Jump to content

  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

2018 NHL Entry Draft – Movin' On Up into the Top-Five – Live Discussion

Drew a Penalty

By Drew a Penalty
in In The System

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 651
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Vodka Drunkenski BSBH Champion

Vodka Drunkenski

Posted
Posted
Then why ask? Nobody?s opinion on here matters to you as they are not worth listening to.

 

The prospect is fine. What?s not to me is that this organization always ALWAYS goes off the board to draft their players. Their resume though frankly sucks. Gordie Clarke has had zero expectations because the gm has always left him with no high picks. Yet when he does get one he passes on a bushel of stars who were obvious entities at their draft to take somebody that the rest of the league likes but not nearly as much as what they pass on. If they had any success other than providing humor for the league in doing this every time they pick in the top of the draft you could be excited about this pick.

 

Maybe this kid proves them right. But at the same time maybe wahlstrom, Bouchard and Dobson prove them to be what we already know then as. Fucking morons who have to try and prove they have a clue. Fact is the I can draft better with my copy of the draft preview from hockey news than these clowns

 

Not for nothing but by observing your posts for a short period, you seem to always be negative about the organization. Maybe it may be time for a new team? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fatfrancesa BSBH Mite

Fatfrancesa

Posted
Posted
Not for nothing but by observing your posts for a short period, you seem to always be negative about the organization. Maybe it may be time for a new team? ;)

 

Maybe. The hockey news draft preview is part of the yearly subscription. I don’t think it’s on their website. If you get hockey news in your mailbox then you get it.

 

The negative reaction towards the pick is based on history. The rangers have in their history repeatedly passed on more known talents to draft players not as regarded league wide. Kravtsov is a great prospect, picking 9 will almost guarantee you a great prospect. The rangers history, even more so history with this gm and scouts, makes me nervous when they go against the consensus. Jessiman, to a degree sagunetti, and most of all mcilrath are examples of this. All of those picks were major misses. Not just because of who they picked but because of who they didn’t. Almost everybody made out in 2003 with a major piece we got jessiman and 2 games played for his career. Mcilrath over Fowler is and was a crime. Tate senior was a miss but they weren’t alone.

 

I hope they finally got it right. I hope this guy is the real deal. I do think he has loads of talent. Wahlstrom and Dobson matter here though. They were the easy pick, the obvious pick. If they turn out to be stars and better than why does Clarke have a job? We’ll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ranger Lothbrok BSBH Junior

Ranger Lothbrok

Posted
Posted
It?s not that I don?t care what people think. I?m trying to understand why they think it?s a bad pick.

As I said, Pronman, TSN, Eliotte - everybody thinks it?s a good pick. And I?m not hearing any strong arguments apart from WAHLSTROM. A kid who?s scored loads of goals playing alongside a generational talent playing against inferior kids, whereas the Rangers pick has been playing against men. Time will tell who got it right, but I?m really not sure what people are basing this reaction on apart from history.

I was as surprised as everybody else. But the rankings went out the window very early. And the big difference this year is that nobody you?d normally listen to seems to think we were reaching this time.

 

Edit to say that sounds unnecessarily harsh on Wahlstrom, I think he?s a great pick.

 

When the first words after you announce the pick are Bob McKenzie saying, "it's not an 'off the board' pick per se," those aren't the first words you want to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slobberknocker BSBH Rising Star

Slobberknocker

Posted
Posted

im o.k. with the first round picks, although Oliver does seem on the surface to be more polished.

 

i'm clueless on today's action. from what i've read it looks like a bunch of ho hum projects.

 

seems like we did a shotgun approach on bringing in as many blueliners as possible in the hope a few stick. no idea on the goalie either. could go either way there.

 

i guess with all the picks we had, i would of liked to have seen a bit more, but time will tell i guess.

 

interesting to see what FA will bring given it looks like we are not going after any of the big names.

 

i'm much more happier today if i'm an islander fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunny BSBH Champion

Dunny

Posted
Posted
When the first words after you announce the pick are Bob McKenzie saying, "it's not an 'off the board' pick per se," those aren't the first words you want to hear.

 

Is Bob McKenzie paid millions of dollars to run hockey teams, or is he a pundit?

 

He was shocked St Louis took Tarasenko with Etem on the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

 

The Rangers' general manager entered Friday with three first-round picks — three more than five other teams — and the way he used them was a bit puzzling. Such ample ammunition could have helped the Blueshirts move up from No. 9 in pursuit of a blue-chip player the organization lacks. Instead, they stood pat and selected Russian forward Vitali Kravtsov, whom most draftniks had rated farther down the draft board. They passed on more well-rounded prospects such as Oliver Wahlstrom and Noah Dobson (who both went to the rival Islanders a few picks later). Gorton then parted with the No. 48 pick to move up four spots in Round 1 and draft K'Andre Miller. The pick was fine, but then Rangers fans watched as the Blues spent only a third-rounder to trade up four spots with the Leafs a few picks later. In general, Gorton did a poor job managing his assets

 

This take away has so many holes in it.

 

Being able to move up from 9 is pure speculation. It's unknown whether there were any deals to be had or what the cost would be to have them. It seems unlikely unless they guessed on Zadina falling to exactly 6th that they could get good value trading up. Could they, before the draft even started, have gotten Detroit's pick for 9th and 26th? Maybe. Of course, then they've got one less first round pick and they would have had to know that Zadina would fall.

 

The cost of moving up from 26 to 22 should be more than trading up from 29 to 25. Yes, they are the same number of steps, but they're steps over more valuable spots in the draft. Just like moving from 4th down to 1st is going to be more costly than moving from 7th to 4th. HockeyStatMiner on twitter dug up the cost of moving in the past in similar circumstances and the pricing was almost exactly what Gorton paid.

 

If you want to complain about this draft, those complaints should start on day 2, not day 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
When the first words after you announce the pick are Bob McKenzie saying, "it's not an 'off the board' pick per se," those aren't the first words you want to hear.

 

The reason it wasn't off the board is because a lot of the draft was in groupings where a significant number of prospects had very similar relative value. So the selections in each group depended on individual scouting and preference. If you take a look at the major reputable draft rankings that came out within the past week or so, you see a ton of disagreement. This was a deep draft that was hard to handicap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vodka Drunkenski BSBH Champion

Vodka Drunkenski

Posted
Posted
This take away has so many holes in it.

 

Being able to move up from 9 is pure speculation. It's unknown whether there were any deals to be had or what the cost would be to have them. It seems unlikely unless they guessed on Zadina falling to exactly 6th that they could get good value trading up. Could they, before the draft even started, have gotten Detroit's pick for 9th and 26th? Maybe. Of course, then they've got one less first round pick and they would have had to know that Zadina would fall.

 

The cost of moving up from 26 to 22 should be more than trading up from 29 to 25. Yes, they are the same number of steps, but they're steps over more valuable spots in the draft. Just like moving from 4th down to 1st is going to be more costly than moving from 7th to 4th. HockeyStatMiner on twitter dug up the cost of moving in the past in similar circumstances and the pricing was almost exactly what Gorton paid.

 

If you want to complain about this draft, those complaints should start on day 2, not day 1.

 

Even better, how about we save the complaining after a year or two as we watch these picks develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fatfrancesa BSBH Mite

Fatfrancesa

Posted
Posted
Hurt my feelings? Nah, but I guess I hit a nerve with you eh “snowflake”

 

Other way around. Your posts are directed at me while mine was directed at the draft. Obviously my negativity bothers you. Try and write me off as a bad fan who should go root for some other team because you don’t like my thoughts regarding this franchise. I will always be a fan and pray that some day the rangers will bask in glory. Didn’t think 1994 would have to last a lifetime but maybe it will have to. Until I die I will support and criticize this team because I do care. I care more than anything that this team just cannot get it done.

You sought me out and posted at me not the other way around. Truth is this is not a well run franchise. I guess that bothers you. Maybe instead of getting mad at me get mad at Dolan for allowing lifetime contracts to a senile old stubborn man. For all the talk of a new nhl and needing a fresh face as a coach , we still have a dinosaur at the helm of this franchise. The league passed him by when he was still drafting mcilrath at ten because he was big. Just because we can’t fire him doesn’t mean we just have to sit back and give him a pass either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fatfrancesa BSBH Mite

Fatfrancesa

Posted
Posted
The reason it wasn't off the board is because a lot of the draft was in groupings where a significant number of prospects had very similar relative value. So the selections in each group depended on individual scouting and preference. If you take a look at the major reputable draft rankings that came out within the past week or so, you see a ton of disagreement. This was a deep draft that was hard to handicap.

 

They went off this board. Not once did I read anywhere that this guy was even close to being in the mix at 9 before the draft. Not one person here mentioned him at 9. Then he drafted and it’s like of course this guy is the best. Everyone here shitting on those who don’t like the rangers going off the board AGAIN, suggesting what people can an can’t have a problem with. The biggest problem is you. Sit here and listen to all of you go on and on about all these guys like your experts. Never once did Kravtsov come up. Not once. But obviously this guy has it all now. Fact is the the put downs of coming to conclusion based on what you read on the internet goes both ways. The defense of the puck since it was made was everyone here going to the internet to read about this guy that no one had on their radar, especially with the players on the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted
They went off this board. Not once did I read anywhere that this guy was even close to being in the mix at 9 before the draft. Not one person here mentioned him at 9. Then he drafted and it?s like of course this guy is the best. Everyone here shitting on those who don?t like the rangers going off the board AGAIN, suggesting what people can an can?t have a problem with. The biggest problem is you. Sit here and listen to all of you go on and on about all these guys like your experts. Never once did Kravtsov come up. Not once. But obviously this guy has it all now. Fact is the the put downs of coming to conclusion based on what you read on the internet goes both ways. The defense of the puck since it was made was everyone here going to the internet to read about this guy that no one had on their radar, especially with the players on the board.
I don't agree with almost anything this guy says.

 

But he's 100% correct here.

 

Rangers had him rated as the 2nd best forward when no one else did. If that doesn't give you pause I'm not sure what to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted

 

The cost of moving up from 26 to 22 should be more than trading up from 29 to 25. Yes, they are the same number of steps, but they're steps over more valuable spots in the draft. Just like moving from 4th down to 1st is going to be more costly than moving from 7th to 4th. HockeyStatMiner on twitter dug up the cost of moving in the past in similar circumstances and the pricing was almost exactly what Gorton paid.

 

If you want to complain about this draft, those complaints should start on day 2, not day 1.

 

I this draft I don't really agree. Lots of level talent back there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bugg BSBH Hall-of-Famer

Bugg

Posted
Posted

Giant Big Picture step back-Kratsov may be a very good player.

 

Problem is smells like AGAIN the Clarke/Gorton braintrust as scouts fell in love with a guy without considering either the team's glaring need for goal scoring, nor that they might have gotten him later anyway. And something very practical; Whalstrom would be be here in 5 minutes. Yes, Kravstov is saying all the right things but you don't know. Like you don't know with Shestorkin, or how it's taken Buch, a talented player, some time to adopt. You can talk about Kuznetsov or Bure or which ever Russian forward you want, which sounds a lot like what they're doing right now. What if his upside is say, Ruslan Fedetenko or any number of decent servicable pros?

 

Looks like groupthink, they talked themselves into this pick . Because a team this desperate for goal scoring really has to do that to not take Whalstrom.

 

While I really like the Miller pick, don't like that BPA always seems to be a 2 way forward or a D rather than a guy who can score. Which is how you end up trading away assets for the likes of Gaborik, Nash and St. Louis. Are guys who can score goals NEVER the BPA? Is there some inherent bias in the NYR evaluation process going on here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...