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

NYR in better shape then people belives...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-28-2005, 09:14 AM
  #1
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,526
vCash: 500
NYR in better shape then people belives...

THN gave the NYR a C+ right and HF had us pretty low to but I personally belives we are a lot better of then that.

In goal we are as solid as its possible to become. Lundqvist will be starting in NY very soon after the leagues starts again. Montoya is very raw but have a lot of raw talent and ALL the attributes it takes to become a star in the NHL. Jason Larbarbera hasn't been able take his game to the next level, but have been extremly solid in the AHL. Something that can't be said about many other high ranked prospects out there. His top end might be as a solid backup in the NHL.

We don't have many spectacular prospects on the blueline. But we have 3 prospects who IMO are locks to make the NHL, Fedor Tyutin, Maxim Kondratiev and Dave Liffiton. All three of them are playing at the higest possible level right now. Tyutin is a big&strong, mobile defensemen who can handle the puck. Thoose type of players are really hard to come by. Kondratiev has great intensity, feisty, fast feets, lightning hands and a good shoot. Maxim is a player I really like. He doesn't have the highest celling. But after watching him the past two years I am 100% convinced that he will make the big club when the league starts again. His positioning have improved lately, he is impossible to beat on the outside. He is also really good at picking up rebounds ect. and getting the puck out of trouble. On the negative side he needs to improve his strength in the corners or get smarter and is at times a bit sloppy with the puck. Liffiton have impressed on me in HFD. Not only is he strong physically but he makes allot of good solid plays and he is still really young.

Behind these three we have Ivan Baranka. He has the necessary size and moves really well. He is equipped with soft hands and extremly posied with the puck. He is maybe a year away but is a really good prospect. When I've seen him at the WJC(especially in Finland) the last two years he haven't dominated. But he plays "his" game really well. I have high hopes that Baranka will become a Adrian Aucoin/Kenny Jönsson type of players, and I am not saying that this is his limit/celling. Thats the role I envision him in...

I also see Thomas Pöck, Bryce Lampman and Jake Taylor while different in style as good solid quality prospects. Pöck with solid offensive upside. Bryce Lampman with a good all around game and great attitude and work ethic. People at times underrate how hard it is to play a "simple game" on defense. If Bryce is able to keep improving his game in all areas he could be a solid defensemen in the future. Taylor is still really raw, but IMO he have two extremly valuble attributes. He have a huge body to add weight to and still moves quit well. He have a effective first step. There is a ton of huge defensemens out there, but not many who can skate. Jake still have allot of improvement left before he is ready. But with his physical attributes he doesn't need to play a perfect game in order to be a asset in NY as a 5th-6th defensemen. If he adds weight and gets more experince with handling the puck in the AHL he could be ready in two year or three...

The bottom line is that we don't have the sexiest prospects on the blue line. But we have 6 prospects who already have made it to the next level, and 3 of them who are really impressive. Allot of people underestimates how hard it is to take that step.

From my point of view we doesn't have the same depth of high quality prospects up front as we do on defense and in goal. Obviously Korpikoski and Jessiman are two. Allot of people agrees with that we are set with 3rd/4th checkers and grinders. But the way I see it, a succesful team today only have 3-4 high scoring forwards and 7-8 grinders. So I don't see it as a catastroph that we are a bit loopsided in that apartment. And there is also a big possibility that one or two of Immonen, Moore, Balej, Prucha, Dawes, Graham, Olver, Petruzalek or Billy Ryan actually ends up becomming really good players in the NHL. I belive the pure depth we have is unmatched in the NHL right now...

With the depth we have with hardworking grinders type of players I would also be suprised if we didn't in the end wind up with a great platform of good hardworking players on the 3rd and 4th line. Ortmayer, Murray, Hollweg, Weller, Bahensky, Byers, Callahan, G. Moore, Dubinsky, Kozak, Helminen and Jonasén are 12 pretty solid hardworking prospects. Atleast 4-5 of them should become decent pro´s...(And I am sure I missed a few )

Ola is online now  
Old
02-28-2005, 09:44 AM
  #2
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 13,227
vCash: 500
Well, I addressed this in my other post... but if we had a higher nmber of guys that were ready, or very close to ready, to take the step to the NHL, then I think we would be rated higher.

Let's do a short comparison:

The Rangers top 10 were Tyutin, Montoya, Korpikoski, Lundqvist, Jessiman, Kondratiev, Dawes, Graham, Baranka and Bahensky. Of those, I would say that on Tyutin and Kondratiev are ready for the NHL. Lundqvist is the next closest. Jessiman, Dawes and Baranka are all definitely ready for the AHL, but iffy on the next step up. Montoya is borderline there. Bahensky, Graham and Korpikoski aren't ready for even that. Throw in Blackburn for the under-21 guys.

Ottawa has Jason Spezza, an upgrade over Blackburn. Plus of their top ten, 4 of them are ready for NHL duty (Meszaros, Emery, Schubert and Bochenski), 2 are pretty close (Kaigorodov, Thompson), 2 are ready for AHL duty (Eaves, Nikulin) and 2 are long-term (Weller, Lyamin).

So in comparison, the Rangers have 2 NHL ready prospects compared to the Senators 4 plus a much better player in their under-21 guys. 1 Rangers prospect is pretty close to the Senators 2. So the Senators are furthur along in development.

That said, I'm starting to get the feeling that Lundqvist is criminally underrated. His numbers are stellar in the best league in the world right now.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
02-28-2005, 09:46 AM
  #3
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,399
vCash: 500
Awards:
I think the biggest thing that is "hurting" the Rangers in the eyes of some people, vis-a-vis, prospects is there is not one guy that you can look at and project to be a consistent all star. Jessiman has the talent and size to be one but he still has a work to do. Tyutin, arguably the NYR's best prospect, is a nice player who will be more than serviceable IMO. But I just don't know if he will become an All-Star defenseman. Some othe teams you can look at may not have the depth that the Rangers do but they do have that one guy that you can point to.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 09:53 AM
  #4
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Lundqvist...

gets very little credit since he hasn't yet played a game in North America. He's consistently put up gaudy numbers the last few years and quite possibly could be the best goaltender in Sweden right now. Further, this season his numbers have been pretty good, I believe, and the competition is pretty tough out there now.

Ola...Tyutin and Drats are locks, I agree. Tyutin scares me a bit. I hope he has the drive to keep his intensity level up for an entire season. Liffiton...not sure if lock is the correct term here, but at 19 (or 20), he looks pretty good. Personally I like Taylor right now a bit more, as he reminds me of Beuk out there with that size, and further, he's playing with more confidence now (i.e., hitting more). Baranka, while not putting up good numbers, seems to have the skill to become an NHLer, and seems to have the drive to do what it takes to be an NHLer. The rest of the defense (or most of the rest) is an average crew that likely can play in the NHL, but may not make much of an impact.

Up front is real raw and the NHL locks are fourth liners, unfortunately. Even Balej's looking marginal these days, and others are flawed. It's tough to say if Korpikoski made any progress this past season, but next season we should look for him to break-out. Other prospects, like Prucha and Dawes, are just so darned small. Graham got hurt as did Jessiman. Neither progressed or stood out, unfortuately. Still looking for that 'home run' prospect that doesn't exist. Could've been Crosby this year [or perhaps Sather would've traded for someone else], but no season screwed that plan up.

Fletch is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 11:18 AM
  #5
AG9NK35DT8*
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bronx/Queens, NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
I think the biggest thing that is "hurting" the Rangers in the eyes of some people, vis-a-vis, prospects is there is not one guy that you can look at and project to be a consistent all star. Jessiman has the talent and size to be one but he still has a work to do. Tyutin, arguably the NYR's best prospect, is a nice player who will be more than serviceable IMO. But I just don't know if he will become an All-Star defenseman. Some othe teams you can look at may not have the depth that the Rangers do but they do have that one guy that you can point to.
Well by name NYR dont have one big star, but NYR does have the prospects with potential to be a All-Star player like Blaej and Jessiman. In much of a sense you are right with saying we dont have an real allstars, but I dont think thats a problem. If you look at a team like NJ they have really just 2 good players in Gomez and Elias, I wouldnt consider them superstars, all-stars in Elias's case yes. Now as time goes and NYR will suck for quit a few more years there will be plenty of first rounders to be had even later picks. Adventually NYR will get a superstar/all-star type player.

My real point is even a team with the right chemistry can be a contender and a winner. Like I said in NJ's case they are just stacked with a bunch of guys who always chip in and thats the type of team I see NYR being, guys who can put some pucks in the net, hopefully work had and play smart 2 way game. So that one all star im not worried about I would rather see a team full of blue collar guys with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 regulars that will be an offensive threat, something like 20-25 goal scorers and maybe 65-70 point players and for them to be steady.

AG9NK35DT8* is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 11:34 AM
  #6
007
You 'Orns!
 
007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mannahatta
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,485
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 007 Send a message via MSN to 007
Put Elias on a more popular team than the Devils, and he becomes a superstar. He's a great player, better than Dvorak or Sykora, who are both good players, and whom Balej is often compared to.

007 is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 11:39 AM
  #7
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,399
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AG9NK35DT8
Well by name NYR dont have one big star, but NYR does have the prospects with potential to be a All-Star player like Blaej and Jessiman. In much of a sense you are right with saying we dont have an real allstars, but I dont think thats a problem. If you look at a team like NJ they have really just 2 good players in Gomez and Elias, I wouldnt consider them superstars, all-stars in Elias's case yes. Now as time goes and NYR will suck for quit a few more years there will be plenty of first rounders to be had even later picks. Adventually NYR will get a superstar/all-star type player.

My real point is even a team with the right chemistry can be a contender and a winner. Like I said in NJ's case they are just stacked with a bunch of guys who always chip in and thats the type of team I see NYR being, guys who can put some pucks in the net, hopefully work had and play smart 2 way game. So that one all star im not worried about I would rather see a team full of blue collar guys with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 regulars that will be an offensive threat, something like 20-25 goal scorers and maybe 65-70 point players and for them to be steady.
You're basically saying what I said. For right or for wrong, the Rangers's don't have a Ovechkin, Lehtinen, Phaneuf, Barker, or even Parise (and let's not get into a Parise is overrated discusion — whether anyone agrees or not, he is a well regarded prospect). And truthfully, I understand that criticism of the Rangers' system. And that is why I have a lot of doubts about this team's depth. The recent purge helped and the past drafted a lot of new guys but I'm not sold on a lot of the guys the Rangers's have.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 11:43 AM
  #8
007
You 'Orns!
 
007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mannahatta
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,485
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 007 Send a message via MSN to 007
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
You're basically saying what I said. For right or for wrong, the Rangers's don't have a Ovechkin, Lehtinen, Phaneuf, Barker, or even Parise (and let's not get into a Parise is overrated discusion — whether anyone agrees or not, he is a well regarded prospect). And truthfully, I understand that criticism of the Rangers' system. And that is why I have a lot of doubts about this team's depth. The recent purge helped and the past drafted a lot of new guys but I'm not sold on a lot of the guys the Rangers's have.
To rate the Rangers higher, you also have to be sold on their ability to develop and work with the guys they have.

007 is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 12:07 PM
  #9
Choice
Registered User
 
Choice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: nyc
Country: Lithuania
Posts: 3,464
vCash: 500
With regards to hockey as an industry the lockout is a terrible thing. With regard to the Rangers' prospect situation, the lockout is pretty good. It is pretty obvious that last season Sather/NYR never expected this season to happen, and you can really see that in the way the organization stands now.
Tyutin. maybe 'Drats, are our only NHL-ready prospects. The rest of the teams assets are playing europe/junior/college. This lockout gives them time to play and improve at those levels without any kind of demand to see them play/rushed to the NHL. The reason they never did this rebuild in the first place is because they were afraid of nobody showing up/losing relevance and revnue during the lean years of the rebuild while the kids still weren't ready. Well now there is no pressure to make the NHL.
Thinking about what our roster looks like this team was never prepared to play a season. It would have been an abomination, an aging Messier, first line center being either Nylander or Holik, Dunham/Weekes between the pipes- horrible! I dont think they were looking to tank the season to get Crosby, that was too risky. The plan all along (since the purge of march '04) has been to use the lockout as a chance to let the next generation incubate.

Choice is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 12:31 PM
  #10
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,399
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 007
To rate the Rangers higher, you also have to be sold on their ability to develop and work with the guys they have.
Great point. We call all say that with the sheer number of prospects the Rangers have, a few are bound to become surprise stars, but this franchise does not have a history of develping players into stars (at least not in the Sather regime). I don't faith that one of these kids will just surprise a la a Mike York of Marc Savard.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 01:18 PM
  #11
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AG9NK35DT8
Now as time goes and NYR will suck for quit a few more years there will be plenty of first rounders to be had even later picks. Adventually NYR will get a superstar/all-star type player.
Have a look at Glen Sather's 1st round picks with Edmonton. There's very little there which suggests that the Rangers will get a superstar/all-star type player. (I will also point to Neil Smith's #4 overall, Pavel Brendl, and #6 overall, Manny Malhotra.) It's not automatic that all-star players will come with high draft picks. If Sather drafts badly (as he has been for a loooong time), you might not see an all-star chosen during his regime.

dedalus is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 01:24 PM
  #12
klingsor
HFBoards Sponsor
 
klingsor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 14,169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus
Have a look at Glen Sather's 1st round picks with Edmonton. There's very little there which suggests that the Rangers will get a superstar/all-star type player. (I will also point to Neil Smith's #4 overall, Pavel Brendl, and #6 overall, Manny Malhotra.) It's not automatic that all-star players will come with high draft picks. If Sather drafts badly (as he has been for a loooong time), you might not see an all-star chosen during his regime.
Hopefully, he's got better scouting here than he did in Edmonton.

klingsor is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 01:26 PM
  #13
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,598
vCash: 500
it's more about the scouting staff and guys like maloney and renney than it is about sather...of course you can pin the ultimate blame on sather for hiring those guys but he's not directly responsible for who gets drafted

i think renney at least is a pretty good judge of talent, and he's spent a lot of time with younger players when he coached juniors and all, so i don't feel too bad about him being involved in the drafting process.

Levitate is online now  
Old
02-28-2005, 01:34 PM
  #14
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate
it's more about the scouting staff and guys like maloney and renney than it is about sather...of course you can pin the ultimate blame on sather for hiring those guys but he's not directly responsible for who gets drafted
He'll get the credit if the team drafts brilliantly (as Lou Lamoriello does), so he'd better be willing to take the hit if the people he hires draft badly. Plus, he puts his scouting and drafting team in a position to succeed or fail through his trades. Taking a first round pick out of their hands to get Pavel Bure and two picks for Eric Lindros isn't helping them to succeed.

dedalus is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 01:36 PM
  #15
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Plus, he puts his scouting and drafting team in a position to succeed or fail through his trades. Taking a first round pick out of their hands to get Pavel Bure and two picks for Eric Lindros isn't helping them to succeed.
but that's entirely unrelated to the other argument about his drafting record

Levitate is online now  
Old
02-28-2005, 01:44 PM
  #16
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate
but that's entirely unrelated to the other argument about his drafting record
Fair enough. My point was about the quality of his staff, but it can easily be widened to the quality of Sather's drafts, and the number and placement of his picks relates to that directly. That's where I was taking the discussion.

dedalus is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 01:50 PM
  #17
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,598
vCash: 500
i agree that the trading of draft picks like with bure hasn't done this team any good...but it leaves me to wonder if things would have been much different with another GM? if smith stayed, does he start rebuilding and stay the course? or does he also go fishing for big name free agents? if it's someone else, do they do the same?

was there a pressure from dolan to bring in big name players? if so, would it have mattered who was GM?

hard to say...

whatever has happened in the past, i hope things turn around now...got no choice but to hope at this point

Levitate is online now  
Old
02-28-2005, 03:37 PM
  #18
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
The Bure pick was not going to make a difference

The problem was trying to do 2 things at the same time, get in the playoffs and rebuild. The rebuilding not only involved picking players, but a complete overhaul of the whole scouting and player developement staff. Anyone who does not view those 2 things together obviously did not know the NYR real situation. The ship has been rebuilt, righted and heading in the right direction. Patience is still required after 7 years. Give it another year, year and a half to see the effort bearing fruits. One pick, who was a stiff did not make a difference. Please don't be saying we could have drafted so and so. That's hindsight and we all know that that is always better than 20/20!

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 05:04 PM
  #19
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 007
To rate the Rangers higher, you also have to be sold on their ability to develop and work with the guys they have.
Great point, also they are famous for trading away prospects. If they fell they can "contend", they will have no problem shipping their prospects away. Their is no such thing as rebuilding in NY. Glen Sather isa not a good talent evaluator, when was the last time he really had a good draft?

jb** is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 05:38 PM
  #20
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Drafts are tough...

Sather, at least pre-NYR, was pretty good at evaluating young talent. With a small budget, and after some re-jiggering as a result of him having to trade away his best players, the team was in the playoffs a few years in a row and was competitive each year with a young club, twice going to the second round. Unfortunately money makes us all crazy.

Fletch is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 05:48 PM
  #21
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,598
vCash: 500
i've heard that the ranger wanted to trade up to draft pitkanen in that draft the bure pick would have been in, but didn't have the first round pick to do it like philly did

so if that theory is true, the bure pick could very well have made a difference

Levitate is online now  
Old
02-28-2005, 06:02 PM
  #22
Olorin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate
i've heard that the ranger wanted to trade up to draft pitkanen in that draft the bure pick would have been in, but didn't have the first round pick to do it like philly did

so if that theory is true, the bure pick could very well have made a difference
I believe the deal was Fedotenko and two seconds. Where did you hear they wanted to move up for Pitkanen? Do you know who/what else would have been involved (supposedly)?

Olorin is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 06:55 PM
  #23
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,399
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb
Their is no such thing as rebuilding in NY.
Its that very mindset has caused the last seven years.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
02-28-2005, 07:21 PM
  #24
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Its that very mindset has caused the last seven years.
Agreed. Neil Smith used to whine the same thing: "Ranger fans won't tolerate a rebuilding. We can only 're-tool.'"

What a load of hogwash.

dedalus is offline  
Old
03-01-2005, 06:38 AM
  #25
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
You're basically saying what I said. For right or for wrong, the Rangers's don't have a Ovechkin, Lehtinen, Phaneuf, Barker, or even Parise (and let's not get into a Parise is overrated discusion — whether anyone agrees or not, he is a well regarded prospect). And truthfully, I understand that criticism of the Rangers' system. And that is why I have a lot of doubts about this team's depth. The recent purge helped and the past drafted a lot of new guys but I'm not sold on a lot of the guys the Rangers's have.
We have Montoya! Seriously, you make a good point. I agree with you that we don't have, among the skaters, a player who we can expect/hope to become a "franchise" player.

However in goal Lundqvist might be that (franchise-)player, he atleast without a doubt have the potential to become one. Its easy to hype a player who you want to succed, but from playing II-tier hockey in Sweden and playing against many good junior players(Sedins) and working as a coach in hockey camps with players like Johan Fransson, 2nd round pick of the Dallas Stars, I belive that I can be fairly accurate when I describes skaters. Goalies are allot harder for me. But I can make one comparison that I belive is 100% correct. I've seen Lundqvist in person 5 times this year and atleast another 20 games on TV. I've seen Manny Fernandez in person 3 times and live atleast 10 times on TV. Lundqvist is better then Manny in all aspects of the game. There is a BIG diffrence in talent and skills between thoose two in favor of Henrik. Fernandez is far from a star but he have avg. 40 games a year the last 4 years in the NHL.

Also the NYR like several other teams don't have a bunch of 1st roundpicks from the last 3 years that scouts have seen several hundred times in CHL. You know like Steve Brenier/Corry Perry/Ryan Getzlaf/Mike Richards or Ryan Whitney/Carlo Coliacovo/Ryan Sutter. This apparently hurts there ranking, since the nack on the NYR is that we don't have players with potential to become franchise players or highend scorers, how many of these prospects will make that cathegory?

Personally I would take Jarkko Immonen and maybe even Joe Balej over Steve Brenier. I would probably also take Max Kondratiev over Ryan Whitney. We was ranked pretty high when we had Lundmark and Brendl as prospects even without anykind of depth. However the way I see it I rather have a prospect that have come far in his development, showed that he have the attitude and worketic that its takes to become a pro then a unproven player who looks good in juniors, unless of course that junior player is a world class talent. The history shows that players from both these cathegorys becomes great players, but only players from one of these cathegorys are ranked by the THN and HF...


Last edited by Ola: 03-01-2005 at 06:51 AM.
Ola is online now  
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 12:31 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.