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

Looks like they moved Dawes up to a 7

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-03-2004, 06:36 AM
  #1
melisa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
Looks like they moved Dawes up to a 7

Miracles do happen. That makes a lot more sense.

They did rate Pock too high. He is not a top 4 defenseman.

melisa is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 06:42 AM
  #2
melisa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
Looks like the ratings are actually pretty fair now. Although Baranka being a 6.0 is insane. Pock will never be the defenseman this kid will. All he did was come over and play huge all year being one of the most dominant players on his team. Should be interesting to see the tone of this board when Pock doesn't have any clue defensively. I wonder what the Poti bashers will say when they watch this guy try to play defense.

melisa is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 09:12 AM
  #3
CaptainBure
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 57
vCash: 500
Yeah looks like they update everyone,montoya is now an 9.5,Jessiman is higher and so is Lundquvist

CaptainBure is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 09:45 AM
  #4
Kubera55
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 323
vCash: 500
Definitely an improvement, but I'm still not entirely sure why Jessiman and Tjutin's ratings are what they are (maybe they're changing later though).

Pock I actually agree with . . . he's another 'boom-bust' type of guy to me. He's either going to score 50 points a season, or probably not be worth having on an NHL roster. Thing is, he does have the skills to score . . . so he could evolve into a Zidlicky/Gonchar type scoring machine. But it's risky given his lack of experience on the blue-line. I'd actually probably have given him at 7.5C or something. He has a very high ceiling, and he's at least flashed some of those talents in last year's brief audition against actual NHL'ers. But the risk of defensive melt-down is definitely there.

Kubera55 is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 10:23 AM
  #5
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Dawes ahead of Korpikoski? Just because we signed him doesnt mean he should get bumped ahead of Lauri. Theres more too.

NYRangers is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 10:34 AM
  #6
CaptainBure
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 57
vCash: 500
THey arent saying Dawes is better than Korpikoski, the number in which they a re placed does not matter,they are both ranked 7 and Korpikoski has an A while Dawes has a C,in my mind, that means they think Korp will be better.

CaptainBure is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 10:38 AM
  #7
ChrisKreider20
Oh Hai Guise
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,312
vCash: 500
They probably partially made changes to please us and partially to shut us up. They made the changes.
STOP COMPLAINING.

FOR SHAME

ChrisKreider20 is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 10:40 AM
  #8
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,454
vCash: 500
I have been asked to be one of the platoon writers for the Rangers. I provided my input on the players.

Dawes and Korpikoski to me both project to be 2nd line players. The difference between 7 and 7.5 is pretty small. The difference between the two players is that Korpikoski has less physical impediments that Dawes does.(Although another 20 lbs would be nice. )

Dawes is not ahead of Korpikoski on the depth chart. That is a coding issue. Korpikoski is a 7A while Dawes is a 7C.

Slats432 is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 10:50 AM
  #9
E-Train
Registered User
 
E-Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Bachul
I have been asked to be one of the platoon writers for the Rangers. I provided my input on the players.

Dawes and Korpikoski to me both project to be 2nd line players. The difference between 7 and 7.5 is pretty small. The difference between the two players is that Korpikoski has less physical impediments that Dawes does.(Although another 20 lbs would be nice. )

Dawes is not ahead of Korpikoski on the depth chart. That is a coding issue. Korpikoski is a 7A while Dawes is a 7C.

Any change to our horrific previous rankings is an improvement. Your efforts are certainly appreciated by me.

E-Train is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 10:52 AM
  #10
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,454
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Train
Any change to our horrific previous rankings is an improvement. Your efforts are certainly appreciated by me.
I am also coming in midstream. I believe a new top 20 is complete and in the Editors hands, but I am not sure where that sits. If it is not done, then I will make sure that it is done in short order.

Slats432 is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 11:08 AM
  #11
E-Train
Registered User
 
E-Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Bachul
I am also coming in midstream. I believe a new top 20 is complete and in the Editors hands, but I am not sure where that sits. If it is not done, then I will make sure that it is done in short order.
good stuff, the new top 20 is the only thing missing, I'll be happy that I don't have to see Jeff Heerema at #11 anymore

E-Train is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 11:33 AM
  #12
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Train
good stuff, the new top 20 is the only thing missing, I'll be happy that I don't have to see Jeff Heerema at #11 anymore

Where is Billy Ryan?? He is not rated.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 11:40 AM
  #13
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by melisa
Looks like the ratings are actually pretty fair now. Although Baranka being a 6.0 is insane. Pock will never be the defenseman this kid will. All he did was come over and play huge all year being one of the most dominant players on his team. Should be interesting to see the tone of this board when Pock doesn't have any clue defensively. I wonder what the Poti bashers will say when they watch this guy try to play defense.
He may not be top 4 in defensive ability (though I think he could become so), but he's top 2 in offensive ability and that will see him through. Between the two, I think Pock is the more likely to be a regular NHLer, while Baranka still has some way to go before we can pencil him into the line-up...though the potential is of course there.

Fish is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 12:02 PM
  #14
melisa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
I agree Fish that Pock has a lot of offensive potential. However, moving from forward to defense and then trying to play defense at the NHL level on this team? Ughhhh. If you think Poti is a horror show just wait.

Thing I love about Baranka is he was coached by Constantine. Always nice to see a talented young player starting off with a great coach.

melisa is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 12:08 PM
  #15
melisa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
I will say Fish that I've been fighting on this board that Poti still has value. I would bet that probably 5% if you were lucky would have thought that we could get something like we did for Nedved, Malakhov and Kovalev.

Nedved and Kovalev were horrible and made a good chunk of change. Getting 2 picks along with Helminen and Balej was ridiculous. A second rounder and prospect for Malakhov? He played OK for Philly but that price was absurd.

So people here saying we couldn't get jack for Poti really have nothing to back it up with. I mean, at 27 with offensive skills he surely could get something in return along the lines of the 3 above. Kovalev couldn't be more horrible and why his skill is much greater then Poti so are his blunders. Poti wasn't half as bad as Kovalev on defense. Kovalev was so bad it was laughable.

I'm not a Poti fan by any means but to come out and say he has no value is ridiculous. Take a look at a team like Boston. He would be a pretty good upgrade over some guys they are playing now.

melisa is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 12:24 PM
  #16
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
I'm very much a Pock fan, and have been since watching him this season with UMass. I'll even admit that his defense is suspect, but I do think he is a better fit offensively in the NHL than Poti is...I know I'm getting ahead of myself, but I do think he is that good.

As for Poti's value...I think he certainly had value, but we'll have to see what the CBA brings to see whether he'll still have it with whatever system gets put in place. If his salary wasn't so high, I think there'd be more interest in him and there is of course always the possibility the Rangers pay some of the salary if they were to trade him.

But to be honest, I think he's got one last chance to prove himself here in New York. The opportunity is there, he'll get all the offensive opportunity that he can handle and that is where he'll make the difference, not at the defensive end of the ice.

Fish is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 12:40 PM
  #17
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,177
vCash: 873
I think that you make a great ponit with the Maladog comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by melisa
I will say Fish that I've been fighting on this board that Poti still has value. I would bet that probably 5% if you were lucky would have thought that we could get something like we did for Nedved, Malakhov and Kovalev.

Nedved and Kovalev were horrible and made a good chunk of change. Getting 2 picks along with Helminen and Balej was ridiculous. A second rounder and prospect for Malakhov? He played OK for Philly but that price was absurd.

So people here saying we couldn't get jack for Poti really have nothing to back it up with. I mean, at 27 with offensive skills he surely could get something in return along the lines of the 3 above. Kovalev couldn't be more horrible and why his skill is much greater then Poti so are his blunders. Poti wasn't half as bad as Kovalev on defense. Kovalev was so bad it was laughable.

I'm not a Poti fan by any means but to come out and say he has no value is ridiculous. Take a look at a team like Boston. He would be a pretty good upgrade over some guys they are playing now.
I mean here we have a 34 year old defencemen with his best years way behind him
and the Rangers were able to get a 2nd rounder for him in addition to Rick Kozak. Kozak may not be more than a physical presense but the 2nd rounder alone was alot in my opinion.

As for Poti's value, depending on the situation, I could see a team offering up something significant for him. But the situation would have to be a team pretty much starving for an offensive guy and I don't know if I see to many out there.

Atlanta would be a team that would have come to mind, had they not signed Modry. And even still, Modry is getting long in tooth so that still may be a possible dance partner in terms of trading.

pld459666 is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 02:20 PM
  #18
melisa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
"I mean here we have a 34 year old defencemen with his best years way behind him
and the Rangers were able to get a 2nd rounder for him in addition to Rick Kozak. Kozak may not be more than a physical presense but the 2nd rounder alone was alot in my opinion."

I totally agree. Poti needs to be on a team deep in good PP forwards with a good system. The majority of points for offensive defenseman come on the PP. Our PP has blown the past 2 years and we have no system. I'm sure other GM's aren't that stupid not to see that and hope to steal Poti and take a chance.

melisa is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 02:26 PM
  #19
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
He may not be top 4 in defensive ability (though I think he could become so), but he's top 2 in offensive ability and that will see him through. Between the two, I think Pock is the more likely to be a regular NHLer, while Baranka still has some way to go before we can pencil him into the line-up...though the potential is of course there.
If Pock bulks up a little more I see him as a poor mans Dan Boyle.

As for Barenka, all I hear is good things. Sounds like a future D-partner for Kondratiev on the 2nd pairing if all goes well.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 03:29 PM
  #20
Bob Froese
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bronx
Posts: 84
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
If Pock bulks up a little more I see him as a poor mans Dan Boyle.
.
well bulk how much more? he is 6'2" 210lbs i think that is fairly a very good size for a defenseman especially not a physical one , but one who will be a very good 2 way player with a good upside. i can see him as a better dan boyle, boyle is a solid 2 way d man i just think pock has a bit more skill offensively than boyle does. the poor mans dan boyle.... hmmmm.....

Bob Froese is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 03:53 PM
  #21
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
I think Pock is going to be a big player. Thats a decent remark coming from me. I try to stay objective (see my Tyutin is overrated posts). I think (like most offensive defensemen) he is underrated on defence. Im not saying hes great but I think hes more than responsible in his own zone. He reminded me of Leetch. Hes not a huge guy (decent size), doesnt hit many guys, but knows how to take the puck and push people to the outside of the rink and uses his body to shield good.

NYRangers is offline  
Old
09-03-2004, 04:42 PM
  #22
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Froese
well bulk how much more? he is 6'2" 210lbs i think that is fairly a very good size for a defenseman especially not a physical one , but one who will be a very good 2 way player with a good upside. i can see him as a better dan boyle, boyle is a solid 2 way d man i just think pock has a bit more skill offensively than boyle does. the poor mans dan boyle.... hmmmm.....
To me he just doesnt look big enough against NHL competition at seasons end. I dont know if he "needs" to bulk up per say, but maybe get some more muscle mass.

As for Boyle, he scored 35+ points every year the last few seasons and even had a 50 point season i believe, how good do you expect Pock to be? Especially since Boyle is also solid on defense.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
09-04-2004, 09:11 AM
  #23
AG9NK35DT8*
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bronx/Queens, NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
To me he just doesnt look big enough against NHL competition at seasons end. I dont know if he "needs" to bulk up per say, but maybe get some more muscle mass.

As for Boyle, he scored 35+ points every year the last few seasons and even had a 50 point season i believe, how good do you expect Pock to be? Especially since Boyle is also solid on defense.
good points , i see pock as a 50 point man though. averaging 35 points a year and being solid in your own in is definitly a good thing , but like i said i see pock as more of a 50 point man and who knows maybe some where in the 60's here and there when he hits his prime.The comparison is solid just think pock has a little more offensive cappabilities, and to me pock has the skill to be a #2-#3 dman , what is boyle considered and where is he on tampa bay im assuming he is a #3 or #4, if im correct

AG9NK35DT8* is offline  
Old
09-04-2004, 09:22 AM
  #24
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Here is a player that I would really watch

Quote:
Originally Posted by JOrtmeyer41
Where is Billy Ryan?? He is not rated.
This kid really impressed me from what I saw on the MSG draft show. One thing I have learned, at this level, draft age, skill levels are pretty even. What starts to seperate players is their drive, their ambition to achieve their goal. That is what I took away from watching Billy Ryan. Same goes to Lauri K. You don't teach that.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
09-04-2004, 12:34 PM
  #25
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AG9NK35DT8
good points , i see pock as a 50 point man though. averaging 35 points a year and being solid in your own in is definitly a good thing , but like i said i see pock as more of a 50 point man and who knows maybe some where in the 60's here and there when he hits his prime.The comparison is solid just think pock has a little more offensive cappabilities, and to me pock has the skill to be a #2-#3 dman , what is boyle considered and where is he on tampa bay im assuming he is a #3 or #4, if im correct
Your going a little overboard here. How many defenseman score 55+ points a season, nevermind 60 or more?

Pock is a nice offensive-defenseman, yes. But dont expect too much because you will only be disappointed.

barnaby63 is offline  
Closed Thread

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.