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

Do you like the (1st round) pick?

View Poll Results: Do you like the pick of McIlrath?
Yes 63 25.71%
No 116 47.35%
Yes and no 66 26.94%
Voters: 245. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-26-2010, 10:22 AM
  #101
Ian
Mike York fan club
 
Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
The last time Ranger fans hated a pick this much was when they drafted a guy named Derek Stepan.
Wonderful post.


I'm not exactly championing this pick, and I'm still not 100% behind it, I just find it funny from the fanbase that champions Mara, that was livid when Gaborik got cleaned out by Carcillo, and general consensus would have had us acquiring Komi at 4+, Orpik at 4+ and now Volchenkov at 4+, is absolutely livid at this pick. People have been clamoring for a true defensive force for years, and while I'm certainly not saying this kid is a lock to be it, he has that potential, and he's getting killed here.

Ian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 10:23 AM
  #102
Black Tank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: a NYer in England
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,170
vCash: 500
Clark and the other guys running the draft really f---ed this up. I mean if they had only thought of trading down, we could have had Fowler and Mcilrath and if they had thought even harder, they could have traded down even more and gotten Fowler, Tarasenko, Mcilrath and if they had traded down even more and a bit harder, they could have had Fowler, Tarasenko, Mcilrath and Gormley. Booyah!

Really? Everyone still posting this trading down nonsense: you don't think Clark and team thought that through and couldn't make it work? Do you really think they forgot about this option because of the pressure? Or do you think they should have dialled they phone extra hard to make it happen?

If they could have taken Mcilrath later they would have but as the poker players sitting at the table, they made the best decision with the cards they had.

Now whether we should have taken Mcilrath rather than Gormley, Fowler, and Tarasenko? I don't know as I've never seen any of them play a full game, much less a reasonable sample. However, as I've posted in the other thread, I love this pick b/c toughness has been a need for the Rangers for decades and I see no other prospects in the system that have this attribute. If you're going to go after toughness and intimidation, based on what I've read, you might as well go with the toughest guy not only in the draft but in the entire WHL which has got a well earned rep for being a physical league.

Black Tank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 10:32 AM
  #103
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
The last time Ranger fans hated a pick this much was when they drafted a guy named Derek Stepan.
I don't even think it's the player himself. McIlrath was one of those players that was discussed as a target if the Rangers could trade up and grab a late 1st rounder. I think it's that he was taken at 10 that bothers most people. Even then I think it comes down to McIlrath v. Fowler v. Tarasenko. Not taking Tarasenko tells me that Lutchenko didn't give his final approval on the kid's commitment to the NHL. My exposure to Fowler was the WJCs and I was impressed. So, again I am not convinced that McIlrath was the BPA at 10.

jas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 10:52 AM
  #104
captain9nyr
@captain9nyr
 
captain9nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hammonton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to captain9nyr
If you believe that he was their target all along (possibly because they didn't think they'd actually miss the playoffs this year and would be picking in that 18-21 range, and if you believe that it's true that Dallas and Anaheim were looking at him at 11 or 12, they had to pick him at 10 if thats who they wanted. If they traded down, to accumulate an additional 2nd round pick if that was available, they may not have gotten their target guy, and could have drafted the next Darin Olver in the 2nd round.

There have been European and Russian guys that are highly touted that are drafted high in the 1st round and amount to be absolutely nothing more than a big name. We don't have to look too far back in our own drafting to see an example in Pavel Brendl. Look at guys like Nikita Alexeev for Tampa in 2000, Stanistov Chistov for Anaheim and Alexander Svitov for Tampa in 2001, Petr Taticek for Florida in 2002, and so on.

Even if you believe that he wasn't their initial target (which I've seen every reason to believe he was), then the fact that Fowler and Gormley fell and the forward went off the board means that the draft didn't go their way ahead of them. I'm sure they liked Skinner and Johansen, they were both gone. I'm sure they liked Connolly and Burmistrov, they were both gone. Campbell wasn't taken. Not only that, but then you look at Tarasenko going at 17, and if we had taken him at 10, nobody would be screaming and yelling about the reach we'd have made, yet this "reach" based on what TSN says, which you can put stock into or not, is a similar one as would have been made for Tarasenko. For what it's worth, TSN did have him at 15 and Tarasenko at 16.

The truth of the matter is, if you believe that Bobby Sanguinetti and Ryan McDonagh are going to be New York Rangers, and if you believe that Michael Del Zotto is going to continue on the path he's currently on, then we already have Cam Fowler and Brandon Gormley. Drafting Fowler or Gormley when you have those names as akin to drafting Jack Campbell when we already have Henrik Lundqvist.

I'm not a big fan of taking this type of player at 10, but if thats who they wanted, and they had reason to believe that he would not be there at 13-14 as we're hearing today was the case, then you can't kill them for the pick.

You can take the ideological difference that we didn't need this type of player, and if that's your opinion, I don't have a problem with it, but the people who are paid to find guys like Bobby Sanguinetti, Chris Kreider, Michael Del Zotto, Derek Stepan, and Evgeny Grachev among others as they have in the past few drafts believe this kid is the real deal, and I'm willing to let time pass and see if they're right. If this scouting and this drafting hasn't given them a massive benefit of the doubt with what they've been able to accomplish in the past few years, I don't know what will.

captain9nyr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 11:06 AM
  #105
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,971
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
I don't even think it's the player himself. McIlrath was one of those players that was discussed as a target if the Rangers could trade up and grab a late 1st rounder. I think it's that he was taken at 10 that bothers most people. Even then I think it comes down to McIlrath v. Fowler v. Tarasenko. Not taking Tarasenko tells me that Lutchenko didn't give his final approval on the kid's commitment to the NHL. My exposure to Fowler was the WJCs and I was impressed. So, again I am not convinced that McIlrath was the BPA at 10.
I get that jas. There's always going to be another name out there.

He probably wasn't the BPA. But he might very well have been the BPA to address this team's need.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 11:10 AM
  #106
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumbo View Post
Hell no. Whoever is voting yes is just reaching for anything to try to justify this terrible, terrible pick at #10, especially considering who was left.

Hmm a potential 40 goal scorer, and game changer defenseman with elite skating skills or a 5/6 dman who is slower then a snail? Good work Clark!

TSN made a complete mockery of the pick, and rightfully so.

They (TSN) didnt know that Dallas, Anaheim and Florida were coveting him as well.

The reason why TSN guys freaked out was because their mocks were all messed up and they had egg on their face for not even mentioning Mcilrath as a possibility when Sather was walking up to the podium.

If it is true, that McIlrath was coveted by at least three teams after us, that means that: a) we couldnt trade down because by 14 or 15, the other options we targeted would have been gone as well and b) this kid hit a home run in all his workouts and interviews, and the Rangers didn't want to lose out

Also, our blueline isn't immobile. Both Staal and Del Zotto can rush the puck up the ice. Look at the last few Cup winners; they each had a hard-hitting, bruising defenseman who covered the front of the net well.

Maybe I'm a little old school, but we have to appreciate the importance of a "buffer" on defense. Sure, the new NHL is all about speed and skill and wants to erase the Dead Puck Era, but you cannot win without a McIlrath-type player.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 11:13 AM
  #107
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,700
vCash: 910
Awards:
I like the player. Glad to have him in the system. That said, not at #10. Hope I'm wrong.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 11:22 AM
  #108
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,630
vCash: 500
Offensive Dmen, DZ and Sangs, check
Shutdown Dmen, Staal, McD , check
Bruiser, Crease clearer, McIlrath, check

they are building a team

Also lets see if Valatenko can step in and smack some bodies around

I am on the Gilroy is out of the mix side. he's 25 which is still young but that 1.7 million can be moved in a package for a C in my books. I would see what Rozy and Gilroy can get in a package

Vitto79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 11:32 AM
  #109
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,138
vCash: 500
To answer the OP, yes, I like the pick. I kinda liked it when it was announced, but after 12 hours, I really like it.

This kid is walking into a good scenario. By the time he's NHL ready, he'll join a defense corps with three seasoned veterans in the top-3 (Staal, DZ and Girardi). I don't care if he was 1st overall -- he'll have very little pressure on him, which will make the transition go smoothly.

It was the same situation for Leetch. leetch walked in with a lot of anticipation, but Patrick was already there to take some heat off him, to the point where Bergeron would tell Leetch to do whatever he wanted.

Also, he's a WHL guy from western Canada (I don't know if Winnipeg is considered western). This guy competes and you know he'll work his tail off.

Lastly, he's listed at 212. By the time he makes it to the NHl, he'll be 6'4 225...at the very least.

Good pick, and not that it's been revealed that Sather couldnt trade down, I like it even more.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:17 PM
  #110
bubba5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,015
vCash: 500
For my 1000th post I'm going to be positive for once. This could be a solid pick. When Rangers fans expectations are low we seem to get something good. Boy would it be nice to see in a couple years DZ and Mcilrath paired together for years to come and have the success that Leetch and Bueck had!!!!!!!!

bubba5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:17 PM
  #111
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,556
vCash: 500
I've come down off my ledge a bit, but I still think this is a terrible pick for to reasons:

1. In Clark's comments on Gross' blog, he mentions that they wanted to bring McIlrath in because he adds something that their prospect pool currently lacks - toughness. But that is a ridiculous strategy to have at 10th overall. You take the BPA, period. And there's no way McIlrath was the BPA over Fowler/Gormley.

2. Anyone banking on McIlrath developing an offensive game a la Shea Weber is seriously deluding themselves IMO. Maybe that's a bit harsh but the odds are really long. This just isn't an upside pick at all.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:25 PM
  #112
Jumbo*
TARGET: ACQUIRED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 16,720
vCash: 500
Just gonna say the same, I've come off the ledge a bit as well.

Though I am worried about Clark's comments, he stated in an interview on NYR.com that he is "a very, very good skater". What? He a very, very average skater at best. Worries me that he really didn't watch him all that much if he's thinking that (neither have I mind you, but every single scouting service says that his skating isn't that good yet).

If he pans out, big if, he will be a great fan favorite for us. Would have liked him to get a call to the Canadian WJC camp but he didn't.

We shall see what happens, still upset we didn't take a few others left, but i'm not going to ***** and moan for 5 years about it.

Jumbo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:27 PM
  #113
Garv23
Registered User
 
Garv23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rockland, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 967
vCash: 500
Absolutely! I'm very happy with this pick. It's a style of stay at home, tough D we've been lacking sorely since BOOOOOOM!

Honestly I could care less about Fowler and Gormley because I like what I see in or young D core.

Time will tell...

Garv23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:33 PM
  #114
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumbo View Post
Just gonna say the same, I've come off the ledge a bit as well.

Though I am worried about Clark's comments, he stated in an interview on NYR.com that he is "a very, very good skater". What? He a very, very average skater at best. Worries me that he really didn't watch him all that much if he's thinking that (neither have I mind you, but every single scouting service says that his skating isn't that good yet).

If he pans out, big if, he will be a great fan favorite for us. Would have liked him to get a call to the Canadian WJC camp but he didn't.

We shall see what happens, still upset we didn't take a few others left, but i'm not going to ***** and moan for 5 years about it.
His straight ahead skating is fine. He has a poor first step.

jas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:37 PM
  #115
Jumbo*
TARGET: ACQUIRED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 16,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
His straight ahead skating is fine. He has a poor first step.
That still contributes to his overall skating.

Jumbo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:40 PM
  #116
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyrfan444 View Post
I've come down off my ledge a bit, but I still think this is a terrible pick for to reasons:

1. In Clark's comments on Gross' blog, he mentions that they wanted to bring McIlrath in because he adds something that their prospect pool currently lacks - toughness. But that is a ridiculous strategy to have at 10th overall. You take the BPA, period. And there's no way McIlrath was the BPA over Fowler/Gormley.

2. Anyone banking on McIlrath developing an offensive game a la Shea Weber is seriously deluding themselves IMO. Maybe that's a bit harsh but the odds are really long. This just isn't an upside pick at all.
How long have you been scouting this kid...how many games have you watched him play...what do you know about him exactly...

This is hockey! You win with a blend of skill, grit and determination...you guys want all skill...where has that gotten us...

Just take last year...we sucked the whole year...watched Gabby get beat up...watched Hank get run like a doll...then we trade for Prust and he fights heavies because he is crazy and has a heart of a lion...then we trade for a legit heavy in Shelley and he brings protection...then the Rangers go on a roll and just miss the playoffs...not coincidence.

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:42 PM
  #117
LamoTheKid
Registered User
 
LamoTheKid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
If he can be close to a Shea Weber/Beuk hybrid guy I'll be plenty happy with him.

LamoTheKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:43 PM
  #118
John Torturella
Registered User
 
John Torturella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,832
vCash: 500
From a pure common sense standpoint, no. Logically, the pick was Gormley or even more likely Fowler. They were the safe bets. Fowler would likely be ready next season. McIlrath, who knows.

But one thing I will say is that McI could be a very nasty defenseman with his style and frame. If he develops like he could, he and Staal would be lockdown.

John Torturella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:46 PM
  #119
captain9nyr
@captain9nyr
 
captain9nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hammonton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to captain9nyr
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korpicowski View Post
From a pure common sense standpoint, no. Logically, the pick was Gormley or even more likely Fowler. They were the safe bets. Fowler would likely be ready next season. McIlrath, who knows.

But one thing I will say is that McI could be a very nasty defenseman with his style and frame. If he develops like he could, he and Staal would be lockdown.
We already have Fowler. His name is Michael Del Zotto, and he was ready last year.

We can't fit Sanguinetti or McDonagh on the team, but we're going to put Fowler out there? Not seeing it.

McIlrath was their guy all along, for better or for worse.

captain9nyr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:51 PM
  #120
John Torturella
Registered User
 
John Torturella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puckhead94 View Post
We already have Fowler. His name is Michael Del Zotto, and he was ready last year.

We can't fit Sanguinetti or McDonagh on the team, but we're going to put Fowler out there? Not seeing it.

McIlrath was their guy all along, for better or for worse.
We have Del Zotto, yes. But from a pure value standpoint Fowler was the logical pick. Most competent teams draft the best player available. That player has the most value, be it to your team or trade wise.

If you draft Fowler, perhaps you can trade Del Zotto for a player that fits the organizations need, like a scoring winger or number one center.

The whole point of the draft is to get the most valuable asset you can. Apparently that is not how the Rangers view it. I guess we will see how it works out.

John Torturella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:51 PM
  #121
we want cup
We do not Sow
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 10,720
vCash: 500
Some of the only consolation here is that I'm looking forward to posting this whenever he does something awesome.


__________________

RANGERS =
we want cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:53 PM
  #122
captain9nyr
@captain9nyr
 
captain9nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hammonton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to captain9nyr
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korpicowski View Post
We have Del Zotto, yes. But in a pure value standpoint Fowler was the logical pick. Most competent teams draft the best player available. That player has the most value, be it to your team or trade wise.

If you draft Fowler, perhaps you can trade Del Zotto for a player that fits the organizations need, like a scoring winger or number one center.

The whole point of the draft is to get the most valuable asset you can. Apparently that is not how the Rangers view it. I guess we will see how it works out.
Nobody values the Rangers prospects more than the Rangers do. Pure value in who's eyes? Pierre McGuire's? Let's rewind this 10 years and ask ourselves how much value the 205th pick had. I'm just saying, "value" is a relative term.

The teams at 11 and 12 were ready to take this guy, and the team at 11 skipped Fowler too, so I don't think the "value" is that far off here.

What was Cherepanov's "value" in 07? He fell to 17. RIP, but what were those teams from 5-16 thinking, right? Just saying.

And furthermore, why would we be trading blue chip known commodities to other teams to replace them with recent draftees? We have no idea how Fowler or McIlrath will turn out, we know what we have in MDZ.

captain9nyr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:58 PM
  #123
John Torturella
Registered User
 
John Torturella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puckhead94 View Post
Nobody values the Rangers prospects more than the Rangers do. Pure value in who's eyes? Pierre McGuire's? Let's rewind this 10 years and ask ourselves how much value the 205th pick had. I'm just saying, "value" is a relative term.

The teams at 11 and 12 were ready to take this guy, and the team at 11 skipped Fowler too, so I don't think the "value" is that far off here.

What was Cherepanov's "value" in 07? He fell to 17. RIP, but what were those teams from 5-16 thinking, right? Just saying.
You can say what you want, but ISS would not have Fowler ranked top 5 for fun. Many scouts and analysts believe Fowler could step in this season, but more likely next.

On your point about Lundqvist, every draft has players that come out of nowhere. That was clearly the case here.

And to Cherepanov, if teams were not scared he would stay in Russia, he was a consensus top 5 pick.

John Torturella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 12:59 PM
  #124
captain9nyr
@captain9nyr
 
captain9nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hammonton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to captain9nyr
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korpicowski View Post
You can say what you want, but ISS would not have Fowler ranked top 5 for fun. Many scouts and analysts believe Fowler could step in this season, but more likely next.

On your point about Lundqvist, every draft has players that come out of nowhere. That was clearly the case here.

And to Cherepanov, if teams were not scared he would stay in Russia, he was a consensus top 5 pick.
Where did ISS have Hugh Jessiman and Pavel Brendl? Jamie Lundmark? Al Montoya?

captain9nyr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2010, 01:02 PM
  #125
jniklast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korpicowski View Post
We have Del Zotto, yes. But from a pure value standpoint Fowler was the logical pick. Most competent teams draft the best player available. That player has the most value, be it to your team or trade wise.

If you draft Fowler, perhaps you can trade Del Zotto for a player that fits the organizations need, like a scoring winger or number one center.

The whole point of the draft is to get the most valuable asset you can. Apparently that is not how the Rangers view it. I guess we will see how it works out.
There's a common misconception on HFBoards: While for GMs the most valuable asset is what helps the team most, here on HFBoards most valuable asset means either most potential or highest trade value. And this dissonance in perception leads to all those trades and picks being so surprising for so many here.

jniklast 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 08:49 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.