Rangers Prospect Poll (Summer 2018): #3 Prospect

[The Crypto Guy]

Ranger's Summer 2018 Prospect Poll
1. Filip Chytil, F (2017 Draft - 1st round)
2. Igor Shestyorkin, G (2014 Draft - 4th round)

*Anthony DeAngelo played 6 too many NHL games is no longer eligible*

--------------------------​

Added: Neal Poink, D


Please post who you want added, eligible prospects that can be add: (thank you @nyr2k2 for the list):

Barron, Morgan C/L
Bernhardt, Daniel LW/L
Bigras, Chris D/L
Crawley, Brandon D/L
Day, Sean D/L
Fogarty, Steven D/L
Fontaine, Gabriel C/L
Georgiev, Alexandar G/L
Gettinger, Tim LW/L
Gilmour, John D/L
Gropp, Ryan LW/L
Gross, Nico D/L
Halverson, Brandon G/L
Hughes, Riley RW/R
Huska, Adam G/L
Keane, Joey D/R
Kjellberg, Simon LW/L
Lakatos, Dominik C/L
Leedahl, Dawson LW/L
Lettieri, Vinni C/R
Lindbom, Olof G/L
Lindgren, Ryan D/L
Lindqvist, Michael RW/R
Lundkvist, Nils D/R
Meskanen, Ville RW/R
Nanne, Tyler D-F/R
Nell, Chris G/L
Nieves, Boo C/L
O'Gara, Rob D/L
Pajuniemi, Lauri RW/R
Pedrie, Vince D/L
Ragnarsson, Jacob D/L
Reunanen, Tarmo D/L
Ronning, Tyler RW/R
Rykov, Yegor D/L
Sjalin, Calle D/L
Virta, Patrik C/R
Wall, Tyler G/L

Click to read more...

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Add Lundkvist

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Krafty. Add Lundkvist.

 

[Matt Rentfree]

Lias add Lundkvist

 

[Don Chytil]

Lias, add Lundkvist

 

[Harbour Dog]

Lias, add Lundkvist.

 

[nyr2k2]

Andersson, Lindgren.

 

[Unusual Suspect]

Add Georgiev.

 

[Edge]

This is where it gets interesting for me.

I went with Andersson and I'll explain why.

What Andersson did last year was in extremely rare company. I believe he played more than 100 games in a one year span, in no less than three leagues, several tournaments, in several countries.

He played against men and more than held his own as a teenager, and produced at a great pace in one of the few windows he played against his actual peers. He not only represented his country several different times, he was selected to captain his WJC teammates.

He didn't just ride shotgun to a guy like Pettersson, he actually helped raise his game and served as the motor for Sweden.

This kid did it all, and he scored against his contemporaries. I mention that last part mainly because everyone keeps talking about the production of other players from the 2017 draft, and Andersson was playing a whole different tier of competition.

Does he have a higher offensive ceiling than Chytil or Kravtsov? No, he does not. But his offensive potential continues to be undervalued. He's arguably the most well rounded forward prospect we have, though sometimes I think that almost causes us to overlook the production he's shown when competing in his actual age group.

Like Chytil, what he's done over the last 12-15 months is in pretty rare company. Right now, he gets my vote for not only his potential, but also for his track record --- something I don't think we can overlook.

We love potential. We love the shiny new toy. But this kid had a top-notch D-1 season and has been routinely ranked as one of the top tier prospects in hockey since being drafted.

He's not flashy, but he's effective and he gets results.

And I will very much beat this dead horse again: on Thursday, June 21, this board would not have voted to trade Andersson for Kravtsov. Just because the latter went 9th and is now a Ranger, that doesn't change. Though I freely admit that Kravtsov is unquestionably my fourth.

Kravtsov could be the better prospect at some point, but that is not right now. Not until we actually see where he does in his D-1 season, because Andersson's is close to good as you can ask for. The only reason we're not talking about it more is because Chytil made some amazing noise in the AHL at barely 18 years of age.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Andersson. Kravtsov has the higher upside, but Lias is a lot closer. Add Lundkvist.

 

[EpicDing]

Kravtsov, add Lundkvist

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Super close between Kravsy and Andersson. I have to go with upside, though. Kravsy, here.

Add Lundkvist.

 

[Polar Bear]

Kravstov, add Lundkvist.

 

[Edge]

I think it's safe to say we won't need a vote for our 4th prospect.

 

[eco's bones]

Super close between Kravsy and Andersson. I have to go with upside, though. Kravsy, here.

Add Lundkvist.

I thought the same....though with the caveat that Lias could easily turn into the leader of this team in 3 or 4 years. Kravtsov though more likely IMO to become a legit 1st line player.

Add Georgiev.

 

[CTRanger]

Andersson

add Lundkvist

 

[kovazub94]

Super close between Kravsy and Andersson. I have to go with upside, though. Kravsy, here.

Add Lundkvist.

Ditto.

 

[JimmyG89]

Andersson. I think with the amount of rest he'll actually have this summer will be good for him. Outside of his normal training, he's not in the world junior prep in late July. He played so many games last season. He could train and know he is in either the NHL or the AHL for the upcoming season. From the end of this rookie camp, he'll have 2 1/2 months where he won't be in a tourney or in a camp. He can train and work on things.

I think he's going to be a big surprise coming into training camp. He should have his legs under him and I think he'll be proving a lot of players wrong.

Add Lundkvist.

Our rankings are going to be very D heavy from here on in, and the middle rounds (10-20) are going to be a ton of forwards like Lindqvist, Meskanen, Lakatos, Virta, Nieves, and Ronning. Interested on how that breaks down. I think we have 20 legit prospects who could see the NHL before they end their careers.

 

[Matz03]

I have to go with upside too but Lias is automatic #4 for me

 

[nyr2k2]

Andersson's year last year was just really, really, good I thought. Playing against all levels of competition in various leagues, and he did well everywhere he played. He's already a polished player, he has good offensive upside, lock-down potential, he's a leader, and so on. I really just think he's the total package. He does't have the pure offensive upside of Chytil of Kravsy, but he's going to be a hell of a player, and probably a future captain for us.

Also, while I love Kravsy and understand what he did in the playoffs was a big deal, I still want to see a full season of production out of him before I can put him with Andersson and Chytil. I know that's "penalizing" him for being younger than the other two, but still, I value not just perceived upside but actual production.

 

[Blueblood9]

Went with higher upside over the higher floor. Do think that Lias will be one of the key leaders on this team in the coming yrs.

 

[Edge]

Honest questions for the people who went with Kravtsov.

5 days ago, would you have voted him ahead of Andersson, or traded Andersson for the chance to pick him? Likewise, if he went to the Islanders instead of the Rangers, would you still vote him ahead of Andersson?

I ask mainly because Kravtsov was nowhere near this popular five days ago, and considering he hasn't played any games between now and last week, I am genuinely curious as to the popularity surge. Did everyone suddenly see things they like or buy into the potential? Do the risks that were expressed suddenly seem less concerning?

The answers would probably yes for some people on here. But at a 2-to-1 ratio?

Hmmm...

 

[nyr2k2]

Honest questions for the people who went with Kravtsov.

5 days ago, would you have voted him ahead of Andersson, or traded Andersson for the chance to pick him? Likewise, if he went to the Islanders instead of the Rangers, would you still vote him ahead of Andersson?

I ask mainly because Kravtsov was nowhere near this popular five days ago, and considering he hasn't played any games between now and last week, I am genuinely curious as to the popularity surge. Did everyone suddenly see things they like or buy into the potential? Do the risks that were expressed suddenly seem less concerning?

The answers would probably yes for some people on here. But at a 2-to-1 ratio?

Hmmm...

There's always an element of Shiny New Toy Syndrome. You and I have been around long enough to know this. And I know that there are probably a lot of people here voting for Kravtsov for totally legitimate reasons, so I don't want anyone to get offended. But, as you allude to, I think there are at least a handful of people that are voting for Kravtsov because he's the new toy.

At the same time, there's also an element of our board that for whatever reason has never been super high on Andersson, so who knows. Combination of both?

 

[E-Train]

Lias, add Lundkvist.

 

[Edge]

There's always an element of Shiny New Toy Syndrome. You and I have been around long enough to know this. And I know that there are probably a lot of people here voting for Kravtsov for totally legitimate reasons, so I don't want anyone to get offended. But, as you allude to, I think there are at least a handful of people that are voting for Kravtsov because he's the new toy.

At the same time, there's also an element of our board that for whatever reason has never been super high on Andersson, so who knows. Combination of both?

There are a handful of people on here who I know legitimately love(d) Kravtsov and have been high on him for a while. I get that, there's a lot to like.

I think I'm more interested in the psychology of how we vote and respond on here --- mainly because I've lived it for 20 some odd years.

For all the talk about people hating the Jessiman, Sanguinetti and McIlrath picks, there was a lot of love and justification for those picks immediately after they were made. Once the shine wore off and reality set it, people quickly distanced themselves from the picks. But coming up with lengthy and plausible defenses of Ranger picks is not entirely a new concept.

Now, let me be clear, in no way am I comparing Kravtsov to Jessiman or McIlrath. The skill is beyond compare in those scenarios.

What I am more curious about is that very, very few people were this "up" about Kravtsov less than a week ago. We keep talking about upside and yet none of the concerns that were there prior to this kid being a Ranger are present. To a lesser extent, we're doing the same with Miller. It doesn't detract from them being good prospects, but it does give me pause as to how much we might be trying to sell ourselves on certain concepts.