Emphasis on drafting speed and skill paying off for New York Rangers

[Sojourn]

When I saw him he was playing with Beuch towards the end of last season. Souray was playing with Lovejoy IIRC. I know Beuch and Souray played a lot together before that.

Though I'm guessing you would know better.

Well, to be fair, they have tried if a few times, for one or two games at a time(don't ask. Boudreau is weird). The timing never seems to be right. The last time it was tried was the first game of the season, and Beauchemin probably had his worst game of the season. It's hard to blame Franky, since it was his first game back after reconstructive knee surgery. It is a pairing I think we could see again, when Beauchemin gets back to 100%. Fowler has separated himself as our best defenseman, by far, this season. He's playing like a legitimate #1 defenseman for us. It remains to be seen if he can maintain this level of play.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Fowler never plays with Beauchemin.

Cam plays with Lovejoy, and the two of them make up our top pairing, with the heaviest D responsibilities. By far.

With all due respect, it seems most people here don't have a clue what kind of player Fowler has turned into.

This. Coming from a noted Fowler "hater", and you know that firsthand, Soj. He's really turned his game around.

That said, go away. No one likes you. You're not welcome here. And you smell.

 

[Barnaby]

were not scouts. we guess. we hit a few and we miss most. gordie needs to be called out on this pick. hes the pro and he goofed. irregardless of what and when mcilrath plays in the nhl, it was a bad pick.

gordie thought del zotto was a better version of cam fowler. wrong.

gordie did not trust our well respected russian scout vlad lutchenko who was very high on tarasenko coming over and playing for us. bad decision.

schwartz was "too small". not true.

the mcilrath pick was a reach and a chance for us to take a kid who would be helping address our needs today. we are suffering from lack of scoring and the 3 players taken after our pick all address that very need.

we just really cannot afford gordies folly and love affair with the undertaker. we are paying a price today for gordies reach.

That's the problem. The pick wasn't made for today. The pick was made for yesterday. At the time, Henrik was getting run like crazy, and the team hadn't really developed a toughness yet to stop/defend it. The team was seriously lacking in that regard. The Rangers needed to add that element and really felt a need for a tough guy on the back line. The problem with that rationale was that you were making the pick based on a need in 2010 knowing that the player wouldn't be in the league for a minimum of 3 seasons. Fast forward to today, and toughness isn't a major issue (although more is always welcome), but overall talent is. That is why you draft BPA, because it can be hard to see what a need will be years down the road so you roll the dice with the best player/asset that you can get.

I wasn't a big fan of the pick at the time. However, I've warmed up to it, and think that McIlrath can be a nice addition to the roster down the road. I still think it's too early to rate this draft, because most/all of these guys are not finished products yet.

Lastly, to sit around and complain about this pick is a waste of time. It gets rather tiresome after awhile. This draft happened over 3 years ago, so let's root for the guy and give him a fair shake rather than sitting around moping about it every time Tarasenko scores. This pick may not be the best pick, but when you consider the entire body of drafting over the last 5 or so years, then you have to see that they've done an excellent job. Can you name a team whose done more with similar or worse picks? MAYBE 1 or 2. This team is young, hungry, and has an identity. There are holes for sure, but I see no real issue with drafting when they've developed more players in the last 5-6 years than they had done in about a 15 year window prior when Mike York was arguably their best drafted asset.

 

[RangersHank*]

That's the problem. The pick wasn't made for today. The pick was made for yesterday. At the time, Henrik was getting run like crazy, and the team hadn't really developed a toughness yet to stop/defend it. The team was seriously lacking in that regard. The Rangers needed to add that element and really felt a need for a tough guy on the back line. The problem with that rationale was that you were making the pick based on a need in 2010 knowing that the player wouldn't be in the league for a minimum of 3 seasons. Fast forward to today, and toughness isn't a major issue (although more is always welcome), but overall talent is. That is why you draft BPA, because it can be hard to see what a need will be years down the road so you roll the dice with the best player/asset that you can get.

I wasn't a big fan of the pick at the time. However, I've warmed up to it, and think that McIlrath can be a nice addition to the roster down the road. I still think it's too early to rate this draft, because most/all of these guys are not finished products yet.

Lastly, to sit around and complain about this pick is a waste of time. It gets rather tiresome after awhile. This draft happened over 3 years ago, so let's root for the guy and give him a fair shake rather than sitting around moping about it every time Tarasenko scores. This pick may not be the best pick, but when you consider the entire body of drafting over the last 5 or so years, then you have to see that they've done an excellent job. Can you name a team whose done more with similar or worse picks? MAYBE 1 or 2. This team is young, hungry, and has an identity. There are holes for sure, but I see no real issue with drafting when they've developed more players in the last 5-6 years than they had done in about a 15 year window prior when Mike York was arguably their best drafted asset.

What is the identity?

 

[Jersey Girl]

McIlrath could be a better skating, nastier version of Dan Girardi, and some people will still think it's a bad pick.

If that happens, we can have that conversation. It hasn't happened, so you should not project people's opinions.

And I want to say, as much as I hated the pick five minutes after we made it, I was and am still rooting for McIlraith to be a success. I would LOVE to come on these boards and say I was wrong.

But unfortunately, so far I'm not wrong.

 

[RangersHank*]

If that happens, we can have that conversation. It hasn't happened, so you should not project people's opinions.

And I want to say, as much as I hated the pick five minutes after we made it, I was and am still rooting for McIlraith to be a success. I would LOVE to come on these boards and say I was wrong.

But unfortunately, so far I'm not wrong.

Agreed. Nobody is rooting for the kid to fail but we do want him to play one day

 

[Barnaby]

What is the identity?

A team built from the back line out. An elite goaltender. A top 5 defense built with guys that are almost all before or entering their prime. A two-way forward group with some quality young/prime age pieces (Stepan, Kreider, Callahan, Hagelin, Nash (not young, but in his 20's) etc…). Take care of your own zone first. They can be chippy, and they play hard. They aren't perfect by an stretch, and we'd all love an elite #1 center ala Crosby, Malkin, Toews etc… but these guys are top 3 picks - a place this team hasn't drafted in my lifetime (the team goes out and overpays a guy like Richards to try and fill that void, but it seldom works). I'd also like a few big, young, tough, hungry guys in the bottom 6.

The way that you criticize every facet of this team makes me think that you haven't been around for very long. It's not perfect by any stretch, but I believe that this team has become a very well run organization in the Bruins current mold (Gorton?). Compare this to 10 or 15 years ago, and we've seen HUGE strides. Night and Day.

 

[Barnaby]

If that happens, we can have that conversation. It hasn't happened, so you should not project people's opinions.

And I want to say, as much as I hated the pick five minutes after we made it, I was and am still rooting for McIlraith to be a success. I would LOVE to come on these boards and say I was wrong.

But unfortunately, so far I'm not wrong.

So far your aren't right yet either ;-)

He's progressing well in Hartford, and hasn't played for the parent club yet. It's too early to say.

At the end of the day Tarasenko and Fowler will probably be better players, but let's let it shake out first.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

___ - ____ - Nash
Kreider - Stepan - ____
Hagelin - Brassard - Callahan
Boyle - Moore - Dorsett

In my opinion, those are current forwards slotted into the proper spots on a true contending team. You can swap Richards and Stepan if you like, but Richards is as good as gone so I left him out. Neither one is an upper-echelon 1C in this league - the one thing that all contending teams have.

I mapped this out for 3 reasons. First, its a pretty easy illustration showing why the Rangers dont score goals. Secondly, as someone who gets accused of hating the team, it shows that I don't. I like 3/4's of the forwards. I do hate that nearly all of them are slotted above their heads in terms of their abilities by a GM that can't fill the important parts of a roster. And lastly, look at the draft picks. All sandwiched in the middle in 2nd/3rd line tweener territory. Its getting redundant.

 

[Jersey Girl]

So far your aren't right yet either ;-)

He's progressing well in Hartford, and hasn't played for the parent club yet. It's too early to say.

At the end of the day Tarasenko and Fowler will probably be better players, but let's let it shake out first.

What I said at the time still stands...it was ridiculous to draft at #10 overall for a need, when the player was five years away from being a full-time NHL contributor and you didn't know what your needs will be in five years.

Everyone who hopes for the Rangers to tank for high draft picks (those people who come out of the woodwork every time there is a two game losing streak) can stop, because Sather done nothing to convince anyone he can draft successfully in the top portion of the draft.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

What I said at the time still stands...it was ridiculous to draft at #10 overall for a need, when the player was five years away from being a full-time NHL contributor and you didn't know what your needs will be in five years.

Everyone who hopes for the Rangers to tank for high draft picks (those people who come out of the woodwork every time there is a two game losing streak) can stop, because Sather done nothing to convince anyone he can draft successfully in the top portion of the draft.

In fairness, its still a need. Not like that hasnt gone away.

 

[aufheben]

___ - ____ - Nash
Kreider - Stepan - ____
Hagelin - Brassard - Callahan
Boyle - Moore - Dorsett

In my opinion, those are current forwards slotted into the proper spots on a true contending team. You can swap Richards and Stepan if you like, but Richards is as good as gone so I left him out. Neither one is an upper-echelon 1C in this league - the one thing that all contending teams have.

I mapped this out for 3 reasons. First, its a pretty easy illustration showing why the Rangers dont score goals. Secondly, as someone who gets accused of hating the team, it shows that I don't. I like 3/4's of the forwards. I do hate that nearly all of them are slotted above their heads in terms of their abilities by a GM that can't fill the important parts of a roster. And lastly, look at the draft picks. All sandwiched in the middle in 2nd/3rd line tweener territory. Its getting redundant.

I agree, but prepare for a barrage of sarcasm. Actually I pretty much agree with this entire post. Spot on as usual BRB.

 

[Anthony Eclair]

In drafting terms, I hope the Rangers select LW Sonny Milano

 

[Jersey Girl]

In fairness, its still a need. Not like that hasnt gone away.

Disagree...Hank getting run is no longer our biggest need. Hank is no longer getting run WITHOUT Mcilrath on the ice.

 

[Jim Ramsay]

___ - ____ - Nash
Kreider - Stepan - ____
Hagelin - Brassard - Callahan
Boyle - Moore - Dorsett

In my opinion, those are current forwards slotted into the proper spots on a true contending team. You can swap Richards and Stepan if you like, but Richards is as good as gone so I left him out. Neither one is an upper-echelon 1C in this league - the one thing that all contending teams have.

I mapped this out for 3 reasons. First, its a pretty easy illustration showing why the Rangers dont score goals. Secondly, as someone who gets accused of hating the team, it shows that I don't. I like 3/4's of the forwards. I do hate that nearly all of them are slotted above their heads in terms of their abilities by a GM that can't fill the important parts of a roster. And lastly, look at the draft picks. All sandwiched in the middle in 2nd/3rd line tweener territory. Its getting redundant.

Only 13 right wingers scored more goals than Callahan last season...... he is easily a second liner on a contender.

I don't think he is playing great this year, but when he is 100% he is without a doubt at least a second liner on a contender.... He had the same amount of points as Hossa who was the second line RW on the Stanley cup winning Blackhawks last season.

 

[Barnaby]

What I said at the time still stands...it was ridiculous to draft at #10 overall for a need, when the player was five years away from being a full-time NHL contributor and you didn't know what your needs will be in five years.

I concur.

However, the pick was made. The player is progressing well. It may not be the player that you or I wanted, but that doesn't mean it's a disaster. If this guy can become a top 4 d-man whose big and nasty, then suddenly it doesn't look like such a bad pick. I don't think that outcome is too far of a stretch either.

I'm not saying it's right, but I think that this pick was based largely on current need (even though he was a MINIMUM of 3 years away), and value. I say value in the sense that these big physical players like an Orpik, Komisarek (at the time) etc… were out signing huge free agent deals. If you wanted this type of player, then he either had to be drafted or highly overpaid. Again, not saying that I agree with this, but it was all probably part of the thinking process..

 

[Thirty One]

___ - ____ - Nash
Kreider - Stepan - ____
Hagelin - Brassard - Callahan
Boyle - Moore - Dorsett

Ah, yes. The idea that contending teams have lineups that are A+ in every spot.

Chicago's 2nd line center last year was Michal Handzus. Derek Stepan handily outscored all of Boston's centers. Pittsburgh won the Cup with maybe one winger better than Callahan or Hagelin. The Kings won the Cup getting 21 points out of their 3rd line center. The Flyers were two games away from the Cup with a third string goalie and no third defense pair.

And on. And on. And on. It would be nice if the Rangers had a lineup like the one you're sketching above. They don't. Nor does any other team.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Disagree...Hank getting run is no longer our biggest need. Hank is no longer getting run WITHOUT Mcilrath on the ice.

I think having a big, tough, defenseman goes beyond the goalie getting run.

Im not in love with the McIlrath pick and I think hes farther away than people think. I hope he even makes the NHL at this point. But panning that pick when you look at what else was available is kind of foolish. I don't think Tarasenko or Fowler would have helped much. Are they really difference makers?

 

[OverTheCap]

I've said it before, but I guess it bears repeating.

Callahan is a great special teams guy. Solid PKer and he's one of the best at deflecting goals in the crease on the PP.

However, at even strength he is mediocre, and unfortunately he hasn't had much chemistry with Stepan or Richards at ES. He has played well with guys that can forecheck and play a cycle game, for example, when he played with Dubi and Anisimov back in 2010-11. Putting him on the 3rd line doesn't mean that he sucks, it may actually put him in a more of a chance to succeed if he has the right linemates.

 

[Jersey Girl]

I think having a big, tough, defenseman goes beyond the goalie getting run.

Im not in love with the McIlrath pick and I think hes farther away than people think. I hope he even makes the NHL at this point. But panning that pick when you look at what else was available is kind of foolish. I don't think Tarasenko or Fowler would have helped much. Are they really difference makers?

Drafting guys that make the NHL >>>>> drafting guys who may never make the NHL. ESPECIALLY for a #10 overall draft pick.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Ah, yes. The idea that contending teams have lineups that are A+ in every spot.

Chicago's 2nd line center last year was Michal Handzus. Derek Stepan handily outscored all of Boston's centers. Pittsburgh won the Cup with maybe one winger better than Callahan or Hagelin. The Kings won the Cup getting 21 points out of their 3rd line center. The Flyers were two games away from the Cup with a third string goalie and no third defense pair.

And on. And on. And on. It would be nice if the Rangers had a lineup like the one you're sketching above. They don't. Nor does any other team.

Well it should come with the caveat that if that #1 center position ever got filled, you could put Ronald McDonald on the wing and be OK.

Putting 1 dynamic player on a line makes a world of difference. We have 1 of those, and hes got concussion problems and the baggage of being a Blue jacket for a decade.

 

[JimmyG89]

I agree, but prepare for a barrage of sarcasm. Actually I pretty much agree with this entire post. Spot on as usual BRB.

No sarcasm, but to me Cally Should Be On That 2nd line. Compliments those players extremely well. He is a top 6 player. He would be the 7th best forward if they can find 3 other guys to fill out that roster. Not easy to do. 2nd line RW with good offensive talent. Is there going to be first liners on the market for trade or free agency? Will those type of players be able to be signed based on our resigns and current commitments? Is there a player that will show and move into a top line spot? I don't see realistic options next season for this projection unless players take a jump (Stepan and Kreider) to become those players.

 

[Beacon]

The whining that we didn't draft the best player in each draft is pretty unbelievable. By this standard, no team ever does well because that's not possible to do on any kind of a consistent basis. We sometimes get a guy who turns out to be the BPA (e.g. Stepan), but it's just not something we can expect on a regular basis.

Also, the argument, "But I knew even back then that..." is stupid. Even the broken clock is right twice a day, so saying you knew something means nothing. For one, it's possible that you remember something that didn't really happen. For ex., there were 4 players you mentioned, 3 of whom went bust, but right now in your mind, you only remember the one that panned out. Two, even if you were perfectly on target, it's just one accurate shot that is based on nothing other than a scouting report in the THN or a few YouTube highlights. Like I said, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[JimmyG89]

Checking Capgee and there are RW options there, but are they better than Cally and are they not going to be resigned?

Iginla, hemsky, setoguci, Kulm in are the highlights for RW. Are they substantial upgrades to but Cally at 3rd line? Do we want to put our assets on 3 expensive RW?

Center is Thornton, Stastny, and not much else for top tier talent. Jumbo Joe after soft comments and at 34? Is Stastny a first line center?

Left wing? Big bucks on Vanek? Moulson? Cammy or oft injured Michalek?

Once again, how many will make it to free agency? Who do we want? How much will we have left to make signings? Not every player wants NYC. I think those lines and structure are not realistic.

 

[eco's bones]

When Chris Kreider was drafted it was pretty much known that he was not going to be an NHL player for a while. That there was a good chance that players picked after him would play in the NHL before him was part of the deal.

The same with Dylan McIlrath. Pretty much understood that he would need a few years before he made it. McIlrath and Kreider were both players that were going to need more time to develop than a good many of the players drafted around them.

I don't really give a rat's ass about Tarasenko or Fowler. They play for other teams. Kreider took his time but finally he's fitting the team and looking like a stud--his highest potential upside--legit 1st line LW looks within his reach. McIlrath has been making progress as well. I don't worry about him too much--a guy that big and nasty who can skate is going to play. He won't be like Fowler but what the hell. It takes all kinds to make a good defense.

Anyway to Fowler and Clark figuring DZ was going to be the Rangers point man. DZ had a fairly spectacular rookie season. There was no reason at that point in time not to think he was for real--37 points as a 19 year old rookie d-man--easy to project he'd be in the 50's now. It didn't happen but it's hindsight to say the Rangers ****ed up not taking Fowler because DZ's game was going to plateau by the time he hit 22.