Prospect Info: Rangers Prospect Poll: #24 TIEBREAKER
- Thread starter Beacon
- Start date
eco's bones
Registered User
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Halverson sucks. He won dozens of games straight games for a dominant Junior team and people read a report that said that he has great stickhandling skills, so let's address both.
1) When his team was winning every game, his GAA and SV% were still pretty average. Playing behind a bad team you face broken down defensive plays results in fast breaks, up close shots, etc. Playing behind a dominant team, you tend to face almost exclusively bad angle, easy shots. Since the NHL has so much parity, you don't see it there very much (just as you do not see NHL teams win dozens of games in a row), but you certainly see it at lower levels. Halverson should've had amazing stats behind such a strong team, and when he did not, I predicted correctly that he will be in the ECHL. Next season he stayed in the Juniors and behind a more average team, he put up terrible stats for a guy in his final year of eligibility. In his rookie pro season, he hit 3.43 and 0.897%, which only came as a surprise if you didn't know how to analyze what he did in the Juniors.
2) He has amazing stickhandling abilities. Fine. How did he slip to the end of round 2 then? If two players are equal at stopping the puck and one has better stickhandling, he goes higher, right? If they go the same, which one is better at stopping the puck? Basic logic here. Now, if I have to choose between stickhandling and stopping the puck, which skill do you think I should go for? So from the minute he was drafted, I didn't like this pick because it means we sacrificed a necessary skill for a nice, but unnecessary bonus. We've had plenty of goalies who can't handle the puck who were great (Lundqvist, even more so Richter), but if you can't catch the puck, stickhandling won't help you much. As the years went by, this analysis was proven accurate.
3) Other than quitting late last season in disgust because the Pack sucked so bad, I've been watching most Hartford games for years. Anyone who reads the Pack thread knows this, as I give info (play by play, instant injury updates, etc) about the Pack not available anywhere unless you're watching the game. Halverson is bad. He does not have NHL starter potential. Maybe if he works on his game a ton, he can make a career for himself as an NHL backup, which would make him a millionaire, but having a dime-a-dozen backup means nothing to us.
1) When his team was winning every game, his GAA and SV% were still pretty average. Playing behind a bad team you face broken down defensive plays results in fast breaks, up close shots, etc. Playing behind a dominant team, you tend to face almost exclusively bad angle, easy shots. Since the NHL has so much parity, you don't see it there very much (just as you do not see NHL teams win dozens of games in a row), but you certainly see it at lower levels. Halverson should've had amazing stats behind such a strong team, and when he did not, I predicted correctly that he will be in the ECHL. Next season he stayed in the Juniors and behind a more average team, he put up terrible stats for a guy in his final year of eligibility. In his rookie pro season, he hit 3.43 and 0.897%, which only came as a surprise if you didn't know how to analyze what he did in the Juniors.
2) He has amazing stickhandling abilities. Fine. How did he slip to the end of round 2 then? If two players are equal at stopping the puck and one has better stickhandling, he goes higher, right? If they go the same, which one is better at stopping the puck? Basic logic here. Now, if I have to choose between stickhandling and stopping the puck, which skill do you think I should go for? So from the minute he was drafted, I didn't like this pick because it means we sacrificed a necessary skill for a nice, but unnecessary bonus. We've had plenty of goalies who can't handle the puck who were great (Lundqvist, even more so Richter), but if you can't catch the puck, stickhandling won't help you much. As the years went by, this analysis was proven accurate.
3) Other than quitting late last season in disgust because the Pack sucked so bad, I've been watching most Hartford games for years. Anyone who reads the Pack thread knows this, as I give info (play by play, instant injury updates, etc) about the Pack not available anywhere unless you're watching the game. Halverson is bad. He does not have NHL starter potential. Maybe if he works on his game a ton, he can make a career for himself as an NHL backup, which would make him a millionaire, but having a dime-a-dozen backup means nothing to us.
Don't want either here, have them plenty further down...
But i'm going with Crawley because i've never really been impressed by Halverson.
But i'm going with Crawley because i've never really been impressed by Halverson.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
eco's bones
Registered User
LOL at some of this ****. We're talking about our #24 prospect. They're both long shots and I have to say it's conceivable that Halverson some day is good enough to be an NHL backup. Crawley's at best a 6-7 stay at home D. Even so it's knuckle headed to be so pissed off about someone choosing one over the other.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Crawley is young enough to be better than a 6/7 D. There's no way the Rangers would've wasted a pick on someone whose ceiling is that low. Halverson's ceiling is as a backup and even that is unlikely. Either way, a third pair defenseman has more value than a backup goalie.
eco's bones
Registered User
Halverson's like a year older than Crawley. It ain't a big deal. A good backup goalie like Raanta for instance is worth more than your average 5-6 defenseman. Halverson had a disappointing rookie pro year. Crawley got passed by in two successive drafts. They both have their work cut out for them. The way I look at Crawley is he'll be the stay at home guy on a third pairing adding a bit of physical play--that's if he makes it and it's kind of a large if. His upside is Brandon Manning. He's not going to be a prime puck mover so he'll accentuate his value if he starts fighting more.
Pavel Buchnevich
"Pavel Buchnevich The Fake"
Matz03
Registered User
Halverson is way down on my list after his rookie pro season, I do not like goalies that regularly get beat by clear sighted shots. But lets not forget he's just 21, was good enough to represent US in U20s, granted as a backup. The Rangers did use a 2nd round pick on him, so it's not like he doesn't have the tool set. We always talk about how Allaire making bad goalies good, Raanta was 27 when he put his game together? Halverson is just 21 and gets to work with Allaire too.
My pick here is Crawley, shinny new toy
My pick here is Crawley, shinny new toy
Lays
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2017
- 13,558
- 12,637
