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

Emphasis on drafting speed and skill paying off for New York Rangers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-27-2013, 02:31 AM
  #276
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rdlineglory View Post
A fan may go about that line of thinking, but management wouldn't. Unless they want to get canned.
Apparently management wants to get canned then, since Russians get drafted later than they normally would all the time.

Barnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 07:23 AM
  #277
shinchanyo
Registered User
 
shinchanyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Here
Posts: 3,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by offdacrossbar View Post
i made a decision on the pick immediately after we made it. bad pick.

what he becomes doesnt change my decision. irrelevant.

a bad pick is a bad pick. then and today.
.
If he became a good 2nd pair D man for this team for a decade and tarasenko has injury concerns that cause him to leave the league within a few years then it's as relevant as anything could possibly be. That's a really ridiculous statement by you. It was a higher risk pick but the only way to determine a bad pick is by two ways.

1) You pick a player who would have been available to you in the next round thereby whiffing on numerous talents.

2) A case like this where there is a consensus about a player (like Tarasenko) and the team passes on the very well known consensus to take a huge risk and the risk (McI) is a much lesser player when everything shakes out. In other words of McI ends up beign a significantly lesser player overall than Tarasenko and/or Fowler and/or some of those other first round Dmen then it was a bad pick.

But the final determination can only be made after their careers have played out (or a reasonable amount of career time has passed.)

Reason would dictate that more likely than not this was a bad pick but this is irrelevant because there are way too many variables and outcomes that are possible. As far as I can see this team could desperately use a RD now and for the near future so I don't get the talk about him filling a need yesterday.

shinchanyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 07:52 AM
  #278
RangersHank*
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
I just want McIlrath to make a damn impact. I dont mind the pick but sooner or later we need to see the product.

RangersHank* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 07:57 AM
  #279
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 21,522
vCash: 500
The impatience around here regarding McIlrath makes me wonder what would have happened if we had drafted McDonagh at #12 in 2007 like Montreal did. Took him 3 years to turn pro. Wasn't showing much offensively on the stat sheet. Panic!

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 08:06 AM
  #280
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,639
vCash: 500
Fowler is a good player for the Ducks. Very skilled. It doesn't hurt that he's playing with offensive minded players like Perry, Getzlaf, Selanne. IMO our best offensive forward Nash is not quite on the level with Perry or Getzlaf. Fowler is not that great defensively and he's kind of soft as well. Really to me he's a completely different kind of defenseman than McIlrath.

Really I think the Rangers were counting on Del Zotto to develop more than he has. McIlrath works well with the idea of grinding out games against the Bruins, Penguins, Flyers, Devils--playing against physical teams and with the Rangers concept of their defenders taking care of their own end first. Del Zotto hasn't developed as much as expected and so Fowler probably seems more like he would have been the better bet to some. It takes a lot of different elements to make a good defense corps. The Rangers are still missing a real offensive threat from the blueline.

McIlrath's decision making comfort level with the puck might be the one thing holding him back from the NHL a bit. Skating/positioning is another thing. Big D always have to be working on these things. I think he's close and for all of ODC's *****ing about DZ and McIlrath it may be that DZ's moving on to elsewhere will be the door opening welcoming McIlrath into the NHL.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 08:16 AM
  #281
Matt4776
Registered User
 
Matt4776's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,282
vCash: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Fowler is a good player for the Ducks. Very skilled. It doesn't hurt that he's playing with offensive minded players like Perry, Getzlaf, Selanne. IMO our best offensive forward Nash is not quite on the level with Perry or Getzlaf. Fowler is not that great defensively and he's kind of soft as well. Really to me he's a completely different kind of defenseman than McIlrath.

Really I think the Rangers were counting on Del Zotto to develop more than he has. McIlrath works well with the idea of grinding out games against the Bruins, Penguins, Flyers, Devils--playing against physical teams and with the Rangers concept of their defenders taking care of their own end first. Del Zotto hasn't developed as much as expected and so Fowler probably seems more like he would have been the better bet to some. It takes a lot of different elements to make a good defense corps. The Rangers are still missing a real offensive threat from the blueline.

McIlrath's decision making comfort level with the puck might be the one thing holding him back from the NHL a bit. Skating/positioning is another thing. Big D always have to be working on these things. I think he's close and for all of ODC's *****ing about DZ and McIlrath it may be that DZ's moving on to elsewhere will be the door opening welcoming McIlrath into the NHL.
Del Zotto always played great whenever he got the opportunity to play top-4 minutes. When he's taken outside of his comfort zone, he struggles.

How would Cam Fowler be on this team getting 3rd pairing minutes and PP time on one of the worst PP teams in the league on a consistent basis? I'm going to guess not good.

Context, people.

Matt4776 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 08:46 AM
  #282
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by darko View Post
So if McIlrath becomes a top pairing D-man or a meaner version of Beuk you'd still think it's a bad pick?
IF that happens, we can talk about it.

But at this point there is probably a better chance McIlrath will never be a good NHL player than he will be a top pairing NHL defenseman. And if he never does become an NHL regular, it would be a ridiculous swing and a miss for Sather.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 08:51 AM
  #283
RangersHank*
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
IF that happens, we can talk about it.

But at this point there is probably a better chance McIlrath will never be a good NHL player than he will be a top pairing NHL defenseman. And if he never does become an NHL regular, it would be a ridiculous swing and a miss for Sather.

God forbid he doesnt become an NHL player, it will be Jessiman all over again

RangersHank* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 08:56 AM
  #284
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangersHank View Post
God forbid he doesnt become an NHL player, it will be Jessiman all over again
Totally agree. In fairness, that didn't happen yet either - it's still too early to write McIlrath off - but all the 'if he becomes this, if he becomes that' is just a bunch of talk at this point. He hasn't become anything yet.

But when Leslie (who knows more about Ranger prospects than all us keyboard geniuses put together) says we should have drafted someone else, I get worried.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 09:12 AM
  #285
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangersHank View Post
God forbid he doesnt become an NHL player, it will be Jessiman all over again
Even after missing the first half of his first pro season with a serious kneecap injury McIlrath did not struggle at the AHL level the way Jessiman struggled. Jessiman even wound up in the ECHL at least once if not twice. McIlrath's transition from the CHL to the pros has not been bad--keeping in mind the injury and keeping in mind that defensemen usually take longer to make it to the NHL than forwards.

Anyway we heard all this next Jessiman **** the moment we drafted Kreider. Jessiman is Jessiman and Kreider is Kreider. McIlrath is McIlrath. Barring career ending injury McIlrath will play in the NHL--at the worst he will be a better skating Matt Carkner. A d-man that big and mean and tough and who can skate is going to play for someone. The same was going to happen to Kreider at his lowest level of potential--he would play for someone in some capacity because he has the gifts of great size and great speed and there is a use for that even if the rest of his game never came around.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 09:40 AM
  #286
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Anyway we heard all this next Jessiman **** the moment we drafted Kreider. Jessiman is Jessiman and Kreider is Kreider. McIlrath is McIlrath.
At the time Kreider was drafted I do not remember anyone proclaiming Kreider to be the next Jessiman. People seemed pretty happy with Kreider's potential.

Read for yourself:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...hlight=kreider

On the other hand there was consternation about the McIlrath pick the moment it was made.


Last edited by Jersey Girl: 11-27-2013 at 09:46 AM.
Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 09:54 AM
  #287
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
At the time Kreider was drafted I do not remember anyone proclaiming Kreider to be the next Jessiman. People seemed pretty happy with Kreider's potential.

On the other hand there was consternation about the McIlrath pick the moment it was made.
You're going to see consternation whenever two things happen:

1) The Rangers pick a "riser", someone who jumps up the rankings and doesn't fit neatly into the mock drafts they've been reading for months

and

2) The Rangers pick someone who the "experts" on this board dislike.

Lets just say what everyone here is thinking... the overwhelming majority of our posters see far too little, if any, of these prospects to have a valid opinion, let alone hold others in contempt for theirs.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 09:57 AM
  #288
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
You're going to see consternation whenever two things happen:

1) The Rangers pick a "riser", someone who jumps up the rankings and doesn't fit neatly into the mock drafts they've been reading for months

and

2) The Rangers pick someone who the "experts" on this board dislike.

Lets just say what everyone here is thinking... the overwhelming majority of our posters see far too little, if any, of these prospects to have a valid opinion, let alone hold others in contempt for theirs.
My point was that when Kreider was selected he was not called 'the next Jessiman' at the time, as the other poster stated. Taking a look at the link I provided validates that statement.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 09:58 AM
  #289
RangersHank*
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Even after missing the first half of his first pro season with a serious kneecap injury McIlrath did not struggle at the AHL level the way Jessiman struggled. Jessiman even wound up in the ECHL at least once if not twice. McIlrath's transition from the CHL to the pros has not been bad--keeping in mind the injury and keeping in mind that defensemen usually take longer to make it to the NHL than forwards.

Anyway we heard all this next Jessiman **** the moment we drafted Kreider. Jessiman is Jessiman and Kreider is Kreider. McIlrath is McIlrath. Barring career ending injury McIlrath will play in the NHL--at the worst he will be a better skating Matt Carkner. A d-man that big and mean and tough and who can skate is going to play for someone. The same was going to happen to Kreider at his lowest level of potential--he would play for someone in some capacity because he has the gifts of great size and great speed and there is a use for that even if the rest of his game never came around.

All i want is to see him play in the NHL. I dont care about college or anything else. I cant wait to see him

RangersHank* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 12:28 PM
  #290
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
My point was that when Kreider was selected he was not called 'the next Jessiman' at the time, as the other poster stated. Taking a look at the link I provided validates that statement.
Understood.

My point was that very few of those opinions really matter. People hated the Jessiman pick. They hated the Stepan pick. They were right about one and wrong about the other.

How many of them saw enough of these prospects to form a valid opinion, let alone have the right to wag their digital fingers in others faces and tell you "I told you so!"?

The loudest people on this board seem to base their opinions on what they read and see in mock drafts. Sauer and Anisimov could have been 1st rounders! What steals! Sanguinetti and Cherepanov fell into our laps! Steals! Who is Stepan? Why not Petrov or Jared Staal? Bad pick! McIlrath was slated to go in the 20's! Bust!

There are far fewer Edge's and Bluenote's than people who just like to see their uninformed and unchanging opinion in digital form.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 12:48 PM
  #291
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,404
vCash: 500
On McIlrath:

There is a difference between a "bad pick" and "not the best pick". There is a huge difference between drafting Pat LaFontaine before Steve Yzerman and drafting Brian Lawton before Steve Yzerman. There is a huge difference between drafting Dustin Brown, who was the captain and playoff point leader for a cup team, before Parise/Getzlaf/Perry/whoever and drafting Jessiman.

Even if the pick is not the "best" it can still be a good pick. Or a great pick.

If McIlrath turns into a top 4 D man who helps the team succeed it will be a good pick. If he turns into a top pair D man it will be a great pick. Regardless of what any of the other players do.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 12:53 PM
  #292
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
The loudest people on this board seem to base their opinions on what they read and see in mock drafts. Sauer and Anisimov could have been 1st rounders! What steals! Sanguinetti and Cherepanov fell into our laps! Steals! Who is Stepan? Why not Petrov or Jared Staal? Bad pick! McIlrath was slated to go in the 20's! Bust!
The McIlrath pick is in question right now because of how he is progressing (or not progressing), not because he was slated to go in the 20's.

And my problem the minute they made the McIlrath selection - and you can look it up right here on this website - was not based on mock drafts or scouting ratings, it was based on the fact that the Rangers were drafting at #10 overall out of need, when the player you drafted was quite possibly five years away from being a productive full time NHL player...and you did not know what your needs would be five years down the road.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 01:33 PM
  #293
offdacrossbar
draft the BPA
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 12,564
vCash: 500
wait.

lets not minimize rankings and scouting services. they are usually right on when it comes to who goes where. i would say 80% of the top15 picks are some combination of the same players that were slated to go top 15. they are usually spot on.

a team can always use a tough dman who fights, throws big hits and generally makes life tough for opposing forwards. that need is always there. question is, was the 10th pick the proper spot to grab that kinda skill set and attempt to address that need? i say no. wrong player to take at that pick when there were better options available to address other needs that were more important, like offense.

i submit that the need for goal scoring trumps any other need in this league today and given our current 2.0 gpg pace were on, its completely relevant. this is a speed based, athletic, goal scoring league right now and its not changing anytime soon. the trend is to eliminate the fighting or atleast curtail it and minimize the flagrant hits and concussion occurrences. the league does NOT want vlad tarasenko or any other offensive player cuncussed by dylan mcilrath with a booming, marginal hit if that means a young star player is taken out and injured. the rough and tumble nhl may be transition into a more wide open offensive, fan friendly game. until the playoffs start ...

the physicality that dylan brings is real and intimidating for sure, but his impact may be minimized as that part of the game is phased out in favor of speed and goal scoring. does he have the other requisite skills to change his game and adapt to the speed and pace of the nhl game in the future ?

time will tell.

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 01:35 PM
  #294
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
At the time Kreider was drafted I do not remember anyone proclaiming Kreider to be the next Jessiman. People seemed pretty happy with Kreider's potential.

Read for yourself:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...hlight=kreider

On the other hand there was consternation about the McIlrath pick the moment it was made.
Not everybody liked the Kreider pick Lots of people including Rangers HF posters were saying he was going to be the next Jessiman. He was a junior at Phillips Andover. When he switched to the prep school he had to go back a grade. A lot of people were worried about the pick for a number of reasons. The level of competition that Kreider had faced was poor by the standards of most other draftees. The fear that Kreider would have to remain at Phillips Andover for his senior year would mean another season against the same substandard competition basically retarding his development even further. Jessiman had come out of New England prep school hockey himself and had played for Ivy league Dartmouth team. He was a big player who had played against the same inferior kind of competition. It was easy to draw comparisons.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 01:43 PM
  #295
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Not everybody liked the Kreider pick Lots of people including Rangers HF posters were saying he was going to be the next Jessiman. He was a junior at Phillips Andover. When he switched to the prep school he had to go back a grade. A lot of people were worried about the pick for a number of reasons. The level of competition that Kreider had faced was poor by the standards of most other draftees. The fear that Kreider would have to remain at Phillips Andover for his senior year would mean another season against the same substandard competition basically retarding his development even further. Jessiman had come out of New England prep school hockey himself and had played for Ivy league Dartmouth team. He was a big player who had played against the same inferior kind of competition. It was easy to draw comparisons.
Instead of attempting to rewrite history of how people felt about the Kreider pick at the time it was made, you can always just click on the link I provided to see the ACTUAL history.

The version you just gave is the extreme minority view in that thread.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 01:58 PM
  #296
Punxrocknyc19*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Not everybody liked the Kreider pick Lots of people including Rangers HF posters were saying he was going to be the next Jessiman. He was a junior at Phillips Andover. When he switched to the prep school he had to go back a grade. A lot of people were worried about the pick for a number of reasons. The level of competition that Kreider had faced was poor by the standards of most other draftees. The fear that Kreider would have to remain at Phillips Andover for his senior year would mean another season against the same substandard competition basically retarding his development even further. Jessiman had come out of New England prep school hockey himself and had played for Ivy league Dartmouth team. He was a big player who had played against the same inferior kind of competition. It was easy to draw comparisons.
Lee Stempniak didnt have a problem making the pros and lead their team in scoring, Stempniak went to the same school as Jessiman. Jessiman also lost a year due to injury.. that is not his fault... Stempniak was a 5th round pick in 2003 while Jessiman a 1st round bust. i can only imagine how Jessiman feels now

Punxrocknyc19* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 02:05 PM
  #297
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
The McIlrath pick is in question right now because of how he is progressing (or not progressing), not because he was slated to go in the 20's.

And my problem the minute they made the McIlrath selection - and you can look it up right here on this website - was not based on mock drafts or scouting ratings, it was based on the fact that the Rangers were drafting at #10 overall out of need, when the player you drafted was quite possibly five years away from being a productive full time NHL player...and you did not know what your needs would be five years down the road.
I don't think Hank getting run or Gaborik getting pummeled had as much to do with the pick as people think. I would argue that large and mobile right handed defensemen are almost always a need. The real truth might be somewhere in the middle.

My issue with the pick, aside from the fact that it was not for a forward, was that I've never been a fan of drafting people based on their physical gifts. This isn't the NFL. I disliked the Malhotra and the Jessiman pick. Kreider was a similar case. McIlrath is a similar case.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 02:13 PM
  #298
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
I don't think Hank getting run or Gaborik getting pummeled had as much to do with the pick as people think. I would argue that large and mobile right handed defensemen are almost always a need. The real truth might be somewhere in the middle.
I completely disagree and think you are totally off base here. Let's leave it at that.

Quote:
My issue with the pick, aside from the fact that it was not for a forward, was that I've never been a fan of drafting people based on their physical gifts. This isn't the NFL. I disliked the Malhotra and the Jessiman pick. Kreider was a similar case. McIlrath is a similar case.
I have no idea what this means.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 02:42 PM
  #299
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 32,228
vCash: 500
Awards:
The biggest concern with the Kreider and Jessiman picks was they were dominating in lousy leagues/conferences.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2013, 02:44 PM
  #300
Punxrocknyc19*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
The biggest concern with the Kreider and Jessiman picks was they were dominating in lousy leagues/conferences.
Lee Stempniak did that also and lead his team 3 years in a row in pts and made the NHL... Tanner Glass was also on that team and made the NHL.. Jessiman just like Grachev played with players that made him look better than he was.

Punxrocknyc19* 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 01:23 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.