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

The 2007 Entry Draft: Any Thoughts?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-14-2007, 07:21 AM
  #51
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSather99 View Post
Anyone interested in Luca Cunti ??
That's my boy.Luca Cunti Love the name.It's a power play goal for Cunti

The new Swiss Miss ala Michel Riesen.Slats remembers that selection

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 08:07 AM
  #52
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
Good prospects have dropped and others were still available for us the last two drafts. I'd just like us to get a good strong prospect. The best one available.
Having a good prospect being available that the likelihood that Sather drafts him are two different things. I have ZERO confidence in him making the right choice, most of the time. Every now and then he seems to get it right (Montoya & Staal), but most of the time he seems to go for some serious reaches that leave this organization mostly devoid of talent.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 11:34 AM
  #53
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Having a good prospect being available that the likelihood that Sather drafts him are two different things. I have ZERO confidence in him making the right choice, most of the time. Every now and then he seems to get it right (Montoya & Staal), but most of the time he seems to go for some serious reaches that leave this organization mostly devoid of talent.
Not sure what your talking about. Saguinetti was a GREAT pick at our spot......getting Anismiov in the second round....getting Sauer in the second round.......we've gotten great value for our draft position recently.


On the Montoya pick, he was not the obvious pick....I remember SO many people not wanting a goalie and wanting OTHER players......I am included in that ...

DarthSather99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 12:31 PM
  #54
Doyle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,151
vCash: 500
Olesz comes to mind, but I'll take Monty anyday

Doyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 03:43 PM
  #55
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSather99 View Post
Not sure what your talking about. Saguinetti was a GREAT pick at our spot......getting Anismiov in the second round....getting Sauer in the second round.......we've gotten great value for our draft position recently.


On the Montoya pick, he was not the obvious pick....I remember SO many people not wanting a goalie and wanting OTHER players......I am included in that ...
How many years has Sather been here for and what does the farm system have to show for it, given that time frame? For that matter what does the big club have to show for it given that time frame? Seems to me that for an organization to be struggling to replace a Malik in the lineup or finding a 2nd line forward, given all the time that the Rangers have missed the playoffs under Sather's watch is the biggest indication of failure.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 04:28 PM
  #56
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRaws View Post
Olesz comes to mind, but I'll take Monty anyday
Too early to be certain, but right now I definitely prefer, partially on results to date and partially on the fact that we have Lundqvist, the following first rounders taken after Montoya:

Radulov
Zajac
Wolski
Meszaros

Montoya remains a bungled pick to me.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 11:37 PM
  #57
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Having a good prospect being available that the likelihood that Sather drafts him are two different things. I have ZERO confidence in him making the right choice, most of the time. Every now and then he seems to get it right (Montoya & Staal), but most of the time he seems to go for some serious reaches that leave this organization mostly devoid of talent.
I'll echo 99 hear TB.

The last three years the team has drafted pretty well. Last year Sanguinetti and Anisimov were solid picks, but the '04 and '05 drafts both have a chance to be pretty special.

'04:
Al Montoya
Lauri Korpikoski
Darin Olver
Dane Byers
Brandon Dubinsky
Ryan Callahan

'05:
Marc Staal
Michael Sauer
Marc-Andre Cliche
Brodie "Moose" Dupont
Tommy Pyatt
Ryan Russell

Thats twelve pretty good prospects right there. Yeah, I know the list would look much better with a name like Brown, Getzlaf or Perry in it, but there are several names here that could contribute solidly for many years. The '03 draft was miserable no question, but '04 and '05 could go a long way in making up for it.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 11:44 PM
  #58
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,404
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
I'll echo 99 hear TB.

The last three years the team has drafted pretty well. Last year Sanguinetti and Anisimov were solid picks, but the '04 and '05 drafts both have a chance to be pretty special.

'04:
Al Montoya
Lauri Korpikoski
Darin Olver
Dane Byers
Brandon Dubinsky
Ryan Callahan

'05:
Marc Staal
Michael Sauer
Marc-Andre Cliche
Brodie "Moose" Dupont
Tommy Pyatt
Ryan Russell

Thats twelve pretty good prospects right there. Yeah, I know the list would look much better with a name like Brown, Getzlaf or Perry in it, but there are several names here that could contribute solidly for many years. The '03 draft was miserable no question, but '04 and '05 could go a long way in making up for it.
Good points there Pizza. I've yet to chime in on this thread because I'm truly conflicted as to whether Sather is capable of piecing together a GOOD draft. On one hand, I see all those names you just mentioned whom I hold high hopes for; on the other hand, I see all the clear missed opportunities to draft great players.

I guess for me, I think Sather has done okay, though I'd be more comfortable with someone else handling the draft. Obviously, as I've wanted Sather gone from essentially the moment we hired him.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2007, 11:55 PM
  #59
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,037
vCash: 500
No question that in retrospect he's blown it more than once k2. He has a history of big hits and misses. Part of the reason he draws such ire is his personality, which many seem to love to hate. All I care about is how well he stocks our club with prospects. The next couple years should begin to tell us a lot....it's the waiting that sucks.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 12:18 AM
  #60
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Too early to be certain, but right now I definitely prefer, partially on results to date and partially on the fact that we have Lundqvist, the following first rounders taken after Montoya:

Radulov
Zajac
Wolski
Meszaros

Montoya remains a bungled pick to me.
I think Montoya was a pick the Rangers had to make. Goaltending stocks were very low for the organization and they had to replace Blackburn.

mike14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 09:40 AM
  #61
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,037
vCash: 500
You re-build a team from the net out. Goal tenders can really make a huge impact. Montoya was a good place to start. Especially in the wake of Blackburn.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 09:57 AM
  #62
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
I've heard comparisons to Afinogenov.
I personally don't like him (Cherepanov) all that much. He is extremely light and can't handle any kind of pain. Like once per game he are helped of the ice to be back the shift after.

He got great offensive tools, it looks so natrual when he sets up a PP or something. Though he doesn't have the raw physical talent Afinegenov, Ovehckin and Kovalchuk for example had. He is not a great skater for example.

If we get a chance to move up and get someone I would hope that it were for Pat Kane. I know that Rockström likes him a ton too. He were in the Swedish Studio for the WJC, and said something like "this is a kid that I can admit that I/we like extremely much, hopefully none of the other teams are listening and finds out about him, or some of the 300 scouts in the stands picks up on him (laughs)..."

Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 10:22 AM
  #63
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,037
vCash: 500
Great that you caught that Ola.

Rockstrom knows his stuff. But he's right, I think a few other people may have noticed Kane as well

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 10:26 AM
  #64
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
How many years has Sather been here for and what does the farm system have to show for it, given that time frame? For that matter what does the big club have to show for it given that time frame? Seems to me that for an organization to be struggling to replace a Malik in the lineup or finding a 2nd line forward, given all the time that the Rangers have missed the playoffs under Sather's watch is the biggest indication of failure.
What you fail to see is that we made an complete 180 degree turnaround in how the organization looks at prospects. We are far better at evaluating, drafting then DEVELOPING them. Since the 2004 draft we've had a whole other braintrust deciding on the draft picks.

Every prospect raves about our developmental camps, something we've never had in the past.

You are far too impatient and maybe a little bitter on a draft from the past. Let it go.

DarthSather99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 10:31 AM
  #65
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
You re-build a team from the net out. Goal tenders can really make a huge impact. Montoya was a good place to start. Especially in the wake of Blackburn.
Good point, look what Lundqvist did for last years ranger team. If it had been Weekes as the #1 we would have finished in the bottom 1/3 of the league.

DarthSather99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 11:40 AM
  #66
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
How many years has Sather been here for and what does the farm system have to show for it, given that time frame? For that matter what does the big club have to show for it given that time frame? Seems to me that for an organization to be struggling to replace a Malik in the lineup or finding a 2nd line forward, given all the time that the Rangers have missed the playoffs under Sather's watch is the biggest indication of failure.
You make a good point TB. 6/1 will mark Sather's 7th complete year as Ranger GM. Good or bad he gets credit for what happened in that time frame.

The first 4 years('00 - '03)were not stellar Sather made bad choices/moves in that time frame. But as imperfect as it was we added Lundqvist, Tyutin, Hollweg, Prucha, Ortmeyer, Baranka and Dawes to the system. The first five are now roster players in New York. The latter two have a decent chance to play for the Rangers or in the NHL at some point.

Since the purge in '04 much as changed for the better. It's still not as good as I would like, but I have to be honest with myself and admit that Sather and the Rangers have done reasonably well in both icing a competitive team and drafting solid prospects.

The big litmus test IMO starts this spring when many of our prospects from the '04/'05 draft begin to skate for organization. It essentially begins a process that will take at least two years to fully evaluate.

'04:
Al Montoya
Lauri Korpikoski
Darin Olver
Dane Byers
Brandon Dubinsky
Ryan Callahan

'05:
Marc Staal
Michael Sauer
Marc-Andre Cliche
Brodie "Moose" Dupont
Tommy Pyatt
Ryan Russell

The bottom line IMO will be which of the above players is still with the team, what have they contributed, and if the Rangers are a legit cup contender.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 12:01 PM
  #67
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
How many years has Sather been here for and what does the farm system have to show for it, given that time frame? For that matter what does the big club have to show for it given that time frame? Seems to me that for an organization to be struggling to replace a Malik in the lineup or finding a 2nd line forward, given all the time that the Rangers have missed the playoffs under Sather's watch is the biggest indication of failure.
The farm system is about 100 times better than it was when Sather came in, unfortunetly the top prospects are mostly from the last 3 drafts, (2004-2006, which all look very good) and arent ready yet.

You know whats funny, as maligned as Sathers first four drafts (2000-2003) are, they've already produced more and higher quality NHLers than Smiths last four (1996-1999), and we havent even seen all of them yet.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 11:09 PM
  #68
xander
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Section A Lynah Rink
Posts: 4,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Too early to be certain, but right now I definitely prefer, partially on results to date and partially on the fact that we have Lundqvist, the following first rounders taken after Montoya:

Radulov
Zajac
Wolski
Meszaros

Montoya remains a bungled pick to me.
Well the picking of Montoya wouldn't have stopped the Rangers from taking Zajac, Wolski, or Meszaros. All three where available at 19 when the Rangers took Korpikoski. Radulov was gone at 15 but, like the other three, he would have been considered a reach at #6 overall.

xander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2007, 07:52 AM
  #69
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xander View Post
Well the picking of Montoya wouldn't have stopped the Rangers from taking Zajac, Wolski, or Meszaros. All three where available at 19 when the Rangers took Korpikoski. Radulov was gone at 15 but, like the other three, he would have been considered a reach at #6 overall.
If you prefer to look at it as Sather screwed up on Korpikoski, that's fine. Korpikoski may turn out to be a good pick. The others I mentioned are already good picks. How good would it be to have Meszaros in our top 6 defensemen now? Zajac and Wolski are already contributing in the NHL and they figure to get better. On a side note, every time I see Parise I think of Jessiman. It's sickening.

The GM and his staff are supposed to be able to evaluate their own talent. By drafting Montoya that high they obviously didn't have much faith in Lundqvist. So we have a very good young goaltender and zero impact forwards on the team. Unless Lundqvist collapses and Montoya goes on to be a star, the pick at number 6 was a mistake in my book.

I get tired of reading the garbage about our young guys not being ready yet when the league is overrun by talented players of the same age group. Either they are incredibly overrated or the putting together of the major league team is incredibly flawed. In either case, Sather is the final decision maker, and neither scenario speaks very well of him.

If all of our "potential" comes through I'll take it back but to date it would be impossible to have done any worse than Sather. By the way, every fan base thinks they have jewels on the horizon.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2007, 08:21 AM
  #70
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSather99 View Post
What you fail to see is that we made an complete 180 degree turnaround in how the organization looks at prospects. We are far better at evaluating, drafting then DEVELOPING them. Since the 2004 draft we've had a whole other braintrust deciding on the draft picks.
I think as Dedalus has pointed out, most of the braintrust that was involved in both the '02 & '03 drafts is still in charge. Talk about developing all you want, but again how can you refute that Sather has been here for a good long time, and what is there to show for it? That not one defenseman can break into this assortment of mediocrity? That not one forward can break onto the 2nd line that currently features a pair of 4th liners?
Quote:
You are far too impatient and maybe a little bitter on a draft from the past. Let it go.
I am a Rangers fan. As thus, patience is my middle name. However, I do not think it much to ask for something besides 4th line grinders, a goalie, a 2nd pairing defenseman and a misused 2nd line sophomore that Sather has shown in his 5-6 years of being in charge of the team.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2007, 08:29 AM
  #71
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
I'll echo 99 hear TB.

The last three years the team has drafted pretty well. Last year Sanguinetti and Anisimov were solid picks, but the '04 and '05 drafts both have a chance to be pretty special.

'04:
Al Montoya
Lauri Korpikoski
Darin Olver
Dane Byers
Brandon Dubinsky
Ryan Callahan

'05:
Marc Staal
Michael Sauer
Marc-Andre Cliche
Brodie "Moose" Dupont
Tommy Pyatt
Ryan Russell

Thats twelve pretty good prospects right there. Yeah, I know the list would look much better with a name like Brown, Getzlaf or Perry in it, but there are several names here that could contribute solidly for many years. The '03 draft was miserable no question, but '04 and '05 could go a long way in making up for it.
Having a chance to be special and being special are two different things. You list out 12 "pretty good" prospects. But let's examine them closer. From the '04 draft, Montoya looks to be heading towards being an NHL starter and Dubinsky looks like he MIGHT be a 2nd line center. Lauri K, I had hopes for being a 2nd line player, but currently looks to be a tweener between the 2nd & 3rd line. If next year he is still not showing any offensive progress, then we can no longer count on him being a 2nd line player. Olver is not making much noise, Callahan looks to be a 3rd liner at best, with Byers being a possibility for a 3rd or a 4th line role. That is not what I would consider special currently.

'05, Stall looks to be a #2 type of defenseman. Cliche, whom I hope can develop into a 2nd liner, is another one that currently looks like a 2nd /3rd line tweener. Sauer looks to be a good 2nd pair defenseman types, but he is constantly hampered by injuries, which is never a good sign. Russell is a long shot to become a 3rd liner and both Dupont and Pyatt are future 3rd liners. If Cliche can take the step to become a 2nd liner and if Sauer can overcome his injuries, this could be a very good draft, but if not, then it is more of the same.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2007, 08:32 AM
  #72
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
The bottom line IMO will be which of the above players is still with the team, what have they contributed, and if the Rangers are a legit cup contender.
I think that the bottom line is this. By next year, if there are still no yoots to be found anywhere aside from the 4th line (Prucha & Henke aside), then I have no idea how anyone can defend Sather's drafting or the farm system anymore. Next year is year #7 of Sather. Should't the Rangers be able to replace 4th liners masquerading as 2nd liners and # 7 defenseman, by that time?

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2007, 09:57 AM
  #73
Anthony Mauro
DB Hockey
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
I think as Dedalus has pointed out, most of the braintrust that was involved in both the '02 & '03 drafts is still in charge. Talk about developing all you want, but again how can you refute that Sather has been here for a good long time, and what is there to show for it? That not one defenseman can break into this assortment of mediocrity? That not one forward can break onto the 2nd line that currently features a pair of 4th liners?

I am a Rangers fan. As thus, patience is my middle name. However, I do not think it much to ask for something besides 4th line grinders, a goalie, a 2nd pairing defenseman and a misused 2nd line sophomore that Sather has shown in his 5-6 years of being in charge of the team.
I think the argument you use is an overblown one. As far as not getting a top liner, it is not the prospects they are getting, but the prospects they refuse to use. Look at Jersey. They have ordinary prospects, prospects who are not really destined for stardom upon being drafted, but they trust them and give them ice. Then, they turn into top liners IE. Gomez, Gionta, Zajac, Parise. Who's to say Prucha cannot be our Gomez or Callahan cannot be our Gionta? Gionta had 65 points in his first 166 games before breaking out. It's not the players they have gotten it comes down to Sather-Renney being sheer cowards. Aside from the obvious, where Hank forced his way into stardom and Tyutin somehow managed his way onto the roster, no other player has been fostered or developed. Hollweg is what he is. He may come around to get 20 points a season or he may get 3, but will still provide the same thing we need every night.

Slice it any way you want, but Dawes and Callahan should be on this roster. Awhile ago I was certain about Baranka, but he's regressed a little and is one that could and is using this year in HFD.

__________________
DRAFTBUZZ HOCKEY
Scouting the 2015 NHL Draft and Futures
Anthony Mauro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2007, 10:10 AM
  #74
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Il Ragazzone View Post
I think the argument you use is an overblown one. As far as not getting a top liner, it is not the prospects they are getting, but the prospects they refuse to use. Look at Jersey. They have ordinary prospects, prospects who are not really destined for stardom upon being drafted, but they trust them and give them ice. Then, they turn into top liners IE. Gomez, Gionta, Zajac, Parise.
Zajac, Gomez & Parise were all first round picks that were well-thought of. They cannot be termed as "ordinary" prospects not destined for good things. When you draft a forward in the first round, your expectation is that they will become a top-6 player.
Quote:
Who's to say Prucha cannot be our Gomez or Callahan cannot be our Gionta? Gionta had 65 points in his first 166 games before breaking out. It's not the players they have gotten it comes down to Sather-Renney being sheer cowards. Aside from the obvious, where Hank forced his way into stardom and Tyutin somehow managed his way onto the roster, no other player has been fostered or developed. Hollweg is what he is. He may come around to get 20 points a season or he may get 3, but will still provide the same thing we need every night.
SO you think that the Rangers have the prospects, but are just guilty of not developing them?

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-16-2007, 11:51 AM
  #75
Anthony Mauro
DB Hockey
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Zajac, Gomez & Parise were all first round picks that were well-thought of. They cannot be termed as "ordinary" prospects not destined for good things. When you draft a forward in the first round, your expectation is that they will become a top-6 player.

SO you think that the Rangers have the prospects, but are just guilty of not developing them?
Honestly, I do not think those first rounders are anything special, with regards to managements selection of them. Its just that the Devils saw what they were and gave them the trust they needed to be the first/second liners that every first round pick "should" be. They were not very risky and translated well to the pro game. I do not think the Rangers have poor evaluators of talent, its just they have missed badly on projects. Jessiman was a huge eff up. OTOH, Korpikoski is our version of the Devil's type of rookie they consistently integrate.

Yes I do think that they are guilty of not developing them. They've already admitted to making a mistake with Staal. Dawes/Callahan should be having Gionta's rookie season of 11 points in 33 games this year. Gionta had 25 points in 37 AHL games before getting called up. Both of our prospects Dawes/Callahan have done better than that. They are ready; Adam Hall, Marcel Hossa, and Jason Ward should not be blocking them. You can ***** and moan about Dubinsky, Moore, Korpikoski but those guys truly are not ready. Immonen is another story, he can be up here but does not seem to fit the type of Ranger they want around.

Anthony Mauro 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 10:25 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.