Dylan mcilrath---in 10 years---

[Ian]

He'll be 31.

That's the only accurate projection of McIlrath in 10 years. At this point, every other mention of him is so swayed by bias that this board should honestly ban threads discussing him.

 

[azrok22]

Apparently where you're drafted determines how good you'll be and how much skill you end up with. Since O'Brien was a late pick and McI was 10th overall, it's impossible that McI not be better.

If we just stuck with Montoya instead of Lundqvist, we'd be swimming in Stanley Cup rings!

 

[Badko]

I'd be happy with a diluted version of Chris Pronger.

 

[Bardof425*]

Man I just hate this pick more and more as each year goes by. Every time I see Tarasenko play I just get angry.

A dozen teams passed on Tarasenko including the St. Louis Blues. It is not apples to apples. He dropped to 16 because of the Russian factor. We could not afford to take that risk at that time. So we didn't. You guys act like it was a no brainer; it absolutely wasn't. McI is potentially a more unique player than Vlad. At this point it doesn't look like he'll reach that potential but guys of his ilk historically take longer to develop. It is still too early to draw any conclusions. I think it may be time to bring him up and see what he can do for 15 games; I expect the first few will be rough as he gets used to the speed of the NHL game. The kid can skate; he's rangy and he has some offense. I for one would like to see it...now especially after the physical beatings we took this weekend.

 

[Raspewtin]

And?



O'Brien's played over 500 NHL GP. Up until recently, he was a tough, gritty 3rd pair defender.

O'Brien doesn't belong on an NHL roster. ****ing awful player.

 

[ArPanet]

Does this mean McIlrath will be better than Shea Weber?

Man this thread made me realize how underrated Michael Sauer was. There is no evidence to suggest McIlrath has more upside than him. One of the smartest defensive players I've seen and was a huge player.

I agree. Loved Sauer. OV once tried running him with glee like he did Staal and Girard. Nope.

 

[slipknottin]

I think anyone who didn't watch mcl when he first joined the whale to where he is now shouldn't judge.

 

[ArPanet]

Rangers id'ed a need and drafted the bpa, in their estimation. But, power center was and still is a need.

And then there's Bjugstad. 14 goals already as a rookie. How'd he look btwn Nash and Kreider?

 

[Osminator]

He'll be with Valarengo Oslo Hockey Club, which will be managed by Zucc after retiring, doing him a favor by giving him an import player slot on the team "for good 'ol times sake" lol

 

[Cassano]

O'Brien doesn't belong on an NHL roster. ****ing awful player.

Yeah, but he played over 500 NHL GP. Truly awful would be Stu Bickel.

 

[haveandare]

Nobody would know McI's name if he was on a different team.

Regarding why I feel he's a bottom pairing dman at best:

His skating is not good. His agility is reasonably good for a big guy but his top speed and acceleration are both lacking. It's a fallacy to say his skating has been described as good. It's been described as adequate and good "for a player of his size". It's been described as improving and mostly as an area of needed continued improvement. His puck skills are marginal, and again could be adequate, but his decision making is still not close to being on an NHL level, and I don't see it ever evolving beyond being able to pick up ~15 points a year, through routine zone clears and such. His positioning is not yet NHL quality either and he does not have the foot speed to make up for it. He doesn't show particularly promising anticipation, gap control, ability to read the play, awareness of guys jumping into the play or going back door. Nothing about him is exemplary or shows great promise besides his size and willingness to play mean. He is only adequate-to-average in most areas, exemplary in terms of size and pugnacity and less than average in terms of decision making. He will continue to develop, and I'm sure he'll carve out a career but I doubt he will ever play above a physical #5 role during it.

Thanks for providing your take on his play. Seriously. I think it's good to be exposed to varying points of view on things like this. Great detail also.

I disagree with your projection for him, though only because you're talking with a level of certainly that I think is a bit too much for someone of McI's age and level of preparedness at this point. I think it's possible that he tops out there, but I think it's possible that he ends up either a step up or down from there too. It's just too early for me to say anything about where he'll end up with any real confidence.

 

[theFiGS]

I'm still pissed we didn't draft tarasenko, like COME ON

 

[nyr2k2]

He'll be 31.

That's the only accurate projection of McIlrath in 10 years. At this point, every other mention of him is so swayed by bias that this board should honestly ban threads discussing him.

I don't think I'm particularly biased. I absolutely hated the pick at the time, there's no disputing that. And initially, I was biased because of that. However, since I decided to actually give the kid a chance, I've actually been very pleased with his development.

He skates very well for a big guy, his positioning and awareness have improved by leaps and bounds, and he has a developing offensive game as well. If he were drafted in the second round, I think people would be extremely happy with the progress he has shown, and outright excited about his potential. Unfortunately, he was drafted ahead of some other players that are significantly ahead of him developmentally, and people allow that to taint their evaluation of him as a prospect.

Where do I see him in ten years? That's really hard to say, for anyone. Within the next year or two, I think it's a pretty safe projection to see him as a good bottom pairing defender, capable of 15 minutes of good defense each night. I think an optimistic projection within the next three years is a quality second pairing defenseman, dominating in the crease area and while making opponents think twice about skating below the circles. Next year should be telling for him--if he looks out of place even in limited minutes, then the optimistic projection a couple years down the line would look a little bleak.

He's still a work in progress. I don't care where he was drafted, though. For the purposes of evaluating and projecting him, that's pretty much irrelevant.

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

Erik Reitz

 

[Ail]

Ask me again---in 10 years---

 

[Clausewitz]

Bust; third-pairing defensive defenseman potential. Source: intuition

 

[Pizza]

He'll be 31.

That's the only accurate projection of McIlrath in 10 years. At this point, every other mention of him is so swayed by bias that this board should honestly ban threads discussing him.

lol. This!

 

[AlternateSideParking]

If he gets a shot he'll stick around.

Id trade him ASAP.

 

[marciiauzii]

I hope he resembles Dylan McIlarth as he would be one of the best so everyone know who he is but that seems like a fantasy

 

[Beacon]

A dozen teams passed on Tarasenko including the St. Louis Blues. It is not apples to apples. He dropped to 16 because of the Russian factor. We could not afford to take that risk at that time. So we didn't. You guys act like it was a no brainer; it absolutely wasn't.

You don't understand something here: they aren't all hating on MCI and pulling for Tarasenko out of 20/20 hindsight reasoning. This is the one time a few of them guessed right at the draft, the one time they were more accurate than the professionals.

So they will ride this sucker for the rest of their lives. This is proof of their intelligence. This is proof that if they ever got a fair chance, they could've been NHL GMs instead of accountants and plumbers. This is proof that they understand hockey on a superior level, far superior to the regular schmucks who post here without any real knowledge of the sport.

 

[Bluenote13]

You don't understand something here: they aren't all hating on MCI and pulling for Tarasenko out of 20/20 hindsight reasoning. This is the one time a few of them guessed right at the draft, the one time they were more accurate than the professionals.

So they will ride this sucker for the rest of their lives. This is proof of their intelligence. This is proof that if they ever got a fair chance, they could've been NHL GMs instead of accountants and plumbers. This is proof that they understand hockey on a superior level, far superior to the regular schmucks who post here without any real knowledge of the sport.

Aww, I love you too Beac

No really, has nothing to do with being right, ask most hockey fans and they would not have taken him at 10 either, they have agendas or just know that was not the best looking hockey player on the board? Thats the bottom line, there will always be haters who just hate. If anything I've been more objective about the player than most of these opinions we see here.

 

[Jersey Girl]

You don't understand something here: they aren't all hating on MCI and pulling for Tarasenko out of 20/20 hindsight reasoning. This is the one time a few of them guessed right at the draft, the one time they were more accurate than the professionals.

So they will ride this sucker for the rest of their lives. This is proof of their intelligence. This is proof that if they ever got a fair chance, they could've been NHL GMs instead of accountants and plumbers. This is proof that they understand hockey on a superior level, far superior to the regular schmucks who post here without any real knowledge of the sport.

Your first paragraph is accurate, you're second paragraph is an attempt to turn this into a Straw Man post. Too bad, since you nailed it in the first paragraph - should have left it at that.

Go back to the original draft thread that year and you'll see me (and many others) complaining long and loud about this pick. My biggest complaint was that drafting out of need at #10 was asinine by Sather, Gorton, or whoever made the pick. We all knew at the time McIlrath was a number of years from making an NHL impact, and by the time his NHL impact rolled around (four years and counting), our biggest need could change.

 

[Ian]

This whole "McI was drafted for a need" talk is what really is asinine.

The Rangers needed a scorer then too, would a Tarasenko pick been drafting for a need? No, it would have been drafting whoever was the best pick at that point in their minds.

That's it. The management felt McI was the best pick at #10, period.

This isn't football. If there was a true need for a player of his ilk, he'd be in the lineup already (or someone would have been acquired to essentially replace him).

They felt he brought a unique skill-set and took a chance. Hopefully that chance works out.

 

[bernmeister]

He will not be the next Tysen Dowzak!

 

[GoAwayGiannone]

Your first paragraph is accurate, you're second paragraph is an attempt to turn this into a Straw Man post. Too bad, since you nailed it in the first paragraph - should have left it at that.

Go back to the original draft thread that year and you'll see me (and many others) complaining long and loud about this pick. My biggest complaint was that drafting out of need at #10 was asinine by Sather, Gorton, or whoever made the pick. We all knew at the time McIlrath was a number of years from making an NHL impact, and by the time his NHL impact rolled around (four years and counting), our biggest need could change.

Based on your 2nd paragraph, he wasn't wrong.