Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: 2013-2014 Rangers Prospects Thread *Part II* (Player Stats in Post #1; Updated 1/31)

  • 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
Not open for further replies.
Punxrocknyc19 said:
it will not matter if Buchnevich does not come to North America.... imagine if he decided to stay in the KHL for the rest of his career.
Click to expand...


Doubt it. If you can play on the top-6 in the NHL, you don't stay in the KHL. Usually it's the borderline NHLers or at least bottom-6ers who choose this option because it's better to be a star in the KHL than a journeyman in the NHL.
 
Bluenote13 said:
Absolutely agree he's having a great season compared to last year. But thats not the same as saying he's having a great year. Tony Duclair is having a 'great year'. I don't want to cheapen Tony's game, get me ? ;)
Click to expand...

Can't argue with anything there.

I was more wondering if this is going to become a McI situation where any positive mention returns an angry Bluenote response.

That kind of thing I need to brace for.


Bluenote13 said:
True there too, but can't you say that about 75 Dmen in College hockey the last 10 years ? :p:
Click to expand...

Depends on how you look at it. No doubt we can list dozens of college D that not only had similar success but outperformed Skjei. Some of them by a country mile. Same with McDonagh.

But looking at the situations and results they are remarkably similar.

Pedigree. Size. Skating. Skill set. Production. Both playing top minutes on an NCAA powerhouse, in similar roles. Both Americans who played in the WJC after be late cuts the year before.

Maybe Mike Matheson, but I would say he definitely looks ahead of where McDonagh was at the same age.

None of this has any barring on the future, of course. Just a casual observation. And a reminder that sometimes there is more value than at first glance.
 
Matt Carle Place said:
Start regretting it now because that is crazy talk :laugh:. The thought of Drouin with Stamkos is scary.
Click to expand...

You look at the number of kids under 6 foot who lit it up in Juniors and failed in pro hockey, it is astronomical. Mantha reminds me of Nash, and I think when all is said and done he will be the better player.

Not to mention, the guy was taken 1 pick after that 1st we dealt to Columbus. I'm sure we would have grabbed him there.
 
Fitzy said:
You look at the number of kids under 6 foot who lit it up in Juniors and failed in pro hockey, it is astronomical. Mantha reminds me of Nash, and I think when all is said and done he will be the better player.

Not to mention, the guy was taken 1 pick after that 1st we dealt to Columbus. I'm sure we would have grabbed him there.
Click to expand...

He fits the mold of the player they like.

Still it's been a long time since we've grabbed a QMJHL player in the first round.

Actually I'm not sure Sather has ever drafted a forward from the QMJHL in the first round in his entire career.
 
McRanger said:
Can't argue with anything there.

I was more wondering if this is going to become a McI situation where any positive mention returns an angry Bluenote response.

That kind of thing I need to brace for.




Depends on how you look at it. No doubt we can list dozens of college D that not only had similar success but outperformed Skjei. Some of them by a country mile. Same with McDonagh.

But looking at the situations and results they are remarkably similar.

Pedigree. Size. Skating. Skill set. Production. Both playing top minutes on an NCAA powerhouse, in similar roles. Both Americans who played in the WJC after be late cuts the year before.

Maybe Mike Matheson, but I would say he definitely looks ahead of where McDonagh was at the same age.

None of this has any barring on the future, of course. Just a casual observation. And a reminder that sometimes there is more value than at first glance.
Click to expand...

Good points about the attributes. Very similar paths too.

Angry posts about MCI ? He's a top 10 pick, I'm pretty harsh on most top ten picks cause the potential should be 'game changer'. And I don't see that, yet I'm always the first person to point out players like this don't play right away, 25yrs old is about average. I just hope he makes it to 25 in one piece.
 
McRanger said:
He fits the mold of the player they like.

Still it's been a long time since we've grabbed a QMJHL player in the first round.

Actually I'm not sure Sather has ever drafted a forward from the QMJHL in the first round in his entire career.
Click to expand...

Only QMJHL 1sts were Kevin Lowe in '79 and Mathieu Descoteaux in '96, both Dmen.
 
Bluenote13 said:
Good points about the attributes. Very similar paths too.

Angry posts about MCI ? He's a top 10 pick, I'm pretty harsh on most top ten picks cause the potential should be 'game changer'. And I don't see that, yet I'm always the first person to point out players like this don't play right away, 25yrs old is about average. I just hope he makes it to 25 in one piece.
Click to expand...

Angry isn't the right word.

Grouchy?

A grouchy Bluenote makes the world a sadder place.

Seriously though back in the day we saw less posts about Brendl and Lundmark combined than we have about McI. And that was a less patient board than the TB/Laches/Dedalus-less board than the one we have today.

In other words its not as much the epic failure of the player that makes people go nuts as it is the player. I'd hate to see this start up again with Skjei.

I worry about your heart going. You aren't the young poster you once were.
 
Bluenote13 said:
Only QMJHL 1sts were Kevin Lowe in '79 and Mathieu Descoteaux in '96, both Dmen.
Click to expand...

Yeah just looked it up myself.

And the last Ranger 1st rounder, of any position, was Lucien DeBlois in 1977.

Picking Mantha would have been pretty historical.

Also, awesome.
 
The Undertaker said:
Holy hell is Duclair on fire, 25pts in his last 11 or so.
Click to expand...

If he goes back to his pre-steak performance for the remaining 20 games, he'll still have 113 points. If his hot streak continues, he'll be at 127 points. I doubt very much he will score this much for the rest of the season, but I think 113 points is very reasonable. That is a phenomenal accomplishment for an 18 year old.
 
Last edited:
Beacon said:
If he goes back to his pre-steak performance for the remaining 20 games, he'll still have 113 points. If his hot streak continues, he'll be at 127 points. I doubt very much he will score this much for the rest of the season, but I think 113 points is very reasonable. That is a phenomenal accomplishment for an 8 year old.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

I'll be looking for big improvement from Dukes next year. Hopefully he can make Canada's WJC team.
 
Bluenote13 said:
Angry posts about MCI? He's a top 10 pick, I'm pretty harsh on most top ten picks cause the potential should be 'game changer'.
Click to expand...


This is just flat out wrong. The vast majority of #10 picks do NOT become game-changers. Not even close. Even the vast majority of #5 picks don't. You are placing on a #10 pick the standard of a #1 pick.

Do you really think that very draft produces 10 game-changers (the top-10 draftees), not to mention a few more who were drafted later (Lundqvist, Brodeur, Tkachuk, Getzlaf, etc)? Really? The league has maybe a dozen game-changers at any given time and those guys play at least a dozen years at a top level (usually make it by 21 and keep at the top until about 33-34). That's means that there's one game-changer breaking in every year.

Let's loosen up that standard: at most there are 2-3 game-changers per draft. If there would be more, they would no longer be considered game-changers since there were too many of them.

This is a list of the #10 picks in the 10 drafts prior to MCI (I'm excluding 2001 because Blackburn got injured and we don't know how he'd turn out):

1999: Branislav Mezei: crappy defenseman
2000: Mikhail Yakubov: bust
(2001: Dan Blackburn: injured)
2002: Eric Nystrom: bottom-6
2003: Andrei Kostitsyn: middle-6
2004: Boris Valabik: bust
2005: Luc Bourdon: bust
2006: Michael Frolik: third liner
2007: Keaton Ellerby: crappy defenseman
2008: Cody Hodgson: second liner
2009: Magnus Paajarvi-Svensson: bottom-6


Do you see ANY game-breakers? Do you even see any first liners? Hodgson is the best player on the list. There were 3 downright busts, a few run-of-the-mill to low-end NHLers and only one of the 10 players turned into anything useful.

Just because there's hype around "Top-10" doesn't mean anything. The odds of getting a game-breaker or even a second liner at #10 are very much against you. If MCI turns into another Beukeboom, he'll be more useful than any of the #10 draftees in the decade before him.

Oh and keep in mind that our own Kyle Beach was #11 and Taylor Pyatt was #8.
 
Beacon said:
If he goes back to his pre-steak performance for the remaining 20 games, he'll still have 113 points. If his hot streak continues, he'll be at 127 points. I doubt very much he will score this much for the rest of the season, but I think 113 points is very reasonable. That is a phenomenal accomplishment for an 8 year old.
Click to expand...

Agreed, his clip pre-hot streak was impressive on it's own. Excited to see how he progresses.
 
Beacon said:
This is just flat out wrong. The vast majority of #10 picks do NOT become game-changers. Not even close. Even the vast majority of #5 picks don't. You are placing on a #10 pick the standard of a #1 pick.

Do you really think that very draft produces 10 game-changers (the top-10 draftees), not to mention a few more who were drafted later (Lundqvist, Brodeur, Tkachuk, Getzlaf, etc)? Really? The league has maybe a dozen game-changers at any given time and those guys play at least a dozen years at a top level (usually make it by 21 and keep at the top until about 33-34). That's means that there's one game-changer breaking in every year.

Let's loosen up that standard: at most there are 2-3 game-changers per draft. If there would be more, they would no longer be considered game-changers since there were too many of them.

This is a list of the #10 picks in the 10 drafts prior to MCI (I'm excluding 2001 because Blackburn got injured and we don't know how he'd turn out):

1999: Branislav Mezei: crappy defenseman
2000: Mikhail Yakubov: bust
(2001: Dan Blackburn: injured)
2002: Eric Nystrom: bottom-6
2003: Andrei Kostitsyn: middle-6
2004: Boris Valabik: bust
2005: Luc Bourdon: bust
2006: Michael Frolik: third liner
2007: Keaton Ellerby: crappy defenseman
2008: Cody Hodgson: second liner
2009: Magnus Paajarvi-Svensson: bottom-6


Do you see ANY game-breakers? Do you even see any first liners? Hodgson is the best player on the list. There were 3 downright busts, a few run-of-the-mill to low-end NHLers and only one of the 10 players turned into anything useful.

Just because there's hype around "Top-10" doesn't mean anything. The odds of getting a game-breaker or even a second liner at #10 are very much against you. If MCI turns into another Beukeboom, he'll be more useful than any of the #10 draftees in the decade before him.

Oh and keep in mind that our own Kyle Beach was #11 and Taylor Pyatt was #8.
Click to expand...

Luc Bourdon is not a bust. he played some games in the NHL, and in the offseason died in an accident..


http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...bers-best-friend-luc-bourdon-5-161121812.html

same with Cherepanov. who would know what they could become.. not willing to call players who died at a young age a bust..
 
Three points for Duclair?

Seriously, why does he suck so bad? His production was cut by more than half since the last game!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom