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

Rangers farm still disrespected

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2008, 11:50 AM
  #126
Duponttime*
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlundqvist30 View Post
It's really unbelievable how stupid people can be.

Of course our prospect pool isn't very good right now. What the hell do you expect after we graduate double digit players within the last 3 years and our top prospect dies?

-Marc Staal
-Dan Girardi
-Ryan Callahan
-Nigel Dawes
-Fedor Tyutin
-Dominic Moore
-Brandon Dubinsky
-Henrik Lundqvist
-Petr Prucha
-Ryan Hollweg

That is a ton of players to have graduated from 2000-2005. Two players per year is an unbelievable success rate, and the only thing that is really lacking from this pool is a top-6 forward, which Tyutin was used to pull in anyway. When you graduate 2 players per year where the hell are do you expect prospects to come in from to immediately fill in the holes? The weaker prospect pool only shows our success and developing talent, not our failure. In the next few years you'll see our pool gain top status yet again. Of course not all of Campbell, Hagelin, Grachev, Del Zotto, Sanguinetti, Anisimov, Doyle, etc. will all develop, but some of them will. We've been incredible in the draft the last few years, and our scouts aren't stupid. They know what are needs are, and unless there is some insane situation where it's a no brainer to take an available defenseman, I fully expect a forward with our first round pick next year. Our drafting of forwards this year shows they know our holes. We'll be fine, I'm not worried.

And BrooklynHockey99, I think you're missing the point. Cherepanov had top 5 pick potential . Grachev was late first round potential. To make a comparison, there's a complete difference between Jonathan Toews (top 5 pick) dropping to the 3rd round and Bob Sanguinetti (late first rounder) dropping to the 3rd round. General consensus around HF is that Grachev based on his abilities alone should have gotten him a late first round pick, at worst early second rounder.

I believe our farm system is still top 7. What other team can say they have 3 NHL, top 4 defense talents in Sanguinetti, Del Zotto and Sauer? Of which 2 project as PP pointmen. How many farm systems can say that they have 2, 6'3, 200 pound two way forwards that project to the NHL in Anisimov and Grachev?

All I hear from the media every year is how teams are desperate for defenseman. We have 3 guys in the minors right now who, 3 years from now the organization could probably trade for the mother load. All the media does is put emphasis on defenseman but when they look at farm systems they constantly fall in love with scoring prospects and rate the system based off of those guys.

Duponttime* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:21 PM
  #127
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,750
vCash: 500
A couple things on this thread as a whole:

On the Russians in last years draft. Filatov was brought up by english speaking parents and taught english at an early age. He's been aimed towards North America since practically kindergarten. Likewise Tikhonov was also mentioned as going before Grachev but he's lived on and off again in the United States for a while. Grachev and Cherepanov a couple years before--fell down in their drafts just because of the fear they might never come over.

There are also guys we don't have a good read on yet and may not for another year or so. Stepan would be one.

On Zaborsky I never would have rated him as high as No. 6 on our prospect list. And on Sauer I think he'll be okay and the comparison made to Pock is just ridiculous. Two completely different styles.

The Rangers do need to replenish their prospect pool. They have only a handful of legit NHL prospects that have turned pro. Anisimov, Byers, maybe Dupont, Sanguinetti, Sauer and Potter. Moore in a pinch but he's getting older. I think HF rated us about right.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:32 PM
  #128
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
I was watching some show on the NHL.com. Just recently was able to get it. Some dude with a beard was hosting it with Jim Dowd. You guys probably know his name. His exact words were about the WolfPack, "There isn't a lot down there right now."

When will the anti-New York garbage stop with these media people in hockey? You could easily make the point that the Rangers have two top 4, NHL defense talents in Hartford in Sanguinetti and Sauer who aren't very far away. Last time I looked, I didn't see teams bringing up young defenseman who can actually play DEFENSE. There are a lot of young defenseman in the league and quite honestly, 80% of them are awful. They aren't on the same planet as a Staal or Girardi. On top of that you have a kid in Anisimov who probably projects as a really good, two way, 3rd line center and is almost ready for the NHL. Dupont is starting to figure out the AHL and it shouldn't be long till his scoring really starts to pick up. I definitely think he will be an NHL player.

To me, if you have 3 players in your AHL system that project to be significant NHL players, you have quite a bit in your farm system. I always look at it like this. If you can find, one good young player a year from your farm that plays in the NHL, your team will never be that old.
So Giradi is now among the upper crust of defensemen in the NHL? Following along that line of thinking, we may indeed have a slew of future all stars on the way.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 12:50 PM
  #129
NorthlandPro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Suwanee GA
Country: United States
Posts: 330
vCash: 500
Hartford is a young team and many of the players are getting their teeth cut at that pro level. They need to have time to adjust and get use to the pros. Sauer has excellent potential and the same with Sangs. AA would have been a 1st round pick if not for the lack of a transfer agreement. Wiese shows some promise, ala Knuble and needs time to develop. The same goes for Dupont. Byers is another player that was on the brink of making it. In addition, there are several more players in College and Jrs. The cupboard is far from bare. Those that criticize fail to recognize that drafting is a crap shoot to begin with. There are no guaranties. You do your homework and wait to see how the player develops. Some players are willing to up their level of commitment to get to the next level, some don't. Not all first rounders make it, not all first overall picks make it. Over the past 3-4 years we have moved a decent number of prospects up from Hartford to the NHL.

Some teams have a knack for developing goaltenders, others defensemen. With Staal and Girardi already on our blueline and Potter having been recalled we seem to have focused on defensemen with Sauer, Sanguinetti, Del Zotto, Kundratek, Gaulton and Dowzak in the pipeline. Not all are going to pan out, but you have to have multiple prospects to better your chances of success. Up front we have Anisimov and Grachev, both of whom would have been first rounders but were not because of the lack of a transfer agreement. Anisimov is already well schooled on the defensive side of the puck and anyone who has followed the rangers, let alone hockey in general, knows that you can not be a defensive liability and make it in the NHL. Grachev is a big player playing for a great Jrs Coach in Stan Butler. Both of our Russians are in North America so there is no issue with a transfer agreement.

Carl Hagelin is another player up front that is getting rave reviews. As a Sophmore he is on their first line, plays PP and PKing. He plays for Michigan, not a low level program. Then you have a guy like Doyle, 18G 28A 61PIM not the biggest dog in the junk yard but one that has some bite to his game. Add to the mix Stepan and Campbell and though all four players are similar, again you increase your odds that one will pan out.

A kid I like and is a long shot but you have to love his game is Justin Soryal. Maybe a real poor man's Adam Graves. Kind of reminds me of Terry O'Reilly, rough around the edges, but with some patience and dedication he may make himself into a useful player. All this rating stuff is a matter of opinion as well. Add to that the number of times the raters actually see these players on a regular basis. I think Prospect Park gives a more balanced and accurate assessment of our players because they enlist scouts from other teams, college and Jr announcers, etc.

NorthlandPro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 01:00 PM
  #130
Radek27
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,179
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarkko Immonen View Post
Bleh, I'm not attacking you but I don't want to hear that complaint again. Biggest piece of hogwash ever. Especially since the guy put up 6 points in 14 games the second time he got called up. Ah well, I take my comments back about the Rangers (*gasp* -- someone is wrong on the internet). I just hope a guy like Owens get his shot somewhere in the league, the guy is a high energy player with offensive skills.
I'm not gonna argue, I liked what I saw out of Immonen when he was called up. I have no idea why he wasn't given more of a chance when. I mean if Renney will dress Hossa every game HOPING too see what he thinks he will see out of him why woudln't he give Immonen the same kind of chance. Renney seems to have his favorites, his projects, and just guys he don't like (Immonen/Prucha)

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 01:48 PM
  #131
Anthony Mauro
DB Hockey
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,665
vCash: 500
This is a thread on a topic about our depth "down there" meaning HFD. That bearded guy did not make a statement of our junior aged players, nor our farm system as a whole. It's beyond me why people are still arguing this fact...

BrooklynHockey is partly right..just like Filatov went early in the draft, if Grachev's ability warranted it he would have went early. If a guy is that talented he's going to get more people watching him, monitoring him, etc. Grachev was thought of by many as a second round pick. You telling me an NHL franchise cant interview a top five talent thoroughly and figure out if he's gonna deusche you after the draft and not come over?

Though I do think NHL scouting community is full of a bunch of ***** (exceptions are crews like Ottawa's) like Kevin Lowe -Cherepanov idiocy - and Brian Burke - xenophobia - who make **** up and have stupid bias just to knock a kid down, or atleast justify their actions.

Before 2008-2009, Radulov et al jumping across the pond, there was absolutely no reason to use not coming over as a CON for a draft prospect. Ovechkin, Malkin, Semin, all those guys came over. I've never heard a story where NHL brass has interviewed a potential draftee and the draftee outright said "I will not come over." In fact they all pretty much act and talk like Filatov and Grachev. They want to come over. They want the NHL. If you don't hear it it's probably because the guy has no future in the NHL and who the heck really cares anyways...

Anthony Mauro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 02:47 PM
  #132
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GongShowHockeyNYR View Post
Staal, Dubinsky, Girardi, Callahan, and Dawes are all playing in either there 1st full or second full NHL season this year.
I am not sure I'd count Dawes anymore. Every year is his rookie year, for the third year. He doesn't seem to be able to put up numbers in the NHL on consistent basis.

We wouldn't be in so much trouble if Dawes actually established himself as a second liner and Cherry was still alive.

When we got Zherdev, things looked pretty good actually. Z is a top 6 forward. Fritsche added good depth. It looked like Dawes will be a second liner, and if he won't, there was still an outshot shot that Prucha would make it. But it was reasonable to think that either Dawes or Prucha would make it. There was also chatter that Korps would be a top-6 forward, which looks unlikely now. And there was Cherry.

The thing is that we really have only 1 wing (Z) who can play on the top 2 lines.

It's a fact that we need to recognize. Homers aren't going to help the team play better.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 04:50 PM
  #133
hlundqvist30*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
I am not sure I'd count Dawes anymore. Every year is his rookie year, for the third year. He doesn't seem to be able to put up numbers in the NHL on consistent basis.

We wouldn't be in so much trouble if Dawes actually established himself as a second liner and Cherry was still alive.

When we got Zherdev, things looked pretty good actually. Z is a top 6 forward. Fritsche added good depth. It looked like Dawes will be a second liner, and if he won't, there was still an outshot shot that Prucha would make it. But it was reasonable to think that either Dawes or Prucha would make it. There was also chatter that Korps would be a top-6 forward, which looks unlikely now. And there was Cherry.

The thing is that we really have only 1 wing (Z) who can play on the top 2 lines.

It's a fact that we need to recognize. Homers aren't going to help the team play better.
The only one there we could possibly call a failure is Dawes. Korpikoski was not going to be a 2nd liner. Prucha was not going to be either. We're not in any trouble. We're set in terms of defenseman between Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto, and Sanguinetti. We'll continue to add depth defenseman, but now they'll be drafting forwards. If we're in "trouble" then so is 2/3rds of the NHL. Homerism might not help, but neither is Chicken Little.

hlundqvist30* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 05:06 PM
  #134
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlundqvist30 View Post
The only one there we could possibly call a failure is Dawes. Korpikoski was not going to be a 2nd liner. Prucha was not going to be either. We're not in any trouble. We're set in terms of defenseman between Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto, and Sanguinetti. We'll continue to add depth defenseman, but now they'll be drafting forwards. If we're in "trouble" then so is 2/3rds of the NHL. Homerism might not help, but neither is Chicken Little.

Yes, that's true about forwards.

But the point was that 4 months ago, there was at least some outside chance of Prucha panning out. There was an outside chance of Korps being a second liner (read old messages. Nobody admits to it now, not even to themselves, but last year, Korps was touted as a blue chipper who'll eventually make a huge difference for us, not just as someone a future solid third liner).


But on defense...

There's very little chance that both DZ and Sang will become top 4 defensemen. Very little.

You remember Backman? Look at the old posts about him. He was a top offensive defenseman. Guess what. Either DZ or Sang will turn into Backman.

Offensive defenseman are the most high risk skaters there are. The odds of both panning out are slim.

So when you look at DZ and Sang, let's count them as 1 because odds are very good that one will pan out and one won't.

Staal and Girardi are looking good. Plus 1 prospect. That makes it 3. Throw in Rosie and Redden, who are here to stay (I love the logic of some fans: "They are overpaid. We should never have signed them because at this salary they are more detrimental than having nothing at all. Now let's trade them for prospects or some star player. How about we get a first line player for one overpaid defenseman and one overpaid center, whom we also think we'd be better off without just to keep cap space open! I am brilliant. I wonder why Sather can't think of that? I mean it makes sense that it would be good to get a star for 2 overpaid players whose salaries are so high that they are detrimental to us. I wonder... Maybe it's time to call WFAN.")

So Staal, Girardi, DZ/Sang, Redden and Rosie make a very solid top 5. Someone else will round it out. Maybe Sauer. Maybe the worse one among DZ/Sang. Maybe Baranka will return. Maybe Kalinin. Oh crap, no! Noooo!

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 05:27 PM
  #135
hlundqvist30*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
Yes, that's true about forwards.

But the point was that 4 months ago, there was at least some outside chance of Prucha panning out. There was an outside chance of Korps being a second liner (read old messages. Nobody admits to it now, not even to themselves, but last year, Korps was touted as a blue chipper who'll eventually make a huge difference for us, not just as someone a future solid third liner).


But on defense...

There's very little chance that both DZ and Sang will become top 4 defensemen. Very little.

You remember Backman? Look at the old posts about him. He was a top offensive defenseman. Guess what. Either DZ or Sang will turn into Backman.

Offensive defenseman are the most high risk skaters there are. The odds of both panning out are slim.

So when you look at DZ and Sang, let's count them as 1 because odds are very good that one will pan out and one won't.

Staal and Girardi are looking good. Plus 1 prospect. That makes it 3. Throw in Rosie and Redden, who are here to stay (I love the logic of some fans: "They are overpaid. We should never have signed them because at this salary they are more detrimental than having nothing at all. Now let's trade them for prospects or some star player. How about we get a first line player for one overpaid defenseman and one overpaid center, whom we also think we'd be better off without just to keep cap space open! I am brilliant. I wonder why Sather can't think of that? I mean it makes sense that it would be good to get a star for 2 overpaid players whose salaries are so high that they are detrimental to us. I wonder... Maybe it's time to call WFAN.")

So Staal, Girardi, DZ/Sang, Redden and Rosie make a very solid top 5. Someone else will round it out. Maybe Sauer. Maybe the worse one among DZ/Sang. Maybe Baranka will return. Maybe Kalinin. Oh crap, no! Noooo!
As of this summer nobody thought Korpikoski was going to be a top 6 forward. In fact, this time last year MANY people were convinced Korpikoski wasn't even going to be an NHL player. You'll see that in a poll we had comparing Jessiman and Korpikoski.

And just as many assume both will pan out, you assume 1 is going to fail. You're Backman argument is worthless. Rafalski and Niedermeyer turned out pretty well. So did Zubov and Leetch. So did Eric Desjardins and Mathieu Schneider. So did Sergei Gonchar and Brendan Witt. I could go on and on. Yes, odds are that one of them could fail, but odds are also that one of Kundratek, Potter, Sauer, and any defense we draft in the next few years will surprise. That's why it's great that we have Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto, and Sanguinetti. We know that we're guaranteed a great base between a combination of them. You're right in that some people are retarded in thinking that everything is going to work out perfectly, but you're "the worst is bound to happen" argument is just as pathetic.

hlundqvist30* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 05:39 PM
  #136
Duponttime*
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlundqvist30 View Post
As of this summer nobody thought Korpikoski was going to be a top 6 forward. In fact, this time last year MANY people were convinced Korpikoski wasn't even going to be an NHL player. You'll see that in a poll we had comparing Jessiman and Korpikoski.

And just as many assume both will pan out, you assume 1 is going to fail. You're Backman argument is worthless. Rafalski and Niedermeyer turned out pretty well. So did Zubov and Leetch. So did Eric Desjardins and Mathieu Schneider. So did Sergei Gonchar and Brendan Witt. I could go on and on. Yes, odds are that one of them could fail, but odds are also that one of Kundratek, Potter, Sauer, and any defense we draft in the next few years will surprise. That's why it's great that we have Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto, and Sanguinetti. We know that we're guaranteed a great base between a combination of them. You're right in that some people are retarded in thinking that everything is going to work out perfectly, but you're "the worst is bound to happen" argument is just as pathetic.
Over the past few years this team has added Lundqvist, Staal, Girardi, Dawes,Dubinsky, Callahan and Korpikoski. They Montoya to get Sjostrom. They used Tyutin to get Zherdev.

So in a few years the far via development or trade has yielded us 9 young players currently on the roster. That's not counting Prucha. A lot of teams would kill to have that kind of farm production. Plus you can figure that next year Anisimov and either Sauer or Sanguinetti will make the team. I don't know what more people expect. Let us not forget that accomplished all of that with bad luck to Cherepanov and Blackburn. I was sure that Blackburn was going to be a stud goalie after watching him.

Duponttime* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 08:07 PM
  #137
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
I don't know what more people expect.
That's easy. Difference makers instead of support players.

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 09:48 PM
  #138
NorthlandPro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Suwanee GA
Country: United States
Posts: 330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
That's easy. Difference makers instead of support players.
How many difference makers play in the minors? Cherapanov was a difference maker type player. Where we have been drafting it is hard to find those types of players. I think we have done well considering what positions in the drafts we have been selecting from. Of course I would have preferred a Gretzlaf over a Jessiman and I would have selected Parise. I thought that would have been a perfect pick for us and a bit of poetic justice to have J P root for the NYRS!

NorthlandPro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2008, 10:20 PM
  #139
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
How many difference makers play in the minors?
If you trouble yourself to read the post to which I was responding, you'll find the writer was talking about youth on the Rangers' roster, not youth in Hartford.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
Cherapanov was a difference maker type player.
Of course he was. So was Pavel Brendl. So was Jamie Lundmark. So was (insert name of high scoring junior player here.) All were huge difference makers in juniors, just as you say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
I think we have done well considering what positions in the drafts we have been selecting from.
LOL. You write this, and yet in your very next sentence you cite two teams who drafted better players while picking in slots LOWER than our position.

See the problem?

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 12:17 AM
  #140
Jxmarts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 344
vCash: 500
Cherepanov wasn't Brendl or Lundmark

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post

Originally Posted by NorthlandPro
Cherapanov was a difference maker type player.


Of course he was. So was Pavel Brendl. So was Jamie Lundmark. So was (insert name of high scoring junior player here.) All were huge difference makers in juniors, just as you say.

Unlike Brendl & Lundmark, Cherepanov wasn't a high scoring junior, of which there have been hundreds who never made it to the NHL. Cherepanov was playing in the Russian elite league & producing as a teenager at a rate that only the likes of Bure & Ovetchkin ever approached.

The Ranger drafts over both the Smith & Sather eras have been underwhelming to say the least, but Cherepanov likely would've been the best skater the Rangers had drafted since Brian Leetch.


Last edited by Jxmarts: 12-21-2008 at 12:26 AM.
Jxmarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 02:08 AM
  #141
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
I'm not gonna argue, I liked what I saw out of Immonen when he was called up. I have no idea why he wasn't given more of a chance when. I mean if Renney will dress Hossa every game HOPING too see what he thinks he will see out of him why woudln't he give Immonen the same kind of chance. Renney seems to have his favorites, his projects, and just guys he don't like (Immonen/Prucha)
I still like Immonen. He had some great stats in Hartford as well as in his native Finland. The problem is. We have too many centers. I the pro's and at the amateur level. Prucha too. We're talking about two good players here but I don't envy Renney at all. It has to be tough. With all these forwards. I was even a big Jamtin fan and wanted him to make the team.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 08:01 AM
  #142
NorthlandPro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Suwanee GA
Country: United States
Posts: 330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
If you trouble yourself to read the post to which I was responding, you'll find the writer was talking about youth on the Rangers' roster, not youth in Hartford.


Of course he was. So was Pavel Brendl. So was Jamie Lundmark. So was (insert name of high scoring junior player here.) All were huge difference makers in juniors, just as you say.


LOL. You write this, and yet in your very next sentence you cite two teams who drafted better players while picking in slots LOWER than our position.

See the problem?
Yes, hindsight is always 20/05! Unfortunately you can not wait a few years after their draft year to pick'em, you have to draft them as 17-18 year olds. Unless they are Ovechin, Crosby, Malkin, etc, who you select is a game of wait and see. NHL teams do not have the luxury of waiting and then making their picks they are on the clock, something we fans are not. On a player like Parise, he was never ever thought to have the potential to be a difference maker. He was thought to have good potential and may turn out to be a decent NHLer. Same with a player like Gretzlaf. They developed into the players they have become, something that is not guaranteed when you draft them.

What would you call Lundqvist and Staal?

NorthlandPro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 08:45 AM
  #143
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jxmarts View Post
Unlike Brendl & Lundmark, Cherepanov wasn't a high scoring junior, of which there have been hundreds who never made it to the NHL. Cherepanov was playing in the Russian elite league & producing as a teenager at a rate that only the likes of Bure & Ovetchkin ever approached.
That's fine. We both know we can find plenty of high scoring elite-leaguers who never made it in the NHL or who made it as second tier players. Although I liked what I saw of Cherepanov and I thought the pick a no-brainer, the fact is he cannot be called an impact player when he never played an NHL game. Seems to me the need to credit Sather with an impact player who never actually achieved the status shows just how empty the cupboard is of these guys, because if we had guys like Mike Richards, we wouldn't be talking about Cherepanov as the proof of Sather's "impact" picks.

The proof would be skating for us.


Last edited by dedalus: 12-21-2008 at 09:17 AM.
dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 09:15 AM
  #144
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
Yes, hindsight is always 20/05! Unfortunately you can not wait a few years after their draft year to pick'em, you have to draft them as 17-18 year olds.
Agreed, and as you pointed out with Getzlaf and Parise (we can find many, many more examples), other GMs did a better job of showing foresight rather than hindsight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
Unless they are Ovechin, Crosby, Malkin, etc, who you select is a game of wait and see.
Rather an oversimplification. Scouting is about projecting, not throwing a dart and waiting to see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
NHL teams do not have the luxury of waiting and then making their picks they are on the clock, something we fans are not.
That's right, and that's why they are financially rewarded for their successes and we are not. Unlike us, they are held accountable for their vision or lack thereof, which is why scouts are promoted and scouts are fired. I understand it's convenient for your argument to pretend that all scouting after the first five picks is just "wait-and-see," but it simply doesn't work that way. There is a reason that Christer Rockstrom is no longer just a scout in Sweden, and that reason is that he has consistently found talent where others did not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
On a player like Parise, he was never ever thought to have the potential to be a difference maker. He was thought to have good potential and may turn out to be a decent NHLer.
THN - "Said one college scout: 'He is a star. He can do it all. He can skate. He is strong and I do not know what the knock is. He can do just about anything. He is a fantastic player. To me he is magical. I think he is one of the best college players to come down the pipeline in years.'"

So you see, some scouts know what they're looking at. Maybe this scout was the Devils'; who can say? The fact is that some scouts were seeing exactly what Parise would be. The Rangers' apparently wre not those scouts. The Rangers' scouts looked at Jessiman and said "He's going to be better."

The Rangers' scouts were laughably, grotesquely wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
Same with a player like Gretzlaf.
I wonder if you realize that any claims you make about your knowledge of a player are rather undermined when you cannot even spell his name correctly. You are, I assume, talking about Getzlaf? The same guy Central Scouting had ranked 5th NA in his draft year? That non-difference maker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
What would you call Lundqvist and Staal?
I call Lundqvist one of the best goalies in the game, and a credit to Neil Smith's scouting staff and Neil Smith's director of scouting, Martin Madden, the man who drafted him.

I call Staal a fine defensive defenseman who I hope will become one of the best in the league, but I do not call him an impact player. That's what I HOPE for him.

But even if I chose to call Staal a sure-fire impact player in two years, what you're telling me is that in the eight drafts Sather can definitively call his own, he's found exactly one impact player: Staal.

Thus Sather's need to overpay for (presumably) impact players like Gomez; thus Sather's need to dredge up past-their-prime UFAs like Naslund; thus Sather's need to deal young assets like Tyutin to try to find the impact players - like Zherdev - that he has been singularly unable to draft.

Thus, in effect, this team's status as an also-ran even while its back is tight to the salary cap.

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 12:57 PM
  #145
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlundqvist30 View Post
And just as many assume both will pan out, you assume 1 is going to fail. You're Backman argument is worthless. Rafalski and Niedermeyer turned out pretty well. So did Zubov and Leetch. So did Eric Desjardins and Mathieu Schneider.
I didn't say that Backman turning sour is proof. He was just one example. A typical example. What you just gave is very atypical.

You can always find a few examples. A couple pairs in the 80s, a couple more in the 90s. But think about it. How many teams at some point in the 90s had 2 offensive defensemen as prospects? Most did. How many got 2 good defensemen out of? Just a few.

And you missed the main point of the argument: That offensive defensemen are the riskiest skaters out there, in terms of potential. Of skaters, they are most likely to fail.

Compare them to goalies, another risky position. Sure you can have both Richter and VBK become #1 goalies. But that's very rare. Much more common is a goalie prospect failing.

Defensemen are different from goalies, but they also carry a big risk (try to stick to the overall point here: it's not what defense has in common with goaltending... it's that both positions carry greater risk than, say, centers).

If Sang turns into Zubov and DZ into Karpovtsev, we should be very happy. To expect Leetch-Zubov is not realistic. It may happen. Just the odds are not in favor of it. Zubov-Karpovtsev would be good enough.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 01:09 PM
  #146
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,517
vCash: 500
"but you're "the worst is bound to happen"..."

I never said the worst is bound to happen. Please try to stick to what I am saying instead of arguing against straw-men.

The worst would be neither Sang nor DZ nor any of the prospects panning out. It can happen. Look at Brown, Jarvis and Henry, who were all considered "safe" prospects. None made it.

But that's not what I am presuming.

I am presuming that everything won't work out perfectly. We won't have every top prospect either make it or get replaced with a lesser prospect who'll suddenly get very good. It just won't happen. To anyone. Ever. Before or after.

If we get a good top pairing Dman and a good third pairing Dman out of our current crop, that's a very good outcome. (Think about how good our D would look now if we replaced Kalinin with Zubov and Karpovtsev, which is what will happen if what I think will come true actually does.)

Let me put it this way:

If someone came to Sather today and offered him a 24-year-old Zubov and a 22-year-old Karpovtsev for prospects Sang and DZ and a few lower-tier D prospects, he'd make that trade so fast, it would make your head spin.

So the point is that if 4 years from now, our team has a new Zubov and a new Karpovtsev, and no other new D from within the system, we should be very happy.

New "Zubov" - Staal
Rosie/Redden - Girardi
New "Karpovtsev - RosieRedden

I'd call that a very good defense. That's 2 stars on the top pair. Two veteran defensemen in Rosie and Redden (probably will still be here with their massive contracts), and I'm hoping 1 would still be a top-4 defenseman. Girardi will just be hitting his prime. And Karpotsev was very serviceable for us a dozen years ago.


Last edited by Beacon: 12-21-2008 at 01:15 PM.
Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 01:22 PM
  #147
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,822
vCash: 500
Great posts in this thread!

Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 07:30 PM
  #148
Duponttime*
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
That's easy. Difference makers instead of support players.
You do realize most of those guys come from top 10 picks or FA's right? You don't find many gems that are difference makers later in the draft. We got one in Lundqvist. Stole one in Girardi when we signed him. Dubinsky was a second round pick and might be a difference maker. I'm sure you were one of the fans that cried about how this team lacked role players, gritty players and players who had character and worked hard. Now the organization has lots of those guys and people are complaining about them.

Duponttime* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 07:55 PM
  #149
Anthony Mauro
DB Hockey
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
You do realize most of those guys come from top 10 picks or FA's right? You don't find many gems that are difference makers later in the draft. We got one in Lundqvist. Stole one in Girardi when we signed him. Dubinsky was a second round pick and might be a difference maker. I'm sure you were one of the fans that cried about how this team lacked role players, gritty players and players who had character and worked hard. Now the organization has lots of those guys and people are complaining about them.
Holy **** man, chill the heck out. This me (nyr fan) against them (nyr fans) attitude is pretty annoying. Not sure why you willingly try to converse on a message board with a group of people you deem dumb/clueless Rangers fans..

No one is complaining about the surplus of players we have. Character guys like Callahan were exactly the types of draft picks and prospects this team needed to stock up on instead of previous cesspool types of pro players and prospects alike.

What is a problem is the way the organization has gone out and addressed getting a young star forward or two. We traded Tyutin to get Zherdev and now find he's not enough. Since I can't see us making another similar trade, and I can't really see Sather pulling the trigger anytime soon, the timing is all ****ed up.

Personally, I think we should have made a lunge in the 2006 draft. That forward (Toews, Backstrom, Kessel, Brassard, Mueller, Little) would now be at the forefront of our attack. However, it's now going to be the 2009 draft and we're still here waiting for our impact players. Waiting for a trade up, rather than relying on good scouting.

Anthony Mauro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2008, 09:58 PM
  #150
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
You do realize most of those guys come from top 10 picks or FA's right? You don't find many gems that are difference makers later in the draft.
True and yet other teams did while Sather was drafting Jessiman. That's rather the point here, isn't it? This team needs to trade away talent like Tyutin to make up for the fact that Sather blew it on talent like Richards, Getzlaf, and Parise. Thus Sather's need to overpay for (presumably) impact players like Gomez; thus Sather's need to dredge up past-their-prime UFAs like Naslund; thus Sather's need to deal young assets like Tyutin to try to find the impact players - like Zherdev - that he has been singularly unable to draft.

Thus, in effect, this team's status as an also-ran even while its back is tight to the salary cap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
We got one in Lundqvist.
Yep. Eight years ago Neil Smith's people got an impact player in the draft. I'd call this an indictment of Sather's drafting, but obviously his record appeals to you, which is perfectly fine. Your standard of success is your own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
Stole one in Girardi when we signed him.
*shrugs* Okay. If Girardi is your model of a "difference maker," great. We apparently have a lot of them. The question then becomes, with so many "difference makers" of Girardi's caliber, why aren't we a Cup contender?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
Dubinsky was a second round pick and might be a difference maker.
So you agree he's not. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
I'm sure you were one of the fans that cried about how this team lacked role players, gritty players and players who had character and worked hard.
Hmmmm ... let's see. Your join date is ... this month.

I've been here .... since 2002.

So you'd agree, I take it, that you're talking out of your ass when you make any claims on what kind of fan I am or what I've said in the past.

Do yourself a favor and stick to licking Sather's balls rather than offering empty claims of knowledge about me, my beliefs, or the beliefs of any posters here that you cannot specifically quote. You can only make yourself look a moron with such tactics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duponttime View Post
Now the organization has lots of those guys and people are complaining about them.
Actually very few are complaining about them. People are complaining about the lack of top flight talent, not the work ethic and grit of Brandon Dubinsky.

But you've been a blowhard for several pages now, so don't let me interfere with your laughably empty claims about the thoughts of other posters.


Last edited by dedalus: 12-21-2008 at 10:29 PM.
dedalus 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 10:13 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.