into all of this?
You wrote that we don't have a top-5 pick and likely won't get a top 5 pick any time soon (barring Lund's injury or trade).

Now, if we expected to get a couple top-5 picks, then maybe it would make sense to get a bunch of third liners with our 2-4 round picks. We'd have a couple of stars and then a solid, deep lineup the rest of the way.

But that's not an option. We likely will not have anything in the top 15. If a kid falls out of the top-10, there must be something wrong with him. Nobody who's assured of playing on the top line will ever fall out of the top 10, and probably not out of the top 3, no matter how good/deep the draft is.

So dealing with the cards that we have, we must consider if we want more guys like Callahan - good character players who'll be low-end second liners or top-end third liners - or if we want some players like Dawes, the types of players who likely will not make it to the NHL, but if they will, they will be solid second liners or better.

We already have enough Callahans. Korps is another. Dubi is another variation of that, though given how hard he works, he may do better than "his potential". Sjo is another. Guys like Greg Moore and Byers have enough potential to play on the third line in the near future. Who knows, maybe even Jessiman will keep improving until he makes it to the 3rd line in a couple of years.

What we need is a Marc Savard. Unfortunately, we traded him away for Hlavac.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 08:36 PM
  #11
Ash
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 48
vCash: 500
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.

Ash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 08:39 PM
  #12
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
You can not give the guy kudo's for this draft for atleast another 4 years. What if every guy turns into a bust? And from the way it seems Del Zotto wasn't even our guy at that pick so who knows. He fell into Slats lap just like Staal did.
I just meant that I like the new strategy.

Right now we have Sang and DZ. Let's say one of them fails completely and one of them becomes a quality #1 defenseman. Right now we don't know which one. Would you re-draft them if you had an opportunity or choose another, safer pair?

I'd be very happy with DZ/Sang. You can't trade a pair of #20 or so picks for a #1 dman, so such a draft outcome would be great.


I would not consider one of the drafts a failure. I would just say that we had to take a stab at it not knowing the outcome, and one worked out well enough that we don't have to care about the other one too much.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 08:43 PM
  #13
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 BrooklynHockey99 View Post
You wrote that we don't have a top-5 pick and likely won't get a top 5 pick any time soon (barring Lund's injury or trade).

Now, if we expected to get a couple top-5 picks, then maybe it would make sense to get a bunch of third liners with our 2-4 round picks. We'd have a couple of stars and then a solid, deep lineup the rest of the way.

But that's not an option. We likely will not have anything in the top 15. If a kid falls out of the top-10, there must be something wrong with him. Nobody who's assured of playing on the top line will ever fall out of the top 10, and probably not out of the top 3, no matter how good/deep the draft is.

So dealing with the cards that we have, we must consider if we want more guys like Callahan - good character players who'll be low-end second liners or top-end third liners - or if we want some players like Dawes, the types of players who likely will not make it to the NHL, but if they will, they will be solid second liners or better.

We already have enough Callahans. Korps is another. Dubi is another variation of that, though given how hard he works, he may do better than "his potential". Sjo is another. Guys like Greg Moore and Byers have enough potential to play on the third line in the near future. Who knows, maybe even Jessiman will keep improving until he makes it to the 3rd line in a couple of years.

What we need is a Marc Savard. Unfortunately, we traded him away for Hlavac.
First from my understanding Savard was traded due to his ****** personality. He wasn't very liked in the locker room. At the time Hlavac was looked at as a good young winger so the trade wasn't all that bad, plus didn't we get hte pick we used on Lundmark or something in that deal too?

Anyhow we have a guy like Savard, his name is Gomez. Savard is a set up playmaking center so is Gomez. Unless you want all 4 centers to be small guys who just look to pass the puck instead of shoot.

Savard
Gomez
Nylander

Looks kinda soft to me and unless you have guys who can put the puck in the net on each of thier lines it's pretty much a waste of thier talents.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 08:59 PM
  #14
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,244
vCash: 500
I don't mean Savard as in someone with a bad personality who plays center.

It could be a nice little winger. Kariya was a small winger who looked real good for years.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
First from my understanding Savard was traded due to his ****** personality. He wasn't very liked in the locker room. At the time Hlavac was looked at as a good young winger so the trade wasn't all that bad, plus didn't we get hte pick we used on Lundmark or something in that deal too?

Anyhow we have a guy like Savard, his name is Gomez. Savard is a set up playmaking center so is Gomez. Unless you want all 4 centers to be small guys who just look to pass the puck instead of shoot.

Savard
Gomez
Nylander

Looks kinda soft to me and unless you have guys who can put the puck in the net on each of thier lines it's pretty much a waste of thier talents.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 09:20 PM
  #15
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
Hey remember during that Rangers inside the draft special? Remember that with Maloney giving the fist pump for the Korp pick? Well I remember some major scout telling our guys big kudos for drafting Ken Roche. How did that turn out? Darin Olver was also a guy on here we were all like huh? Then we forced ourselves into thinking he is gonna be somethin. Not drinking anymore Sather kool aid, had enough. To be honest I think the only thing we got outa this draft is Zotto and Grachev. The rest all have huge question marks. Gotta see how they do atleast a year before kudo's are given. Thats just my opinion though.
Alright, well in my opinion and obviously the opinion of BH99, Sather did well. Which team didn't draft a bunch of players with question marks? I like what we did, and I'm pleased with Sather. We'll have to agree to disagree.

nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 09:45 PM
  #16
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 nyr2k2 View Post
Alright, well in my opinion and obviously the opinion of BH99, Sather did well. Which team didn't draft a bunch of players with question marks? I like what we did, and I'm pleased with Sather. We'll have to agree to disagree.
So your saying you wouldn't have rather taken Petrov with that 2nd? Staal was picked right before so I don't know if we would have taken him, but I can still think of 3 or 5 names that I would have with before Stepan? I just don't like a lot of our 2nd round picks. Almost as bad as our 1sts have been.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2008, 11:27 PM
  #17
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
You can not give the guy kudo's for this draft for atleast another 4 years. What if every guy turns into a bust? And from the way it seems Del Zotto wasn't even our guy at that pick so who knows. He fell into Slats lap just like Staal did.
The Rangers traded up to get Staal, so he didn't really just fall into their laps. They went after him when they saw they had a chance to get him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
Hey remember during that Rangers inside the draft special? Remember that with Maloney giving the fist pump for the Korp pick? Well I remember some major scout telling our guys big kudos for drafting Ken Roche. How did that turn out? Darin Olver was also a guy on here we were all like huh? Then we forced ourselves into thinking he is gonna be somethin. Not drinking anymore Sather kool aid, had enough. To be honest I think the only thing we got outa this draft is Zotto and Grachev. The rest all have huge question marks. Gotta see how they do atleast a year before kudo's are given. Thats just my opinion though.
Of course the rest have huge question marks. Even Del Zotto and Grachev have big question marks. That's the nature of the NHL draft. Even if only Del Zotta and Grachev pan out, that's a successful draft.

And I still don't think Korpikoski was a bad pick. It was plainly stated that he'd be a guy you needed to wait for. So now he's just on the cusp of making the NHL and we're *****ing about him? There a few good players drafted after him, but I don't think the Rangers really blew it with that pick.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2008, 07:30 PM
  #18
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
So your saying you wouldn't have rather taken Petrov with that 2nd? Staal was picked right before so I don't know if we would have taken him, but I can still think of 3 or 5 names that I would have with before Stepan? I just don't like a lot of our 2nd round picks. Almost as bad as our 1sts have been.
I would have liked Petrov, sure, but I understand the reasoning behind passing him up. The draft wasn't perfect, sure, but all in all, I think it was solid (again, first impression, like you said we'll know nothing for years).

nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2008, 08:33 PM
  #19
BobMarleyNYR
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Alphabet
Country: Iraq
Posts: 2,918
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BobMarleyNYR
We've had high picks before. Brendl, Lundmark, Blackburn, Jessiman. Bad luck, bad drafting. Lundqvist might bee the only homemade star for a looong time.

Yet we still really and truly believe our young players are the best things around. Tyutin is ok... he'll get a little better, but he's just ok. Callahan is developing like a fourth liner. Prucha fell off the face of the earth. Byers will be a poor man's Avery. Dawes looks like he'll be an average second liner Dubinsky could be a good one.

Then there's the Immonen's, Kondratiev's, Goneau's, Ryan's, Roche's, Bahensky's, Jessiman's, Yeremeyev's and Holmqvist's. Do other teams have these lists going 5 yrs back of good prospects that never went anywhere.

BobMarleyNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2008, 09:17 PM
  #20
Ace2008
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country:
Posts: 366
vCash: 500
the key is that Sather hasn't made any silly trades like the desperation moves of the Lindros +Bure era

good players but inj prone isn't what's needed

Redden despite his party habits is a workhorse in terms of games played... a short term 1-2 yr deal would make a lot of sense but something tells me he's not interested in playing for a good team...he wants a crack at Lord Stanley's Cup...nYr better 1st get a true #1 forward if either Avery/Jagr aren't signed by 4pm Tuesday

Ace2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2008, 10:43 PM
  #21
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 Ace2008 View Post
the key is that Sather hasn't made any silly trades like the desperation moves of the Lindros +Bure era

good players but inj prone isn't what's needed

Redden despite his party habits is a workhorse in terms of games played... a short term 1-2 yr deal would make a lot of sense but something tells me he's not interested in playing for a good team...he wants a crack at Lord Stanley's Cup...nYr better 1st get a true #1 forward if either Avery/Jagr aren't signed by 4pm Tuesday
I loved the Bure deal. Novak never did anything so whats the problem with that trade? Pavel Bure was one of the best offensive player to ever wear skates. I loved every game I got to see him play. I wish they would put some of those games on the Rangers in demand thing over the summer.

Radek27 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 11:08 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.