Eastern Conference drafting in the past decade (NYR Management Appreciation)
I decided to look at each team in the East to see what kind of drafting position everyone has had since 2001. What we all know is that the Rangers haven't had a high draft pick pretty much ever (except for Brendl). However, to compare it to the rest of the league conference, it's quite amazing how this team was built.
The Rangers are the one and only team in the East that hasn't had a top 5 pick in the past decade (plus 1 yr I guess).
Also, there is not one team in the top 5 who hasn't had at least two top 5 picks in that time... except the Rangers.
Add that to the fact that none of the Rangers top 10 players are with the team (Blackburn, Montoya, McIlrath) and you get a great appreciation for what NYR management has accomplished.
Only two other teams have had less top 10 picks than the Rangers: NJ, Buffalo, and Toronto (their own stupidity).
So as a celebration to our team and how great management has been. Building from within with great draft picks, key trades and FA signings (at least since Gaborik anyway). So Cheers!
We traded picks for the likes of Lindros, Bure, and Kovalev I believe. The Rangers problem in the late 90's early 2000's was they traded for good old guys with their picks and then were the 8th worst team in the league year in and year out and missed out on guys like Crosby and Ovechkin
mahon - Crosby and Ovechkin were both 1st picks overall. The Rangers never played bad enough for those picks. The Brendl pick was a trade with Tampa Bay that got us the 4th overall pick.
The pick for Bure wound up being a #10.
Lindros was acquired a package plus a 3rd rounder
The Rangers traded for Kovalev, which was a salary dump for Pittsburgh. I don't think picks were moved in that trade.
We traded picks for the likes of Lindros, Bure, and Kovalev I believe. The Rangers problem in the late 90's early 2000's was they traded for good old guys with their picks and then were the 8th worst team in the league year in and year out and missed out on guys like Crosby and Ovechkin
They didn't miss out on Crosby because of trading for the older guys. Along with the Sabres, Columbus, and Pittsburgh we had the best odds to land the #1 pick in the 2005 draft lottery. But I'm convinced it was fixed for Pittsburgh to win because they were tanking financially (but that is the subject of another discussion).
That list gets progressively better as the years go on, and thats one of the keys.
Rangers will need to get awfully lucky to get an elite talent where they generally draft. They'll likely always need to fill the top end in with UFA signings.
Gaborik and Richards are a helluva lot better than Drury/Gomez/Redden.
Well Gomez did give us McD if you want to put a positive spin on that. However, if you look at the amount of players drafted in the 2nd round and later who are important parts of the team:
Gives you an appreciation for how good the scouting department is.
Luckily the major FA mistakes that Sather made are gone now (except Redden who's rotting in HFD). We can only hope that things are better going forward, especially since I can't foresee the Rangers sinking 7M into anyone else who's not home grown at this point.
That list gets progressively better as the years go on, and thats one of the keys.
Rangers will need to get awfully lucky to get an elite talent where they generally draft. They'll likely always need to fill the top end in with UFA signings.
Gaborik and Richards are a helluva lot better than Drury/Gomez/Redden.
Looking back at every post-lockout draft, Giroux has been the only "elite" level player drafted towards the end of the first round. Man I wish it was us who grabbed him.
why the shake head? The flyers WERE awfully lucky to get Giroux there.
As I said later I agree. The shake head is that they lucked out. Imagine if we switched picks. The Rangers would probably be 30 points ahead of them in the standings right now and comfortably first in the league. Then again, I'm not sure we could have all of Richards, Gabby, and Giroux, so maybe I exaggerate.
mahon - Crosby and Ovechkin were both 1st picks overall. The Rangers never played bad enough for those picks. The Brendl pick was a trade with Tampa Bay that got us the 4th overall pick.
The pick for Bure wound up being a #10.
Lindros was acquired a package plus a 3rd rounder
The Rangers traded for Kovalev, which was a salary dump for Pittsburgh. I don't think picks were moved in that trade.
To be fair, Crosby was drafted by the Penguins 1st overall after a lottery because of the lock-out. Rangers could have had Crosby if they were lucky enough in the lottery.
To be fair, Crosby was drafted by the Penguins 1st overall after a lottery because of the lock-out. Rangers could have had Crosby if they were lucky enough in the lottery.
To be fair, Crosby was drafted by the Penguins 1st overall after a lottery because of the lock-out. Rangers could have had Crosby if they were lucky enough in the lottery.
What about the other years? The Rangers never played bad enough or tanked to get the #1 overall or top 5 pick. I think Montoya was picked at 6 in 2004. Out of the examples, only 1 first rounder was traded for the examples.
Detroit could have also been lucky enough to get Crosby as well...they had a lower percentage.
Al Montoya was 6th overall in 2004, not a top5 pick but pretty close. Still... You're right. Rangers never played bad enough to qualify for the top picks
As do I. They were in dire financial trouble then "coincidentally" they land the first pick in the draft and get a highly touted once-in-a-generation talent? I'm not buying it.
Eh,
Staal - Franchise D-man
MDZ - Potential to be a top pair D-man (I think we're seeing that this year, he was a steal at #20)
Kreider - Unknown but has lots of potential to be a top 6
Cherepanov - RIP, would have probably been a top 6
Blackburn - Would have been a stud if not for the injury. We would have had another Beezer/Richter situation with Blackburn & Hank.
You can say that Montoya, Korpido, Sanguinetti, and Jessiman (colossal bust) were failures. So I can understand that saying that they've done mediocre. However, when they've picked well they've done well.
I think McIlrath in light of our current D group may not have been the best of picks. He may turn out to be a vicious defenseman that fans grow to love, but I'm sure they could have taken someone better.
JT Miller is too early to tell, but he's looking like a good pick.
I still think their drafting in the first round has been mediocre.
I think everyone can agree they didn't start drafting well until 2004. Since then their firsts have been:
2004: #6 Montoya and #19 Korpikoski
Montoya is the only high pick they've had over this period. The 2004 draft did not have a great first round. Players who turned out well: Ovechkin (1), Malkin (2), Ladd (4), Stafford (13), Radulov (15), Zajac (20), Schneider (26), and Green (29). The bottom half of the top 10 where they were picking was complete garbage. Nobody they missed was a franchise player (maybe Green if you squint really hard). I guess you can fault them for taking Korpikoski over Zajac, but Korpikoski has turned out to be a good NHL player in his own right.
2005: #12 Staal
The only people unhappy with this pick are the loonies.
2006: #21 Sanguinetti
The only outright terrible pick in the bunch. The fact that the Flyers were apparently going to take him over Giroux makes it even worse. Other than Giroux though, nobody else picked behind them in the first round amounted to much either. This is a pick that looks way worse in hindsight than it did at the time.
2007: #17 Cherepanov
Nothing to say here except this: RIP
2008: #20 Del Zotto
If you redo the 2008 draft today, he'd be gone by the 10th pick (and so would Stepan).
2009-Present: #19 Kreider, #10 McIlrath, #15 J.T. Miller
The early looks are encouraging, but it's too soon to know.
When you break it down, it's hard to find much fault with their recent drafting methodology. Nobody gets every pick right. Their post-first round success over this period (Dubinsky, Callahan, Sauer, Anisimov, Hagelin, and Stepan) more than makes up for any shortcomings.
