PDA

View Full Version : Recalled/Assigned: Dylan McIlrath Returned to Hartford



Phil in Absentia
11-05-2014, 01:09 PM
:tweet: @HartnettHockey: The Rangers have assigned defenseman Dylan McIlrath to the Hartford Wolf Pack of the AHL. #NYR

:tweet: @PLeonardNYDN: Rangers have sent Dylan McIlrath back to the Hartford Wolf Pack #NYR

:tweet: @stevezipay: As expected with #NYR D Kevin Klein healthy, Dylan McIlrath returned to Hartford

--

Hope you enjoyed the cup of coffee, Dylan. :/

momentum
11-05-2014, 01:11 PM
Probably where he belongs, at least for now, maybe for his whole career.

Keirik
11-05-2014, 01:24 PM
Good decision. Still scratching my head as to why he fought in a game where they recalled him to alleviate some of the intensive minutes our D has logged from the game before.

Pete
11-05-2014, 01:38 PM
Just a stumbling block. We knew he'd been brought along slowly.

Thing that concerns me is he looked better in his 2 games last year.

Dunny
11-05-2014, 01:43 PM
I think it's impossible to draw any conclusions from what we've seen.

Puck Head
11-05-2014, 01:50 PM
I think it's impossible to draw any conclusions from what we've seen.

There are a few fundamental things we can conclude he still needs to improve on.

Mike
11-05-2014, 01:50 PM
I think it's impossible to draw any conclusions from what we've seen.

I have 2 conclusions:
1. He got his ass kicked by Reaves.
2. He got walked by a guy we passed up in order to pick him.

Future
11-05-2014, 01:59 PM
Good decision. Still scratching my head as to why he fought in a game where they recalled him to alleviate some of the intensive minutes our D has logged from the game before.
I'd chalk it up to a young guy trying to make an impression. Probably not the best fight in the world, but not a big surprise really.

McDougalfaschnitzer
11-05-2014, 02:01 PM
2. He got walked by a guy we passed up in order to pick him.

That is all.

JOHN
11-05-2014, 02:03 PM
I'd chalk it up to a young guy trying to make an impression. Probably not the best fight in the world, but not a big surprise really.

The point is that he didn't make a good choice. Making an impression is knowing the situation you're in, where the momentum is and the situation you as a team are in, and making the right decisions. He didn't make the right decision, and unfortunately for him it potentially came at the price of a long look at the NHL level.

Lt. Dan
11-05-2014, 02:18 PM
I have 2 conclusions:
1. He got his ass kicked by Reaves.
2. He got walked by a guy we passed up in order to pick him.

:lol:

Ass kicked is a bit much, no. He walked away fine afterwards.

Tarasenko owned 3 different people on that goal. 4 if you include Cam. Don't really fault him for that. However I do hate everything whenever I see Tarasenko score.

GJ Sathers and co

Slobberknocker
11-05-2014, 03:50 PM
how many other teams passed on tarasanko?

Phil in Absentia
11-05-2014, 04:09 PM
how many other teams passed on tarasanko?

Based on where he was ranked going into the draft, and not including the Rangers, four. Stars, Ducks, Yotes and Kings. Though it should be noted that STL had two first-round selections at 14 and 16 and picked Tarasenko with 16, so there was a chance they could have lost him after taking Schwartz to the Kings, who took Forbort instead.

BlueJay
11-05-2014, 05:55 PM
First round fizzle... even a glimpse should be viewable by now, no?

Dunny
11-05-2014, 06:09 PM
Good job Sather and Co. for drafting Hank in the 7th round. Good job for signing Dan Girardi when nobody could be bothered to waste a pick on him at all. Good job on Duclair in the 3rd, woops, wonder how many teams are going to regret that one. Probably about 15, judging by the amount of awful picks there were in that years first round. Good job Sather and Co. for Hagelin in the 6th. Good job on identifying Kreider, while those ahead of you were busy drafting the Peter Hollands, Scott Glennies, Calvin De Haans and Louie LeBlancs of the world. Good job on Ryan Callahan in the 4th round.

It's a two-way street. You win some and you lose some. No team, NONE, ZERO, are even close to perfect at this. In fact, there isn't even a single NHL team measurably better at drafting than another.

Morphinity
11-05-2014, 06:15 PM
Good job Sather and Co. for drafting Hank in the 7th round. Good job for signing Dan Girardi when nobody could be bothered to waste a pick on him at all. Good job on Duclair in the 3rd, woops, wonder how many teams are going to regret that one. Probably about 15, judging by the amount of awful picks there were in that years first round. Good job Sather and Co. for Hagelin in the 6th. Good job on identifying Kreider, while those ahead of you were busy drafting the Peter Hollands, Scott Glennies, Calvin De Haans and Louie LeBlancs of the world. Good job on Ryan Callahan in the 4th round.

It's a two-way street. You win some and you lose some. No team, NONE, ZERO, are even close to perfect at this. In fact, there isn't even a single NHL team measurably better at drafting than another.
Holy shit, i love you

Travis Bickle
11-05-2014, 06:15 PM
Bravo! :clap:

Pete
11-05-2014, 06:26 PM
Good job Sather and Co. for drafting Hank in the 7th round. Good job for signing Dan Girardi when nobody could be bothered to waste a pick on him at all. Good job on Duclair in the 3rd, woops, wonder how many teams are going to regret that one. Probably about 15, judging by the amount of awful picks there were in that years first round. Good job Sather and Co. for Hagelin in the 6th. Good job on identifying Kreider, while those ahead of you were busy drafting the Peter Hollands, Scott Glennies, Calvin De Haans and Louie LeBlancs of the world. Good job on Ryan Callahan in the 4th round.

It's a two-way street. You win some and you lose some. No team, NONE, ZERO, are even close to perfect at this. In fact, there isn't even a single NHL team measurably better at drafting than another.

Wow, if this isn't muddying the waters, I don't know what is.

You make it like they identified who those players were and targeted them.

They got lucky, which was half your point.

But the fact is you don't take project defense man when an impact wing is there at 10 and you can have Radko Gudas in the third.

While I hope for McIlrath to develop and I'll root for him as long as he's a Ranger, that pick will go down as a big of a swing and a miss as Jessiman.

Pointing out the swings and misses of others is irrelevant.

The Dude
11-05-2014, 06:40 PM
Bahhh. Why keep Koska-ka?

Mcllrath need a long leash. On a rebuilding team, this dude would be playing every day. This team has no room for rookie growing pains on D. Wish they did, because they have time for crap heap players like Koska and J. Moore.

Maybe its time to cut bait and package him and JT Miller for a need. I'd imagine a team like Edmonton or Carolina would give up assets for these two.

What do you all think they could get for the pair and sayyy Moore?

Dunny
11-05-2014, 06:40 PM
Wow, if this isn't muddying the waters, I don't know what is.

You make it like they identified who those players were and targeted them.

They got lucky, which was half your point.

But the fact is you don't take project defense man when an impact wing is there at 10 and you can have Radko Gudas in the third.

While I hope for McIlrath to develop and I'll root for him as long as he's a Ranger, that pick will go down as a big of a swing and a miss as Jessiman.

Pointing out the swings and misses of others is irrelevant.

But they all swing and miss. Every team. To expect them not to is just setting yourself up to be disappointed. Of course it was a bad pick, but they did it before and they will do it again and the same can be said for every god damn team in the league.

Pete
11-05-2014, 06:43 PM
But they all swing and miss. Every team. To expect them not to is just setting yourself up to be disappointed. Of course it was a bad pick, but they did it before and they will do it again and the same can be said for every god damn team in the league.

Oh 1,000%.

But we're still gonna talk about it haha.

I'm sure there are thousands of HF thread like these.

Dunny
11-05-2014, 06:53 PM
I'm sure many here are just like me and get lost for hours on HockeyDB going through the drafts. It's fascinating how many guys are projected as a top 30 18 YO and 3 more years of development would have shown that the guy picked 200th was actually light years better.

2004 basically the exact same thing happened to Minny. They drafted AJ Thelan @12 and left Radulov on the board. Thelan managed to play 9 games. In the AHL.

Pete
11-05-2014, 07:06 PM
Pierre said it best when debating Tyler versus Taylor. The best player now might not be the best player in 5 years.

We knew he wasn't the best player there. Or the 3rd best. We thought he had a more aggressive development arc (he made big strides his draft year), but I don't think there was a question who'd be the better NHLer, him or Tarasenko.

JOHN
11-05-2014, 07:58 PM
The problem isn't it was a swing and a miss, it's the kind of swing and miss they took. It was for someone who's upside was very debatable, very much not assuredly great and in fact with little promise of being great vs. someone who had great promise and there was a much more legitimate shit of him being great. But it is what it is. You can't change the past. I'm over it now and have moved on, but I think being defensive about the pick and validating it by other good moved they've made over the years is a but convoluted. Especially if you're bringing guys into the equation who are below hanks talent, because frankly I'll take Tarasenko over Girardi everyday and would make an even swap any time.

Puck Head
11-05-2014, 08:55 PM
Bahhh. Why keep Koska-ka? Mcllrath need a long leash. On a rebuilding team, this dude would be playing every day. This team has no room for rookie growing pains on D. Wish they did, because they have time for crap heap players like Koska and J. Moore. Maybe its time to cut bait and package him and JT Miller for a need. I'd imagine a team like Edmonton or Carolina would give up assets for these two. What do you all think they could get for the pair and sayyy Moore?

This isn't a case of Mcilrath not getting I've because of our defensive depth.
No team in the NHL is as thin on the blue as we have been, and he's still not a option.

Phil in Absentia
11-05-2014, 09:02 PM
Wow, if this isn't muddying the waters, I don't know what is.

You make it like they identified who those players were and targeted them.

They got lucky, which was half your point.

But the fact is you don't take project defense man when an impact wing is there at 10 and you can have Radko Gudas in the third.

While I hope for McIlrath to develop and I'll root for him as long as he's a Ranger, that pick will go down as a big of a swing and a miss as Jessiman.

Pointing out the swings and misses of others is irrelevant.

It's not irrelevant. It's actually quite relevant in showing that no one ever gets it right 100% of the time. So yeah, even if McIlrath charts the all-time busts list, every team has one, and every team has made mistakes in the first round. In every round, really.

The science on drafting is just never going to be concrete, because you are judging the car by its headlights before you've really seen the engine or body, which won't show until multiple years of progression that you can't predict with certainty. Just guesses. Its like that line from Moneyball where Pitt tells his scout that telling parents "with your son, I know" is a lie, because you don't.

Even "can't miss" prospects go bust. Look at Nikita Filatov or Thomas Hickey or Peter Mueller or James Shepard. The list goes on and on.

Pete
11-05-2014, 09:07 PM
It's not irrelevant. It's actually quite relevant in showing that no one ever gets it right 100% of the time. So yeah, even if McIlrath charts the all-time busts list, every team has one, and every team has made mistakes in the first round. In every round, really.That's exactly the reason it's irrelevant.

Phil in Absentia
11-05-2014, 09:24 PM
How? It's drawing a correlation to other examples of teams that haven't gotten it right year-after-year either.

Pete
11-05-2014, 09:32 PM
How? It's drawing a correlation to other examples of teams that haven't gotten it right year-after-year either.

Because no one here is suggesting otherwise.

Mike
11-06-2014, 09:23 AM
90% of the draft is a crap shoot. Not too many people realize how thin the talent pool really is. Factor in the elements of human temperament, and it becomes that much harder. It just hurts when it happens to your team

Niko
11-06-2014, 09:30 AM
Every time we hear about Dylan, we hear "he's working on his skating, he's improving" etc. The guy was drafted in 2010. At what point can we expect him to have his shit together and not skate like complete trash? Realistically, at what point is it "what ya see is what ya get!", because that's honestly where I am with him.

Future
11-06-2014, 09:35 AM
Every time we hear about Dylan, we hear "he's working on his skating, he's improving" etc. The guy was drafted in 2010. At what point can we expect him to have his shit together and not skate like complete trash? Realistically, at what point is it "what ya see is what ya get!", because that's honestly where I am with him.
We haven't seen him, so we don't know what we're going to get.

Niko
11-06-2014, 09:40 AM
It's what we're told about him, constantly. Every time his name is mention, it's quickly followed by how he's learning and improving or how his mobility is getting better. I'm tired of Rangers personnel trying to sell him or give us hope that one day he'll be more than he is.

NYR2711
11-06-2014, 10:01 AM
I don't see it more of a hit or miss type thing with drafting him. It was known that he was a work in process when he was drafted. Like Pete is saying, Tarasenko was and is a better player in that draft. taking McIlrath at that point really hurt the team since we lack any scoring forward like him in our prospect pool. This is the problem this team has in drafting. We have been weak on wing for a long time, and outside of Kreider, we really haven't drafted a decent goal scorer in a long time. As much as I hope Dylan succeeds here, I feel it was a waste to use a first round pick on him, and to pick him simply because he is a physical defensemen. HAd he had offensive instincts, I probably would have been fine, but I really didnt like this pick.

Phil in Absentia
11-06-2014, 10:22 AM
Every time we hear about Dylan, we hear "he's working on his skating, he's improving" etc. The guy was drafted in 2010. At what point can we expect him to have his shit together and not skate like complete trash? Realistically, at what point is it "what ya see is what ya get!", because that's honestly where I am with him.

Well, he doesn't skate like complete trash, so I'm not sure that aspect of your objection applies.

Getting his shit together, in terms of becoming an NHL defender, yeah. That's a concern over how much longer you wait for the photo to develop, but there are aspects of his game that are absolutely there, including character (off the charts), work ethic (off the charts) and skating (improved over years).

He struggled with containing the speed of some of the Blues' players, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he isn't fast enough for the NHL.

Future
11-06-2014, 10:29 AM
I don't see it more of a hit or miss type thing with drafting him. It was known that he was a work in process when he was drafted. Like Pete is saying, Tarasenko was and is a better player in that draft. taking McIlrath at that point really hurt the team since we lack any scoring forward like him in our prospect pool. This is the problem this team has in drafting. We have been weak on wing for a long time, and outside of Kreider, we really haven't drafted a decent goal scorer in a long time. As much as I hope Dylan succeeds here, I feel it was a waste to use a first round pick on him, and to pick him simply because he is a physical defensemen. HAd he had offensive instincts, I probably would have been fine, but I really didnt like this pick.
The mistake was that they drafted for need, rather than just getting the best player. The Rangers were desperate for a crease-clearing type defenseman, and that's what they took.

At the time, their defense consisted of Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto, Roszival, Redden, and I think Gilroy. The defensemen in the pipeline were abysmal...Potter and Sanguinetti. Not a physical player among them.

Sure you can make the argument that should have taken Tarasenko. Fine. But passing on a winger specifically wasn't necessarily the mistake, it was drafting to fill an immediate need.

NYR2711
11-06-2014, 11:12 AM
The mistake was that they drafted for need, rather than just getting the best player. The Rangers were desperate for a crease-clearing type defenseman, and that's what they took.

At the time, their defense consisted of Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto, Roszival, Redden, and I think Gilroy. The defensemen in the pipeline were abysmal...Potter and Sanguinetti. Not a physical player among them.

Sure you can make the argument that should have taken Tarasenko. Fine. But passing on a winger specifically wasn't necessarily the mistake, it was drafting to fill an immediate need.

They didn't draft for the need though. At the time, they had no wingers with any goal scoring skills. Taking a project player isn't drafting for the need of the team. Drafting for the need of the team is drafting a player that is pretty much almost ready to play in the NHL. Everyone knew, including the team, that McI was years from being ready to play at the NHL level. Tarasenko was more of a need than McI was. We have been weak on the wing for a very long time, and basically still are.

Future
11-06-2014, 11:28 AM
They didn't draft for the need though. At the time, they had no wingers with any goal scoring skills. Taking a project player isn't drafting for the need of the team. Drafting for the need of the team is drafting a player that is pretty much almost ready to play in the NHL. Everyone knew, including the team, that McI was years from being ready to play at the NHL level. Tarasenko was more of a need than McI was. We have been weak on the wing for a very long time, and basically still are.
Gaborik? This was a team that, under Tortorella, tried to win games 2-1. McIlrath would have been a perfect fit if he could step in. So I don't disagree that they were wrong in filling that gap by hoping McI would play soon, but I don't think winger was the bigger need.

NYR2711
11-06-2014, 11:34 AM
Gaborik? This was a team that, under Tortorella, tried to win games 2-1. McIlrath would have been a perfect fit if he could step in. So I don't disagree that they were wrong in filling that gap by hoping McI would play soon, but I don't think winger was the bigger need.

Your talking about two different things here. You can't say we drafted McI because we needed a defensemen, yet had Staal, Girardi, MDZ, Roszival, Redden and Gilroy, yet say that we didn't need a winger because we had Gabby. Thats not how teams draft. You said that we only had Potter and Sang in the system, but who else did we have that was a goal scorer in the prospect pool? Anyway you look at it, Tarasenko was more of a need than McIlrath was for the team, at the time of the draft, and even now. They knew he was far from being NHL ready, and I do believe the team said he was 4 or 5 years out from being ready when he was drafted.

Future
11-06-2014, 11:38 AM
Your talking about two different things here. You can't say we drafted McI because we needed a defensemen, yet had Staal, Girardi, MDZ, Roszival, Redden and Gilroy, yet say that we didn't need a winger because we had Gabby. Thats not how teams draft. You said that we only had Potter and Sang in the system, but who else did we have that was a goal scorer in the prospect pool? Anyway you look at it, Tarasenko was more of a need than McIlrath was for the team, at the time of the draft, and even now.
I'm saying that 4 of the 6 sucked, so there was a huge hole on defense. Just having a volume of defensemen doesn't mean you have a good defense.

And that's not what I was saying about Gabby. You said we had 0 scoring wingers. We had one of the best in the game and a team that was driven by hard work and cycling, not explosive playmakers. Was wing a need, sure? But wing was far less important to that system than D.

NYR2711
11-06-2014, 11:54 AM
I'm saying that 4 of the 6 sucked, so there was a huge hole on defense. Just having a volume of defensemen doesn't mean you have a good defense.

And that's not what I was saying about Gabby. You said we had 0 scoring wingers. We had one of the best in the game and a team that was driven by hard work and cycling, not explosive playmakers. Was wing a need, sure? But wing was far less important to that system than D.

How can you say this when defenders take a lot longer to develop? Both players would have been drafted for the future, as are every player. Saying that because we had Gabby, who was/is a very injury prone player, plus an aging player, we didn't need Tarasenko, but we had Staal And Girardi, who were both very young and two of the top defenders in the league at the time, yet we still needed McIlrath seems contradictory. It was also stated by the team that they knew he was going to be a project and was no where near ready to play in the NHL. And even when we look now at our prospect pool, we still have no pure goal scorers in the system, and McI has dropped significantly in our prospect rankings. I don't see how McIlrath was a need for the team but Tarasenko wasn't.

Future
11-06-2014, 12:22 PM
How can you say this when defenders take a lot longer to develop? Both players would have been drafted for the future, as are every player. Saying that because we had Gabby, who was/is a very injury prone player, plus an aging player, we didn't need Tarasenko, but we had Staal And Girardi, who were both very young and two of the top defenders in the league at the time, yet we still needed McIlrath seems contradictory. It was also stated by the team that they knew he was going to be a project and was no where near ready to play in the NHL. And even when we look now at our prospect pool, we still have no pure goal scorers in the system, and McI has dropped significantly in our prospect rankings. I don't see how McIlrath was a need for the team but Tarasenko wasn't.
Good grief, I haven't said that. It's like you're not reading my posts.

NYR2711
11-06-2014, 03:15 PM
Good grief, I haven't said that. It's like you're not reading my posts.

You said the reason they drafted McIlrath over Tarasanko is because they drafted based on the need of the team. I am saying and pointing out how that I don't agree with that theory.

Myusername
11-06-2014, 07:25 PM
Poor McIlrath, he'll always now be known as that dude that was picked instead of Tarasenko or Fowler. Unless the guy is an aberration, looks like he's on a path to being a #6 defender at best. Sometimes GM's and whatnot overthink and end up passing up the obvious choices... happens. At least we picked Kreider over Schroeder who looks like he's going to have a great AHL career

Dunny
11-06-2014, 07:52 PM
A good 5 right now would be awesome. Obviously disapointing given his draft position but a good 5 or 6 making no money is a good thing.

RichieNextel305
11-06-2014, 08:19 PM
Sad thing is I don't even see that right now. It's been small sample sizes, but he really just hasn't ever looked good up here or taken advantage of anything he could have thus far.

At this point, I'd even say a good 5 or 6 is maybe even a reach.

The Dude
11-07-2014, 10:04 AM
This isn't a case of Mcilrath not getting I've because of our defensive depth.
No team in the NHL is as thin on the blue as we have been, and he's still not a option.

Yes, but look whsts playing and what has usually played over the kids. Scrap head throw aways. No team would play Kostka or take a chance on Hunwick, over a prospect drafted so high, and with so much potential, that has NOT been given the leeway these throw aways have.

Miller and Mcllrath make a poor decision in an NHL game? Benched and likely sent down or benched the next game. Faulk, Kostka, Hunwick, Moore, and so on get chance after chance after chance. Come onnn. Kostka? Seriously?

Miller, Mcllrath, Allen would find their way onto a lot of teams. Somehow, the Rangers arent into developing these guys at the NHL level. Ive seen Hates and Duclair make errors that would get Miller benched instantly and sent down. I just dont get it.

Moore takes endless stupid penalties and does idiotic things with the puck for a year plus now. Never gets benched and probably should have been sent down last year.

Pete said it best. AV doesnt like something in these players games. They obviously have some big talent, otherwise there would be no talk about them, nor would they have been drafted so high.

The Dude
11-07-2014, 10:22 AM
Sad thing is I don't even see that right now. It's been small sample sizes, but he really just hasn't ever looked good up here or taken advantage of anything he could have thus far.

At this point, I'd even say a good 5 or 6 is maybe even a reach.


Three NHL games. Two fights and a minus 1. Got burned on one of the nicest goals in years as HE WAS COVERING for his partner who fell down by the blue line. Weird how this keeps getting over looked. For a a guy that is supposedly a poor skater, he got across the ice to get in position to make the guy work for the goal.

What is it that you see about him that hasnt looked good?

Two injury plagued AHL seasons haven't helped him much either.

Pete
11-07-2014, 10:25 AM
Three NHL games. Two fights and a minus 1. Got burned on one of the nicest goals in years as HE WAS COVERING for his partner who fell down by the blue line. Weird how this keeps getting over looked. For a a guy that is supposedly a poor skater, he got awho

What is it that you see about him that hasnt looked good?

Two injury plagued AHL seasons.

He got beaten wide repeatedly. Tara beat him wide left and another guy beat him wide right and he took a penalty on the play. His transitions are poor and he can't square up to quicker offensive players. You never want your right shoulder pointed at a guy going right. You want to be angled and looking directly at a player going wide, and you turn as the angle changes. He wasn't doing that.

NYR2711
11-07-2014, 02:15 PM
Yes, but look whsts playing and what has usually played over the kids. Scrap head throw aways. No team would play Kostka or take a chance on Hunwick, over a prospect drafted so high, and with so much potential, that has NOT been given the leeway these throw aways have.

Miller and Mcllrath make a poor decision in an NHL game? Benched and likely sent down or benched the next game. Faulk, Kostka, Hunwick, Moore, and so on get chance after chance after chance. Come onnn. Kostka? Seriously?

Miller, Mcllrath, Allen would find their way onto a lot of teams. Somehow, the Rangers arent into developing these guys at the NHL level. Ive seen Hates and Duclair make errors that would get Miller benched instantly and sent down. I just dont get it.

Moore takes endless stupid penalties and does idiotic things with the puck for a year plus now. Never gets benched and probably should have been sent down last year.

Pete said it best. AV doesnt like something in these players games. They obviously have some big talent, otherwise there would be no talk about them, nor would they have been drafted so high.

The problem with Miller is that once it starts to spiral, it just keeps going. He loses his confidence way too quickly and has tons of problems getting it back, so one small bad play will just keep happening throughout the game. He doesn't correct his problems either. Duclair and Hayes have seemed to learn from their mistakes, and honestly, since Duclair sat those couple of games, he has come back and played a lot better. Thats just something Miller hasn't done. He will play good for 1 game, then he is almost invisible the next couple. For some reason, at least to me, it seems like he just isn't picking up the game at the NHL level, and the is a serious problem.

Pete
11-07-2014, 02:23 PM
It's not a serious problem. He's 21, not 25.

And maybe if AV stayed with him like he stays with some other guys, Miller could work his way out of it. Miller might be a top 6 guy, he might be a bottom 6 guy, he might be a career 4th liner. I don't know. All I know is we aren't going to find out by playing him on the 4th line for 2-3 games and then sending him down, bringing him up, same deal, send him back down.

NYR2711
11-07-2014, 02:35 PM
He has had chances to play on the third line. To me, it is a serious problem when a guy isn't correcting or learning from his mistakes. No coach is gonna play a guy that doesn't learn from his mistakes. I agree, I want to see more of him play, but he isn't giving the coaching staff a reason to put him in the lineup. When guys that are younger than him are learning the game quicker than he is, that is a problem in my eyes. If he wants to stick here, then he has to start playing better, you can't blame the coach for that. This also isn't 1 coach that he is having issues under, its the second coach now. I would hope he would succeed here, but at some point, enough is enough and it will be time to move on.

fletch
11-07-2014, 02:58 PM
I'd chalk it up to a young guy trying to make an impression. Probably not the best fight in the world, but not a big surprise really.

This.

The Dude
11-08-2014, 02:06 AM
He got beaten wide repeatedly. Tara beat him wide left and another guy beat him wide right and he took a penalty on the play. His transitions are poor and he can't square up to quicker offensive players. You never want your right shoulder pointed at a guy going right. You want to be angled and looking directly at a player going wide, and you turn as the angle changes. He wasn't doing that.

3rd NHL game. 1st of the season. I mean can we maybe keep playing him, to see what hes learned, instead of deeming a mistake a habit or something?

Everyone is a lil quick to judge the guy off of so little experience.

Not a shot or trying to be a dick, but you give Miller soooo much more leeway. Hes played waaaayyy more games but you seem to think he deserves more chances. Not that I dont agree. I just dont get why you are so quick to point the finger at Mcllrath, while giving endless amounts of rope to Miller.

IMO, these players deserve a chance to work through their errors and learn on the job MORE.

This dudes played 1 game this season. His third NHL game ever. Can we not write him off and complain about draft status or ROOKIE mistakes?

Pete
11-08-2014, 08:51 AM
3rd NHL game. 1st of the season. I mean can we maybe keep playing him, to see what hes learned, instead of deeming a mistake a habit or something?

Everyone is a lil quick to judge the guy off of so little experience.

Not a shot or trying to be a dick, but you give Miller soooo much more leeway. Hes played waaaayyy more games but you seem to think he deserves more chances. Not that I dont agree. I just dont get why you are so quick to point the finger at Mcllrath, while giving endless amounts of rope to Miller.

IMO, these players deserve a chance to work through their errors and learn on the job MORE.

This dudes played 1 game this season. His third NHL game ever. Can we not write him off and complain about draft status or ROOKIE mistakes?

Tell it to AV. I didn't make the decision to send him down, and I'm not saying I would have done the same. You asked what didn't look good. I answered.

Miller has nothing to do with this. 2 different players in 2 different situations with nothing to do with each other at all.

Slobberknocker
11-08-2014, 10:56 AM
is there anyone in the rangers organization that is on record saying if they didnt draft mcilrath they would take tarasenko?

other teams did pass on the guy.

Puck Head
11-08-2014, 12:01 PM
is there anyone in the rangers organization that is on record saying if they didnt draft mcilrath they would take tarasenko? other teams did pass on the guy. Teams rarely speak of hypotheticals on players they passed on.

Every once in a while a team talks of a prospect they were high on yet went before. Like when rangers received McDonagh in trade.

Pete
11-08-2014, 12:39 PM
is there anyone in the rangers organization that is on record saying if they didnt draft mcilrath they would take tarasenko?

other teams did pass on the guy.

No, but I've heard they regret taking McI. Maybe that means Tarasenko or Fowler, but almost no one in the org aside from Gordie Clark was high on McIrath.

JOHN
11-08-2014, 05:06 PM
McIlrath represents a downturn for Clarke that didn't really come back until Duclair was taken. We really had a streak of meh players taken.

Pete
11-08-2014, 05:38 PM
McIlrath represents a downturn for Clarke that didn't really come back until Duclair was taken. We really had a streak of meh players taken.

Well the Miller draft...was just meh period.