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

Combine Wrap-up

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-06-2011, 12:00 PM
  #26
we want cup
We do not Sow
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 10,648
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenrikTheKing30 View Post
Except that drafting D-lineman helped the Giants win a Super Bowl. Does that mean that the Cup is ours this year?
We still need to find Manning, Burress, Toomer, Smith, Jacobs, and Ware, not to mention the O-Line. Whammy.

__________________

RANGERS =
we want cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 12:04 PM
  #27
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
They have to trade up. Pretty simple.
Okay, since you said it was simple, what do we trade up with now that the 2nd rounders are gone?

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 12:12 PM
  #28
JeffMangum
Ra shi da
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 55,711
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
They have to trade up. Pretty simple.

They may get somewhat lucky with late rising defensemen pushing some forwards down a bit.

But we have to trade up.

Colorado or Boston maybe.
I would have said the same had the Rangers not traded their 2nd rounders for Erixon.

But, that WAS the Rangers moving up.

Clarke isn't stupid. He knows it is not realistic to trade up to the point of where the Rangers would get a player that we could not find between 11-15. This draft is all about the top-8; and then, there is a huge drop-off.

Why would the Rangers waste assets to draft a player @ 11, when they could draft a near-similar player @ 15? Answer; they wouldn't.

If anything, the Rangers should be trading down to try and add depth to the lineup. Maybe #15 for #25 and #39. Whatever.

If they are going to move up, they will do it next year, in a draft with real talent.

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 12:17 PM
  #29
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,509
vCash: 500
I see the Rangers staying put at #15. As they've had a history of doing recently. We'll see though.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 06:06 PM
  #30
Leslie Treff
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,212
vCash: 500
Unless the Rangers can get an elite power forward, I don't see them moving up. I believe that the best player available at this spot will be a forward. However, a blueliner may fall to them for some reason and I don't believe that the Rangers would pass on a talented defenseman already on their radar.

Leslie Treff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 06:14 PM
  #31
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 8,093
vCash: 500
Drafting bpa is a tried and true strategy. Can't argue with that.

Drafting another dman will cause alot of unhappiness in ranger land. We seem to be stocked with young blue line talent.

we need an impact forward. We can draft one that might be ready in 2 years or we can draft a dman with big upside in this draft and package him to acquire an NHL ready scorer that can help now.

Then again, we might already have that dman draft pick we can move....

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 06:19 PM
  #32
TheRedViper
Registered User
 
TheRedViper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Niagara
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by offdacrossbar View Post
Drafting bpa is a tried and true strategy. Can't argue with that.

Drafting another dman will cause alot of unhappiness in ranger land. We seem to be stocked with young blue line talent.

we need an impact forward. We can draft one that might be ready in 2 years or we can draft a dman with big upside in this draft and package him to acquire an NHL ready scorer that can help now.

Then again, we might already have that dman draft pick we can move....
Agreed, get the best player you can. We can always move assets later for a position of need.

TheRedViper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 06:22 PM
  #33
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Okay, since you said it was simple, what do we trade up with now that the 2nd rounders are gone?
There's always picks in 2012, and prospects, though I don't expect that we'll be trading up.

GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 07:37 PM
  #34
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leslie Treff View Post
Unless the Rangers can get an elite power forward, I don't see them moving up. I believe that the best player available at this spot will be a forward. However, a blueliner may fall to them for some reason and I don't believe that the Rangers would pass on a talented defenseman already on their radar.
I agree.

Zibanejad, McNeill, Scheifele, Armia...

I'd love to be able to know what they feel about these players.

If they don't like what's available at #15 what are the odds they trade #15 in a package for a proven player or NHL ready prospect?

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 07:58 PM
  #35
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,636
vCash: 500
I have seen quite a few mentions of Oleksiak and apparently there's a decent chance he's on the board at 15. But what about Ryan Murphy and Duncan Siemans? Certainly one of them could fall a bit and be on the board when we're up...while I don't know much about them I'd have to think either would be a solid value at our spot. Considering the scouting reports I've read on some of the forwards we (at least here on HF) are targeting, it might actually work out to our advantage if one of them falls and we go D again. Since none of these kids are likely to play for a couple of years I think we are all a bit hung up on drafting a forward. With so many solid D prospects we could certainly deal from a position of strength to land some offense.

broadwayblue 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 06:01 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.