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

Let's take a stab at when was the last time

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-30-2006, 05:39 PM
  #51
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13
Traded for that higher draft choice?
I heard the second coming of Brendel and Lundmark are in next years draft.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 05:43 PM
  #52
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Just looked up Brendl's stats...

16 goals (31 points) in 58 games this season. Man, he cannot even score in the AHL right now.

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 05:47 PM
  #53
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
16 goals (31 points) in 58 games this season. Man, he cannot even score in the AHL right now.
He just has no desire or heart..something the scouts should have picked up on when drafting him.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 05:49 PM
  #54
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balej20
He just has no desire or heart..something the scouts should have picked up on when drafting him.
Most scouts liked Brendl that year, can't blame our scouts entirely. Lundmark too. Both were very raw and underdeveloped off the ice, thats not always easy to see when dealing with 18 year olds.

Bluenote13 is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 05:51 PM
  #55
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13
Most scouts liked Brendl that year, can't blame our scouts entirely. Lundmark too. Both were very raw and underdeveloped off the ice, thats not always easy to see when dealing with 18 year olds.
Yeah, I know most liked him. I don't know, it should have been something that they could have picked up on.

As for Lundmark, he is an enigma. I don't think his effort has anything to do with it...I just don't know what it is with him.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 06:17 PM
  #56
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
It may've been picked up on...

but when a guy produces like he does, sometimes you hope he matures. It's hard to teach that type of talent. Lundmark had the work ethic and skill. He just lost it on the way to the NHL. He does currently have six points in six games with the Flames.

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 06:18 PM
  #57
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
but when a guy produces like he does, sometimes you hope he matures. It's hard to teach that type of talent. Lundmark had the work ethic and skill. He just lost it on the way to the NHL. He does currently have six points in six games with the Flames.
Lundmark is still young, I'm just affraid maybe his skill level was a tad bit overrated? I dunno, I have a real hard time trying to figure out what went wrong with him.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 06:19 PM
  #58
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balej20
He just has no desire or heart..something the scouts should have picked up on when drafting him.

Team's noted that, it wasn't a suprise. He was seen as high risk, high reward.

The general consensus is that he could be a top scorer or a complete bust. He was very much boom or bust even then.

But it comes down to taking the risk. He's not terribly unique in that regard. Some team's took the risk and it paid off heavily. Other's didn't (like the Rangers).

7 years ago Brendl was seen as a player who could go either way. Lundmark on the other hand was seen as a safe bet to make the NHL. He wasn't as offensivly flashy as Brendl, but he was seen as far more likely to be an NHL player.

Both guys were wanted by a lot of teams, both were consensus top 10 picks and both were rated very highly by scouts.

Contrary to the belive that somehow all these evaluations should make drafting easier, the Draft is still going to produce far more misses than hits over the years. If it wasn't the Rangers, they would've been another team's busts.

I don't blame a team when they go with the same approach as their peers, it's when they start going for serious stretches (and I won't name who, because it'll start a tangent) when they already know they haven't had previous luck that gets me angry.

Edge is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 06:30 PM
  #59
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Me too, Balej...

but in the end, it seemed as though he wanted it handed to him, which goes against what his M.O was in juniors.

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 06:31 PM
  #60
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
but in the end, it seemed as though he wanted it handed to him, which goes against what his M.O was in juniors.
I think you're exactly right. Boy would it have been nice if his Junior game translated to the NHL...hardnosed, gritty, tough player who can score. If I'm not mistaken, didn't he has one real good year in the 'A' as well?

Balej20* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 06:40 PM
  #61
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Good year...

no better than what Dawes is doing this season though. His size was an issue too.

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 06:46 PM
  #62
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
no better than what Dawes is doing this season though. His size was an issue too.
Ahh, I see now, only 27 goals...I was under the impression it was closer to 40. Maybe he just wasnt strong enough to bring his tough style over to the pro game.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 08:13 PM
  #63
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
no better than what Dawes is doing this season though. His size was an issue too.
Personally I think Dawes was better this season and will eclipse Lundmark's totals by more than few points.

Dawes got better at his position as the season went on and has become a real player to watch lately.

Lundmark switched positions and was never really quite as intregal as Dawes is making himself.

When all is said and done Dawes should post around 35-40 goals this year and close to or around 70 points. He's been better in the second half so you have to add a little to his projections on the season.

But the difference has also been about more than points too, Dawes looks like he really wants it. Lundmark always looked like he expected it. That difference is so huge.

(I'm not disagreeing with you Fletch, just expounding on the idea).

Edge is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 08:24 PM
  #64
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
I would assume that most of those scouts are

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13
Most scouts liked Brendl that year, can't blame our scouts entirely. Lundmark too. Both were very raw and underdeveloped off the ice, thats not always easy to see when dealing with 18 year olds.
now unemployed. Anyone who had better than 20/400 vision quickly could see that he was a very bad skater. There were grave issues with his all around game. Brendl was a classic example of someone dominating at the Jr level to be a bust anywhere above Jr A.

Brendl had average speed at best, difficualty changing speeds (many because there was little difference between standing still and coasting), he lacked agility on his skates, his balance on his skates was poor. Like most I thought this kid was the coming based off of what we all read. That is why I caution people on here about seeing people yourself before you believe what you read. I saw his first NHL game in Atlanta and I knew right then and there that we made a huge, huge mistake. Lundmark was not far behind in my assessment of him.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 08:30 PM
  #65
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Excellent analogy not just about Brendl & Lundmark

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Team's noted that, it wasn't a suprise. He was seen as high risk, high reward.

The general consensus is that he could be a top scorer or a complete bust. He was very much boom or bust even then.

But it comes down to taking the risk. He's not terribly unique in that regard. Some team's took the risk and it paid off heavily. Other's didn't (like the Rangers).

7 years ago Brendl was seen as a player who could go either way. Lundmark on the other hand was seen as a safe bet to make the NHL. He wasn't as offensivly flashy as Brendl, but he was seen as far more likely to be an NHL player.

Both guys were wanted by a lot of teams, both were consensus top 10 picks and both were rated very highly by scouts.

Contrary to the belive that somehow all these evaluations should make drafting easier, the Draft is still going to produce far more misses than hits over the years. If it wasn't the Rangers, they would've been another team's busts.

I don't blame a team when they go with the same approach as their peers, it's when they start going for serious stretches (and I won't name who, because it'll start a tangent) when they already know they haven't had previous luck that gets me angry.
but the thought process behind a selection and the point about knowing that you may not have struck gold but ratehr lead and to keep spinning the wheel of chance instead of recognizing that you already, unintended as it may have been, taken a risk on a bust or boom prospect but forge ahead and compound the situation by knowingly taken a risk or two. That in a nut shell was our undoing.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
03-30-2006, 08:35 PM
  #66
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Blue old boy, I find it amusing that you are big into

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
If Staal can truly develop into a #2 type, then Toots being a 2nd pair defenseman is not really an issue. I will gladly sign up for one #2 (Staal) and three #3-4 (Toots, Sauer & Baranka). Take into account that at least one of Liffiton, Taylor, Guenin or Flatt have a good chance of turning into a #5-6, and the future of the defense is in good shaper.
And that is not even mentioning Pock or Lampman, with the emphasis being on the former as opposed to the latter.
touting players like Immonen, Dawes, Baranka, Liffiton,Taylor Guenin, Lampman, etc.
Funny what a difference a year makes.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
03-31-2006, 09:00 AM
  #67
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,142
vCash: 500
And I find equally amusing

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLANTARANGER
touting players like Immonen, Dawes, Baranka, Liffiton,Taylor Guenin, Lampman, etc.
Funny what a difference a year makes.
your sheer ability to take hindsight 20/20 and use it as a personal tool. Does your shoulder hurt from all the self-congradualtions you love to heap upon yourself yet? What I state now is what I stated in the beginning of the. You need time to evaluate, not just lap up what the Rangers marketing machine is telling you. NO ONE knew what Prucha was in the beginning of the year. No one except Rodent that is, and you are not him. Now that he has proven it, expectations are different. As well they should be.
In the beginninig of the year, no one knew what either Immonen or Dawes or Baranka or Liffiton or Taylor would give you. Now that they have shown in at the AHL level, one can form a much more educated idea, rather than just simply waive the pom-poms around and trumped everything the Rangers marketing department tells you as sheer fact.
You were ready to crown all of these players as "bona-fide" prospects just becuase Sather either traded for them or drafted them. I preferred to wait until they actually showed something before I made judgement.

True Blue 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 07:51 AM.

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.