HFBoards

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

FINAL PROSPECT LIST (Summer 2012)

View Poll Results: Do you mostly agree with this list?
Yes 18 72.00%
No 7 28.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-24-2012, 08:47 AM
  #1
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
FINAL PROSPECT LIST (Summer 2012)

After a month of voting, we have our Top-20 list. Here's the breakdown by position:

Centers: 6
Left Wings: 4
Right Wings: 4
Defensemen: 5
Goalies: 1


TOP PROSPECTS

1. LW Chris Kreider
2. LW Carl Hagelin
3. C J.T. Miller
4. D Dylan McIlrath
5. RW Christian Thomas


SECOND TIER

6. RW Jesper Fast
7. D Brady Skjei
8. C Michael St. Croix
9. C Andrew Yogan
10. C Oscar Lindberg


PROJECTS

11. C Steven Fogarty
12. C Cristoval Nieves
13. LW Marek Hrivik
14. RW Shane McColgan
15. D Calle Andersson


SUSPECTS

16. D Samuel Noreau
17. LW Ryan Bourque
18. RW Thomas Spelling
19. G Scott Stajcer
20. D Peter Ceresnak


HONORABLE MENTIONS (ranked by the votes they got in the last round)

21. RW Kyle Jean
22. G Cam Talbot
23. D Blake Parlett
24. G Jason Missiaen
25. D Steven Delisle

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 08:49 AM
  #2
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
This crop is still good, but not as much depth as we had in prior years. I suspect a year from now, we'll have a hard time coming up with a top-20 list with several prospects either graduating or failing, and with no first rounder in 2013. But let's hope someone will nicely surprise us in the meanwhile. Hrivik? Andersson? Jean?

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 09:02 AM
  #3
silverfish
Mr. Glass
 
silverfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Standing on a Train
Country: United States
Posts: 14,384
vCash: 500
I think Talbot should be in the top 20. I think Bourque is too low. And I also think, that as of right now, JT Miller should be lower than Thomas and McIlrath.

I know, I know, JT Miller this and JT Miller that

silverfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 09:11 AM
  #4
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,279
vCash: 500
It's not very deep. After Hrivik it gets really dodgy as far as I'm concerned. Rangers are going to have to build it up again.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 09:18 AM
  #5
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverfish View Post
I think Talbot should be in the top 20. I think Bourque is too low. And I also think, that as of right now, JT Miller should be lower than Thomas and McIlrath.

I know, I know, JT Miller this and JT Miller that
Bourque has a lot to prove. With his size and injury history and coming off of a very poor year--at least offensively. This is not a guy you'd want on your 4th line. If he can't put up some numbers he's going to be useless. Can't score at the AHL--he's not going to score at the NHL level.

Thomas' numbers declined. He is not big. He has excellent hands. He goes to the AHL this year--against bigger, stronger players. If he can show he can compete against them and put up good stats then I'll think we might have a player but I'm not sure that's going to happen. Putting up numbers in juniors is easier than putting them up in the AHL--some guys just can't make that step. Miller's going to be a player one way or another even if only a 3rd liner because he has the size and the body and pretty good skill and work ethic. A lot easier to project him as an NHL player.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 11:08 AM
  #6
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,365
vCash: 566
about as accurate as a 9 year old firing a machine gun.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 11:25 AM
  #7
silverfish
Mr. Glass
 
silverfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Standing on a Train
Country: United States
Posts: 14,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vipernsx View Post
about as accurate as a 9 year old firing a machine gun.
So, dead on?

silverfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 12:18 PM
  #8
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 19,810
vCash: 500
this is maybe the weakest our prospect pool has looked in 10 years...i consider both Kreider and Hagelin graduated, even though this list does not.

If you remove those 2...youre lucky if there are 3 or 4 regular nhlers in the rest of the list

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 12:21 PM
  #9
Tanner Glass
Call me Nils
 
Tanner Glass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NYC
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,754
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
This crop is still good, but not as much depth as we had in prior years. I suspect a year from now, we'll have a hard time coming up with a top-20 list with several prospects either graduating or failing, and with no first rounder in 2013. But let's hope someone will nicely surprise us in the meanwhile. Hrivik? Andersson? Jean?
Is it really worse than before? We didn't build the team through top prospects, but through average prospects becoming awesome

2008: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=550286

2009: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=674430


Last edited by Tanner Glass: 08-24-2012 at 12:26 PM.
Tanner Glass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 12:39 PM
  #10
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 18,598
vCash: 500
Not worried about the weakness of the pool. We still have some NHLers on the way and our team is incredibly young.

By the time guys are moving on we'll have a stronger system again. Gordie and Gorton did a great job.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 06:01 PM
  #11
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bipolar View Post
Is it really worse than before? We didn't build the team through top prospects, but through average prospects becoming awesome

2008: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=550286

2009: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=674430
A total of 14 guys guys made the NHL from the 2009 list and 3 more are still prospects.

The 2008 pool produced 9 NHLers and 3 more prospects.

No way the current pool produces that.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 06:08 PM
  #12
Bird Law
Daisy's back.
 
Bird Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Country Roads
Country: United States
Posts: 72,195
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Bird Law
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverfish View Post
I think Talbot should be in the top 20. I think Bourque is too low. And I also think, that as of right now, JT Miller should be lower than Thomas and McIlrath.

I know, I know, JT Miller this and JT Miller that
No. He's too high.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
"Used to be only Twinkies and cockroaches could survive a nuke. I'd add Habs to that. I'm convinced the CH stands for Club du Hypocrisy." - Gee Wally
Bird Law is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 06:27 PM
  #13
Tanner Glass
Call me Nils
 
Tanner Glass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NYC
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,754
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
A total of 14 guys guys made the NHL from the 2009 list and 3 more are still prospects.

The 2008 pool produced 9 NHLers and 3 more prospects.

No way the current pool produces that.
I'm sure people thought the same back then

Tanner Glass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 07:00 PM
  #14
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 50
Andersson will turn heads next yr.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 10:28 PM
  #15
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bipolar View Post
I'm sure people thought the same back then
The fact that we went to 30 instead of 20 is a sign of how deeply we viewed that pool. I distinctly remember thinking how deep the pool is, and seeing comments around #14 that said, "holy crap, I can't believe we have a guy this good at #14, we are really deep!"

We had 3 guys (Hagelin, Weise Horak) ranked between 21 and 30 who made the NHL. Right now, we can't even figure out who our 26-30 guys would even be. The ones who are 21-25 are barely prospects and probably none will come close to the NHL.

The prospect pool is still strong, but if Kreider and Hagelin graduate, and especially if we trade away a prospect or two for mid-season help, the Rangers will have a weak prospect pool for the first time since the Winter 2004 rebuilding began. Oh well, it was a great run anyway.


Last edited by Beacon: 08-24-2012 at 10:34 PM.
Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 10:47 PM
  #16
Tanner Glass
Call me Nils
 
Tanner Glass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NYC
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,754
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
The fact that we went to 30 instead of 20 is a sign of how deeply we viewed that pool. I distinctly remember thinking how deep the pool is, and seeing comments around #14 that said, "holy crap, I can't believe we have a guy this good at #14, we are really deep!"

We had 3 guys (Hagelin, Weise Horak) ranked between 21 and 30 who made the NHL. Right now, we can't even figure out who our 26-30 guys would even be. The ones who are 21-25 are barely prospects and probably none will come close to the NHL.

The prospect pool is still strong, but if Kreider and Hagelin graduate, and especially if we trade away a prospect or two for mid-season help, the Rangers will have a weak prospect pool for the first time since the Winter 2004 rebuilding began. Oh well, it was a great run anyway.
I'm sure we'll get some more steals in later rounds, and maybe some more Shrewd trades

Tanner Glass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 11:18 PM
  #17
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,111
vCash: 500
Wow, we are truly spoiled by Gordie and Gorton.

IMO, just as with every list we've done for the last 4-5 years, I think this is a good one. I don't agree with the order, but there are selective prospects I like into the late teens. How many fanbases can say that?

I completely disagree that it's a weak list. The fact that we don't have fringe Petruzaleks to go to 30 and beyond doesn't have any bearing on the quality of those in the 20 we HAVE listed. Man, if you think this is thin, you should've been around in the late nineties...

BrooklynRangersFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 11:58 PM
  #18
Cresto
Much Disappoint
 
Cresto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,453
vCash: 500
we only really need a few NHLers from the prospect pool. For now, there's no worry. In 5 years or so, we can start ******** our pants.

Cresto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 12:06 AM
  #19
Zil
Registered User
 
Zil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,404
vCash: 500
No discrepancies at the top, but I'd definitely move around the middle and later guys:

10. C Steven Fogarty
11. C Cristoval Nieves
12. C Oscar Lindberg
13. LW Marek Hrivik
14. D Calle Andersson
15. RW Thomas Spelling
16. RW Shane McColgan
17. D Samuel Noreau
18. G Scott Stajcer
19. D Peter Ceresnak
20. RW Kyle Jean

Kick Bourque off the list entirely. It would take a shocking progression for him to reach the NHL at this point.

Zil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 01:23 AM
  #20
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bipolar View Post
Is it really worse than before? We didn't build the team through top prospects, but through average prospects becoming awesome

2008: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=550286

2009: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=674430
Good call. Look at our opinions of some of these players. Top end was meh, but we have some gems in the middle. Hopefully we have some more players who will rise out of the woodwork...

I don't know why - but every time I see Stepan's name on these lists - it makes me think of Fogarty.

Barnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 02:14 AM
  #21
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beacon View Post
The fact that we went to 30 instead of 20 is a sign of how deeply we viewed that pool. I distinctly remember thinking how deep the pool is, and seeing comments around #14 that said, "holy crap, I can't believe we have a guy this good at #14, we are really deep!"

We had 3 guys (Hagelin, Weise Horak) ranked between 21 and 30 who made the NHL. Right now, we can't even figure out who our 26-30 guys would even be. The ones who are 21-25 are barely prospects and probably none will come close to the NHL.

The prospect pool is still strong, but if Kreider and Hagelin graduate, and especially if we trade away a prospect or two for mid-season help, the Rangers will have a weak prospect pool for the first time since the Winter 2004 rebuilding began. Oh well, it was a great run anyway.
I'm looking at the 2009 list. We named 30 players, but only 1 player between 20-30 (Hagelin) has made an impact on this team or become any more than a fringe NHLer (I'm not complaining if we don't find another Weise or Horak). Only one player between 10-20 (Brian Boyle). Between 1-9, 6 players have become legitimate NHLers (7, if you count Gilroy, but I'm not going to) to varying degrees. We may not find quite as many in the current crop, but I wouldn't be surprised if we found a similar group in our current pool. Time will tell, but depth wise I feel about the same as I did at that time.

You have to remember that Grachev was supposed to be a star. Anisimov might be a #1 center. Sanguinetti should be an offensive blue liner...

At the same rate - Kreider was a total project which some said had questionable hockey IQ. McDonough was playing well in school, but his 'offense hadn't developed as hoped.' Mike Sauer looked to be on the chopping block 2 years ago, and many thought he would be dealt for a pick, because the Rangers couldn't send him down after camp without him going through waivers and he didn't look that good.

The point is that I think you can take 6 names off of the current list outside Hagelin and Kreider who will be bona-fide NHLer's. There's no reason that the Rangers can't bring along a couple of rookies each year. A couple will drop and a couple will rise. I like the picks for the most part and this team has learned to develop them pretty well...

Barnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 09:42 AM
  #22
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
On our list, I see the following:

CENTERS:

- 1 second-liners: Miller or MSC
- 2 bottom-six liners: Miller, Yogan, Lindberg, Fogarty, Nieves


WINGS:

- 2-3 second liners: Kreider, Hagelin, Thomas, Fast, Hrivik
- Maybe 1 bottom-six guy (50-50 chance): Hagelin, Spelling, McColgan, Jean and Bourque

DEFENSE:

- 1 top-4 guy: McIlrath or Skjei


That's a total of 7 NHLers, potentially maybe even 8. Though it's not as good as 2009 and surrounding years, that's still a good list, especially with all the youth we have. The only thing I was unhappy about is if Kreider and Hagelin graduate without a replacement via draft or someone breaking out, we will not be as good.

This is how our lineup would be projected in 3 years:

Nash - Brad - Callahan
Kreider - Stepan - Thomas/Fast
Hagelin - Miller - ???
Hrivik/Bourque/??? - Yogan/Fogarty/Lindberg - McColgan/Jean/???

To the people who say that we don't need to have a prospect pool as good as in 2009 when we got 13 players, I say look at the depth of the above group.

We will need to either re-sign Gaborik or bring in someone on par with him to the right wing in order to maintain ourselves at the top. We will need some more depth on the wings. I am not at all convinced that Bourque and some others will come close to the NHL.

I wouldn't mind have a couple guys like Dale Weise who'd do a competent job on the 4th line for pocket change instead of having to sign 4th line UFAs every year for $1.5 million. It would save us enough money to sign a top-end replacement for Gaborik even if the cap goes down significantly.

Boyle, Pyatt, Rupp and Asham are making around $5. Having them replaced with 4 rookies who'd make around $3 total would mean a saving of $2, which is the difference between being able to afford to afford a $5.5 million player (top-end second liner if he's a UFA) and a $7.5 player (top-end first liner).


EDIT: I just looked at our cap situation. Without Gaborik, Boyle, Pyatt, Rupp, Asham, Halpern, Haley, Stralman (all UFAs), assuming we resign our guys to reasonable contracts, we would be at around $60-$63 million, having to sign a top-line RW and a pair or 4th liners.

The 2012-13 cap is $70.2. On the one hand, it will now go down, but on the other, it will rise over 3 years to be above. We'd need to spend about $3 ($1.5+$1.5) on two good 4th liner UFAs, and another $7-8 on a top line RW. Plus we'd need to spend a couple million on replacement players. Therefore, we'd need the cap to be in the low-to-mid $70s, higher than today, for us to be able to either re-sign Gabby or bring in someone as good.


Last edited by Beacon: 08-25-2012 at 10:28 AM.
Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 11:51 AM
  #23
Joey Bones
Registered User
 
Joey Bones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,686
vCash: 500
I think this is a pretty good list. I would make a few tweaks, but all in all very solid. I don't know why Jyri Niemi is not up there. He's definitely better than Steven Delisle IMO.

Joey Bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-28-2012, 06:43 PM
  #24
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
It's not as deep as some years, but you also have to account for how many of those guys have graduated, which is a good thing.

On defense, you have a group of Girardi, Staal, McD, DZ, Sauer, Bickel and Stralman who are all under 28.

Forwards you have two guys in the top 9 who haven't even played a full NHL season yet, and 1/2 of our top 12 is 28 and under.

Needless to say, we can only get so young. This isn't a rebuilding team anymore, we need to get out of that mindset.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-28-2012, 07:13 PM
  #25
Propane Nightmares
Spirit Shine
 
Propane Nightmares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England land
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 42,670
vCash: 500
I remember when people on here were saying Ryan Bourque will be as good as Ryan Callahan

Propane Nightmares is online now   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 12:40 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.