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

Are 18 NYR prospects worth a 2-rounder or more?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-11-2007, 02:54 AM
  #1
HockeyGuru07
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5
vCash: 500
Are 18 NYR prospects worth a 2-rounder or more?

LaFleur was just drafted in the second round. This HF board just ranked him #18 of the Rangers prospects. Does that mean that the Rangers have about 20 or so prospects worth a second round pick or more? Really?!

That would be phenomenal, but I highly doubt it.

HockeyGuru07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 03:14 AM
  #2
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuru07 View Post
LaFleur was just drafted in the second round. This HF board just ranked him #18 of the Rangers prospects. Does that mean that the Rangers have about 20 or so prospects worth a second round pick or more? Really?!

That would be phenomenal, but I highly doubt it.
he was almost universally considered a reach at the pick we took him.


we took him that high because we didnt have another pick for the next 3 (?) rounds. Rangers desperately need goaltending depth beyond Henrik and Monty so they "Reached" for this kid with the 2nd round pick rather than have all the good goalie prospects gone by the time they picked again. heck, i believe when they picked again San Jose had already taken 2 or 3 goalies.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 04:05 AM
  #3
HockeyGuru07
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5
vCash: 500
18 top prospects?

Quote:
Originally Posted by inferno272 View Post
he was almost universally considered a reach at the pick we took him.


we took him that high because we didnt have another pick for the next 3 (?) rounds. Rangers desperately need goaltending depth beyond Henrik and Monty so they "Reached" for this kid with the 2nd round pick rather than have all the good goalie prospects gone by the time they picked again. heck, i believe when they picked again San Jose had already taken 2 or 3 goalies.
So why not trade down? You can get a pair of third rounders, or at least a 3 and a 4 in return for a second round pick. Then draft a goalie in the third round.

Seems like Sather believes that LaFleur is worth a second.

HockeyGuru07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 04:28 AM
  #4
BLACKBURN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuru07 View Post
Seems like Sather believes that LaFleur is worth a second.
Allaire is very high on this guy and he happens to know a thing or two about goaltenders. I wouldnt be suprised to see LaFleur progress well, especially with guys like Allaire tutoring him.

BLACKBURN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 04:32 AM
  #5
incident
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: England
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by inferno272 View Post
he was almost universally considered a reach at the pick we took him.


we took him that high because we didnt have another pick for the next 3 (?) rounds. Rangers desperately need goaltending depth beyond Henrik and Monty so they "Reached" for this kid with the 2nd round pick rather than have all the good goalie prospects gone by the time they picked again. heck, i believe when they picked again San Jose had already taken 2 or 3 goalies.
But surely the Rangers scouting must've rated him above the other available goaltenders - the very next pick after LaFleur was another goaltender (Trevor Cann), taken by Colorado who certainly didn't have the "lack of picks" excuse.

incident is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 07:14 AM
  #6
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
This past draft more than any previous draft was about shoring up weaknesses within the organization. That is why we selected him. There was no guarantee that if we traded down he would there. Shoulda, woulda, coulda weren't on the NYR selection board.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 07:26 AM
  #7
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuru07 View Post
So why not trade down? You can get a pair of third rounders, or at least a 3 and a 4 in return for a second round pick. Then draft a goalie in the third round.

Seems like Sather believes that LaFleur is worth a second.
they tried to trade down but with it being a crappy draft no one was willing to deal with us and they didn't want to risk that he'd still be there in the 5th round

NYR469 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 07:28 AM
  #8
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuru07 View Post
LaFleur was just drafted in the second round. This HF board just ranked him #18 of the Rangers prospects. Does that mean that the Rangers have about 20 or so prospects worth a second round pick or more? Really?!

That would be phenomenal, but I highly doubt it.
where a player gets draft means ZERO about his trade value. the fact that lafleur was picked in the 2nd round does NOT mean he's worth a 2nd rounder. lundqvist was drafted in the 7th round, would you trade him for a 7th rounder?

draft picks have value based on the risk/reward of not knowing who you will get...but once you identify that specific player then the value is based on that players value, not the pick.

NYR469 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 08:00 AM
  #9
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 13,210
vCash: 500
Got to think that Benoit Allaire had a lot of input into taking Lafleur--and Allaire and his brother are goalie gurus. I forget but he was either the first or second goalie drafted. I have to think there is some kinks to work out with him but also some really good upside.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 08:19 AM
  #10
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Got to think that Benoit Allaire had a lot of input into taking Lafleur--and Allaire and his brother are goalie gurus. I forget but he was either the first or second goalie drafted. I have to think there is some kinks to work out with him but also some really good upside.
He was the second of four goalies taken in the second round. Gistedt was first, taken by Phoenix 11 picks earlier.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 08:24 AM
  #11
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,156
vCash: 50
Awards:
I didn't think he was really a reach. Behind Smith, I saw the rest of the goalies ranked all over the place with no bona fide second best guy out there. We needed some G depth, so we took a guy with solid numbers at PEI in the Q that we thought Allaire could develop.

I'd say we have about 15 guys that could go in the top two rounds of a draft held today if they were all eligible. We're very deep.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 11:34 AM
  #12
007
Olympic nut
 
007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mannahatta
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 007 Send a message via MSN to 007
On another, more general note, you should also be conscious of the fact that a 2nd-rounder in this year's draft would not necessarily have been a 2nd-rounder in some other draft. The overall quality of draft classes fluctuates.

007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 12:09 PM
  #13
Nich
Registered User
 
Nich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wantagh
Country: Croatia
Posts: 6,895
vCash: 500
honestly, seeing that we had our choice of every goalie, but one, and took this guy, shows me allier thinks he has a lot of raw talent...plus he is freaking huge!

Nich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 12:39 PM
  #14
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuru07 View Post
LaFleur was just drafted in the second round. This HF board just ranked him #18 of the Rangers prospects. Does that mean that the Rangers have about 20 or so prospects worth a second round pick or more? Really?!

That would be phenomenal, but I highly doubt it.
No, cause no intelligent hockey person would look at the list in such a way.

And as some mentioned, we tried to trade down and get a few picks, no one was looking to move.

'The Flower' is a project goalie no doubt.

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 01:01 PM
  #15
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLANTARANGER View Post
This past draft more than any previous draft was about shoring up weaknesses within the organization. That is why we selected him. There was no guarantee that if we traded down he would there. Shoulda, woulda, coulda weren't on the NYR selection board.
exactly

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 01:12 PM
  #16
HockeyGuru07
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR469 View Post
where a player gets draft means ZERO about his trade value. the fact that lafleur was picked in the 2nd round does NOT mean he's worth a 2nd rounder. lundqvist was drafted in the 7th round, would you trade him for a 7th rounder?
I didn't realize Lundqvist was drafted in 2007...

Lafleur was JUST drafted. Nobody had a chance to bust, break through or get injured. You'd think that Sather would not waste a second round pick on a 3/4 round quality player. NYR is not a desperate for a goalie with Lundqvist and Montoya in the system. Worst case, they could've waited a year until the next draft. And why do they even need a goalie prospect now with two young blue chippers in the NHL or on the verge of the NHL? If anything, they needed a good LW.

HockeyGuru07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 01:20 PM
  #17
rodmunch
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 593
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuru07 View Post
I didn't realize Lundqvist was drafted in 2007...

Lafleur was JUST drafted. Nobody had a chance to bust, break through or get injured. You'd think that Sather would not waste a second round pick on a 3/4 round quality player. NYR is not a desperate for a goalie with Lundqvist and Montoya in the system. Worst case, they could've waited a year until the next draft. And why do they even need a goalie prospect now with two young blue chippers in the NHL or on the verge of the NHL? If anything, they needed a good LW.
But the thing is, you always want depth, and after Montoya, the only goalie prospect I can think of is Holt, who has no future in the NHL.

As mentioned before, he was a reach, but Sather apparently coudn't trade down since no one was interested (like when LA took Hickey 4th overall because they couldnt move down)

And what makes you think they needed a LW over a goalie? Along with Prucha, they already have Dawes and Byers in the minors, and a whole bunch of other names.

rodmunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 01:32 PM
  #18
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,264
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuru07 View Post
LaFleur was just drafted in the second round. This HF board just ranked him #18 of the Rangers prospects. Does that mean that the Rangers have about 20 or so prospects worth a second round pick or more? Really?!

That would be phenomenal, but I highly doubt it.
For those that said LaFleur was a reach, yes according to some scouting services. I believe the Rangers believed he was worth that pick as they took him above other highly touted goalies. From what I hear Allaire made this pick.

Take into consideration that this was a weak draft. Also, star power (Cherepanov) and development have alot to do with rankings. Take a player like Pyatt who was ranked low but the last few years really developed his game. He is much closer to the NHL than other player drafted higher than him, thus a higher ranking.

LaFleur is low because nobody really knows alot about him. He needs to prove his worth this year.

DarthSather99 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 04:25 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.