Phil Posted June 9, 2018 Author Share Posted June 9, 2018 Tkachuk? Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Tkachuk? Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Yep. If he falls to 9, sure. But they're not selling assets to move up and get Callahan+ after last draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 9, 2018 Author Share Posted June 9, 2018 Interesting. You'd think there'd be at least some given his connection to Quinn, but I hope that means they're prioritizing skill over all else. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Interesting. You'd think there'd be at least some given his connection to Quinn, but I hope that means they're prioritizing skill over all else. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk They took a high character guy early last year. Does it really make sense to sell something in order to get another one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 9, 2018 Author Share Posted June 9, 2018 No. Not at all. I certainly wouldn't move up to get him, and I love him as a player. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Much as I like him, I can't shake the feeling they're going to move up for Tkachuk, leaving more talented players—Bouchard, Hughes, maybe even Zadina—on the board in the process. It wouldn't be as big of a reach as they made on Andersson or McIlrath, but it could be equally damaging. As much as I like Tkachuk, Zadina is on another level and worth trading up for. No way Bouchard is more skilled than Brady, beyond his excellent point shot. His offensive vision and ability to read a play and execute is his strength. Dobson is not a refined scoring talent, so rule him out as a trade-up, if that is the criteria. As far as character, it seems 7 of the top 9 are noted high character guys. Zadina has work ethic, Bouchard and Tkachuk are outright leaders. Not aware of Wahlstrom's character and haven't read much about Dobson in that area, but reports seem to indicate he's liked. Basically, we are getting a high character guy at #9, whether we like it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 No. Not at all. I certainly wouldn't move up to get him, and I love him as a player. Isn't that just because of cost? I'd move our 3rd to get him, no way he lasts till 9. Unfortunately I don't think that is enough. Tkachul is and will be a better player than Wahlstrom, Bouchard and Dobson, IMO. Some will disagree on these rankings and I could be wrong. I do like those 3 as prospects (7 to 9) and there is a drop-off after them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 As much as I like Tkachuk, Zadina is on another level and worth trading up for. No way Bouchard is more skilled than Brady, beyond his excellent point shot. His offensive vision and ability to read a play and execute is his strength. Dobson is not a refined scoring talent, so rule him out as a trade-up, if that is the criteria. As far as character, it seems 7 of the top 9 are noted high character guys. Zadina has work ethic, Bouchard and Tkachuk are outright leaders. Not aware of Wahlstrom's character and haven't read much about Dobson in that area, but reports seem to indicate he's liked. Basically, we are getting a high character guy at #9, whether we like it or not. I think Bouchard, Dobson, Hughes and Boqvist all have the chance to be franchise players, similar to Weber, Doughty , Karlsson. I see Tkachuk as a complimentary top-6 player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 9, 2018 Author Share Posted June 9, 2018 Same here. Depending on how high he goes, that can be seriously disappointing relative to what else is going to be available. Like picking Tom Wilson?a useful player, but miles from stardom?over Hertl. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 I think Bouchard, Dobson, Hughes and Boqvist all have the chance to be franchise players, similar to Weber, Doughty , Karlsson. I see Tkachuk as a complimentary top-6 player. Agree on the D men. Bouchard feels like a shorter Weber with Shatty's vision in the O zone. Boqvist and Hughes could be some combo of Zubov meets Leetch. Dobson could be a right handed McD. However, Josh i already knew your take on Brady, but Phil? He's no Wilson, so much smarter, excellent passer and much better hands. How about a cross between Shane Doan and Iginla? Anyway, I'm excited because the top 9 looks very strong and none of them have a fatal flaw or a character concern. Sure one may bust and some won't approach their upside comparables, but each of these 9 are not long shots to be top line or top pair players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 General Ranger Draft thought: No trade down in this draft, especially #9. We just squeaked into the sweet spot where the last of the top prospects will be selected. Holland's statement that Detroit won't trade out of the top 10 supports this. It is refreshing to not have anyone here yelling for a trade down, like at blueshirtbanter. If anything, acquire another top 9 pick. Their was a rumor (XM radio and other forums) that Vanc would consider trading down for multiple picks. I'd do pick #26, 28 and a sweetener like 88 or a 3rd next year or a B prospect. Ottawa might be a longshot to consider it, but Ryan would have to be a part of the deal. If we can't get an extra top pick, I hope Gorton explores what it would take to trade up from 9 to get Zadina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Do we know for a fact Quinn is high on Brady, or is it just an assumption based on their time together? I?m sure I read a scout report where Quinn?s deployment of Tkachuk was questioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 ?I think he?s going to be a great player at the NHL level,? Quinn said at his introductory press conference on Thursday at the Garden. ?He has all the tools. I think people get enamored with his physical play, but he?s a talented player. Great skill, great vision, he skates well. There?s an awful lot there.? https://nypost.com/2018/05/24/could-new-rangers-coach-put-bu-star-on-their-draft-radar/ Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Right. I really like him as a player but I’d be concerned about trading down to get him. He’d have to pan out 100% + on the projections for that trade to be worth it, and that’s even before considering the fact we’re guaranteed a brilliant prospect at #9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 Tkachuk? They'd be trading up, not down. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Lol. That’s what I meant, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Lol. That’s what I meant, obviously. I don’t think he read past “down”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 Lol. That?s what I meant, obviously. All good. I'm wary of trading to take him, too. I really like everything he brings, but I'm fearful of the aggregate cost to take a player who projects as a complementary top-six winger. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Lothbrok Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 All good. I'm wary of trading to take him, too. I really like everything he brings, but I'm fearful of the aggregate cost to take a player who projects as a complementary top-six winger. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Yeah, he is easily the most terrifying of the potential top-10 picks. He just has Drew Stafford written all over him. I don't want any part of Brady Tkachuk unless he's on the board at #9 and Wahlstrom, Boqvist, etc. are all gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 Or Matthew Tkachuk. Good player. Just seems silly to draft him when there's such a dire organizational need for talent. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Lothbrok Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Or Matthew Tkachuk. Good player. Just seems silly to draft him when there's such a dire organizational need for talent. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Would kind of be par for the course though, no? Aiming for reliability and "character" instead of swinging for the fences on talents? I'm not normally a Blueshirt Banter guy, but this is a solid piece with reference to some strong analytics that really hammers the point home pretty well. Author has him ranked at #9 actually, and if you read the article, it's for good reason: https://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2018/5/18/17349830/blueshirt-banter-2018-nhl-draft-rankings-9-brady-tkachuk-boston-university-ncaa-scouting-report-usa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 A couple of assumptions can start to be made. Combine is done, team's boards are mostly finalized. Canes are taking Svech. Even if by some longshot they trade the pick, Svech is going #2. Montreal wants a C much more than the rest. Speculation is they could trade down a few and take Kot. Hope so, Kot isn't in my top 9. But I think they end up taking Zadina. If the Rangers do trade up, I hope it is for Zadina. Josh, you want a star? You underrate him. No chance Tkachuk lasts to #9. Wahlstrom could. Zona could do anything, but I'd bet they take either Hughes or Tkachuk. Detroit definitely likes the Dmen. Local boy Hughes, but word is they love Bouchard. Vanc - rumor is they've talked to someone about trading down. If they stand pat they will take the highest rated player regardless of position. It is not so much a run on Dmen. It is that after the 3 highest rated forwards, there are 4 (five if you include Smith) Dmen and Wahlstrom that are clearly a notch above the rest of the draft prospects, IMO. Something makes me think Vancouvers pick will be the one the Rangers should be focusing on. Probably Zadina , Tkachuk or Wahlstrom. The Rangers will wind up with Smith or Dobson on their plate. Would anyone trade up with Vancouver at the cost of 9 and a 2nd? Or 9 and one of Boston or Tampa's pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 Would kind of be par for the course though, no? Aiming for reliability and "character" instead of swinging for the fences on talents? I'm not normally a Blueshirt Banter guy, but this is a solid piece with reference to some strong analytics that really hammers the point home pretty well. Author has him ranked at #9 actually, and if you read the article, it's for good reason: https://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2018/5/18/17349830/blueshirt-banter-2018-nhl-draft-rankings-9-brady-tkachuk-boston-university-ncaa-scouting-report-usa https://thehockeywriters.com/2018-nhl-mock-draft-round-1/ Hockeywriters.com also got Tkachuk at #9. Would obviously be fine taking him at #9, but if I could I'd take Wahlstrom before him. He's just more talented and a better goal scorer, and that is what this team is lacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 Would kind of be par for the course though, no? Aiming for reliability and "character" instead of swinging for the fences on talents? I'm not normally a Blueshirt Banter guy, but this is a solid piece with reference to some strong analytics that really hammers the point home pretty well. Author has him ranked at #9 actually, and if you read the article, it's for good reason: https://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2018/5/18/17349830/blueshirt-banter-2018-nhl-draft-rankings-9-brady-tkachuk-boston-university-ncaa-scouting-report-usa Hmm. If "talent" = "elite goalscoring" then yeah. I guess that view is understandable when looking at the draft from a Rangers perspective. This organization needs high end goalscoring above all else. But there is absolutely no doubt that Tkachuk is a huge talent, and is as close to a complete 2-way player as you're likely to get at that age. If he ends up as a complete power forward type that puts up 60+ points in addition to everything else that he brings to the table, is that a bad pick in the 4-8 range? I don't think so. But it is certainly a valid opinion that Rangers should be looking at other qualities if picking in that range themselves. For me, the article merely states that he is unlikely to develop into an elite goalscorer and there is nothing groundbreaking in that revelation. Everybody knows this, yet most scouts/analysts has Tkachuk rated higher, in many cases far higher, than Herman from BSB. Virtually everyone agrees there is little to no chance of Tkachuk being available at #9. At the end of the day, the only sure fire elite goalscorers in this draft are Svechnikov and Zadina. Wahlstrom is promising, but there should be some question marks over how he pans out when no longer playing against kids alongside Jack Hughes. Like I said, I wouldn't trade up to get Tkachuk. I'd have a hard time choosing between him and Wahlstrom because of the Rangers needs. But I think he's an excellent pick for someone in 4-8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 https://thehockeywriters.com/2018-nhl-mock-draft-round-1/ Hockeywriters.com also got Tkachuk at #9. Would obviously be fine taking him at #9, but if I could I'd take Wahlstrom before him. He's just more talented and a better goal scorer, and that is what this team is lacking. Interesting. My gut feeling says this guy is going to take a hit on his accuracy rating with this mock draft. But he obviously knows a lot more than I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.