HFBoards

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

Grade the draft and the picks

View Poll Results: Draft grade
A 23 18.11%
B 74 58.27%
C 24 18.90%
D 2 1.57%
F 4 3.15%
Voters: 127. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-28-2011, 07:36 AM
  #76
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
 
UAGoalieGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace2008 View Post
have to say that this is a classic D draft until some of the long term project players pan out.

THe NYR brass did nice in getting Erixon but they could've insisted that it be 1 2nd round pick and a 3rd from next season.

THey should've landed Miller in the 2nd round as he was basically available @45 no problem.

As for 15th....no brainer here McNeil has the size/ Faceoffs and speed to be a good #2/3 pivot right now in the NHL the way that 18 yr old o'Reilly was the for AVS recently. Really shocked that he fell that far down and the blackhawks lucked out getting him @18.

The Blueshirts could've also had Miller in the late first or early 2nd by way of swap as they had probably scouted him much more than most teams. Talking to several GM's over the weekend I didn't see too much focus on players that were NHL ready now outside of the obvious top 10 players which Miller clearly wasn't. HE's a classic inside info guy that other teams would consider in the mid-late second round...but I'm sure the NYR could've sent say....Gratchev+Williams to the Wild for the 40thpick to land Miller. that way they'd have 2 solid pivots in McNeil and Miller instead of just 1....SHame...the other picks are mostly projects and will probably net 1 solid NHL starting lineup player to surprise us all but the reality is that this Draft was more about getting 1 "safe" all around skater than it was about getting the usual drafting Hat trick of 3 good players in a draft.

they've could've gotten much more and aimed too low of just getting 1 key player. Time will tell but SAFE IS DEATH is the mantra that organizationally should be part of the Draft focus for the NYR now with a large spread of varied types of players and no elite star defenders or Playmakers waiting outside of the NHL.
I stopped reading after your said Miller would be available at 45. What are you basing this off of? He easily would have been gone by 20. Every ranking had him going between 12 and 21, I believe.

And it's Grachev not Gratchev (The former Islanders prospect), oh and if your referring to Nigel Williams to include in your proposed trade with the Wild, he hasn't been a part of the Rangers organization for well over a year.

UAGoalieGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 07:37 AM
  #77
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
 
UAGoalieGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,684
vCash: 500
Back on track, so the Rangers selected two players that are NCAA bound, three CHL, and one Euro?

UAGoalieGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 08:02 AM
  #78
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
I stopped reading after your said Miller would be available at 45. What are you basing this off of? He easily would have been gone by 20. Every ranking had him going between 12 and 21, I believe.

And it's Grachev not Gratchev (The former Islanders prospect), oh and if your referring to Nigel Williams to include in your proposed trade with the Wild, he hasn't been a part of the Rangers organization for well over a year.
ISS had him 16, (ahead of McNeil at 20), and RedLine had him at 9. BPA was in the eye of the beholder after 8/9 this year. Given that Miller and McNeil were similar and similarly-rated players, I would not have been surprised to see Miller got to Chicago at 18 if the Rangers took McNeil. From what I can gather, Miller's the better skater, while McNeil might be somewhat more physical. I would have been satisfied with McNeil, also, but, to claim that Miller was going to be available in the 2nd round, (as the poster you responded to claims), is rather unknowing. The Rangers anticipate Miller playing center in their top six, which, is what you'd want to see from a 1st round pick in the middle of the round.

And, what's just as presumptuous is the idea that the Rangers could have traded Gratchev and some other spare part from the Whale for the Wild's pick at 40, thereby suggesting that Rangers decided to not make such a deal and preferred to get only a 3rd round pick for Gratchev, and therefore highly valued the additional part from the Whale over the additional value of a 2nd round pick. And, of course, quantity always makes such a package more enticing.


Last edited by jas: 06-28-2011 at 08:33 AM.
jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 08:07 AM
  #79
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnaby View Post
You have the strangest outlook on prospects... because Miller and Fogarty have size they are 3rd liners, but the small guys can be 'impact players.' I'm not trying to be overly critical, but it seems like size and physicality make you look down on players...
Exactly...the Rangers believe both Miller and Fogarty, (whose passing skills they raved about) as being potential top six forwards. Now, if the the poster you responded to actually meant that, similar to Kreider, they have the size and ability to be at least 3rd liners in the NHL, and therefore, getting guaranteed NHLers out those picks makes this successful just based on that notion alone, that is a different and more plausible reasoning.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 08:10 AM
  #80
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
 
UAGoalieGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
ISS had him 16, (ahead of McNeil at 20), and RedLine had him at 9. BPA was in the eye of the beholder after 8/9 this year. Given that Meiller and McNeil were similar and similar rated players, I would not have been surprised to see Miller got to Chicago at 18 if the Rangers took McNeil. From what I can gather, Miller's the better skater, while McNeil might be somewhat more physical. I would have been satisfied with McNeil, also, but, to claim that Miller was going to be available in the 2nd round, (as the poster you responded to claims), is rather unknowing. The Rangers anticipate Miller playing center in their top six, which, is what you'd want to see from a 1st round pick in the middle of the round.

And, what's just as presumptuous is the idea that the Rangers could have traded Gratchev and some other spare part from the Whale for the Wild's pick at 40, thereby suggesting that Rangers decided to not make such a deal and preferred to get only a 3rd round pick for Gratchev, and therefore highly valued the additional part from the Whale over the additional value of a 2nd round pick. And, of course, quantity always makes such a package more enticing.
Thick on the sarcasim, I like! hahaha

UAGoalieGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 08:11 AM
  #81
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
yeah, Miller was a first round pick all the way this year. rangers certainly did not reach to draft him

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 09:03 AM
  #82
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnaby View Post
You have the strangest outlook on prospects... because Miller and Fogarty have size they are 3rd liners, but the small guys can be 'impact players.' I'm not trying to be overly critical, but it seems like size and physicality make you look down on players...

If two players are ranked the same, and one player is bigger, don't you think there is a reason the smaller player is ranked just as highly despite being smaller?

Think about it.

It's much easier for fans to pretend that someone is more skilled than he really is than to pretend that someone is bigger than he really is. If someone is 5-9, he's 5-9. At most, he'll lie and pretend to be 5-11. But we still know he's small.

But if someone isn't skilled enough to be a top-6 forward in the NHL, he can still score against children in juniors, especially if he can dominate them physically.

Fans want size. They look at two players who are ranked the same, and think to themselves, "see, they are ranked the same, but Mike is bigger than Bob by 5 inches, so therefore, I want him."

But isn't there a reason why Bob is taller by 5 inches and yet he's not ranked significantly higher? Wouldn't you expect that if two players are equally skilled, but one is 5 inches taller, that player would be seen as a far better prospect?

And if the taller player is not ranked significantly higher than the smaller player, wouldn't you expect that there is a reason for it?

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 09:12 AM
  #83
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,078
vCash: 500
And one more thing. When comparing any big vs. any small players. Small players can pretty much only be impact players or minor leaguers. There are a few small journeymen out there, but overwhelmingly, when we talk about St. Louis, Savard, etc., we are talking about impact guys.

Big guys can be anything from a 4th liner to an All-Star.

If you read what I actually wrote about Fogarty and Miller vs. McColgan and St. Croix, I *expect* that either Fogarty or Miller will be a top-end third liner, but I *hope* that either McColgan or St. Croix would be top-6.

That's because someone like Miller has probably a 60-40 chance of being a top-9 forward, though maybe only a 20-80 chance of being a top-6 forward and 3-97 chance of being a first liner.

Someone like St. Croix has an 80%+ chance of outright failure. But if he does make it, he'll be a top-6 forward, and I would say that he stands a higher shot of being a first liner than Miller. The problem is that his odds of making the NHL are far, far lower.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 09:23 AM
  #84
pwoz
Registered User
 
pwoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,467
vCash: 500
The picks look nice, but I was REALLY hoping we'd select someone that would make the NHL immediately... I know I know that's usually for lottery picks AND we got Erixon but still...

pwoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 10:04 AM
  #85
Miz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Excellent draft, for the amount of picks we had and where we picked, i would say we got pretty solid value with every pick. Good Job Gordie and crew!!

Miz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2011, 10:39 AM
  #86
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 22,791
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwoz View Post
The picks look nice, but I was REALLY hoping we'd select someone that would make the NHL immediately... I know I know that's usually for lottery picks AND we got Erixon but still...
Who at 15 were we going to pick that would make the team immediately?

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 09:18 AM
  #87
Chief
Registered User
 
Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
I stopped reading after your said Miller would be available at 45. What are you basing this off of? He easily would have been gone by 20. Every ranking had him going between 12 and 21, I believe.
I don't agree with it but THN had Miller at 59.

Chief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 09:49 AM
  #88
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief View Post
I don't agree with it but THN had Miller at 59.
And, Scheifele at 46...they did an awful job, and this was the 1st year I didn't bother picking one up for the draft. They've gotten progressively worse over the years.

And, Ray, I'm going to disagree with your assessment that there were better players at 15 than Miller. Pretty much every report I read had the draft being all over the map after #8. I took that to mean that BPA was going to be in the eye of the beholder. I said for a while that Scheifele was my first choice, but, when he was gone, I was going to be satisfied with either Miller or McNeil. From what I've read, Miller fits the Ranger mold more than McNeil did, so I was satisfied with the pick. As for the next three picks, it was encouraging to see the Rangers adopt the approach they did, meaning they were willing to take gambles on players they felt had boom potential. Given the overall depth of the organization, that should be the approach going forward.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2011, 09:58 AM
  #89
ogie
Registered User
 
ogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Staten Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,271
vCash: 500
B ...but have to say that McColgan raised that up from a C-, even though this kid is small he is fiery and can score. Not sure if he has a mouth on him or not but he could be almost a Theo Fleury in the future.

ogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-01-2011, 08:08 PM
  #90
Chief
Registered User
 
Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,825
vCash: 500
JAS and BROOKLYN:

Again, I didn't agree with the THN ranking of Miller but I would be willing to bet that there were teams who had Miller ranked that low. Especially in this draft where I think all bets were off, earlier than usual.

Miller: I didn't love the Miller pick because I wanted offense with a forward in that spot and I thought there were players with higher offensive ceilings on the board - Puempel, Namestnikov, Khokhlachev and Kucherov. I had Miller in my next group of player which included him, Jensen, Armia and Biggs.

Fogarty: I had a bigger problem with this pick as I thought there were substantially better players available like Boucher, Lowe, Catenacci. I would have even taken the guy the Rangers took in the next round St. Croix ahead of Fogarty (and I'll admit I would've taken Rau as well, even with his lack of size).

St. Croix: No problem with this pick. I would've preferred Noebels or Rieder but I liked St. Croix in this spot.

McColgan, Noreau and Ceresnak: This is where the draft becomes more of a crap shoot and I won't complain much butI'd have real doubts that either of McColgan and Noreau ever sniff the NHL. Players like Friberg, Nesterov, Scarlett, Tesink, Pribyl, Marchenko, Pat Westerholm and Henrik Tommernes (who was one of my hidden gems in last year's draft) are guys I would have preferred instead of McColgan and Noreau. I also would have liked for the Rangers to snag a goalie who could have developed for a few years, just in case something happened to The King, someone like Volden, McNeely or Traber.

So in the end, I liked the Miller pick - didn't love it but liked it. Did not like Fogarty where he was taken. Liked St. Croix and was indifferent about the final 3 picks. Hence, my C grade.

Chief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-01-2011, 09:15 PM
  #91
gotmonte
Registered User
 
gotmonte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,545
vCash: 500
I am not sold on Miller. If he turns into a Dubinsky player: HOME RUN for this draft.

I just hope he is not a tough 3rd liner in the end

gotmonte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 01:41 AM
  #92
donpaulo
Capt Barry Beck
 
donpaulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: nihon
Country: Japan
Posts: 1,602
vCash: 500
considering that the entire 2nd round was punted to acquire Erixon I gave a C to the remainder.

hoping Jonathan Miller makes a great impression in camp

donpaulo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2011, 04:25 AM
  #93
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
First off, people making comments such as "he would be available in the second round" "3rd line tough guy" "was looking for more offense" do not know what they're talking about. And its obviously baseless opinion without having watched Miller play...ever.

Second, Miller has MORE offensive upside then Puempel, Bartschi, McNeill. He has more upside as a hockey player.

Third, Miller played against tougher competition. He has NCAA experience, he has international experience. As a 17-18 year old, Miller and the USNTDP payed against 20-23 year olds playing for D1 NCAA teams. And then the best players in his age bracket at the U-18 WJC.

Four, Miller is a far more complete hockey player then anyone tat was available at #15. He's a legitimate two way hockey player, right now. This isn't a project pick like Puempel would have been. Miller actually knows how to play hockey.

Five, the "tough" element to Miller's game is hard work, crashing the net, fighting for loose pucks, hard forecheck, finishing his checks. This is not Ryan Hollweg brain dead tough guy act. Being a physical player doesn't mean you lack skill.

Miller's assets are his vision, his playmakimg ability, his hands, and his shot.

He's a smart, two way player, that can shut down the opposition's top players while being his team's top offensive player, as well as most physical player.


Last edited by SupersonicMonkey*: 07-02-2011 at 04:43 AM.
SupersonicMonkey* 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 10:19 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.