HFBoards

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

Rangers farm still disrespected

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-19-2008, 11:17 PM
  #76
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash the Net View Post
You're pretty negative.

It's a combined problem.

1) Bad drafting. Simply put. Last few years we've come up with a handful of good picks, and almost none in the first round (obviously most notable is Jessiman and the fact that he's the only player that never made it to the NHL as part of our organization from that draft.)

2) And the fact that we've never been bad enough to warrant getting a top 10 pick lately, which is usually where those top six forwards and top four defensemen that you're seeking are at. That's just the way it is. I hope we'll never be that bad so that we are forced to pick in the top five. Look at the Islanders right now. The Thrashers. The Lightning. Could you imagine being a fan of those teams? (No offense to them - but they'd have to admit it sucks).

Honestly, this board would blow up if we were that bad. NYR has too big of a fan base to deal with that ****. Therefore, we'll never be picking in the top ten probably, and thus won't have those big name prospects that would make us have a great farm system, which is obviously what you want.

The consensus: tough luck.
If the Rangers fanbase can't deal with that, it's only because its a fanbase full of morons who don't understand that that's the way to build a winner in today's NHL.

Your examples are really, really one-sided when it comes to this debate. You don't take into account the fact that the Thrashers, Islanders and Lightning have had , and may still have, terrible, terrible management. Now, if you look at the Penguins, Capitals, Kings, Blackhawks, and Bruins, among others, you'll see what good management combined with an HONEST re-build, that is a re-build that goes all the way and nets you FRANCHISE PLAYERS, can do.

Those teams all had to hit rock bottom, but now they're all either elite or on their way there, and they'll be leaving the Rangers in the dust over the next couple of years because of it. It's a lot more convenient to have some of your best players be on rookie contracts than it is to dish out horrible salaries to overrated players, like the Rangers do.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:18 PM
  #77
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
Things would look a hell of a lot better if Cherepanov wasn't ****ing dead
They sure would...the kid would be playing on the 2nd line in 2009. The Rangers as an organization are going to feel his loss for a LONG time.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:20 PM
  #78
ThirdEye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 11,666
vCash: 500
Why do you have to say that they "suck" when they clearly don't. Sure there are teams that have better prospects, but I don't think all of our prospects suck.

Also, let's not forget how many of them graduated to the NHL in just the last 2-3 years.

Unfortunately, Cherepanov was by far and large our best prospect. With his hockey smarts and skill he could have been a 80 point forward in this league. But I'd rather not think about that now

ThirdEye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:22 PM
  #79
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
"
The fact is that top Russian talent still gets drafted relatively close to their position. A top-10 pick will go in the top-20. A first round pick will go in the second round. But Filatov wouldn't have slipped to the middle of the third round no matter what. He's an elite talent. Grachev isn't. Period.
Filatov had committed to playing in the NHL prior to the draft. Both Grachev and Petrov were considered 1st round talents, but had yet to commit to the NHL. Petrov's contract was being discussed as a reason not to draft him since it appeared he was committed for another three years.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:22 PM
  #80
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Now, I agree that our prospect pool isn't very good, because we never finished rebuilding like we should have. But you hurt your own argument with this ridiculousness.
Hey, it's not my ridiculousness, it's that people aren't that bright and misunderstand things completely because they think of things as 0% vs. 100%, and nothing in the middle.

Nobody argued how much of a drop the Russian problem would cause.

I get vague BS about "problems" and being "wary". And?! So? What does that mean? How much damage does the lack of transfer agreement cause?

In Cherry's case, it was maybe a half dozen to a dozen draft spots. For Filatov, it seems none at all.

What in the world would make you think that the transfer agreement would cause a player to tumble to the third round?!


Again... a drop may be expected, but not a drop to the third round. If people don't get that, it's only because they can't get that there is something between 0% and 100%.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:23 PM
  #81
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Yeah, so there were 5 RUSSIANS picked ahead of Grachev. And this debate has nothing to do with Eastern Europe, it has to do with
Russia and the lack of a transfer agreement. Now, I agree that our prospect pool isn't very good, because we never finished rebuilding like we should have. But you hurt your own argument with this ridiculousness.
If we have anyone to look forward to, it is Grachev. He was a borderline 1st rounder if he wasn't Russian, and so was Kiril Petrov, who was picked 2 spots before him. Both of those guys could have been 1st round picks if they weren't Russian.

Cherepanov was a consensus top 5 pick that year, for sure. Maybe not top 3, but certainly top 5.

We definitely have a tremendous lack of high-end forward prospects, but that point can EASILY be made without making unfounded and flat-out incorrect statements about the ones we do have.
I think Grachev was more likely an early 2nd round pick, maybe late first if someone had a second pick to spare. His willingness to come to NA and his adaption to play in the CHL might have bumped his stock a lot if the draft was done now, though.

I don't think Cherepanov was a consensus top 5. I'd say most people expected top 10, though, and were pretty shocked he fell as low as he did.

Looking around a few other teams prospects, I'm not really that much impressed with most of them compared to the Rangers. Obviously some have some great players, but a lot have one guy who's "pretty good" and some depth/high risk high reward types after that. A lot of players get some more hype because they were picked in the first round or at least have names some people know.

Looking at the HF grades on a lot of these guys, they're about the same or even a little less certain than a guy like Anisimov. Most teams don't have that one guy that's a 8.0+

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:24 PM
  #82
Rangerfan4life90
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: College Point, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,460
vCash: 500
Anisimov has top 6 potential, wrong there

Grachev could become a sleeper pick, need to see him more, his size though is intriguing.

Personally I like Del Zotto more than Sangs...Sauer is well IMO average and injury prone, another Pock IMO.

Zaborsky could become a fringe 2nd liner one day.

Hagelin, Hillier and Weise definately aren't useless. Especally Hagelin who has impressed me a lot and so has Hillier. Weise I need to see a lot more of.

You forget Derek Stepan who if he pans out has top line potential!

It sucks that Cherry died but I don't think we belong in the bottom half dozen, more like in the middle of the pack.

Rangerfan4life90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:25 PM
  #83
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
"Why do you have to say that they "suck" when they clearly don't. Sure there are teams that have better prospects, but I don't think all of our prospects suck. "

I hate when people do that. I didn't say all of them suck. Please read. They suck as a bunch. Together. Take out top 20. Take most teams' top 20. Combined they suck when compared to others.

"Also, let's not forget how many of them graduated to the NHL in just the last 2-3 years."

I addressed that... and the conclusion was that we are lacking severely on both wings.

"With his hockey smarts and skill he could have been a 80 point forward in this league."

Maybe, maybe not. I remember pinning my hopes on Dube being a superstar. You can never expect, just hope.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:26 PM
  #84
Shake and Bake
 
Shake and Bake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,367
vCash: 500
Our prospects aren't that great, mainly because of the following:

-We have had a few crack the Rangers in the last few years

-Cherepanov died (easily our best prospect)

I Know it is still considered early, but I don't think Sanguinetti will ever amount to what we all thought...God, I hope I'm wrong

Shake and Bake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:26 PM
  #85
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
I think Grachev was more likely an early 2nd round pick, maybe late first if someone had a second pick to spare.
Yup, that's what I see him as. But that's not exactly Elite talent. Most early second rounders never become impact players.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:30 PM
  #86
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Filatov had committed to playing in the NHL prior to the draft. Both Grachev and Petrov were considered 1st round talents, but had yet to commit to the NHL. Petrov's contract was being discussed as a reason not to draft him since it appeared he was committed for another three years.

You still haven't addressed my point, just created an impression that you did.

How much of a drop does this problem cause? 5 picks? 20 picks? 3 rounds? How much?

Why did Cherry drop only about 10 picks down while Grachev dropped to the third round? Could it be that Grachev just isn't a blue chip talent?

If a team is wary, they'd be at least a little concerned about Filatov too because he can always change his mind. Petrov had a contract. Grachev was something between Petrov and Filatov.

He was not really seen as a first rounder, but more as a second rounder by those in the know. So he dropped because of the transfer agreement.

But he didn't drop from top-10 to the middle of the third round.

Let's stop pretending like we have a blue-chipper here. We have a second rounder who went in the third round. Kinda like Billy Ryan in 2004.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:30 PM
  #87
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
"You have heard about the KHL, right?"

Right. When you can't argue your point, you have to engage in personal attacks and hyperbole.
That's not a personal attack or hyperbole


Quote:
"That's why people are wary about Russian players"

But when you have blue chip talent, like Filatov, you go in the top 10. Even others like Tikhonov and Vojnov got drafted long, long our guy.

"...either the players themselves perhaps wanting to play in a major league in their own country, or not wanting to stick around if they're not guaranteed a spot, or their teams refusing to let them leave to go to the NHL. That's why people are wary about drafting Russian players..."

The answer is too vague and doesn't explain things. How much of a drop does the KHL cause? Is it a few picks? Is it 3 rounds?

To say, "KHL causes people to be wary of drafting Russians" is on par with saying, "sneakers cause people to run faster". Yeah, but by how much?
I don't think you can quantify the "Russian effect" like you want, and you seem to be arguing about it for the sake of arguing. It does have an effect. How big of an effect probably depends on the player. You're right that elite talents won't drop far, and you're right that guys won't drop 3 rounds or something, but it could certainly be enough to cause teams to take a pass on someone for a round, which is what I think pretty much happened with Grachev. Everyone knew he was a big, skilled player that had a good upside, but with some idea of whether he was going to come over and play, it's safer to take a north american or something who also has a good upside.

That's all I'm saying at least. I won't fight other peoples battles if they're trying to save Grachev was a middle first rounder or something.

Quote:
The fact is that top Russian talent still gets drafted relatively close to their position. A top-10 pick will go in the top-20. A first round pick will go in the second round. But Filatov wouldn't have slipped to the middle of the third round no matter what. He's an elite talent. Grachev isn't. Period.
Definitely true. But it's very hard to get sure fire elite talent when you're drafting around the 20 spot. Most of of the teams out there that have these "elite" guys got them by being terrible terrible teams and drafting really high, something the Rangers haven't done lately. So, until they take a **** on an entire season, it'll be difficult to pick up a sure fire elite talent in the draft. That's just how it is, regardless of who you are and who's running your draft.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:38 PM
  #88
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangerfan4life90 View Post
Anisimov has top 6 potential, wrong there

Grachev could become a sleeper pick, need to see him more, his size though is intriguing.

Personally I like Del Zotto more than Sangs...Sauer is well IMO average and injury prone, another Pock IMO.

Zaborsky could become a fringe 2nd liner one day.

Hagelin, Hillier and Weise definately aren't useless. Especally Hagelin who has impressed me a lot and so has Hillier. Weise I need to see a lot more of.

You forget Derek Stepan who if he pans out has top line potential!

It sucks that Cherry died but I don't think we belong in the bottom half dozen, more like in the middle of the pack.

Yeah, I knew this post was coming.

Zabo is in the ECHL. He is a high risk, high return type of guy, but at this point, he's not looking like a second liner, more like a bust.

All those guys like Hagelin, Weise and Hillier aren't worthless only to the team's diehards.

Can you name any prospects of their quality on another team? Maybe, but only if you are someone really into prospects. But most people here can't. Because these aren't game-breakers.

You just think of someone who may be a marginal NHL as "not useless", but only on your favorite team.

But if someone has a 60% of chance of not making the NHL at all and a 30% chance of being no more than a 4th liner, guess what, he's useless. He couldn't bring back a 7th rounder because no team would pay anything for him.

Yes, Stepan can be great. But again, if he was expected to be great, he'd have gone in the top 10 or at least the first round. He didn't. Because as a high-risk, high-return prospect, he's seen as more of a risk and less of a return.

If he was someone projected to be a star, the reaction of this board to the pick would not have been a collective, "HUH!?"

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:39 PM
  #89
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
One thing I'll say is that I think the Rangers need to do a better job of getting something out of later round picks.

For the most part, I'm ok with their first round picks after 2004. They picked talented players, one of which is already a mainstay for the Rangers. It's the later rounds that are very uncertain and I feel like pull down the overall pool They've gotten some good ones like Dubinsky, Callahan (though he's not really a top 6 guy), but they really do need guys like Anismov, Grachev, Stepen, Hagelin, etc, to step up and show us that hey, they could be top six guys in the future. Hell, if Kveton could come back over and force his way onto the team next year as a wing, that'd be awesome...he's doing well in the Czech pro league as a scorer.

I guess I'm saying that getting elite level forwards is usually about draft position. After that, it's pretty much about luck. So the Rangers either need better draft position, or need to get lucky. Only so much they can do there other than not draft another defenseman this year.

After that, though, they need some of these 2nd round and later guys to pan out to be something more than 3rd liners. That will help the prospect pool a lot.

edit: Is this thread really just about the Rangers not drafting elite forwards in the first round? I can agree that they need to go out and manage to replace Cherepanov with someone on par, but again, the weak forward prospect pool (at least going by your standards) comes more from drafting a lot of high level defensemen lately. So...are you complaining about draft strategy?

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:41 PM
  #90
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,918
vCash: 500
No problem with what Dowd is saying at all. Though we do seem to get under rated a bit.

As much as I like some our prospects in Hartford, (Anisimov, Sangs, Sauer, Weiss) I can't pick out a sure fire game breaker there.

Our prospect pool, although pretty good is in need of replenishing over all.

In junior I think Del Z and Gratchev have pretty good potential. Beyond them it's weak IMO.

I really thought Bourett would turn out great and losing Cherepanov...well what is there to say. Draft wise we could use a really nice break, like the Staal pick. Only up front.


Last edited by Pizza: 12-19-2008 at 11:46 PM.
Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:42 PM
  #91
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
"I don't think you can quantify the "Russian effect" like you want, and you seem to be arguing about it for the sake of arguing. It does have an effect."

You can't do it precisely, but you can do it to some degree. I am not arguing for arguing sake. The point is that we need to know what effect it has.

Because to just say, "transfer agreement caused Russians to fall" could mean anything from they will fall 10 picks like Cherry or it could be an excuse for every Russian who failed to get drafted.

I'd like to know one thing: would the lack of transfer agreement, alone and without any other reason, cause a player to drop from top-10 to the third round? Or even from the first round to the third? Because if it won't, then we have a recognition that Grachev is not a top-10 or even a top-30 talent, meaning he's just another marginal prospect who should've gone in the second round, but fell to the third.

And let's stop pretending that a second round quality prospect is our savior.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:42 PM
  #92
Rangerfan4life90
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: College Point, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,460
vCash: 500
Derek Stepan IMO is the one I really have a good feeling about.

The fact that he also goes to St. Paul is encouraging because they produce a lot of great NHL players.

Rangerfan4life90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:45 PM
  #93
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,918
vCash: 500
You suck.

Our prospect pool is a bit thin right now, but far from sucktastic.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:47 PM
  #94
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
I think I'm going to have to accuse you of hyperbole, a bit. I don't think anyone is pretending that Grachev is a top 10 talent. I don't think anyone is anointing him (or Anisimov) some kind of savior.

But they are skilled players with upside and so, compared to what the Rangers have now, they're interesting to talk about. People may go overboard on their expectations, but I also feel like most people realize there's a significant bust factor in all of this.

At any rate, I already answered your questions about "the russian effect", and again, if you want top 10 talent you usually have to draft top ten or get lucky

edit: Let me ask this. Is this point you're trying to make; is it about the Rangers or is it about Rangers fans? Because I'm actually not seeing where you're really trying to go with this unless it's basically "I think you guys should stop pimping up our forward prospects so much"

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2008, 11:54 PM
  #95
Rangerfan4life90
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: College Point, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,460
vCash: 500
Basically next draft we should pick the best offensive prospect on the board, i'd even consider moving up.

Rangerfan4life90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:00 AM
  #96
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
"I think I'm going to have to accuse you of hyperbole, a bit. I don't think anyone is pretending that Grachev is a top 10 talent."

Ok, fair enough. But my presumption for a prospect who's a potential bedrock of a team is that his talent must be in the top-10, or at least a first round pick who has a lot of potential and some risk, but more reasonable than players who fall out of the first round.

If Grachev is just a second rounder, then let's stop pretending he's more than what he is. Remember Billy Ryan who was supposed to be a second round quality player who fell to the third? Actually... remember all those second rounders who never wore an NHL jersey?




"But they are skilled players with upside and so, compared to what the Rangers have now, they're interesting to talk about."

More power to you. This was a prospects board after all. But we also have to be realistic about what we have and what we don't have. Grachev is a nice, high-risk, high-return prospect who belonged in the second round. That's a marginal prospect, not a player we can now project to be on our top 2 lines.





"Let me ask this. Is this point you're trying to make; is it about the Rangers or is it about Rangers fans? "

Originally it was just the Rangers. We need more prospects or young players, one way or another.

It did rub me the wrong way when a couple people's response to my position was, "obviously you know nothing". If you want to argue your position, great. But let's not go with, "I know everything and you know nothing, so there! I win!"


Last edited by Beacon: 12-20-2008 at 12:06 AM.
Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:03 AM
  #97
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangerfan4life90 View Post
Basically next draft we should pick the best offensive prospect on the board, i'd even consider moving up.
Yes... I actually really wanted to draft an offensive defenseman this time and was VERY happy with DZ.

There's no certainty with offensive defensemen, so I preferred to double-up on Sang. I just wanted to make sure that we got at least one good offensive defenseman. It's much easier to get a good forward than a good offensive defenseman.

But now that we got him (and lost Cherry), I think it's pretty clear that we should be going for an offensive winger.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:06 AM
  #98
GoNikolaiZherdevGo
 
GoNikolaiZherdevGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 58
vCash: 500
It only takes one hit in the first and a couple solid sandwich round picks to turn the average prospect pool into a top ten.


Just look at the Defending super bowl champion New York Giants as a guide.

Eli Manning-#1 overall
Tuck was a second or third rounder i believe
Brandon Jacobs was around the fourth
steve smith late second
osi was in the second
bradshaw was sixth or seventh round

i could go on for awhile.

GoNikolaiZherdevGo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:10 AM
  #99
KreiMeARiver
Have Confidence
 
KreiMeARiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers3018 View Post
I agree with you. Although I'm high on Grachev, I don't see Anisimov being any more than a second line center when it's all said and done, people on this board do tend to overrate our prospects.

This falls on Slats. When we started this "re-build" of ours, we were on the right track, but we fell off of it with the Gomez Drury signings.

That's my opinion.
I totally agree. Signing Gomez and Drury lulled everyone into thinking that because they weren't aging superstars....so it would be fine to pay mediocre players insane money because of their "leadership" qualities, and age.

BAD MOVE

then we wasted $ on Rozy and Redden...and it was old Rangers all over again. Then poor Cherepanov died....and now the farm is pathetic and we have terrible contracts once again.

basically what I'm saying is GET KOVALCHUK or

TRADE DRURY AND GOMEZ FOR PROSPECTS

KreiMeARiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:24 AM
  #100
The Fuhr
Registered User
 
The Fuhr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hamilton,Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,655
vCash: 500
Anisimov upside is a prime Steve Rucchin. Kids talented.

The Fuhr 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 05:40 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.