2017 Draft & UDFA Thread - Part III
- Thread starter Fugazy
- Start date
Thomas > Norris imo, i don't want either at #21 though, trade down if those are your targets, same with Poehling.
Mac n Gs
Drury plz
- Jan 17, 2014
- 22,840
- 13,578
Tobbe that's my motto with everyone I bring up since I'm all about trading down and getting more assets
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,075
- 40,935
Tobbe that's my motto with everyone I bring up since I'm all about trading down and getting more assets
I hope we somehow trade into the 2nd and 3rd round. With teams losing defensemen, there might be a market for Klein and Holden
Tobbe that's my motto with everyone I bring up since I'm all about trading down and getting more assets
Hehe nice, that's a good motto
Only scenario where i wouldn't trade down (from the somewhat realistic scenarios) is if we can get Brännström or Liljegren. Yamamoto would be tough to trade down from too but i still think i'd do it.
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Good and tough question.
I would take Thomas, he is a more versatile and natural Center. Norris is a nice sized player with a pro shot, I admit it would be hard to pass up. But Thomas has the ability to surprise opponents with his plays, whereas Norris is a straight shooter, and uses his physical gifts around the net.
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
The thing is, all 3 of those guys are projected to go around #21. How many teams will want to trade up in the late first and how do we know they will not take they guy they like?
It's tricky, but if they like the player, they almost never trade back, they'd rather get their guy.
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,993
- 13,669
That's probably the first decent scouting report I've read about Poehling. Everything else I've read indicates that he has a lot of holes in his game. Personally, I'm concerned that his skating will hold him back.
I see what you're saying, my view is that neither of those 3 have enough upside to warrant NYR picking them at #21. We lack high end skill in our prospect pool right now and taking one of these "safe" players as early as #21 is just bad imo.
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Yeah I hear what you're saying, it might be very disappointing to hear them pass up on some dynamic skilled player for someone who projects as a solid and reliable pro. Not a whole lot coming along in the pipeline so who knows if it's the right time to gamble but eventually you gotta gamble.
With Buchnevich graduating it's fair to say we don't have a single high end skill guy in our prospect pool, that's really bad. But we finally have a 1st rounder so we can rectify that by going for the slightly riskier player with high end skill, i think we need to do that. I understand why teams go for the safe player, but NYR is in a position where we desperately need to add high end skill.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,075
- 40,935
I am really curious to see how Pionk does though. A sophomore UDFA, opting to sign a pro contract, instead of finishing college, is rare. You can't send him back, the way you can with players coming from the major junior leagues. He has to be very confident he can make the team out of camp. Together with Bereglazov, we might have 2 D-men stealing a spot. Not saying those two are high end prospects, but they are already the best options we have on defense.
Hehe nice, that's a good motto
I don't think I could.
Lack of size is a bit of a red flag but he tested very well at the combine.
Plus he doesn't play small and hes got some really awesome skills. I'd be very happy with him at 21.
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Lack of size is one thing but we're talking about a first-rounder, I don't remember the last time a guy was a buck 47 and made it into the first round. I guess it's definitely quite possible in this draft, but lets not forget the Grimaldi's and Bracco's of the hockey world, that kind of size scares teams off in round one.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,075
- 40,935
I guess it all depends on who is available. After seeing mocks with Liljegren being picked later than 21st (which I seriously doubt) it got me thinking how great it would be to pick him. He is this year's Chychun
MarkMessyay11
Registered User
Everything about Poehling screams the Rangers to me. Hard working two-way center with some good size, American-born NCAA player, and a seemingly "safe" pick...but the skating issue is a big one.
I don't think I'd be upset if he's our pick, but it will depend on who's available when we come up.
What a crazy draft. I think there's legitimate list of about 15 players who could all be argued as 6-10 range guys.
eco's bones
Registered User
Forwards
1. Hischier
2. Patrick
3. Pettersson
4. Vilardi
5. Mittelstadt
6. Glass
7. Suzuki
8. Kostin
9. Tippett
10. M. Rasmussen
11. Tolvanen
12. Necas
13. Andersson
14. Yamamoto
15. Chityl
16. Vesalainen
17. Poehling
18. Robertson
19. Thomas
20. Anderson-Dolan
Defense
1. Heiskanen
2. Makar
3. Liljegren
4. Valimaki
5. Brannstrom
6. Foote
7. Vaakanainen
8. Hague
9. Jokiharju
10. Timmins
Goalies
1. Oettinger
2. Di Pietro
3. Luukonen
It would seem to me that the Rangers if they stay at 21--the possibilities at forward begin pretty much at 10 on up to 20 and the possibilities for defenders at 5 up to 10 and if a team like San Jose which is weak on goaltending prospects opts for Oettinger at 19 that would drop one more player down. But the nexus of the above list right now puts us somewhere around 13/14 Andersson/Yamamoto and 7/8 Vaakanainen/Hague but if San Jose or some other team goes for a goalie and a team or two reaches then we work our way down to where it's Necas/Tolvanen or Foote/Brannstrom.
It's not unusual for some teams to go off the board a bit. I suspect that will happen on draft day. By the way if it's pretty much like the above I think Yamamoto would still be a great addition.
1. Hischier
2. Patrick
3. Pettersson
4. Vilardi
5. Mittelstadt
6. Glass
7. Suzuki
8. Kostin
9. Tippett
10. M. Rasmussen
11. Tolvanen
12. Necas
13. Andersson
14. Yamamoto
15. Chityl
16. Vesalainen
17. Poehling
18. Robertson
19. Thomas
20. Anderson-Dolan
Defense
1. Heiskanen
2. Makar
3. Liljegren
4. Valimaki
5. Brannstrom
6. Foote
7. Vaakanainen
8. Hague
9. Jokiharju
10. Timmins
Goalies
1. Oettinger
2. Di Pietro
3. Luukonen
It would seem to me that the Rangers if they stay at 21--the possibilities at forward begin pretty much at 10 on up to 20 and the possibilities for defenders at 5 up to 10 and if a team like San Jose which is weak on goaltending prospects opts for Oettinger at 19 that would drop one more player down. But the nexus of the above list right now puts us somewhere around 13/14 Andersson/Yamamoto and 7/8 Vaakanainen/Hague but if San Jose or some other team goes for a goalie and a team or two reaches then we work our way down to where it's Necas/Tolvanen or Foote/Brannstrom.
It's not unusual for some teams to go off the board a bit. I suspect that will happen on draft day. By the way if it's pretty much like the above I think Yamamoto would still be a great addition.
I'd imagine that Tyler Ennis wasn't too far off from that number and he went in the 1st in a much, much deeper draft.
I think the thing that separates him from other smaller guys is that his strength numbers were still pretty damn good at the combine. The league is pretty well populated with smaller players doing very well and his lack of size hasn't gotten in the way of him going into the dirty areas and he doesn't have a problem with his motor.
In most years you're probably right but in a draft like this where everything is all over the place, he could (and should IMO) go in the 1st.
Mac n Gs
Drury plz
- Jan 17, 2014
- 22,840
- 13,578
Keep in mind, this organization may be putting a lot of pressure to add depth down the middle and on defense. Don't misinterpret this as me saying not to draft guys like Yamamoto or Kostin, but moreso that they probably have guys ranked in similar positions that fit more of a need.
It's not a knock on those guys, but it falls in line with the same idea I brought up with Brannstrom. We really need a young center to add to the stable and a young RHD. A player that fits that mold, while also arguably being BPA, will be available at 21.
It's not a knock on those guys, but it falls in line with the same idea I brought up with Brannstrom. We really need a young center to add to the stable and a young RHD. A player that fits that mold, while also arguably being BPA, will be available at 21.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,075
- 40,935
I am pretty confident FO will pick the right player based on who is available and their experience after interviewing the players. When we look at all the players we have picked in the 1st round in the last 10 years, only McIlrath failed to become a decent player.
Savant
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 39,412
- 12,010
Thomas is going to be one of those players that rises and gets taken higher than he probably should.
Joey Bones
***** 2k16
Missing my point, bud. Said that Robertson's shot generation is "equally" as impressive. A matter of .3 shots/game is no different. Very similar, indeed.
What I'm mentioning is that Robertson was superior in point totals by exactly 30 points above the next guy on the team. He created his own offense, with zero help, on a non existent Kingston offense. Gadjovich played a lot with Palmu and Suzuki which inflated his numbers drastically. Hence why I am saying that Robertson's offensive awareness is better to that of Gadjovich's.
I agree that both are similar in skating style, but Robertson is indeed a better talent. If Robertson was on a team with playmakers like Palmu and Suzuki, he'd hit the 100 mark. I'm curious to see what Gadjovich would produce if they swapped teams.
Aight, that's fair enough.
Important to take their ice time into account aswell since you're taking the quality of their teams into account, Robertson plays about 2.30 more per game then Gadjovich.
Not going to take this further, i made my point about that top 31 from Redline.
I'd be happy with either Robertson or Gadjovich in the 2nd if we had a 2nd.
