Player Discussion Post Draft Discussion

[Matt Rentfree]

B-

9) Kravtsov - has the potential to be an excellent player. Personally I would have preferred one of Wahlstrom or Dobson, but I have no complaints about this pick.

22) Miller - not particularly happy with this pick or the trade up to take him. For a team that has needed forwards that are difference makers for I can't remember how long, I think we should have taken Bokk. Even if we did need to trade with the Leafs to get him, we probably could have gotten that deal done for 26+70 at most (assuming the Blues were still offering 76) and had our 48 to ameliorate the horrible pick at 39 so that the 2nd round wasn't a total abortion for us.

Miller is a super nice kid and I hope he makes it, but at this point we have more left handed D men than I can count, and while being an excellent athlete who is also smart is nice, I would have preferred not to take someone this raw.

28) Lundkvist - I like this pick a lot. I think he has the potential to turn into a Stralman type defender who could be a nice mid pairing guy for us in the future

39) Everyone has already said everything that needs to be said. Unless he turns into the next Lundqvist, management deserves to be ***** slapped for this idiotic pick.

70 and later - the only pick I actually watched was Ragnarsson and not all that much of him either, so I'm not going to comment on any of them - my grade of B- refers to the first 2 rounds anyway, though I do think the nepotism pick in the 6th round was a bit galling.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Truthfully, I'm not sure because I don't what moves were possible or not possible.

But, one has to wonder, if we swap Andersson, Kravtsov, Miller and Lindbom for Mittelstadt, Dobson, Bokk and Wilde over the last two years, what the opinion would be outside of our immediate community.

At the very least, it's an interesting question. And one that could very well pop up over the next year or two --- both in our favor, and not in our favor.

Fair on Middlestadt and Lindbom, the other two I don't believe would make a big difference.

Much as we are susceptible to group think within our Rangers circle here, I believe the same also occurs outside of our circle. You have a few knowledgeable people disseminating information to people who don't know a damn thing. While we may tend to swing too far one way, I think the external group will swing too far the other way.

 

[Off Sides]

I think in a couple years it will be interesting to see the hypothetical redrafts of these past two drafts.

While I'm leaning towards it probably not looking as good as it could have for the Rangers, I don't think they did bad.

I think it's probable they definitely hit on Chytil as being one of those prospects who should have been taken much earlier. I'm hoping there are more prospects added to that list as time goes by, but right now I wish I felt a little more comfortable in thinking that.

 

[Edge]

I think in a couple years it will be interesting to see the hypothetical redrafts of these past two drafts.

While I'm leaning towards it probably not looking as good as it could have for the Rangers, I don't think they did bad.

I think it's probable they definitely hit on Chytil as being one of those prospects who should have been taken much earlier. I'm hoping there are more prospects added to that list as time goes by, but right now I wish I felt a little more comfortable in thinking that.

I think it will be good, though I think there will be a little bit of, "Ugh, if only we had landeded that guy instead of..."

 

[offdacrossbar]

kravtsov miller and lundkvist as a whole are pretty solid.

those 3 all have solid + upside and all have tremendous skills.

having said that, i cant help but feel all 3 of those could have been passed and we would have had a more "consensus" draft.

wahlstrom
bokk
alexeyev

or

dobson
bokk
alexeyev

looks better to me and keeping that other 2nd rounder would have been nice. this sounds no worse and perhaps better.

oh and dont draft a goalie at 39

 

[Doctyl]

First round was A-/B+

Second round was an F. Absolutely ridiculous and completely inexcusable. This was a firable offense for our entire scouting department and seriously makes me question how well we did in the first round.

The rest was meh. C.

Overall C

 

[nyr2k2]

First round was A-/B+

Second round was an F. Absolutely ridiculous and completely inexcusable. This was a firable offense for our entire scouting department and seriously makes me question how well we did in the first round.

The rest was meh. C.

Overall C

From most indications, the guy seems to be a really good goalie prospect. A lot of people have praised the kid and said he was one of the very top handful of goalies in the class. So, I don't think it's a scouting issue. The issue would be (and those in line for a firing, which is over the top but I understand the sentiment) that those running the draft felt this was the appropriate time to grab the kid, even if he's a really nice prospect.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Veleno over Lundkvist...too funny.

People who seriously have Veleno over Lundkvist are only impressed because of the exceptional status.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I have a question for people who say they preferred Wahlstrom over Kravtsov. Can you explain why without using "BPA" or "draft ranking" as a reason?

 

[RangerBoy]

EJ Hradek was at the draft. He said the scouts he spoke to "are really high on Lundkvist". EJ really likes the Miller selection.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

I have a question for people who say they preferred Wahlstrom over Kravtsov. Can you explain why without using "BPA" or "draft ranking" as a reason?

See my post on the last page. Sample size and personal preference to draft a sniper which I have been "patiently" waiting on for 25 years.

Edit by last page I mean the Kravtsov thread, whoops.

 

[Inferno]

Pretty disappointed we didn't take veleno with the 9. I know @jas definitely agrees.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Pretty disappointed we didn't take veleno with the 9. I know @jas definitely agrees.

Bastid!!

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

See my post on the last page. Sample size and personal preference to draft a sniper which I have been "patiently" waiting on for 25 years.

Edit by last page I mean the Kravtsov thread, whoops.

Thanks! That's actually a good reason. And I can agree with that. The preference for a sniper, understandable. The sample size for Kravtsov, same. I actually brought that up in a conversation with Edge before the draft.

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/draft-and-udfa-thread-2017-18.2363041/page-426#post-147034733

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Thanks! That's actually a good reason. And I can agree with that. The preference for a sniper, understandable. The sample size for Kravtsov, same. I actually brought that up in a conversation with Edge before the draft.

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/draft-and-udfa-thread-2017-18.2363041/page-426#post-147034733

Yea I actually remember that. At the end of the day though I'm still super excited about VK, he has the potential to be elite for sure which was what I wanted at #9.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Yea I actually remember that. At the end of the day though I'm still super excited about VK, he has the potential to be elite for sure which was what I wanted at #9.

I am extremely happy because (and this is going to sound really selfish) I decided to fly all the way from Vienna to Dallas to attend the draft and the Rangers pick the player who I wanted. I've fallen in love with his play in the weeks leading up to the Olympics. I reluctantly accepted that Kotkaniemi was going at 3 and I stepped into the arena, and was sitting next to a guy from St Louis. We discussed who we wanted. We are on the clock, and he leans in asking "and?" to which I responded "I hope Kravtsov, but I think they go with Wahlstrom". And then they announce the pick.

Don't get me wrong, I would have been happy with Wahlstrom, but us going with the kid I have been following for months, the year I actually attend the draft, was just perfect. But I do not forget the reservations I had about him (sample size the biggest one, physical strength the other) but I can't escape the feeling that people always focus on the negatives with their own prospects, and only focus on the positives with other team's prospect. The "grass is always cleaner" thing.

One more thing I'd like to add. After pick 15, I started talking to the Blues fan about Bokk and how I wanted him at 26. Then we trade up to 22 and he goes "Bokk?" haha. We go with Miller, and then Toronto trades down with St Louis, I lean over and say "If you hear Vaxjo, it's Bokk" and damn. He goes home with a player I was hyping up for 20 minutes haha.

 

[Doctyl]

From most indications, the guy seems to be a really good goalie prospect. A lot of people have praised the kid and said he was one of the very top handful of goalies in the class. So, I don't think it's a scouting issue. The issue would be (and those in line for a firing, which is over the top but I understand the sentiment) that those running the draft felt this was the appropriate time to grab the kid, even if he's a really nice prospect.

He was the 5th ranked goalie in Europe. Wasting a 2nd round pick on a guy that would have been available in the 3rd or 4th round is an atrocity.

He has pretty mediocre number outside of the WJC. I don’t hate Lindbom, but I sure hate this pick. Ranking him as a 2nd round, 39th overall talent is absolutely a scouting issue.

 

[LeetchisGod]

I have a question for people who say they preferred Wahlstrom over Kravtsov. Can you explain why without using "BPA" or "draft ranking" as a reason?

Right handed snipers the caliber of Wahlstrom are rarer and more valuable. Particularly when this team has lacked one forever.

 

[nyr2k2]

He was the 5th ranked goalie in Europe. Wasting a 2nd round pick on a guy that would have been available in the 3rd or 4th round is an atrocity.

He has pretty mediocre number outside of the WJC. I don’t hate Lindbom, but I sure hate this pick. Ranking him as a 2nd round, 39th overall talent is absolutely a scouting issue.

I know CSS had him as the #5 goalie in Europe, I've mentioned it myself a number of times. But McKenzie for example had him as the #53 overall prospect in the draft and McKeen's had him at #91 overall. Pronman said he was a top-tier goalie prospect and some other lesser-known guys had him ranked much higher as well. You can't evaluate him on his number in the J20SE--that's just like looking at some guy in the Q and saying his numbers are mediocre, so he must not be that good. The teams and talent are disparate and goalies in those leagues usually end up either having unfairly poor numbers or vastly inflated numbers. If you evaluated him on his numbers he probably wouldn't be ranked.

Again, my point is that this isn't a scouting failure. It's just a general failure of the front office in taking him too early.

 

[duhmetreE]

To me, Kravstov will be similar to Kreider. In the sense that they both will drive the play. ( Yes, I know Kravy has a lot more playmaking ability, Kuznetsov would have been the better comparison )

Wahlstrom will be more along the lines of a Gaborik. Invisible until he's not.

I think Gorton chose based on 'styles'.

 

[Levitate]

I think in a couple years it will be interesting to see the hypothetical redrafts of these past two drafts.

While I'm leaning towards it probably not looking as good as it could have for the Rangers, I don't think they did bad.

I think it's probable they definitely hit on Chytil as being one of those prospects who should have been taken much earlier. I'm hoping there are more prospects added to that list as time goes by, but right now I wish I felt a little more comfortable in thinking that.

I think if they hit on Andersson being a "do it all in all situations competitive captain type of player who puts up 50 or more points" and Chytil as "big, dynamic center/winger" and Kravtsov as another "big dynamic winger" type, then we'll look at these drafts favorably in general in a few years. There's always guys you miss, no team drafts perfectly every year, but if those three guys form a big part of the Rangers top six going forward then they did well in these drafts. Hopefully we can all feel that they can be top line players in one way or another.

Also regarding Wahlstrom, I'm interested to see how Zibanejad does going forward. Big right handed shot that can score on the PP, he came close to putting up 30 goals last year. If he stays healthy next season and finally gets his breakout...it does relieve some of the pressure for a RH shot if a guy you currently have can post 30.

re: Lindbom, I think it's always good to keep the goalie pipeline stocked. What if Shesty only turns out to be "OK?" What if Wall and Huska are nothing special? What if Georgiev turns out to suck? Lundqvist retires and we're left with "OK" at best goaltending? Then Lindbom turns out to be better than OK?

I'm not a huge fan of taking a goalie that early but that doesn't mean the pick itself has no value. You need at least "good" goaltending to win in the NHL and we've been spoiled with Lundqvist for the past decade and a half or whatever it's been.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

re: Lindbom, I think it's always good to keep the goalie pipeline stocked. What if Shesty only turns out to be "OK?" What if Wall and Huska are nothing special? What if Georgiev turns out to suck? Lundqvist retires and we're left with "OK" at best goaltending? Then Lindbom turns out to be better than OK?

IF all of that happens you trade a 1st/2nd rounder for some team's currently blocked "top prospect". Or you sign a veteran UFA. Or you sign an NCAA UFA and let Allaire work his magic. The position just isn't valuable enough on the ice or the trade market. NYR track record with 2nd Rd tenders hasn't exactly been great recently either. Pretty much no way to spin this pick IMO.

 

[LeetchisGod]

IF all of that happens you trade a 1st/2nd rounder for some team's currently blocked "top prospect". Or you sign a veteran UFA. Or you sign an NCAA UFA and let Allaire work his magic. The position just isn't valuable enough on the ice or the trade market. NYR track record with 2nd Rd tenders hasn't exactly been great recently either. Pretty much no way to spin this pick IMO.

It's a bad sign if they have already soured on all the goalie prospects that they have drafted in the last few years. Either they are terrible at evaluating the position or goalie development is too volatile to predict with any certainty. In either scenario, spending another second round pick on a goalie is inexcusable.

 

[Ghost of jas]

IF all of that happens you trade a 1st/2nd rounder for some team's currently blocked "top prospect". Or you sign a veteran UFA. Or you sign an NCAA UFA and let Allaire work his magic. The position just isn't valuable enough on the ice or the trade market. NYR track record with 2nd Rd tenders hasn't exactly been great recently either. Pretty much no way to spin this pick IMO.

I'm probably about as positive about this draft as anyone here, and even I can find NO excuse for taking a goalie in the 2nd round. Get me a Jake Wise or Jacob Olofsson here, and I give this draft a solid 'A". I HATE taking goalies before the 4th round.

 

[nyr2k2]

It's a bad sign if they have already soured on all the goalie prospects that they have drafted in the last few years. Either they are terrible at evaluating the position or goalie development is too volatile to predict with any certainty. In either scenario, spending another second round pick on a goalie is inexcusable.

I don't think they've soured on any of the guys and I definitely don't think they're terrible at evaluating the position. They pulled Georgiev out of nowhere and he looks really promising. Shesterkin wasn't a super-popular pick and yet he's now regarded as one of the top two or three goaltending prospects in the game. Talbot was a nothing that they picked up and turned into something. Huska was a late pick with good upside that has shown a lot of talent. Even if you extend it to non-prospects, they did great in finding Raanta and even Pavelec had a better-than-normal year while here. They're definitely identifying good players. They have some misses, too, but such is the nature of the position.

As for souring on them, I just can't see how that's the case. I think it's more a matter of the fact that goalies are hard to project. You could also have a situation where Hank finally retires, Shesterkin has decided to stay in Russia (unlikely, but still, not theoretically impossible), Huska busted, and then you're left with Georgiev--assuming he's even around. You have to continually keep adding to the cupboard with goaltenders because of their unpredictable development curves.

Again, I think the kid Lindbom went two rounds too early. I'm not defending where he was picked. But, I don't think the fact that he was picked is any reflection of how the team views its current goalies, or how the team evaluates goaltending talent. It might be indicative of an overvaluation of the position, but that's something different entirely. And lastly, I do think that the team is showing it wants to build from the net out--great goaltending, great defense, great forwards. In that order. I think that's why we keep adding goalies and defensemen.