HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Hockey's Future Rangers Top 20 prospects, Fall 2009

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-01-2009, 01:01 PM
  #26
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,111
vCash: 500
Anisimov's numbers were inflated from playing with a talented AHL star, PA Parenteau

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:04 PM
  #27
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,018
vCash: 500
I have no opinion on any of them because other than a game or two here and there, I have not seen them play.

I'm impressed by how many of you actually watch these players play enough to say whether they should be a 7.5 or 8.0.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:06 PM
  #28
LyNX27
Registered User
 
LyNX27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I have spent time on youtube, which seems to be the scouting service of choice for 99% of hfboards.

I also determined long ago that Ill never reach a conclusion on a player by watching a 4 minute clip of them set to bad rock music.
Brampton Battalion have a Youtube channel of their own which they post all the highlights of games with about 20 seconds before and after the highlight with no music. Check it out some time.

LyNX27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:12 PM
  #29
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
I have no opinion on any of them because other than a game or two here and there, I have not seen them play.

I'm impressed by how many of you actually watch these players play enough to say whether they should be a 7.5 or 8.0.
The person mostly advocating for ranking changes was Jonathan, who apparently does actually watch a good amount of these players.

My opinion was just that I think it's hard to rank Kreider right now when we have no real idea of how he'll play at the next level of competition.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:19 PM
  #30
LyNX27
Registered User
 
LyNX27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
The person mostly advocating for ranking changes was Jonathan, who apparently does actually watch a good amount of these players.

My opinion was just that I think it's hard to rank Kreider right now when we have no real idea of how he'll play at the next level of competition.
Thats why they rank him so low. Until he plays at that next higher level they can't guarantee a good showing.

The Number represents the Over-All Potential.
The Letter is how close/likely they will be to reach that potential.

In summary, this should all be looked at with a grain of salt since we all see players through different eyes and have different opinions.

LyNX27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:20 PM
  #31
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,111
vCash: 500
I know that, I just don't think it's a very good system when applied to someone like Kreider.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:22 PM
  #32
Harrison Ford
Registered User
 
Harrison Ford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 19,927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
Oh, and for the record, both Ani and Grachev should be 8.0Bs.
Really? I think their grades are pretty spot on to be honest.

Is Grachev on the same level as Giroux and Oshie right now? They have already done some damage in the NHL. I think the 8.0C is perfect for him, and 7.5B is perfect for Anisimov.

Harrison Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:33 PM
  #33
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 7,562
vCash: 500
On a team that's supposed to be strong on Defense, 3 out of the top 4 (and 4 out of the top 7) prospects are forwards.

Our D is completely set. They say you can never have too many D prospects, but with the acquisition of McDonagh, Valentenko, Williams and Gilroy, anything more would be too much.

We were already strong before the summer and the addition of those 4 give us the best defensemen prospect corps in the league... by far.

If we don't trade away any youth or draft picks, we should have the best set of prospects by the All Star break.

We have such a plethora of kids in the system that some will bust, but some will pleasantly surprise, so midway through the season, we will have fewer projects, but more exciting prospects. Gilroy and whoever becomes our other D rookie, as well as Byers, will remain prospects as per HF rules. We'll only lose Boyle as a prospect.

If we aren't in the top 3 when THN rankings come out, it will be only due to the anti-NY bias.


Quote:
Originally Posted by squishy View Post
The list:

1. Evgeny Grachev, C/LW, 8.0C
2. Artem Anisimov, C, 7.5B
3. Ryan McDonagh, D, 8.0C
4. Derek Stepan, C, 8.0C
5. Michael Del Zotto, D, 7.5C
6. Bobby Sanguinetti, D, 7.5C
7. Chris Kreider, C/LW, 8.0D
8. Ilkka Heikkinen, D, 7.0B
9. Matt Gilroy , D, 7.0B
10. Michael Sauer, D, 7.0B
11. Nigel Williams, D, 7.0C
12. Tomas Kundratek, D, 7.0C
13. Dane Byers, LW, 6.5B
14. Ethan Werek, C, 7.0C
15. Ryan Bourque, C, 7.0D
16. Brian Boyle, C, 6.5B
17. Carl Hagelin, LW, 6.5C
18. Chris Doyle, C, 7.0D
19. Brodie Dupont, LW, 6.0B
20. David Kveton, RW, 6.5D

The details:
http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...ects_fall2009/

Discuss.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:38 PM
  #34
LyNX27
Registered User
 
LyNX27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
The Rangers were ready to trade up to get the Phillips Andover grad, who was the highest ranked US high school player, but it turned out not to be necessary.
Did anyone else hear anything about this. I know we watched him extensivly but we were willing to trade up for him?!?! Last time we did that, we got Marc Staal.

Anyone know what we were willing to give up?!?!

LyNX27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:41 PM
  #35
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 7,772
vCash: 500
i find this rating system for our prospects to be quite annoying. i look at this and shake my head and really pay very little attention to it.

giving kreider a D - whatever that means- seems low. same with bourque.

and if we drafted kreider in the 1st round and these guys project him to be a 3rd line player, we suk. period.

the whole letter part of this thing is the stupid part. it makes the whole thing goofy. much of this whole process is guessing. at best.

i like our prospect list alot right now. i think were loaded with talent but when i read this list, it looks like all the youngest guys are rated as poor letters, while the older guys whove been around longer are rated higher- letter wise. i guess that makes sense with new guys being more unknown and thus, the letter reflects more doubt. the more we see them, the more the letter can be adjusted based upon the likelyhood of them reaching their potential. new guys have lower letters but guys that have been around awhile have more realistic letter ratings.

whatever. just start the season already.

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:46 PM
  #36
ThirdEye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 11,666
vCash: 500
I find the rating system to be a bit of a gimmick as well, don't worry offdacrossbar. Who rated these players? Something tells me a lot of these ratings are based on when the player was drafted, a small sample of clips, and a lot of guess work.

That's not to say that I think some of these players should be rated higher, I'm just skeptical is all.

ThirdEye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:47 PM
  #37
Cermi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 996
vCash: 500
It seems we had a bitweird '08 draft -
3rd round pick is 1st,
2nd round pick is 4th and
1st round pick is 5th...

Cermi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:50 PM
  #38
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 7,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
Anisimov's numbers were inflated from playing with a talented AHL star, PA Parenteau

PA Parenteau isn't such a spectacular talent at the AHL level. He's certainly a star, but not someone who can just make AA look like a star without being one.

Plus, to become a first line center in the AHL as a 21-year-old is an accomplishment in and of itself.

That said, our F prospects do need a couple more additions. I hope Slats does the same thing next year and drafts forwards with the first two picks.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 01:50 PM
  #39
Shadowrunner
Registered User
 
Shadowrunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,198
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Shadowrunner Send a message via AIM to Shadowrunner
For all the *****ing and moaning going on here, let's agree that the people rating these prospects have spent a lot more time analyzing them than we did. And they've been doing it longer than we have. So don't be quick to dismiss their analysis just because it doesn't fully correspond to our fanboy rose-colored goggles.

Shadowrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:01 PM
  #40
ThirdEye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 11,666
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowrunner View Post
For all the *****ing and moaning going on here, let's agree that the people rating these prospects have spent a lot more time analyzing them than we did. And they've been doing it longer than we have. So don't be quick to dismiss their analysis just because it doesn't fully correspond to our fanboy rose-colored goggles.
I wouldn't dismiss the ratings completely, but I would take them with a grain of salt

ThirdEye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:32 PM
  #41
Shadowrunner
Registered User
 
Shadowrunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,198
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Shadowrunner Send a message via AIM to Shadowrunner
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdEye View Post
I wouldn't dismiss the ratings completely, but I would take them with a grain of salt
Obviously nothing is gospel, but what I find interesting is that some of the more knowledgeable posters on this board usually tend to agree with one another, and are realistic in their assessment and expectations. Theirs is the opinion I'm looking forward to reading. Looking at you, Edge, Squishy, etc...

Shadowrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:32 PM
  #42
squishy
Registered User
 
squishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowrunner View Post
For all the *****ing and moaning going on here, let's agree that the people rating these prospects have spent a lot more time analyzing them than we did. And they've been doing it longer than we have. So don't be quick to dismiss their analysis just because it doesn't fully correspond to our fanboy rose-colored goggles.
Seriously. Leslie's seen most of these guys play far more than the vast majority of people here have. She also has something none of us have: access to Gordie Clarke (and others in the organization) to get their take on what they project for each of them.

I'm not going to say I don't have minor qualms with the list, but on the whole I think that it's pretty solid.

As for the Anisimov vs. Grachev debate... I agree with Jonathan (I think) that the hype around Grachev is a bit over the top. But either one of them could have been ranked first and I would have found it hard to argue. I do think Grachev has higher offensive potential than Anisimov, but Anisimov is likely to be the better all-around player and is the safer bet to actually reach his potential.

squishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:34 PM
  #43
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
PA Parenteau isn't such a spectacular talent at the AHL level. He's certainly a star, but not someone who can just make AA look like a star without being one.

Plus, to become a first line center in the AHL as a 21-year-old is an accomplishment in and of itself.
You realize that this all applies pretty much equally to Grachev and his linemates?

Sure, playing with good linemates helped him. It helps any player. Duschene was also helped out by playing with Grachev. Becoming the OHLs top scoring rookie was an accomplishment in and of itself as well

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:38 PM
  #44
FLYLine24*
 
FLYLine24*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,102
vCash: 500
Not sure why people are getting so upset that Grachev is above AA. I could see them both as #1 or #2 as both could have a good argument why they should be #1.

Grachev has a higher ceiling, AA is more NHL ready. Both could be good 2nd line players (again Grachev has a higher ceiling and could be a 1st liner) Thats about it right now.

The complaining over those two for the top spot is just silly as they are very close with each other.

edit - just saw Squishy remarks...pretty much agree

Quote:
As for the Anisimov vs. Grachev debate... I agree with Jonathan (I think) that the hype around Grachev is a bit over the top. But either one of them could have been ranked first and I would have found it hard to argue. I do think Grachev has higher offensive potential than Anisimov, but Anisimov is likely to be the better all-around player and is the safer bet to actually reach his potential.

FLYLine24* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:38 PM
  #45
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 7,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
You realize that this all applies pretty much equally to Grachev and his linemates?

Sure, playing with good linemates helped him. It helps any player. Duschene was also helped out by playing with Grachev. Becoming the OHLs top scoring rookie was an accomplishment in and of itself as well
It does, but less so.

1. Grachev had TWO star linemates, not one.

2. It's one thing to be a first liner in juniors, it's another in the AHL.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:40 PM
  #46
LyNX27
Registered User
 
LyNX27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
It does, but less so.

1. Grachev had TWO star linemates, not one.

2. It's one thing to be a first liner in juniors, it's another in the AHL.
Grachev only played with one on his line.

LyNX27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:43 PM
  #47
FLYLine24*
 
FLYLine24*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
It does, but less so.

1. Grachev had TWO star linemates, not one.

2. It's one thing to be a first liner in juniors, it's another in the AHL.
So? AA is 21 years old. Grachev is 19. That argument means nothing.

FLYLine24* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:52 PM
  #48
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
Heikkinen? The list is a joke.

THN Yearbook

1-Grachev
2-MDZ
3-McDonagh
4-Gilroy
5-Anisimov
6-Sanguinetti
7-Stepan
8-Kreider
9-Werek
10-Baranka

Take out Baranka and replace him with Bourque or Sauer. That's a more accurate read than Heikkinen being in the top 10. Maybe if it was the Devils barren list.

Heikkinen?

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 02:54 PM
  #49
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squishy View Post
Seriously. Leslie's seen most of these guys play far more than the vast majority of people here have. She also has something none of us have: access to Gordie Clarke (and others in the organization) to get their take on what they project for each of them.

I'm not going to say I don't have minor qualms with the list, but on the whole I think that it's pretty solid.

As for the Anisimov vs. Grachev debate... I agree with Jonathan (I think) that the hype around Grachev is a bit over the top. But either one of them could have been ranked first and I would have found it hard to argue. I do think Grachev has higher offensive potential than Anisimov, but Anisimov is likely to be the better all-around player and is the safer bet to actually reach his potential.

Well those are all good points squishy. Still is Clark really that high on Heikkinen? Though the reports out of the development camp were really good about him (and Gilroy) he's kind of an unknown. As well I've heard things over the past year or so about how the Rangers really like Potter (even if a good many posters here aren't too excited about him) but he doesn't even make the list.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2009, 03:20 PM
  #50
Fitzy
Relative to what?
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,191
vCash: 50
The one thing that stood out to me was that I think Kveton has the chance of being better than just a third line forward. Thats my only real issue with the list.

Fitzy 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 09:14 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.