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

Redline Report Top 10 Defensemen

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-20-2004, 07:40 PM
  #1
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,377
vCash: 500
Redline Report Top 10 Defensemen

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hocke...-draft-d_x.htm


1 Cam Barker 6-3, 206 L 4/4/86 Medicine Hat 1st
2 Ondrej Meszaros 6-2, 191 L 10/13/85 Dukla Trencin 1st
3 A.J. Thelen 6-3, 210 L 3/11/86 Michigan State 1st
4 Mike Green 6-1, 191 R 10/12/85 Saskatoon 1st
5 Ladislav Smid 6-2, 189 L 2/1/86 Liberec 1st
6 Kirill Lyamin 6-3, 198 L 1/13/86 CSKA 1st
7 Boris Valabik 6-5, 228 L 2/14/86 Kitchener 1st
8 Jeff Schultz 6-6, 210 L 2/26/86 Calgary 1st/2nd
9 Dimitri Vorobiev 6-2, 211 L 10/18/85 Lada Togliatti 2nd
10 Wes O'Neill 6-3, 204 L 3/3/86 Notre Dame Univ. 2nd

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 07:51 PM
  #2
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 16,154
vCash: 500
i'm actually glad Roman Tesliuk didn't make their top 10. hopefully we can grab him at the beginning of the second round...although we may have to move up to get him as i'm not sure he's still on the board at 36.

broadwayblue is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 07:56 PM
  #3
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue
i'm actually glad Roman Tesliuk didn't make their top 10. hopefully we can grab him at the beginning of the second round...although we may have to move up to get him as i'm not sure he's still on the board at 36.
Are you kidding me? He will likely go late second/early third. What is this obsession with Tesliuk?

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 07:58 PM
  #4
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
He's physical, he can move the puck and he plays good defense. He is however raw and will take some time but the guy could be a very good pick for the second round.

He knows that his responsibilities are and he goes out and does. Not enough defenseman in this draft do that night in and night out.

Edge is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 08:01 PM
  #5
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
He's physical, he can move the puck and he plays good defense. He is however raw and will take some time but the guy could be a very good pick for the second round.

He knows that his responsibilities are and he goes out and does. Not enough defenseman in this draft do that night in and night out.
He sure could be very good, but I wouldn't consider it much of a steal taking him in the 2nd, he would be great if he falls to us in the 3rd or 4th rounds. And how many average sized defense prospects do we need?

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 08:05 PM
  #6
draftpool
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 11
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue
i'm actually glad Roman Tesliuk didn't make their top 10. hopefully we can grab him at the beginning of the second round...although we may have to move up to get him as i'm not sure he's still on the board at 36.
He would be a reach at 36. He is a tweeener size wise and doesn't excell at any one thing.

draftpool is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 08:06 PM
  #7
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Never said he was a steal, said he'd be a solid prospect.

I don't care if the guy is average sized or not, if he can develop he becomes a bargaining chip.

Getting a guy who is 6'6 doesn't do anything if he can't play. Valabik is big but about as raw as can be. Schultz is less physical than guys 5 inches shorter.

Tesliuk checks in at around 6'1, 200 pounds and will probably play at 6'1-6'2, 210-215 pounds. Now if he were 5'11, 175 than I'd be concerned but he's a solid checker, and a solid defenseman. Size is always nice, but an average size player with the right tools will go further than a big boy who doesn't fit into a plan.

The Rangers are VERY high on him.

Edge is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 08:11 PM
  #8
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 16,154
vCash: 500
i see your point about it not being a steal if we take him in the second... but how do you define steal? considering how many picks are busts wouldn't it be nice to just draft a guy with a second round pick and have him become a top 4 dman on our team? maybe i'm just numb from the years of bad drafting/trading away decent prospects...but at this point i'd like us to just make good picks and get guys who can come in and contribute in the next couple of years. who would you consider a steal in the second round?

broadwayblue is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 08:13 PM
  #9
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
I don't think he'd be a steal, but he could be a solid pick.

Edge is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 08:30 PM
  #10
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Never said he was a steal, said he'd be a solid prospect.

I don't care if the guy is average sized or not, if he can develop he becomes a bargaining chip.

Getting a guy who is 6'6 doesn't do anything if he can't play. Valabik is big but about as raw as can be. Schultz is less physical than guys 5 inches shorter.

Tesliuk checks in at around 6'1, 200 pounds and will probably play at 6'1-6'2, 210-215 pounds. Now if he were 5'11, 175 than I'd be concerned but he's a solid checker, and a solid defenseman. Size is always nice, but an average size player with the right tools will go further than a big boy who doesn't fit into a plan.

The Rangers are VERY high on him.
having 6'6" guys on the defense instead of 6'1" is not just physical advantage it is also mental, it intimidates other teams' smaller forwards. 6'6" guy is usually much stronger and is harder to hit, harder to beat and he has a much larger reach. We don't need a safe pick like Baranka and Liffiton, we need some huge monster on defense like Schultz, I know he is not super physical, but he doesn't have to be, especially if he is good both defensively and offensively, he is in the Rathje mold, what is wrong with that? Another need on defense is the clear cut #1 defenseman, maybe Thelen is that guy, don't know for sure.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 08:32 PM
  #11
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue
i see your point about it not being a steal if we take him in the second... but how do you define steal? considering how many picks are busts wouldn't it be nice to just draft a guy with a second round pick and have him become a top 4 dman on our team? maybe i'm just numb from the years of bad drafting/trading away decent prospects...but at this point i'd like us to just make good picks and get guys who can come in and contribute in the next couple of years. who would you consider a steal in the second round?
A steal is Tyutin for example. He could have easily gone in the middles of 1st round but dropped to us in the 2nd, he was way more talented than Tesliuk at his draft year.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 09:01 PM
  #12
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
having 6'6" guys on the defense instead of 6'1" is not just physical advantage it is also mental, it intimidates other teams' smaller forwards.
That thought process has fallen away from most beliefs at this point. Years ago with guys like Kudroc and Biron, etc. People have come to just go with a gut that can play the position. You notice a lot smaller guys or averaged size guys on a lot of bluelines now. Players learn very quickly if a big player isn't gonna drill them. But they also remember the average sized guys who can drill them {guys like Kasparitis comes to mind.

The league went through a phase where everyone wanted to find the next 6'5 or 6'6 monster but quickly learned that sometimes the guy who is 6'1 is the better choice.

Quote:
6'6" guy is usually much stronger and is harder to hit, harder to beat and he has a much larger reach.
That's a myth and has proven to be such in recent years. For every 6'6 monster who made it, you can find 15 guys who played like a ***** cat. This year offers the same problem, a lot of big but soft guys. If Tom Poti were three inches taller and 15 pounds heavier it still wouldn't make a difference because he's still Tom Poti.

Quote:
We don't need a safe pick like Baranka and Liffiton, we need some huge monster on defense like Schultz, I know he is not super physical, but he doesn't have to be, especially if he is good both defensively and offensively, he is in the Rathje mold, what is wrong with that?
We need a defenseman so we can get depth. Depth allows for many wonderful things like callups and trades and a little something called a foundation. I don't care if they are safe, if they play defense and keep the other team from scoring then they will have done what they were asked.

Schultz is not a huge monster. A solid defenseman yes, but you keep using the term monster and you're waaaay off on that one. Without getting into another argument that's going to go nowhere I'll say this again. If you draft Schultz you draft him to play positional hockey and to redirect guys, you DON'T draft him expecting a monster because he's just not that type of player. For the same reason you don't draft Wolski and expect a power forward. It's just not their game.

But again no one is talking about taking Tesliuk instead of Schultz. They are talking about taking a guy in the second round. Too totally different parts of the draft.

Nothing is wrong with taking a Mike Rathje but no one would have taken him where he was taken if they knew that his current state is the finished product.

Taking a Schultz or Rathje isnt a problem so long as you understand what you're getting {Which I'm not totally sure you do yet}. At the same time you also don't want 4 Mike Rathje's in the same draft. Schultz is similar to two other guys {on the same team} who are VERY similar to him. Getting one is fine, maybe even two but if Tesliuk is there with a second rounder I think you consider him. Worst case scenario is you add some depth.

Quote:
Another need on defense is the clear cut #1 defenseman, maybe Thelen is that guy, don't know for sure.
Possibly, but the team has needs all over the place. In fact 80% of the league needs a number one defenseman.

If he is the best player and they feel he fits that mold, he might very well be taken. It's all up to them, but for my money I'm guessing the Rangers go much heavier from the WHL pool of talent.

Edge is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 09:14 PM
  #13
modestfwd
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 109
vCash: 500
I want Lyamin at #24, there is no way he lasts until #36.

He is exactly what we need. Hard hitting d-man, crease clearer.
Compared to Kasparitis. Any thoughts on taking him that early?

modestfwd is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 09:22 PM
  #14
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
That thought process has fallen away from most beliefs at this point. Years ago with guys like Kudroc and Biron, etc. People have come to just go with a gut that can play the position. You notice a lot smaller guys or averaged size guys on a lot of bluelines now. Players learn very quickly if a big player isn't gonna drill them. But they also remember the average sized guys who can drill them {guys like Kasparitis comes to mind.


The league went through a phase where everyone wanted to find the next 6'5 or 6'6 monster but quickly learned that sometimes the guy who is 6'1 is the better choice.



That's a myth and has proven to be such in recent years. For every 6'6 monster who made it, you can find 15 guys who played like a ***** cat. This year offers the same problem, a lot of big but soft guys. If Tom Poti were three inches taller and 15 pounds heavier it still wouldn't make a difference because he's still Tom Poti.



We need a defenseman so we can get depth. Depth allows for many wonderful things like callups and trades and a little something called a foundation. I don't care if they are safe, if they play defense and keep the other team from scoring then they will have done what they were asked.

Schultz is not a huge monster. A solid defenseman yes, but you keep using the term monster and you're waaaay off on that one. Without getting into another argument that's going to go nowhere I'll say this again. If you draft Schultz you draft him to play positional hockey and to redirect guys, you DON'T draft him expecting a monster because he's just not that type of player. For the same reason you don't draft Wolski and expect a power forward. It's just not their game.

But again no one is talking about taking Tesliuk instead of Schultz. They are talking about taking a guy in the second round. Too totally different parts of the draft.

Nothing is wrong with taking a Mike Rathje but no one would have taken him where he was taken if they knew that his current state is the finished product.

Taking a Schultz or Rathje isnt a problem so long as you understand what you're getting {Which I'm not totally sure you do yet}. At the same time you also don't want 4 Mike Rathje's in the same draft. Schultz is similar to two other guys {on the same team} who are VERY similar to him. Getting one is fine, maybe even two but if Tesliuk is there with a second rounder I think you consider him. Worst case scenario is you add some depth.


Possibly, but the team has needs all over the place. In fact 80% of the league needs a number one defenseman.

If he is the best player and they feel he fits that mold, he might very well be taken. It's all up to them, but for my money I'm guessing the Rangers go much heavier from the WHL pool of talent.
players like Kudroc and Biron got problems with hockey sense and are somewhat slow skaters, I don't think Schultz suffers from these flaws. I know that Schultz will not be a "monster" in a sense of physical play, but I would be totally happy if we can get an 18 year old Rathje in the 2nd round. Sure I wouldn't take him 6th overall, but if he is there at 36 I would be all over him. Yes I agree being huge doesn't automatically make you better than other smaller players, but if you are huge and skate well and have good puck skill and solid defensively, then you shouldn't have a problem being a good player in NHL.

Yes, depth is great, but I think we already have it (Kondratiev, Potter, Liffiton, Lampman, Tyutin, Pock, Baranka, Guenin, and Taylor) they are all around 6'0", none of them are really big except maybe Taylor. So I think it would be kind of stupid to draft several more defenseman who are almost identical to the ones we have.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 09:23 PM
  #15
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by modestfwd
I want Lyamin at #24, there is no way he lasts until #36.

He is exactly what we need. Hard hitting d-man, crease clearer.
Compared to Kasparitis. Any thoughts on taking him that early?
I would only take him if he is there in the 2nd round, I wouldn't spend a 1st rounder on him.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 09:36 PM
  #16
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
players like Kudroc and Biron got problems with hockey sense and are somewhat slow skaters, I don't think Schultz suffers from these flaws. I know that Schultz will not be a "monster" in a sense of physical play, but I would be totally happy if we can get an 18 year old Rathje in the 2nd round.
The issue wasn't whether he can play, but you thought you could get an aggressive streak out of him. The whole time i've been saying he isn't bad so long as you know what you're getting. If you're expecting a Rathje that is a bit more reasonable, but you were throwing around monster visions.

Quote:
Sure I wouldn't take him 6th overall, but if he is there at 36 I would be all over him. Yes I agree being huge doesn't automatically make you better than other smaller players, but if you are huge and skate well and have good puck skill and solid defensively, then you shouldn't have a problem being a good player in NHL.
I think he could be a good player, I just don't think he is a cornerstone player or one that is going to intimidate anyone. He'll quietly do his job like a Popovic or a Rathje, but he's not gonna get in people's heads. And the bottom line is he is going to have to toughen up a bit if he's gonna be a pro player. He gets pushed around way too much for a guy that big. Poke checks and sticks slaps aren't enough against guys like Primeau and Bertuzzi.

Quote:
Yes, depth is great, but I think we already have it (Kondratiev, Potter, Liffiton, Lampman, Tyutin, Pock, Baranka, Guenin, and Taylor) they are all around 6'0", none of them are really big except maybe Taylor. So I think it would be kind of stupid to draft several more defenseman who are almost identical to the ones we have.
They're not big, but they aren't midgets either. Kondratiev, Potter, Lampman and Baranka and Guenin will all play in the 6'1-6'2 range and and 200-210 pounds.

Tytuin is 6'3, 215 Liffiton will finish around 215 with his 6'2 frame {and be a nasty player} abd Taylor is starting to add the weight to his 6'4 frame. So right there, just in the system you've got three guys who at a minimum will be 6'2, 210. Would I love to add more big guys? Sure, who wouldn't. But they ahve to be there in order to draft them. Drafting a 6'5 guy who plays like he is 6;1 is no different than drafting a guy actually is 6'1. He takes up more room but the trade of is that he is almost guranteed to be a little slower.

If there is a big guy available of course you take him, but you gotta weight his overall game. You can't just look at his size and hope he intimidates the other team.

Edge is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 09:44 PM
  #17
NYblades
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 83
vCash: 500
Edge: What about Meszaros?

Next on Red Line's hit parade is smooth Slovak Ondrej Meszaros, who plays a mature two-way game and shows plenty of skill and puckhandling ability. Meszaros excels in the transition game and plays with lots of poise and confidence. Many teams are reluctant to mention him because they hope to steal him in the mid-to-late first round. We don't think he'll last much beyond the top 10, though.


Would he both worth considering moving up with the second 1st round pick?

NYblades is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 09:45 PM
  #18
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Possibly, I think he's a safe pick.

I don't see him wowing people with offense or moving mountains but he plays an excellent if unspectacular two way game.

Personally I think he might have the best defensive ability of any kid in the draft.

Edge is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 11:16 PM
  #19
modestfwd
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prucha73
I would only take him if he is there in the 2nd round, I wouldn't spend a 1st rounder on him.
Why not? He would most likely be the best defenseman avaible at 24.
Lyamin >>>> O'Neil

He would be perfect for us, just what we need, and he will most likely not be around at 36.

modestfwd is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 11:23 PM
  #20
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by modestfwd
Why not? He would most likely be the best defenseman avaible at 24.
Lyamin >>>> O'Neil

He would be perfect for us, just what we need, and he will most likely not be around at 36.
Maybe there will be a better forward at 24 and I do like Schultz a bit better and I really like Nokelainen who is very good both offensively and defensively, but in any case I doubt we will stay at 24, so it is likely Lyamin will be gone by #36.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 11:29 PM
  #21
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prucha73
Maybe there will be a better forward at 24 and I do like Schultz a bit better and I really like Nokelainen who is very good both offensively and defensively, but in any case I doubt we will stay at 24, so it is likely Lyamin will be gone by #36.
I would take Lyamin over Schultz any day. I really don't get the Schultz infatuations. Aren't we sick of big guys who don't use their size? I'll take a 6'1 guy who gives it all physically over a guy who's 6'7 and doesn't. Size is nice... but there are factors that I would consider much more important. If Schultz isn't physical at 6'6 in juniors then how will he be when he hits the NHL when players are MUCH bigger and MUCH stronger. Give me Lyamin or Green any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Barnaby is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 11:33 PM
  #22
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnaby
I would take Lyamin over Schultz any day. I really don't get the Schultz infatuations. Aren't we sick of big guys who don't use their size? I'll take a 6'1 guy who gives it all physically over a guy who's 6'7 and doesn't. Size is nice... but there are factors that I would consider much more important. If Schultz isn't physical at 6'6 in juniors then how will he be when he hits the NHL when players are MUCH bigger and MUCH stronger. Give me Lyamin or Green any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
I would take Lyamin over Schultz if Lyamin had any offensive upside, but it looks like he is strictly defensive. I want our defense to be versatile and always dangerous offensively. And Schultz does use his size, just not often enough and lacks a mean streak.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 11:44 PM
  #23
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
more on Schultz: http://newyorkrangers.com/team/nhldr...Player=Schultz

Quote:
A solid defenseman with a cool demeanor in high pressure situations A good skater who is agile and strong on his skates Uses his body well for puck protection Gives a quick first pass and likes to throw the long pass up the middle for breakaways Jumps into the play to create odd-man rushes Possesses an excellent shot Is tough to beat in one-on-one situations Is not intimidated in a physical game Plays with intelligence rather than trying to over-power opponents Is very effective at tying up his man Has good hockey sense and skill.
That is almost everything I am looking for in a defenseman.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 11:48 PM
  #24
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prucha73
more on Schultz: http://newyorkrangers.com/team/nhldr...Player=Schultz



That is almost everything I am looking for in a defenseman.
I'll pass. One Tom Poti is enough for me. I'd rather take a smaller player who's better defensively and is decent with the puck. A big guy who isn't physical and solid offensively doesnt do much for me.

Barnaby is offline  
Old
06-20-2004, 11:51 PM
  #25
vbox81
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prucha73
Yes, depth is great, but I think we already have it (Kondratiev, Potter, Liffiton, Lampman, Tyutin, Pock, Baranka, Guenin, and Taylor) they are all around 6'0", none of them are really big except maybe Taylor. So I think it would be kind of stupid to draft several more defenseman who are almost identical to the ones we have.
But with Liffiton, Tayler and Guenin: What's the difference between a 6'0" ton of bricks hit and a 6'6" ton of bricks hit? Those three will hit hard and you will not be smiling afterwards. I don't think opponents check the roster sheet for size before or after they get smacked into the glass.

vbox81 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42 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.