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

HF's NYR Draft Preview

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-23-2010, 09:30 PM
  #1
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,405
vCash: 500
HF's NYR Draft Preview

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...draft_preview/

I haven't seen this posted yet

n8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 09:40 PM
  #2
LyNX27
Registered User
 
LyNX27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,255
vCash: 500
Skinner personally should be one of our last choices for a forward, but what do I know, im not Gordie Clarke.

Reasoning : Skinner gets away with a lot of stuff in the OHL that just straight wouldn't fly in the NHL. His scoring knack is undeniable it really is but his physique, skating and style of play might be a little iffy. This pick reminds me of a Jason Krog/ Corey Locke kinda deal. Personally I'd rather go with some of what I feel are the "Safer Picks" because I'm not sure all those goals will translate but thats just me...

Of course this kid could explode and be the next biggest scoring phenom also and make me look like a total jackass.

LyNX27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 09:47 PM
  #3
SERE 24
LGR
 
SERE 24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 9,785
vCash: 500
I don't want Skinner because Johansen and Burmistrov will likely still be available, have just as much talent, and both have much better NHL size. Not that Skinner can't be great in the NHL because of his size but because we already have Cally, MZA, Drury and Avery (for at least two years longer)... all under 5'11. I'd like to see us add some size with skill.

SERE 24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 09:54 PM
  #4
GaborikEqualsGod1995*
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,766
vCash: 500
Skinner is a bad pick at 10. One of Johansen, Burmistrov, Tarasenko, or Connolly will be available and are all better and safer picks.

GaborikEqualsGod1995* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 09:57 PM
  #5
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zetterqvist24 View Post
I don't want Skinner because Johansen and Burmistrov will likely still be available, have just as much talent, and both have much better NHL size. Not that Skinner can't be great in the NHL because of his size but because we already have Cally, MZA, Drury and Avery (for at least two years longer)... all under 5'11. I'd like to see us add some size with skill.
Yeah, but look at it this way. We've also got Dubinsky, Artie, Grachev, Kreider and Weise. They are all big boys (though not all play a physical game). I don't think we necessarily have to get a big player. For me, this biggest concern is skill, either playmaking or goalscoring. In that regard, I think Skinner would be a great pick, but I trust Gordie Clark and his scouts to make the right choice.

GAGLine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 10:03 PM
  #6
SERE 24
LGR
 
SERE 24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 9,785
vCash: 500
I don't think they need a big body. I'd just like to see someone with a little size when there's definitely players of comparable skill and potentially higher ceilings who will be available at the #10 pick.

SERE 24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 10:06 PM
  #7
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zetterqvist24 View Post
I don't want Skinner because Johansen and Burmistrov will likely still be available, have just as much talent, and both have much better NHL size. Not that Skinner can't be great in the NHL because of his size but because we already have Cally, MZA, Drury and Avery (for at least two years longer)... all under 5'11. I'd like to see us add some size with skill.
Don't put too much emphasis on size... Look at how tall Anisimov is and we saw him get pushed around all season.... Every one talks about him bulking up but I'll believe it when I actually see the results.... Height becomes less important when you consider the player's frame and muscle mass.... Tarasenko like Skinner is also 5'11, but 200+ pounds... If you were worried about size, why would you be advocating ALEX BURMISTROV? He weighs 159 LBS at 6'0.... Even if he put on 30 lbs, that's still only 190, which is not big for NHL standards for a 6'0 player....

I'm not going to knock the guy based on his weight alone but the Rangers need to draft prospects who are natural goal scorers who can give us scoring depth.... What I'm reading on this guy he projects to be more of a skilled playmaker and less of a natural goal scorer... I'd rather roll the dice on a younger player with a history of lighting the lamp....


Last edited by wolfgaze: 06-23-2010 at 10:15 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 10:16 PM
  #8
SERE 24
LGR
 
SERE 24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 9,785
vCash: 500
The most up-to-date I've seen on Burmistrov has him at 168lbs, which isn't terrible for a 6'0 18y/o. I just like him better as a prospect. I'm not so much talking about physicality though when I talk about size. Anisimov may not play a big man's game but his size is still an asset because it makes him harder to defend against. Skinner isn't supposed to be terribly fast and smaller guys are easier to play against, imo, unless they're very quick. Overall, idk, just my opinion I'd rather have Burmistrov or Johansen. Tarasenko as well.

SERE 24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 10:16 PM
  #9
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,160
vCash: 500
Last year, the pick for the mock was Kyle Palmieri. Don't sweat it.

jas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 10:37 PM
  #10
we want cup
We do not Sow
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 10,684
vCash: 500
I really wouldn't know what to make of this pick. On one level I'd be excited to have a kid who seems like a winner through and through, who just has a goal scoring knack. On another level, though, it does SEEM like there are safer picks who seem to have more tools in their toolboxes.

Ah well, it's in Gordie's hands now.

__________________

RANGERS =
we want cup is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 10:54 PM
  #11
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,405
vCash: 500
their pick of Skinner is based off of their mock draft.
http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...ff_mock_draft/

Burmistrov and Johansen were still available on their board.

n8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 11:01 PM
  #12
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,925
vCash: 500
That mock draft is a nightmare scenario for the NYR organization.

If it happens, Rangers should trade down and select whoever is left of Skinner/Brumy/Johansen

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 11:05 PM
  #13
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
...a playmaking center will be at the top of the Rangers list later this week.
I disagree with this completely, and I have a feeling that the Rangers do too. They should be targeting the best offensive forward available, regardless of position. I'm not saying that won't be a playmaking center, but they'd be foolish to pick a lesser center over a better winger. The weakness in the prospect system is not at center, it's at all forward positions. Either way, I doubt that player is going to be Skinner.

But hey, I could be completely wrong too.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 01:51 AM
  #14
donpaulo
Capt Barry Beck
 
donpaulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: nihon
Country: Japan
Posts: 1,612
vCash: 500
the draft is basically a crap shoot.

I think a team's diligence can result in avoiding a player who won't make the show.

There are so many factors that can go into a players progression up the ladder so to speak that are outside the pro teams control.

having said that we a teams drafting record stands for itself

I am sure we all hope NY selects a player who will help the club eventually.

from where I sit, I don't care if they take a defenseman as long as the kid makes the show at some point down the road and becomes an asset.

donpaulo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 05:14 AM
  #15
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,160
vCash: 500
Again, I don't see a team in the top 10 taking Tarasenko, especially Atlanta. From what I've read, they are more likely to take Johansen (or Nino if he;s there). If Rangers brass is to be believed, and Connolly is dropping, so he's not going #6 to TB. (I still believe they go with Campbell anyway.) And, in that scenario, I think the Rangers are more inclined to take either Johansen or Burmistrov, due to the skating issues associated with Skinner.

jas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 05:26 AM
  #16
free0717
Registered User
 
free0717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Old Bridge, NJ
Posts: 2,137
vCash: 500
MY Final list assuming Hall and Seguin are gone

Connelly
Nino
Johansen
Tarasenko
Bjugstadt
Skinner
Etem

free0717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 05:40 AM
  #17
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by free0717 View Post
MY Final list assuming Hall and Seguin are gone

Connelly
Nino
Johansen
Tarasenko
Bjugstadt
Skinner
Etem
I'd put Tarasenko at the top of the list, and Burmistrov over every else, aside from Connolly. I hope Etem is not even a consideration. I'd look at Kuznetsov before either Etem or Skinner.

jas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 06:24 AM
  #18
RMcDonagh
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,264
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
I disagree with this completely, and I have a feeling that the Rangers do too. They should be targeting the best offensive forward available, regardless of position. I'm not saying that won't be a playmaking center, but they'd be foolish to pick a lesser center over a better winger. The weakness in the prospect system is not at center, it's at all forward positions. Either way, I doubt that player is going to be Skinner.

But hey, I could be completely wrong too.
I'd agree as well. I can't seem to believe that Center is a spot in where we are lacking, I'd hit RW first. The argument is the need for a true #1 center, but really, you'd have to be pretty lucky to draft such a player when you're usually a mid-range team in the draft.

Also, the goaltending statement is ridiculous. Lundqvist IS manning the pipes until 2014 and probably more years after that. The lack of a true #1 behind him? The Rangers can start that search within 2-3 years, but don't need to use a 1st round pick to do its exploring. Again, you'd be fine tuned AND lucky to have a true #1 developing below Lundqvist and have him step in the minute after he retires or moves on.

RMcDonagh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 08:24 AM
  #19
Leslie Treff
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,224
vCash: 500
Couple of things here.

First, remember that my pick of Skinner is based upon the fact that Tarasenko, Connolly, Nino, and Granlund were gone at #10. That is not likely to be the case in tommorrow night's draft. I do believe that Skinner is a better fit than either of Burmistrov or Johansen.

Second, I never said that the Rangers should draft a goalie in the first round of this year's draft. I was just pointing out an organizational weakness. There should be a goalie in the system that an NHL team believes at least has the potential to be a number one. The Rangers think that Johnson may have that capability, but I just don't see it at this point.

Leslie Treff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 08:28 AM
  #20
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,840
vCash: 500
I think the Rangers are actively looking for that goalie, they've been signing a lot of them and drafting a few. I'm not particularly worried about that. They're doing what they should be doing as a team that already has a franchise goalie

Levitate is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 08:31 AM
  #21
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leslie Treff View Post
Couple of things here.

First, remember that my pick of Skinner is based upon the fact that Tarasenko, Connolly, Nino, and Granlund were gone at #10. That is not likely to be the case in tommorrow night's draft. I do believe that Skinner is a better fit than either of Burmistrov or Johansen.

Second, I never said that the Rangers should draft a goalie in the first round of this year's draft. I was just pointing out an organizational weakness. There should be a goalie in the system that an NHL team believes at least has the potential to be a number one. The Rangers think that Johnson may have that capability, but I just don't see it at this point.

Yeah I think some people didn't realize it was based on the mock draft and that this wasn't a "I want Skinner" selection.

I don't think Johnson is going to be a number one.

We really don't have much depth as far as goaltending goes right now, but that doesn't worry me.

We've got some time to worry about that for now.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 08:31 AM
  #22
Leslie Treff
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
I think the Rangers are actively looking for that goalie, they've been signing a lot of them and drafting a few. I'm not particularly worried about that. They're doing what they should be doing as a team that already has a franchise goalie
Agreed. All I was saying is that it is a weakness--one that they are aware of.

Leslie Treff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 08:49 AM
  #23
t3hg00se
Registered User
 
t3hg00se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,393
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to t3hg00se
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leslie Treff View Post
Couple of things here.

First, remember that my pick of Skinner is based upon the fact that Tarasenko, Connolly, Nino, and Granlund were gone at #10. That is not likely to be the case in tommorrow night's draft. I do believe that Skinner is a better fit than either of Burmistrov or Johansen.

Second, I never said that the Rangers should draft a goalie in the first round of this year's draft. I was just pointing out an organizational weakness. There should be a goalie in the system that an NHL team believes at least has the potential to be a number one. The Rangers think that Johnson may have that capability, but I just don't see it at this point.
How can you say that Skinner is a better fit than Burmistrov or Johansen? We need elite playmaking centers, not a goal scoring center who plays like Dawes.

Skinner will never have the impactful two way game that Burmistrov or Johansen would bring here. Skinner will be a great player for someone, but he's not a fit with the Rangers. Do we really need a small, soft player like Skinner? And for a smaller guy like him you'd expect a greater skater. He's not going to transition well, and I don't think he sniffs the top 10.

t3hg00se is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 08:59 AM
  #24
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leslie Treff View Post
Couple of things here.

First, remember that my pick of Skinner is based upon the fact that Tarasenko, Connolly, Nino, and Granlund were gone at #10. That is not likely to be the case in tommorrow night's draft. I do believe that Skinner is a better fit than either of Burmistrov or Johansen.

Second, I never said that the Rangers should draft a goalie in the first round of this year's draft. I was just pointing out an organizational weakness. There should be a goalie in the system that an NHL team believes at least has the potential to be a number one. The Rangers think that Johnson may have that capability, but I just don't see it at this point.
Leslie, while I have had no problem disagreeing with some of the conclusions you have drawn, especially regarding the draft, understand that I appreciate the information and insight you provide. You are miles ahead of the local beat writers in that regard.

That being said, I disagree on your point that Skinner is better fit than either Johansen or (especially) Burmistrov. IMO, there is no greater need on the Rangers than a #1. From all the information I have, both players have the ability to become #1 centers. I see Burmistrov as the perfect fit between Dubi and Gaborik. I'm not seeing the same about Skinner. Throw in the skating issues, and I just don't see Skinner as a Ranger type of 1st round pick.

jas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2010, 09:09 AM
  #25
Leslie Treff
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,224
vCash: 500
My reasoning with Burmistrov, who I like better than Johansen, is that Skinner is a better finisher, and Burmistrov is so light--he looks smaller, even though Skinner is shorter.

Leslie Treff 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 09:02 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.