Phil Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 Collectively speaking, NHL scouts aren?t clairvoyant in that they can?t predict the future. But the sheer volume of effort they put into studying and ranking each crop of prospects every year more often validates, rather than vilifies, their judgment. Anyone can point to a miss or two, but on the whole, particularly in the first round, they get it right the lion?s share of the time. Yet in recent seasons, on at least two occasions, the Rangers? front office has been guiltier than O.J. in trying to outsmart the scouts with off-the-board and reaching selections?decisions that saw them lose out on measurably more talented players for needlessly bad reasons. Drafting players based on an organization?s positional depth is rarely a great idea, and even rarer when based on a particular coaching philosophy or style. The McIlrath debacle illustrates the former perfectly, having been taken by the Rangers specifically to the fit mold of then-head coach John Tortorella?s ?Black and Blueshirts?. While attempting to be strategic about which positional depth you mean to improve with targeted drafting can have some benefits, it?s never a wise approach to adopt if it means leaving more talented options on the table as the Rangers have done repeatedly. Character is great, but skill?which can?t be taught?is greater. The fact of the matter is, even for a rebuilding Blueshirts squad that could stand to improve just about everywhere but in net, the franchise is better served to embrace BPA this June. If the result of that game plan produces a surplus at any given position, trading from that excess in the future to address immediate positional needs is a much more sound policy than drafting for the needs of today. Given the time it takes for an average prospect to develop, too often the landscape changes before that prospect can vindicate his team?s choice to draft him. Few know this as well as McIlrath. While the Andersson pick is mitigated in direct comparison to the McIlrath selection, both share the wrong kind of connective tissue regarding the Rangers? decision-making that high in the draft order. https://thehockeywriters.com/ny-rangers-draft-strategy-simple/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 Couldn’t agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 Likewise, couldn't agree more regarding BPA. We should even be emphasizing upside, impact players. Even if it means 3 dmen in the first 3-4 picks. However, character matters and would be reflected in the prospects overall score. Surprised you left out the issue where the Rangers were prejudiced by their prior selection of an offensive Dman (Del Zotto). Another way mgmt over-complicated the decision, thinking Fowler would be redundant. Passing on Fowler caused future pain in trading top picks for Yandle and signing Dan Boyle for more O, while letting Stralman go. Awful ramifications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 What's BPA? Safest? Most skilled? Biggest impact? Best all-around player (2-way)? Closest to NHL-ready? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 9, 2018 Author Share Posted May 9, 2018 Most talented. If you've got a choice between a player who projects as a 20-goal, middle-six, two-way player and one who has first-line, 30-goal potential, you go with the latter. Always. No exceptions. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 Most talented. If you've got a choice between a player who projects as a 20-goal, middle-six, two-way player and one who has first-line, 30-goal potential, you go with the latter. Always. No exceptions. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Always? No exceptions? If that's how it worked Duclair wouldn't have been a 3rd round pick... There are far more things to consider than talent alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 9, 2018 Author Share Posted May 9, 2018 With first round picks? Yes. Always. Especially top-ten. I'm also not suggesting that talent and ONLY talent be accounted for. I'm suggesting a weighted system in which talent is the most important ingredient. If your choosing between two equally talented players, go with the guy you think has the better work ethic or attitude. By all means. But I never want to see the Rangers passing up on a Tarasenko or Fowler or otherwise to draft the next Ryan Callahan. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 After McIlrath and Jessiman (and going on back to Steven Rice and Troy Mallette), I'm skeptical about drafting for size. Goalies in the first 10 have historically been very risky for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 Rangers aren't outsmarting scouts, they employ their own scouts who give them a list and they chose BPA according to that list. It's easy for fans to point and say, well, that guy didn't work out so they reached and should never do that again. Nobody even knew who Chytil was when he was picked last year and now he's by far our most "skilled" prospect. Sure when Pierre says, "Rangers going off the board for this one" you have to cringe but there will always be someone who goes later in the draft that turns into a star. It happens in every single draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 9, 2018 Author Share Posted May 9, 2018 McIlrath was ranked by every major outlet anywhere from 20th to 31st. Andersson from 13th to 25th. If your own scouts have them each in the top-ten, it's time to fire your scouts. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 McIlrath was ranked by every major outlet anywhere from 20th to 31st. Andersson from 13th to 25th. If your own scouts have them each in the top-ten, it's time to fire your scouts. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk But Andersson was captain of his team.... Hated that pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 Most talented. If you've got a choice between a player who projects as a 20-goal, middle-six, two-way player and one who has first-line, 30-goal potential, you go with the latter. Always. No exceptions. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk You taking Chris Phillips or Nikita Filatov? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 9, 2018 Author Share Posted May 9, 2018 Phillips. Pretty sure he was the consensus number one that year. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 McIlrath was ranked by every major outlet anywhere from 20th to 31st. Andersson from 13th to 25th. If your own scouts have them each in the top-ten, it's time to fire your scouts. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk There's always the theory of the "old boys club", but you'd have to assume NHL franchises pay their scouts better than every major outlet, and therefore, the teams of scouts employed by NHL franchises are better at scouting than everymajor outlet. The team of scouts factors heavily into creating the list for a franchise, but the GM makes the pick. For all we know Sather went off the Rangers own draft broad to pick McIllrath regardless of what his scouts said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 9, 2018 Author Share Posted May 9, 2018 My point is, even internal scouts should be coming to similar conclusions to professional scouting services like the ISS and guys who follow Junior hockey professionally like McKenzie. If your internal group is telling you McIlrath should go tenth and literally everyone else is saying anywhere from 20th to 31st, you need to be taking a long, hard look at your scouts. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 Clark wanted McIlrath and Sather didn't really want Zuccarello, if that's an indication of anything. Clark's magic seems to have worn off, especially in the early rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 What magic has he really had? What picks were his? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 My point is, even internal scouts should be coming to similar conclusions to professional scouting services like the ISS and guys who follow Junior hockey professionally like McKenzie. If your internal group is telling you McIlrath should go tenth and literally everyone else is saying anywhere from 20th to 31st, you need to be taking a long, hard look at your scouts. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk The professionals seem to be all over the board with this draft rankings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 10, 2018 Author Share Posted May 10, 2018 With some players, yes. But generally the average is on target. It's wild cards like McIlrath and others who tend to have such drastic rank differences. Svechnikov and Zadina, for example, have been 2/3 all year. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 We can't really nitpick about the top, say 8, guys who shift. When you're picking guys in the top 10 who everyone else has in 20-30 that's just too big a jump to justify... Especially when it happens frequently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 10, 2018 Author Share Posted May 10, 2018 Exactly. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 Always hated the sports talk stupidity of "We'll trade you our 4 POS guys the other team does not need and makes no sense for the other team to take for your superstar that makes no sense at all " . BUT Outside the box crazy ass idea ;any thought to dealing some first rounders for Eichel? Heard he hates Buffalo. They probably would rather pay a bunch of first rounders a lot than pay his 2nd contract.And the Sabres could actually like that and be able to sell it to their fan base. For all these picks realistically every NHL team is paying it's top 6 forwards, top 4 D and a goalie and filling out the rest however then can. And out of the young superstars who could plausibly be traded Eichel makes the most plausible to move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 They aren’t moving Eichel anytime soon. If you’re still on the Ryan O’Reilly bandwagon, you might be getting excited Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJWantsTheCup Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 I wonder how different hockey would be if the Pens didn't draft Malkin because they already had Crosby and drafted a winger or defenseman instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 I wonder how different hockey would be if the Pens didn't draft Malkin because they already had Crosby and drafted a winger or defenseman instead. Malkin was drafted the year before Crosby was drafted - and they werent going to pass over Crosby - especially when Malkin was still in Russia and the chance of him defecting was rather low. *After Crosby, they took Jordan Staal over Toews, Backstrom and Kessel. Brassard, Mueller and Okposo were highly touted prospects as well. After that, they took C Angelo Esposito instead of Pacioretty. *Please note that this was the season after Eric Staal had his good season and won a cup. Jordan was viewed as the "younger, meaner, better, faster, better scorer, and better hands version" of his older brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.