One of the worst drafts in Ranger history

[Garden_Variety]

There are exceptions to every rule however that being said Lou Lamirello said that he drafts who the organization feels is the best player available. Look at his draft record.

[Levitate]

the rangers drafted almost all for offense last year...this year they draft almost defense. did they really need to continue stocking up on questionable late round offensive players after last year? they picked some, picked up some solid defenseman to start the draft...complaining they didn't draft enough offense in this draft is kind of reaching IMO because like i said, look at last years draft...that's what they did, they didn't need to do that two years in a row

olver, ryan, dubinsky, psuny, petruzalek, even callahan has some offense in there. and this year they picked up cliche, who from all accounts has some offensive talent to develop, dupont who has a lot of people thinking he's about to break out as a power forward, and pyatt who looks like a talented two way player and leader for his team.

honestly that's a lot of potential offensive talent from rounds 2 onward. compared to that we drafted sauer, flatt, koverko, and paimement (last year) as defensemen in the 2nd round onward. so you have 9 forwards (hell that's not even all the forwards they've drafted in the past two years) vs. 4 defensemen.

methinks someone is overstating the "drafting too much defense this draft" idea

[Davisian]

Originally Posted by happyrangerfan

Actually, calling this draft one of the worst in history is right on the money and if you don't believe that you need to get a clue.

People who say you don't draft by need should follow golf. That is the dumbest theory of all time. You always draft for need if the players available at that need are talented enough.

Obviously, some of you aren't bright enough to see what is happening here.

Originally Posted by happyrangerfan

A long time before you rookie and the team since 1975 and practically never miss a game. You need to learn a lot more.

Originally Posted by happyrangerfan

If I hear that moronic phrase one more time I'm going to throw up

If the talent at the need doesn't justify the pick you draft the best player available and only then

Let me just make sure we've got this straight, as its hard to see the logic through the thick curtain of sanctimony..

You're saying you draft on need if the guy is very talented and ready to step in, and if not, you take the best player available?

The moronic phrase that makes you wretch, which you use yourself later in the post?

Sounds like you're talking about Best Player available either way, and hoping it fills a need immediately..

Tell me how many drafted Hockey players make the team in their draft year?

If most take 2-4 years to reach the show, how does one know a teams need that far in the future?


Who knows how this draft works out.. I don't have much faith in Sather, but I do know that the more young talent in a system, the better chance at team depth down the road. And by being strong in one area (Defense after this draft) you can use that depth to fill the other areas in needed.

Best Player Available, it's the only way to fly..

[dumpsathernow*]

Best player available is how idiot GM's draft who have no vision of what they want there team to look and play like

The myth that Lou drafts for the Devils on best player available is ridiculous and an insult to Lou. He doesn't do that at all. He drafts based on need, talent and character. He doesn't sit at the draft and say, wow, we need a center and there are 4 talented centers out there with great attitudes but this defenseman is slightly better talent wise so we will take him. Give me a break

[Fletch]

too tough outside the sure-fire guys and there were few sure-fire guys out there. I would say that picking the BPA is the way to go - although if you have a lot of depth in any one area, there's no shame in trading your pick and not picking the BPA to try and get another body. Having said that, I'm of the opinion that the Rangers needed every type of player. Defensive d-men, offensive d-men, forwards with skill, forwards with size. If they currently look over-loaded at defense, albeit with a bunch of guys who are not ready for the NHL yet, then that's a problem that's easily solved (if there are too many defensive studs - trade for some offensive studs, but trade from strength). With Staal, they may have that defensive defenseman that can man the top pairing - something they do not currently have in the organization, and something's that be a glaring hole in the Rangers for 8 years. If he and Tyutin work out - they may form a formidible 1-2 on defense for years to come - or not of course.

[Garden_Variety]

Originally Posted by happyrangerfan

Best player available is how idiot GM's draft who have no vision of what they want there team to look and play like

The myth that Lou drafts for the Devils on best player available is ridiculous and an insult to Lou. He doesn't do that at all. He drafts based on need, talent and character. He doesn't sit at the draft and say, wow, we need a center and there are 4 talented centers out there with great attitudes but this defenseman is slightly better talent wise so we will take him. Give me a break

HE SAID THAT HIMSELF. "I draft the best player available." I guess he is an idiot. BTW when the player that you want is not on the board you take the BPA even if it does not fullfil a need.

[in the hall]

ok happyranger.. just stop posting because you have zero credability and it is painfully showing

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

OK, that'll do.