Is our Prospect Pool that Bad?

[haveandare]

I'd guess that the Oilers were at the top of these lists for the past few years.

A lot of good it's done them.

These are prospect popularity contests to a large degree.

Our pool isn't the tops in the league by any means, but as Beacon pointed out, there are a lot of options for each tier of player. The odds are that we get numerous solid pieces from this current group.

 

[JCrusher*]

I'd guess that the Oilers were at the top of these lists for the past few years.

A lot of good it's done them.

These are prospect popularity contests to a large degree.

Our pool isn't the tops in the league by any means, but as Beacon pointed out, there are a lot of options for each tier of player. The odds are that we get numerous solid pieces from this current group.

agreed, the oilers have been rebuilding for like a decade lol

 

[Jersey Girl]

I'd guess that the Oilers were at the top of these lists for the past few years.

A lot of good it's done them.

To be fair, the Kings, Blackhawks and Blues have also been high on prospect lists the last number of years, and it has done them some good.

That said, these rankings are very subjective - for those of you who are college football fans, Alabama, Ohio State and Texas are always in or near the top five in recruiting class rankings, and while that's worked out well for Alabama and Ohio State, it has not recently translated into wins for Texas.

It will be much more important to see how our current group of prospects is doing in the NHL five years from now, than where they're ranked before they even plan an NHL game.

To be honest I am a little worried about what our prospect system will look like 3-5 years from now, when three years of no first round draft picks (last year, this year, and next year) will begin to affect our prospect system.

Hopefully by then good 'ol #10 overall will be making an NHL impact.

 

[Tawnos]

To be honest I am a little worried about what our prospect system will look like 3-5 years from now, when three years of no first round draft picks (last year, this year, and next year) will begin to affect our prospect system.

We will see. From the first year of that stretch, we have one and possibly two players who should be ranked top 30 from their draft class after just one season. Duclair top 30. Buchnevich top 60 easily. If we pulled similar value out of this past draft, it will go a long way to mitigating the first round pick issue. Even then, every team has had dud years where nothing comes out. One year isn't a huge deal. Two years could be.

 

[Zil]

We will see. From the first year of that stretch, we have one and possibly two players who should be ranked top 30 from their draft class after just one season. Duclair top 30. Buchnevich top 60 easily. If we pulled similar value out of this past draft, it will go a long way to mitigating the first round pick issue. Even then, every team has had dud years where nothing comes out. One year isn't a huge deal. Two years could be.

Our 2013 draft looks fantastic against all odds, but that's not something you should expect to see multiple times. I don't dislike our 2014 draft, but none of the guys we took have the ceiling of a Duclair or a Buchnevich. If Iverson or Nejezchleb proves to be a solid third liner that's a win. If any of Mantha, Walcott, or Nanne proves to be a solid third pairing guy with some offensive punch that's a win. We may or may not have drafted Lundqvist's successor, but that's way down the line. If any of the skaters we took in 2014 prove to be second line or second pairing material it will be absolutely stunning.

 

[Cassano]

Well Pronman's articles aren't biblical. He can be wrong. And very often is wrong.

They have had 6 1sts or 2nds in the last four years. That's about normal. They kept their first every year except 2013 which was traded in the Carter deal. That's the key, they still have their shiny 1st round picks, which are much higher regarded than an accomplished lower-drafted player.

If the Rangers had 1sts these last two years, 80% chance they'd be ranked above LA. But it doesn't matter.

Eh the rangers have had 4 1sts/2nds, not that much of a difference to account 6 prospects on Pronmans list vs 1 from the rangers.

Also fasching would probably be on Pronmans list too, but he was traded for a 2nd.

It's possible to draft well without top picks, kings and testament to that. Rangers too, but probably to a lesser extent.

 

[Mikos87]

There aren't any frontline players in the farm system, or high upside guys that crack people's top 50 lists.

It's a by product of not having 1st round picks, or drafting high in the 1st. There is nothing wrong with this. The Rangers farm system now reminds me of Detroit's in a way since they never really had first rounders but had a lot of young players they cooked for a long time that came up on bottom line roles.

You then had the occasional late round gem every couple of years. Recently its Nyquist for them... the cycle a decade earlier brought Datsyuk and Zetterberg.

Not saying the Rangers are as good, but there isn't a lot of name players or prospects out there.

Besides the Rangers have done a tremendous job of drafting and/or developing. A lot of those guys aren't with the team anymore... Dubinsky, Anisimov, Callahan, Sauer, Weiss, Korpikoski, Montoya.

You still have guys that play on the Rangers, Zuccarello, Kreider, Stepan, Girardi, Staal, Lundqvist, Hagelin.

So where the prospect rankings are really doesn't matter to me.

 

[Raspewtin]

Eh the rangers have had 4 1sts/2nds, not that much of a difference to account 6 prospects on Pronmans list vs 1 from the rangers.

Also fasching would probably be on Pronmans list too, but he was traded for a 2nd.

It's possible to draft well without top picks, kings and testament to that. Rangers too, but probably to a lesser extent.

And Brayden McNabb. The Kings definitely needed him more than Fasching.

The Kings do draft well, it's not as if I am discrediting them, I think the Rangers draft well too. But what high end talent do the Kings have in their system? I can't think of anybody except maybe McNabb and Zykov as blue chippers. And that is the usual complaint, that we can't pull high end talent out of thin air.

And the Kings have had plenty of high picks critical to their success. Kopitar was 11th OA, Doughty 2nd OA, they traded 5th OA Brayden Schenn for Mike Richards, they traded 3rd OA Jack Johnson for Jeff Carter, Brown was 12th OA. They have plenty of high picks that are responsible for their team being great. If you meant the Kings can remain competitive and still draft very well, then I agree.

 

[Raspewtin]

There aren't any frontline players in the farm system, or high upside guys that crack people's top 50 lists.

It's a by product of not having 1st round picks, or drafting high in the 1st. There is nothing wrong with this. The Rangers farm system now reminds me of Detroit's in a way since they never really had first rounders but had a lot of young players they cooked for a long time that came up on bottom line roles.

This this and this.

Sexy names and sexy draft pedigrees are what the Rangers' farm lacks. Not good players. That's a large reason why you don't see a lot of rankings like Pronman's being good to us. Pronman has a mancrush on Buchnevich and was shocked he fell so low to the Rangers, only reason he's in the top 100. There aren't 100 drafted prospects that are better than Duclair. If he was drafted in the top 40, he's on the list, guaranteed.

 

[Raspewtin]

Our 2013 draft looks fantastic against all odds, but that's not something you should expect to see multiple times. I don't dislike our 2014 draft, but none of the guys we took have the ceiling of a Duclair or a Buchnevich. If Iverson or Nejezchleb proves to be a solid third liner that's a win. If any of Mantha, Walcott, or Nanne proves to be a solid third pairing guy with some offensive punch that's a win. We may or may not have drafted Lundqvist's successor, but that's way down the line. If any of the skaters we took in 2014 prove to be second line or second pairing material it will be absolutely stunning.

I actually really like the 2014 draft for this reason.

We went HRHR last year with all three of our 3rd rounders. Every pick this year was one in an area of weakness. OFD-Nanne and Walcott, Goaltender-Halverson and Shesterkin, Body banger types-Nejezchleb and Iverson. A big issue with our system recently is there's no diversity. It's all the same kind of players. This draft sucked, I don't think they missed out on any much better players. Though I'm surprised no one gave Tkachev a chance.

 

[Zil]

Yeah, I'm not complaining. Our 2014 picks are solid. Talents like Duclair and Buchnevich aren't supposed to drop to where we nabbed them. It was the happiest of accidents and it may end up covering for some of the firsts we dealt away.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

We are without a doubt in the top 30 of the NHL.

 

[Machinehead]

We are without a doubt in the top 30 of the NHL.

That's pretty good. There's probably several Swedish teams with better farms than San Jose and Vancouver.

 

[Savant]

The Rangers continue their MO of being able to pump out quality d-men and 2nd/3rd line forwards. Fast, Miller, Lindberg, Duclair, Buchnevich, Kristo all look to be in that forward mold. Possibly Bourque, Haggerty and Tambellini can continue to progress. McIlrath, Skjei and Allen all look to have NHL futures

The Rangers strategy has been hitting single and doubles instead of striking out trying to hit a home run. Considering they have been drafting later 1st, its a sound strategy.

 

[AHB*]

The Rangers strategy has been hitting single and doubles instead of striking out trying to hit a home run. Considering they have been drafting later 1st, its a sound strategy.

I don't know about that. Guys like MSC, Duclair, etc are somewhat home run picks just in the later rounds. I'd even include players like Buchnevich and formerly Grachev and obviously Cherry as well.

Honestly, I'd even classify McIlrath in the way they viewed him as a type of home run selection.

 

[Beacon]

Kreider was also a homerun pick. He was a first rounder too, so we've done it early (Kreider, Cherry, MDZ, Sanguinetti), mid-tier (Thomas, Butcher, Duke, St. Croix, Grachev) and late (Hagelin, Horak, Fast, McColgan). We even signed some (MZA, Gilroy).

Our batting average with them is very good considering the general percentages of players chosen in similar draft spots.

Too bad we didn't get any homerun picks this year. I like them a lot because if they make it, it changes the team.

 

[chosen]

The prospect pool is less important than the situation that the Rangers window for winning a Cup is currently open. Those openings tend to not last more than three seasons.

 

[Beacon]

The prospect pool is less important than the situation that the Rangers window for winning a Cup is currently open. Those openings tend to not last more than three seasons.

This.

As much as I focus on prospects, maybe more than anyone else on this forum, we need to go all out to win the Cup. Our window ends when Lundqvist starts to slow down. If we need to deal away Miller, Fast, McIlrath, Skjei, Duke, Butcher to win the Cup, so be it.

 

[nyr2k2]

Kreider was also a homerun pick. He was a first rounder too, so we've done it early (Kreider, Cherry, MDZ, Sanguinetti), mid-tier (Thomas, Butcher, Duke, St. Croix, Grachev) and late (Hagelin, Horak, Fast, McColgan). We even signed some MZA, Gilroy).

Our batting average with them is very good considering the general percentages of players chosen in similar draft spots.

Too bad we didn't get any homerun picks this year. I like them a lot because if they make it, it changes the team.

I would say a guy like Walcott is in that mold.

 

[Raspewtin]

Something to remember when reading lists like Pronman's.

Teams with the best prospects =/= Teams with the best future.

 

[The Sweetness]

Our prospect pool is pretty horrible IMO.

However, on the flip side we have a fairly young core to our team even though we've got a bit older adding St Louis. Players like Stepan, McDonaugh, Kreider, Zuccarelo, Hagelin, Brassard and Staal are all 27 years old or younger so they should be able to play for a while.

It would certainly help though if Buchnevich and/or Duclair would pan out because a lot of our core guys came from late round picks in prior drafts and we are certainly not getting many key pieces from our 1st rounders (or lack thereof).

 

[RangerBlues]

Prospect pool is fine. Just not as glamorous as others.
As long as you can develop the interchangeable parts and depth to fill in, the franchise will be fine.
If you are integrating one player a season in your lineup where the Rangers are they will compete just fine for years to come.
Having high flashy picks does not guarantee success.