Who Will We Pick?

[Drew a Penalty]

They do. Duclair already has. Maybe they'll prove me wrong but few of those prospects have shown much promise to even make the NHL.

[Rosenvold]

They do. Duclair already has. Maybe they'll prove me wrong but few of those prospects have shown much promise to even make the NHL.

 

From a selection of three 2nd, five 3rd, two 4th and one 5th round pick, its not too shabby that Duclair and Buchnevich are already NHL'ers and a couple more are at least likely NHL'ers, including a potential starter in Shestyorkin. It's realistic to project that 3-4 from that list of 11 will get 100 NHL games, which is quite a solid return on that assortment of picks.

[Dunny]

You just know that after biting their thumb and keeping their pick he's going to turn out to be useless.

[Cash or Czech]

Our 1st rounders, when we have them, have turned into NHL contributors.

 

Brady Skjei

JT Miller

Dylan McIlrath

Chris Kreider

Michael Del Zotto

 

80% of our last five first round picks have had some extended impact on this team. We need to keep it and use it to fill the gap of organizational talent. I personally hope we pick the most skilled player available, as we need an injection of playmaking and offense.

 

Also for those propagating moving towards late round picks, please look at our 2014 entry draft. 7 picks, only 2 are still within the organization and both are goaltenders. The 2015 draft also had 7, and as it looks will produce maybe one NHLer. Neither draft did we have a first rounder.

[Phil]

And the majority of them have come in the back half of the round. Skjei went 28th, Miller 15th, Kreider 20th, Del Zotto 20th.

[CreaseCrusader91]

I hope I'm not overstepping any rules in here and perhaps the timing is off, but I missed some discussion and insight on the Rangers prospect pool before the coming summer with the first 1st-rounder in ages. I tried to compile a quick list of the best current prospects and their expected potential rating from what I've heard and seen:

 

Goalies

Igor Shestyorkin - A

Brandon Halverson - D

 

Defence

Ryan Graves - B

Sean Day - B

Sergey Zborovsky - C

Tarmo Reunanen - D

Calle Andersson - F

Alexei Bereglazov - B

 

Center

Cristoval Nieves - C

Adam Tambellini - D

Gabe Fontaine - D

Brad Morrison - D

 

Left Wing

Robin Kovacs - C

Ryan Gropp - D

Tim Gettinger - F

 

Right Wing

Malte Stromwall - D

Daniel Bernhardt - F

 

It's not really fair to talk about "holes" in the prospect pool - the Rangers need improvement in all departements except between the pipes. But they will only have one shot in the rifle in the draft, so I imagine they will go for a forward, although there are so many talented D-men in the late 1st round. I'm hoping for someone like Elias Pettersson or Kristian Vesalainen to drop a little and be possible targets for the Rangers, but I'm Scandinavian and probably not entirely unbiased here :D

 

Curious why Tambo is a D and Nieves a C. Boo was hurt off and on this season. Tambo increased his production this year and showed more versatility as a playmaker. Less goals, more assists and overall points. I think he had a decent year and that expectations were placed rather high after his play with the Hitmen. Additionally I'd say Ronning had a good season for VAN.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Dunny]

Huh?

 

Nieves didn't produce anything

Tambolinni didn't produce anything

Ronning had less points this year than he did in his draft year.

 

 

These guys aren't prospects. They're organizational filler.

[Future]

That's probably a little harsh.

 

Nieves wasn't productive but he's not really projected as a top-6 player. Had he not gotten hurt, he might have had a shot at the 4c role to start the season.

Ronning is 18 and had 5 points in 12 games in the AHL. The drop in production wasn't significant (59-53 points). I don't think he's projected as more than a bottom 6 guy either.

 

There's not a lot of top flight talent in the system, but there's a bunch of NHL prospects. Calling these guys filler, at this point, is exaggerative.

 

Tambo sucks though, lol

[Phil]

That depends on your definition of filler. If your "best" prospects project as fourth-line players, I'd call that filler. What franchise doesn't have these types of players in their pipe, and really, is the gap between developing one and signing one as a free agent that great in terms of on-ice impact? I know it is financially simply because of the nature of dealing with Unrestricted free agency, but on the ice I'm skeptical.

[Long live the King]

That depends on your definition of filler. If your "best" prospects project as fourth-line players, I'd call that filler. What franchise doesn't have these types of players in their pipe, and really, is the gap between developing one and signing one as a free agent that great in terms of on-ice impact? I know it is financially simply because of the nature of dealing with Unrestricted free agency, but on the ice I'm skeptical.

 

Ok, so lot of talk about Fast's value lately. What if Kovacs or Stromwall can become the next Fast? Is having a young, hungry defensively responsible guy, that can still chip in 20-30 points for under $1M or valuable than hoping a UFA will be fill the role for money? Right now we're paying Fast and Lindberg $1.6M and that's probably half the price compared to if we had veteran UFA in those spots.

[Phil]

That's great. But what I'm saying is that I wouldn't object to someone calling them filler. They are, in that they are much more easily replaced than a top-six forward, for example.

 

I also acknowledged the monetary aspect. I understand UFA's cost more money by default. But the on-ice impact doesn't change much between drafting one and buying one. The biggest advantage to drafting is the cost control, not on ice impact.

[Future]

That depends on your definition of filler. If your "best" prospects project as fourth-line players, I'd call that filler. What franchise doesn't have these types of players in their pipe, and really, is the gap between developing one and signing one as a free agent that great in terms of on-ice impact? I know it is financially simply because of the nature of dealing with Unrestricted free agency, but on the ice I'm skeptical.

I thought Dunny meant "filler" as completing the ranks in the AHL and minors. When talking about prospects, I wouldn't really call NHL-calibre players filler, even if they are only going to be 4th liners.

[Dunny]

They aren't NHL calibre players and I don't think that after this year they've done anything to change that view.

 

Nieves will get looks because he has tools. He's done precious little with those tools. At any level.

 

Even so, I would call guys that play 15 or so games a year for 2 or 3 years in the bottom 3, filler.

 

It's a term that's really prevalent in MLB, I'm borrowing it for this purpose.

[Phil]

I would in the context of talking about draft impact. It's great to get games played out of players, even bottom-six, but if the majority of your picks, including second and third-rounders, are all only evolving into fourth-line players, you're not getting much value.

[Future]

They aren't NHL calibre players and I don't think that after this year they've done anything to change that view.

 

Nieves will get looks because he has tools. He's done precious little with those tools. At any level.

 

Even so, I would call guys that play 15 or so games a year for 2 or 3 years in the bottom 3, filler.

 

It's a term that's really prevalent in MLB, I'm borrowing it for this purpose.

Yea but at this point, there's nothing to say whether or not Nieves or Ronning could or couldn't be a long-term 4th liner. There's no reason why they couldn't have the same career arc as, say, Fast and Brian Boyle.

[Cash or Czech]

Ok, so lot of talk about Fast's value lately. What if Kovacs or Stromwall can become the next Fast? Is having a young, hungry defensively responsible guy, that can still chip in 20-30 points for under $1M or valuable than hoping a UFA will be fill the role for money? Right now we're paying Fast and Lindberg $1.6M and that's probably half the price compared to if we had veteran UFA in those spots.

 

Neither Kovacs nor Stromwall had an impact in the American League last year. They're young, but they're years off from having impact at an NHL level.

 

I agree with the idea though, and that's why you draft these prospects and develop them. Getting ELC players to contribute is how successful teams manage the cap. There's still opportunity to see this from Nieves, Tambo or Kovacs. Even some of the NCAA signings.

 

But the issue is you don't know what you're going to get with a young prospect. When you pay extra for a UFA, you know what you're going to be getting.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Drew a Penalty]

Fast was a top scorer on his team in the SHL at Stromwall's age and then followed that season up with a .7 ppg in the AHL. Stromwall had 6 points over 44 games in the AHL. The chances of Stromwall progressing towards being Fast are slim. Fast changed his game from being a skill player to being a role player and did so really well. Stromwall hasn't even exhibited the ability to be a skilled player and doesn't remotely have fast's defensive pedigree.

[Steven.]

Get me Brannstrom or Lilegren. I expect us to pick another North American in round one, though, and in that case, get me Robert Thomas.

 

It feels nice to look forward to the draft for once.

[Cash or Czech]

At least for the first round...then we have to wait until the fourth. But hey, at least we have the first this time!