Player Discussion Post Draft Discussion

[Gardner McKay]

Continue.

Click to read more...

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

If we would have picked Bokk over Miller and Lauko over Lindbom, I would probably give this draft an A overall.

Now, I have to go with B

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

The first round is an A+.

2-7 is a C- IMO. But, I just love what we did in the first round, so the second day mehness doesn’t affect the overall score too much in my book.

Not only is Kravstov a stud prospect, but he is electrifying to watch; I hope he can be at training camp and get a few preseason games.

 

[defjux41]

Even though I wanted Wahlstrom, I have no issue overall with Kravstov. Miller and Lundkvist were solid picks as well.

However, they totally botched Day 2. It was really disappointing to see.

So overall it just depends on how much you value the 1st round over the rest of the draft. I'll give it a B, but it should've been so much better.

 

[Neilstrong218]

A+

 

[Ori]

Yes, a B for me - maybe I sound worse in my brief comments about it, but I also like part of the draft which end up with a solid B.
I also enjoy Vitali pick and Nils prospects, Miller might develop well too in some years you never really know about future prospects - suddenly they can blossom out from nowhere!

 

[Edge]

I'd give it a B-plus.

Lots of potential, some pretty bold moves, but also a higher degree of risk.

I also think this one is going to take a little longer to accurately assess.

 

[Lion Hound]

I very generously gave them a B-. They proved last year they knew the players they reached for were solid picks. This year i hope the same.

 

[Off Sides]

They get a C from me.

I think they would have done just as well if not better had they gone auto draft based on where the prospects were more or less ranked pre-draft.

Does not mean I do not like some of their picks, in fact I like the first three they made even if I would have selected different players.

 

[Ail]

Based on the potential of what it could have been, C. First round was an A-. Second was an F, and the fact they couldn't find a deal to acquire another first or second rounder on top of an over-payment to draft Miller made it difficult for me to say they did a great job overall. Can't hang the lack of a deal on them completely, but the fact that Hayes/Names/Spooner/Zucc are still Rangers post draft is disappointing. Adding another late first or second for one of them would have been nice since this draft is supposedly pretty deep within the first 2 rounds.

At the end of the day if any of those first 3 picks hit, it's still a win, but I really didn't feel like they came out of this with the most bang for their buck. Hopefully I am wrong.

Based on the selections B overall, the goalie in the second after giving up a second is my only real gripe.

 

[Ori]

One of those players might still be moved before this summer window is over @Ail. It`s not easy to create a big name deals before the draft like in summer of 2017 - it happens in more rare circumstances. I`m not happy with all the first round picks, but it was obvious a difficult decision for our staff.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

They get a C from me.

I think they would have done just as well if not better had they gone auto draft based on where the prospects were more or less ranked pre-draft.

Does not mean I do not like some of their picks, in fact I like the first three they made even if I would have selected different players.

I think our first round was good enough to have the grade drop no lower than a B

 

[Ratelleitlikeitis]

I gave us a C+ based on acquired quality, reaches and lack of movement of resources. quick question...if Kravs is playing KHL does he stay there or play in the Traverse City rookie tourney and then attend training camp? Who has that call?

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I gave us a C+ based on acquired quality, reaches and lack of movement of resources. quick question...if Kravs is playing KHL does he stay there or play in the Traverse City rookie tourney and then attend training camp? Who has that call?

He won't play in Traverse, because the KHL pre-season started by then already. He's signed for one more year and will be flying back after prospect development camp (unless Kravtsov can come to an agreement for mutual contract termination)

 

[Off Sides]

I think our first round was good enough to have the grade drop no lower than a B

I don't think they did any better than they could have. I can't give them a higher grade just because they had more picks going in.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Veleno over Lundkvist...too funny.

 

[JT Kreider]

Lindbom brings it down to AV levels of incompetence. Just another atrocious pick in a string of atrocious 2nd round picks.

I really have no other reason to believe otherwise that it wasn't a huge gamble we couldn't afford to make.

Plus we got worked over by Pierre Dorion of all people in the trade up. The Senators have been a laughing stock since the season ended and this was the one positive thing they've done this off-season.

You don't get an A for hitting on 9th overall. That simply is the minimum requirement of doing your job. You best be coming away with a high impact player at 9.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Basically wrote a long post on this already, but overall give it a B-.

They went for it in R1 which on the one hand I really give them credit for. I like all three prospects a good deal. But passing on Wahlstrom and moving #48 leave too much of a sour aftertaste. Overall though I could see the potential of R1 overcoming the shortcomings and give it a B+.

R2-7 was just baffling. R2 was incredibly deep this year and the NYR completely botched it. Even if they get a competent starter and not LaFleur/Halverson the value just isn’t close to being there IMO.

Agree wholeheartedly that this draft should determine the future of Gordie. A lot of very bold moves, which has been a pattern of this staff. So much potential due to the load of picks, and very little sticking to consensus. He better be right.

 

[Edge]

I think the Rangers did better than some are giving them credit for, but I also think there's a general feeling that they didn't quite hit it our of the park either.

Around the sport I think you're seeing people not necessarily dislike the picks, but feel that the value of the picks is probably on the lower side.

I think people expected a draft like Vegas had last year, and in reality the prevailing opinion outside of this board is that the honor probably belongs to the Wings or Islanders.

We can disagree with that to our heart's content, but right now I think this board is probably more of the outlier than the consensus. Just keep that in mind if you're wondering why some of the draft grades are coming back and you're not really seeing a lot of A grades.

 

[Off Sides]

I think the Rangers did better than some are giving them credit for, but I also think there's a general feeling that they didn't quite hit it our of the park either.

Around the sport I think you're seeing people not necessarily dislike the picks, but feel that the value of the picks is probably on the lower side.

I think people expected a draft like Vegas had last year, and in reality the prevailing opinion outside of this board is that the honor probably belongs to the Wings or Islanders.

We can disagree with that to our heart's content, but right now I think this board is probably more of the outlier than the consensus. Just keep that in mind if you're wondering why some of the draft grades are coming back and you're not really seeing a lot of A grades.

As much as it pains me to say, I would have rather had the Islanders and Wings drafts. They just took whoever fell to them and I really think that draft strategy pays off, maybe not in one draft but more so over several drafts that sort of strategy is going to pay off more so as it's kind of just creating the best odds.

 

[offdacrossbar]

anything other than an overall low B is denial.

kravtsov over wahlstrom is a push. i like the russians overall ceiling more but ollie would look good in a rangers sweater too. damn that shot of his would have been sweet. im torn here. noah dobson would have been a solid play too. A-

miller after moving up to 22 for a 2nd. again, hard to say but i would give this a B. moving up cost was steep imo. he's got ENORMOUS upside. perhaps as much has anyone in the draft. this is a solid play at 22. his boom is huge but his bust potential is there as well. i like this pick and i like this kids overall package.

lundkvist wasnt my favorite pick. i like others better not gonna lie. seems we we're locked in on swedes. draft all the swedes. he's super skilled and skates great so he fits the bill. i think he's got a chance to be a very good offensive dman. i give this choice a B

first day i have to go with a solid B/B+

day 2 after pick 39 was a blurrrr. FAIL. day 2 FAIL. overall day 2 score D

 

[Thordic]

Solid first round, BUT as much as I think Miller is a good pick I think they could have gotten a good player by standing pat and used both their second rounders. But Miller and Bokk would have both been gone by 26 it appears, so maybe they did make the right move. I'll give them a pass. Day 2 is a little more questionable.

If Ragnarsson makes the team, even for one game, I'm buying that jersey though.

 

[mas0764]

I think the Rangers did better than some are giving them credit for, but I also think there's a general feeling that they didn't quite hit it our of the park either.

Around the sport I think you're seeing people not necessarily dislike the picks, but feel that the value of the picks is probably on the lower side.

I think people expected a draft like Vegas had last year, and in reality the prevailing opinion outside of this board is that the honor probably belongs to the Wings or Islanders.

We can disagree with that to our heart's content, but right now I think this board is probably more of the outlier than the consensus. Just keep that in mind if you're wondering why some of the draft grades are coming back and you're not really seeing a lot of A grades.

I think it revolves heavily around the fact that people realize that dynamic forwards win in hockey these days; and not only are the Rangers short on dynamic forwards, but we also kinda have a lot of defensive talent in the pipeline in Hajek, Lindgren, Rykov, ADA, Pionk, all young players with room to grow and become starters.

People were both hoping, and expecting (with a good amount of reasonableness) that the Rangers would come away from the first 3 rounds, in which they had 7 picks, with multiple impact forwards and maybe some steals as they had prime picks in the second and third.

Instead, the Rangers came away with one forward of any note, and while a very good prospect, he projects as maybe more of a long term development (which I'm ok with, but disappointed that that is all we got).

At the end of the day, if the simple fact is that the Rangers didn't like the forward prospects of the second/early third rounds, like McLeod, Wise, Morozov, Hallinder, Akil Thomas, then it is what it is, but sitting back and taking defenseman after defenseman at less than consensus "value" was very underwhelming.

I think people would have been a lot more satisfied if the team had packaged 26 and 28, frankly, and tried to get up for Farabee or Kaut or something like that (not that I'm saying I know any of those were necessarily available), and then sat back in the second and took your defenders there.

In retrospect, especially if you are taking Kravtsov over Wahlstrom, I would have been a lot happier in the instant moment with a trade of 26, 28, and 88, for example, for 13 with Dallas, or 15 with Florida, two teams rumored to be looking to trade, and then maybe also a trade of 70 and 163 for 63 with Vancouver, and then have a draft haul of:

9) Kravtsov
13 Farabee or 15) Kaut
39) Wilde
48) Tychonik/Addison
68) Wise
101) Gross
132) Pajuniemi
216) Hughes

Again, not saying it was possible. No idea. But something like this would have satisfied a lot more people I bet. I just get the sense that what they decided to do was not ever gonna make people happy given the impact they were kinda expecting.

 

[Polar Bear]

Draft grades are dump and pointless, whether after a perceived positive or negative draft.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

I think it revolves heavily around the fact that people realize that dynamic forwards win in hockey these days; and not only are the Rangers short on dynamic forwards, but we also kinda have a lot of defensive talent in the pipeline in Hajek, Lindgren, Rykov, ADA, Pionk, all young players with room to grow and become starters.

People were both hoping, and expecting (with a good amount of reasonableness) that the Rangers would come away from the first 3 rounds, in which they had 7 picks, with multiple impact forwards and maybe some steals as they had prime picks in the second and third.

Instead, the Rangers came away with one forward of any note, and while a very good prospect, he projects as maybe more of a long term development (which I'm ok with, but disappointed that that is all we got).

At the end of the day, if the simple fact is that the Rangers didn't like the forward prospects of the second/early third rounds, like McLeod, Wise, Morozov, Hallinder, Akil Thomas, then it is what it is, but sitting back and taking defenseman after defenseman at less than consensus "value" was very underwhelming.

I think people would have been a lot more satisfied if the team had packaged 26 and 28, frankly, and tried to get up for Farabee or Kaut or something like that (not that I'm saying I know any of those were necessarily available), and then sat back in the second and took your defenders there.

In retrospect, especially if you are taking Kravtsov over Wahlstrom, I would have been a lot happier in the instant moment with a trade of 26, 28, and 88, for example, for 13 with Dallas, or 15 with Florida, two teams rumored to be looking to trade, and then maybe also a trade of 70 and 163 for 63 with Vancouver, and then have a draft haul of:

9) Kravtsov
13 Farabee or 15) Kaut
39) Wilde
48) Tychonik/Addison
68) Wise
101) Gross
132) Pajuniemi
216) Hughes

Again, not saying it was possible. No idea. But something like this would have satisfied a lot more people I bet. I just get the sense that what they decided to do was not ever gonna make people happy given the impact they were kinda expecting.

Very well said overall and spot on RE expectations. Obviously we have no idea if such a trade up was possible. But to leave this draft with one potential impact F (albeit a good one) is pretty damn disappointing especially given the state of the prospect pool.