2013-2014 Hartford Wolf Pack/Greenville Road Warriors Thread Part II
- Thread starter Jarkko Immonen
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
- Aug 5, 2010
- 13,836
- 9,467
No to Flyers.
Seriously, drafting goalies in early rounds shouldn't be a priority. First, there is a low chance that something should happen with the King. Obviously even lower for something to happen both to him and Talbot. And in this case a short term solution would cost at most a 2 or 3 round pick or a similar value prospect. So why spend a pick now, waste time developing it and still dealing with big possibility of being a bust. I agree with the approach for obtaining goalies by the organization through college FAs and drafting Euros in late rounds.
eco's bones
Registered User
Talbot was a college free agent--not a drafted player. There will be college and CHL free agent goalies this year too. Not saying the Rangers shouldn't use a higher draft pick on a goalie--said that we have numerous other holes as well--power forward prospects, puck moving d-men especially ones that can really shoot and if they're right siders that's an added bonus--a talented center with size who can skate. We're not going to be able to fill all the holes we have for developing players in one draft.
Going back to goaltenders whether drafted or not--there's a process. They're going to in 99% of cases advance in stages. Talbot could probably have done alright in the NHL last year--at the age of 25. Most of them whether draftees or free agents are going to take time too. Your draftee will probably not go pro right away. Your free agent will. Just drafting a guy early is no guarantee. Rangers used a 2nd round on a QMJHL goalie--Antoine Lafleur (or something like that) 6-7-8 years ago if I remember right. He was a complete bust.
For the meanwhile one would think the Rangers are planning on signing someone for Hartford next year who can fill in at the NHL level in an emergency.
Going back to goaltenders whether drafted or not--there's a process. They're going to in 99% of cases advance in stages. Talbot could probably have done alright in the NHL last year--at the age of 25. Most of them whether draftees or free agents are going to take time too. Your draftee will probably not go pro right away. Your free agent will. Just drafting a guy early is no guarantee. Rangers used a 2nd round on a QMJHL goalie--Antoine Lafleur (or something like that) 6-7-8 years ago if I remember right. He was a complete bust.
For the meanwhile one would think the Rangers are planning on signing someone for Hartford next year who can fill in at the NHL level in an emergency.
Osminator
Registered User
Dubbyk, LaBarbera, Leighton, McElhinney... someone like them that will dominate the AHL and u can call up to the NHL in emergencies...
Missiaen, Stajcer are basically done with this organisation IMO.
Missiaen, Stajcer are basically done with this organisation IMO.
TheTakedown
Puck is Life
- Jul 11, 2012
- 13,694
- 1,493
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Skapski. He is a big 19 yr old, plays for a team that is offensively challenged, has been one of their best players every other game at the very least. His save % is 9th playing for a 15th overall team.
He's a good prospect at this point, he has many attributes that are on display most nights.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
What did you expect? Were UDFAs all supposed to become NHLers? Even a second rounder has only a 20% chance of having any kind of an NHL career. Plus, a goalie is a higher risk. Plus, not all of these subs tones who "make it" are any good, most aren't.
If you draft a goalie in the 2/3 round, not only are you not getting the fresh immediately, but the odds of this goalie having a career like Marty Biron are statistically at 3-5%. Plus, there is another 7-8%% chance he might become another Valliquette.
You look at other teens and think that just because you don't know how many scrubs they drafted, that never happened. But let me assure you that it did. And for every team that gets lucky with Lundqvist, there are dozens of first round picks, and even more second rounders that become busts.
Goalies are the highest risk.
Last edited:
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
In a vacuum, it would be good to get a solid goalie prospect. But It's not a vacuum. If we use our second round pick on a goalie, we don't use it on someone else. With Lundqvist and Talbot in the net, we are very solid, but we have glaring holes elsewhere with RD, C, RW, any type of scorer, an offensive defenseman.
It is much more important to get a skater than to get a goalie who might be ready if Lundqvist gets injured. There are so many problems with this thinking.
1. The goalie likely won't become an NHLer.
2. Lundqvist likely won't get injured.
3. If he becomes an NHLer, it will probably happen years before or after Lunqvist gets injured. If it happens years before Lundqvist gets injured, chances are this goalie will be traded away a la Schneider.
4. A forward or a defenseman who's even a marginal NHLer would be useful to the team, a goalie not so much.
5. We have real holes at D and F that we don't have at G.
6. To say, "What will happen if Lundvqist gets injured" is no different than saying "What will happen if Stepan or McDonagh or Nash gets injured". Yes, things will suck if we get a major injury. But you don't draft a kid hoping to time it perfectly with an unpredictable injury.
7. If Lundqvist gets injured, we can always trade for another goalie. Just as we can send away an extra goalie if we draft one, we can acquire another team's extra goalie. Those are available every year. Either way, if we lose Lundqvist we aren't contending.
8. It makes a lot of sense right now, more than it did at any point since we had both Richter and Beezer, to draft goalies only in the late rounds and to sign them as UDFAs. We have two good goalies and we have Skapski, who we are told is playing well. Most of these will turn into nothing, but striking one good goalie like Lundqvist and (to a lesser degree) Talbot per decade is more than enough.
Last edited:
The NHL depth at goalie is as good as it gets. Skapski is a good, unheralded prospect. Glad to see BN advocating for him. I thought it was just me.
We can take a guy in the middle rounds and bring in another UDFA. That's a good route to take. Prioritizing the position at this point is unnecessary.
We can take a guy in the middle rounds and bring in another UDFA. That's a good route to take. Prioritizing the position at this point is unnecessary.
NYR Viper
Registered User
Is t just me, or does anyone find it odd that the Rangers haven't taken another European goalie in a LONG TIME.
what about the Rangers have not drafted a player from Finland since Korpikoski in 10 years 2004. that is really strange..
anyone know why they are avoiding Finland??
what about the Rangers have not drafted a player from Finland since Korpikoski in 10 years 2004. that is really strange..
Probably because there aren't that many players from Finland available in the draft.
what about the Rangers have not drafted a player from Finland since Korpikoski in 10 years 2004. that is really strange..
Because they can't finish, they never finish anything they start, they don't finish checks, Selanne and Koivu are finished. Ba dum.
In 5 years when we need to start thinking about keepers, either use a 1st to get a Schneider or draft every Finish keeper in rounds 6-7. There's the plan
Osminator
Registered User
Uhm... Guess they solved by signing LeNeveu, who started late this season on a PTO with the P-Bruins... Good for hin, embaressing must-signing by the NYR...
pelts35.com
Registered User
- Oct 4, 2004
- 11,600
- 2
Actually he started late this season by signing with the ECHL South Carolina Stingrays. The then was loaned to Providence before signing with Hartford.
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
what about the Rangers have not drafted a player from Finland since Korpikoski in 10 years 2004. that is really strange..
prolly cuz its kinda near russia ?
- Aug 5, 2010
- 13,836
- 9,467
I was going to say cause it's not Sweden (actually could be a tiny bit of a logic there if one believes there is an actual reason behind it).
Finland is not part of Russia and it takes under an hour to fly from Stockholm to Helsinki (figuring in the time difference it actually takes under a minute). I don't see why it would be so hard for the organization to scout players there.
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
Probably has to do with the mediocre state of Finnish hockey. There are only 22 Finns in the entire league right now. Six of them are goalies. Only four skaters currently in the NHL have been drafted in the last five years.
Edit: Wait. Nevermind. Only two Finnish skaters currently in the NHL were drafted within the last five years.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
It used to be and it's culture, particularly architecture is greatly effected by Russia.
Finland was part of Sweden for 700+ years--they lost Finland to Russia in 1815 (or so) and Finland became independent in late 1917. One thing the Russians did was move the capital to Helsinki (which had been a pretty small town) because it was closer to Russia--hence the Russian looking architecture in the pictures above. Ask any Finn how they feel about their neighbor to the east and it's a very short answer (usually not printable).
Anyway, I'm surprised at how few Finns have been drafted recently. Sweden has spent a lot of time and effort improving their youth hockey and it shows. The Finns need to get back on track.
Anyway, I'm surprised at how few Finns have been drafted recently. Sweden has spent a lot of time and effort improving their youth hockey and it shows. The Finns need to get back on track.
No its not. As Brooklyn wrote Russian occupied Finland for 100 years. Hardly enough time to have a great effect on their culture.
Like most citizens in Europe and Asia who were forceably occupied by the Russian Empire (which includes Ukraine, Poland and others) their is no love lost by the Finns for their Russian neighbors.
This is a hockey site and this discussion doesn't belong here. In addition obviously your knowledge of world politics and history leaves much to be desired and is definetely slanted.
Finland is all of a sudden doing a lot better.
It's important to remember that Finland and Sweden too are really small countries. As we did things as well as other countries, we would never be able to compete. Hence, we will be very up and down in terms of developing players. When we manage to get ahead, players will be developed.
It's important to remember that Finland and Sweden too are really small countries. As we did things as well as other countries, we would never be able to compete. Hence, we will be very up and down in terms of developing players. When we manage to get ahead, players will be developed.
The Russian empire reminds me of this really crappy landlord I had once.....
- Status
