Toggle sidebar

Draft and UDFA Thread 2017-18

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
jas said:
If Zadina is still there at 9, I don’t think the Rangers can get to the podium fast enough. Zadina is a player I’ve mentioned that I can see the Rangers targeting to trade up and get.
Click to expand...

They should be calling every team he falls to ahead of them if he gets past 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RGY
Edge said:
Part of me does, and part of me wants to go really go for it if the opportunity presents itself.

Using the trade chart as an entertaining starting point.

If I can do 9+70 to get to 6 and take Zadina;

And I can do 26+28 to get to 16, take Kravtsov or Farabee or package 16 and 48 to get to 10 to take Boqvist, or stay at 16 and somehow get 10 via a different trade

I'd sacrifice the quantity if it results in Zadina and Boqvist, or Zadina, Boqvist and Kravstov/Farabee.

Because at that point, even if I'm not picking again until the third or fourth round, I've got a legitimate shot at two first line wingers and a number 1 defenseman.

It doesn't sacrifice anything from next year's draft, and I'm walking away with high end talent.

It's gutsy. But I'd take a deep breath and do it.
Click to expand...

Success doesn't always come from hard work or luck. It takes two things. Balls and brains.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edge
Edge said:
People are all over the map on Berggren's hands. It's certainly not the energy, frankly it's not even the size. I think people are legitimately unsure if the hands will be there for a top six player.

He's an easy guy to love, but because of that energy and zip, he's also an easy guy to potentially over-project. In a draft with some intriguing options, that's the concern. But I would not bat an eye if he went in the late first and I think most wouldn't either.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have him high, but mid to late 1st, sure that is not odd.

But it just stands out to me that Akil Thomas, who I just don’t think have the motor to play in the NHL (which I thought was very obvious on the big ice in the U18), is ranked higher than him. Like sure, if someone take a 6’3 LD like say Samuelsson over Berggren, it is apples and organges and not easy to call it out. But like a Steckel shouldn’t play over a Hayes, I just think it’s obvious in that case.
 
RangerSeth said:
Awesome goal-scorer, but questions about his ability to produce without a center to feed him the puck.
Click to expand...

Right, and he played with Jack Hughes?

Rangers could have some effective centers to a complementary goal scoring winger isn't a bad thing.
 
RangerSeth said:
Awesome goal-scorer, but questions about his ability to produce without a center to feed him the puck.
Click to expand...

Well, the good news is unless he plays exclusively in 3-on-3 situations he'll likely always play with a center.
 
Gardner McKay said:
Success doesn't always come from hard work or luck. It takes two things. Balls and brains.
Click to expand...

And for as much as I love some of those late first and second round kids, I just couldn't pass on the opportunity to walk away with a combination of some of the names we mentioned.

Obviously, in a fantasy world Zadina is there at 9 and doesn't require a trade, and Farabee/Kravtsov or Boqvist is somehow there at 16, but I'm not inclined to sit and wait for that.

I consider myself a fairly pragmatic person when it comes to trades --- especially draft dealings. But I would be particularly aggressive in some of the scenarios we're bouncing around.

We have 8 of the top 101 picks. If it costs all 8 to turn our draft into a haul of Zadina, Boqvist and Farabee. I'm doing it, knowing that for better or worse it's my defining moment.

That's not a knock on the Addisons, the Wises, the Millers and other intriguing prospects to be found. But I'm going for it with guys who have a chance to completely change the landscape of my organization's depth and prospect cupboard, to say nothing about potential trajectory of the franchise.

I've still got my later picks, I still have my 2019 picks --- including the potential for a second first. I've got wingers to go with my centers. I've got a defenseman, right-handed to boot, to potentially surround with what I have. I have two promising goalies in my system. I have depth at center, i've transformed my potential future on the wings, and I don't have to worry about salary concerns for years.

Yeah I'm gambling, but I didn't blow the rent money either.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: belford222, Fvital92, Trxjw and 4 others
Ola said:
Yeah, I have him high, but mid to late 1st, sure that is not odd.

But it just stands out to me that Akil Thomas, who I just don’t think have the motor to play in the NHL (which I thought was very obvious on the big ice in the U18), is ranked higher than him. Like sure, if someone take a 6’3 LD like say Samuelsson over Berggren, it is apples and organges and not easy to call it out. But like a Steckel shouldn’t play over a Hayes, I just think it’s obvious in that case.
Click to expand...

You're not wrong on Thomas.

I'd dare say that in some ways he's kind of the opposite of Bergrren.

JB has the energy and the drive. For as skilled as he is, everything screams overachiever. Which isn't a bad thing, you just wonder how far it can take him.

Thomas on the other hand is an incredibilty talented prospect who seems to leave you wanting more. All the tools are there, and they come together nicely. But there's that feeling that it should be more. More goals because we know he can shoot, better defense because we know he can play that.

With Bergrren it's not hard to see him as middle/bottom six talent who could potentially play himself into a top 6 role. With Thomas it's not hard to see him as top six talent who potentially slides down into a middle six role.

Despite that, I think Thomas' attributes just have too much potential for most teams to pass on. But none of what you're saying is inaccurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ola
Amazing Kreiderman said:
My question is: How much are Wahlstrom's numbers affected by playing with Jack Hughes? Can anyone elaborate?
Click to expand...

This seems to be the crux of the matter I guess...

the people who like him look at his underlying numbers and see a guy who projects extremely well. I've seen a comparison with a guy like Boeser.

Others see a guy with one talent, a great shot, and wonder if he'll be able to do anything at a higher level.
 
Levitate said:
what's the criticism of Wahlstrom? His numbers all project fantastically
Click to expand...

He has a reputation has someone who floats a little and some questions as to how he brings outside of goal scoring and whether he can really create plays for his entire lineup, or be the guy who puts the exclamation point on the sentence.

Arguably one of the three best shots in the draft and offensively probably right up there with Zadina and not as far behind Svechnikov for a pure ability standpoint.

You put him in the right environment, with a creative playmaker, and he's a pumping in goals at a very high rate.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
My question is: How much are Wahlstrom's numbers affected by playing with Jack Hughes? Can anyone elaborate?
Click to expand...

You'll get different answers depending on who you ask. Myself and @ManUtdTobbe have debated this issue a little when looking at Wahlstrom and Farabee and have some differing opinions.

In a nutshell, I think his numbers were probably impacted by Hughes' more than some others might. I personally don't feel there's a tremendous gap between Farabee and Wahlstrom offensively. Having said that, he clicked with Hughes and there's no denying that you have to stop and take notice of what Wahlstrom can do alongside someone with whom he has chemistry.
 
Levitate said:
This seems to be the crux of the matter I guess...

the people who like him look at his underlying numbers and see a guy who projects extremely well. I've seen a comparison with a guy like Boeser.

Others see a guy with one talent, a great shot, and wonder if he'll be able to do anything at a higher level.
Click to expand...

I think he'll score goals, it's mainly a matter of how many and what he can bring outside of that.

I could see a team justify taking him as high as third, I could see going 10th.

But the talent is too high for him reasonably to slip beyond the top 10.
 
Levitate said:
but then the question is...who has someone as talented as Hughes to pair Wahlstrom with
Click to expand...

Obviously a talent like Hughes would take Wahlstrom's ability and put it on steroids.

But I don't think he needs that level of center to produce. It was a bonus, but it wasn't his crutch. He was scoring before Hughes and he'll score away from him.

What you need is a center who can create space and set up plays.
 
So do the Rangers have any of those guys I guess is the question.

Chytil seems like someone who could play that way, but it's unknown if he'll really be a center. Andersson seems more like an opportunist rather than a space creator.

Honestly, Hayes might be the guy...

e: though honestly Zibby can do that too when he's on his game
 
Levitate said:
So do the Rangers have any of those guys I guess is the question.

Chytil seems like someone who could play that way, but it's unknown if he'll really be a center. Andersson seems more like an opportunist rather than a space creator.

Honestly, Hayes might be the guy...

e: though honestly Zibby can do that too when he's on his game
Click to expand...
Zibby has very underwhelming assist totals for a number one center.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom