GeorgeKaplan
Registered User
I think his floor is Hagelin, but I think the odds to hit his ceiling or floor are probably in favor of his floorpodkolzin continues to fail at production.
hes a tough one to figure out
I think his floor is Hagelin, but I think the odds to hit his ceiling or floor are probably in favor of his floorpodkolzin continues to fail at production.
hes a tough one to figure out
2. Kakko2. Kakko
19. Newhook
28. Thomson
37. Bjornfot
58. Foote
69. Konovalov
Fight me
I agree with a lot of what you wrote but Pod has no case to be 2nd over Kakko. 90% of things Kakko either does better and obviously has the historic production to back his cause. Honestly, I might sooner take Byram/Turcotte (if healthy) at 3 than Pod.I have Podkolzin at 8 and everything about that has me uncomfortable.
From a skill and talent perspective, he should be third. And probably making a damn good case for being second.
From a repeated results and observation standpoint, I can say that I’d be elated to be picking 8th and have him on the board. There are so many kids, even at that slot, who have shown more. Frankly, they deserve to be picked ahead of Podkolzin if we’re going strictly by performance.
Yet, he would be a hard one to pass up because there’s no one outside of Hughes or Kakko who can do what he does.
So now, if you’re a GM, it can quickly become a nightmare scenario. If this trend continues, you will have passed on some great young players. But if you pass on Podkolzin, and the light bulb goes off next season, you’re going to feel sick. Either way, there’s a good chance you’re going to be hearing about it for a long tine.
I’ll even put myself in that position. The Rangers play lets make a deal and have the 9th pick in the draft.
Hughes, Kakko, Byram, Dach, Cozens, Krebs, Turcotte and Zegras are off the board. In theory, no one has more talent or upside than Podkolzin. But passing on a kid like Boldy or York is tough in that scenario. Same for Newhook or several other guys.
Part of me feels like I “have to” take Podkolzin in that scenario. But I can’t say it feels right either.
I agree with a lot of what you wrote but Pod has no case to be 2nd over Kakko. 90% of things Kakko either does better and obviously has the historic production to back his cause. Honestly, I might sooner take Byram/Turcotte (if healthy) at 3 than Pod.
Ahhhh I see what you meant, and yes I concur with your thoughts then. Pod absolutely has the goods but the lack of production has to be very concerning. I'm not sure I would have the balls to pick a player that high who is essentially a giant toolbox right now.No he doesn’t have a case, that’s not what I was trying to imply.
It was to illustrate that he’s every bit as naturally talented as Kakko. He should be right there in that conversation. The fact that he’s not is telling.
Take that + the fact that he’s a wing + the contract situation... I’d rather someone else take the gamble and push one of the centers down.podkolzin continues to fail at production.
hes a tough one to figure out
The two things I'm currently worried about are our forwards and defenders peaking at separate times (someone else made this point yesterday) and that we're building too homogenous of a team. You need to be able to attack in a multitude of ways and in waves. We're lacking that in our current group outside of Zibanejad. It was one of the reasons why that 13-14 team was so good- it could beat teams in whichever style their opponent wanted to play. I want them to get that ability back.
podkolzin doesnt give any reason to take a chance that high. hes a player with skills and no abilty to score consistently outside of a few international tourneys.
hes a guy who shows flashes of brilliance followed by alot of ranger rick nash invisible player vanishing act stuff.
i dont get it
2. Kakko
19. Newhook
28. Thomson
37. Bjornfot
58. Foote
69. Konovalov
Fight me
Explain more? That team was still more of a fast break counter attack team. All of AV's teams were. They didn't have one line that was great at puck possession and one line that was a counter attack line...I don't think most if any teams do something like that, it's too hard to coach everyone to do something different and of course lines rarely stay together all season long.
These past 3 drafts (including the upcoming one) could go a long long ways to shaping how this Rangers team shapes up for the future...even if Andersson isn't a pick that pans out as a top sixer and even if Chytil isn't anything more than a good depth scorer, if they hit on Kravtsov being a very talented top six guy with potential for more and Kakko being a franchise player then combined with guys like Howden, Buchnevich, Zibanejad...you've got a solid to great group of forwards as your core that bring some different styles of play individually IMO. Ultimately a TON is going to rest on how Howden and Andersson and Chytil can develop as centers or wingers, but we'll see how it goes.
I guess the question is, what other scorers are available? Who else might they be eyeing?Thanks for the insight. Kreider at 50% sounds pretty appealing...
Good point. As a Ranger fan this is something I never consider.I think Edmonton will be very loathe to take anyone headed to the American college route.
If they keep Maurice, it's just another wasted year for them coming up.Changes are coming for sure in Winnipeg. Chevy surely won't be pleased with two years in a row without a conference championship after spending two consecutive first round picks at the deadline for players that were supposed to be the missing piece.
Big summer for them. Laine disappeared after Game 2. He and Connor are due big money this summer. I have a feeling only one returns to Winnipeg next season...
I suppose the Rangers have to send Riley Hughes to the Canucks, right?Yeah, and he plays a very mature style of hockey. I think he would be a good pick late in the 1st especially since we need some forward prospects. Our 3 best unsigned forward prospects right now are Virta, Barron and I guess Riley Hughes?
Was in Örnsköldsvik yesterday and watched US-Latvia and Russia-Sweden.
This US team just isn’t fair, Hughes had a meh game and they all kinda went at half speed but they still created some magic. Their D is underrated, especially Warren and Fensore who are both super smooth skaters. I thought Zegras, Boldy and Brink were their best Fs, they created chances pretty much every shift, Brink was a force along the boards.
The other game was much closer, Sweden did a good job keeping Russia to the outside but a poor job moving the puck, Swedish D had issues there, all of them except Broberg who had an excellent game.
For Russia their big guns were underwhelming, Podkolzin/Nikolaev did create some pressure but both were sloppy and they never really got to the inside. Podkolzin took two poor penalties and had a horrific No look spinorama giveaway which led to the 3-0 goal. Spiridonov had a quiet 1st period and then he stopped playing somewhere in the 2nd, didn’t catch What happened.
Their best line by far was the Sheshin-Khusnutdinov-Gushin line which created extended pressure and chances often, those wingers are really fun, quick and super tricky, Khusnitdinov balanced that line well. Another one that impressed me was Chistyakov, incredibly smooth skater and good passer.
I’ll be up Thursday, Saturday and Sunday aswell.
I suppose the Rangers have to send Riley Hughes to the Canucks, right?
Edge- Warren is really good and so is Fensore, but you can only treat yourself to so many of those type of players...
Hehe, when you think about it, it would be a bit funny if Gorton just went **** this and collected an immensely talented group of D's (maybe one guy like K'Andree) and didn't care about size at all.
lol!
Really comes down to who is on the board and where.
Would I take Warren if Dorofyev is on the board? Absolutely not.
Would I take him if some of the high-reward, reasonable risk guys are gone? Perhaps.
But you know me, my philosophy has always been that I'd rather have too much talent in one area, and be "forced" to choose my pick of the litter, than have less to work with and have to try and polish a turd.