Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Rangers Prospects Thread (Stats in Post #1; Updated 5.29.18)

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hajek really nice move to get a clean shot on net.
Must say I haven't watched Mahura much but he has some tremendous speed and quickness that creates great chances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeKaplan
Fitzy Duke of NY said:
It has been 13 years since Staal joined this organization. My god. Is it autocorrect?
Click to expand...

Stahl, Stall, McDonough, Krieder, Vessey, Straalman, Lundquist, Stephan, Zibenajad, Lindbergh, Stahlberg, Pavelech. I can go on and on. I've seen it all. Apparently it is REALLY difficult to spell the names of our players.
 
GeorgeKaplan said:
Mahura’s another in the long line of impressive ducks defensemen prospects
Click to expand...
yep. His skating is super impressive. He's even the pp specialist over Hajek. Not saying he's better but he is very impressive in the games I've seen him in
 
Irishguy42 said:
And this is why there is zero reason to worry about the draft.
Click to expand...

Assuming that Dahlin, Svechnikov and Zadina are almost 100 percent certain to be gone by the time the Rangers pick — we can assume that at least one of Boqvist, Hughes, Tkachuk, Bouchard, Dobson or Wahlstrom will be available when the Rangers pick. Possibly two of them will be there if someone goes earlier than we think.

What’s funny is that on any given week the name of the “riser” on these boards has changed. I think that’s a testament to the quality of these prospects. But in reality, these kids are not rising and falling on teams’ lists like they are on here.

The general consensus is that the top 10 of this draft is really good. Personally, I pegged the number as closer to 12. But either way, we are in the zone we want to be in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeKaplan
Doesn't look good for Regina down 2-0 with 5 minutes but Hajek has looked really good in the third.
 
Edge said:
Assuming that Dahlin, Svechnikov and Zadina are almost 100 percent certain to be gone by the time the Rangers pick — we can assume that at least one of Boqvist, Hughes, Tkachuk, Bouchard, Dobson or Wahlstrom will be available when the Rangers pick. Possibly two of them will be there if someone goes earlier than we think.

What’s funny is that on any given week the name of the “riser” on these boards has changed. I think that’s a testament to the quality of these prospects. But in reality, these kids are not rising and falling on teams’ lists like they are on here.

The general consensus is that the top 10 of this draft is really good. Personally, I pegged the number as closer to 12. But either way, we are in the zone we want to be in.
Click to expand...

this is why i'd be less concerned with trying to move up from #9 and instead focusing on trying to find a deal to get another top 10-15 pick
 
  • Like
Reactions: belford222 and kovazub94
Edge said:
In fairness, we’ve said that about several kids now, depending on if they were playing and the hype train was in full swing.

We’ve said it for everyone from Boqvist to Hughes to Bochard to Wahlstrom at some point.

At least one of them will be there at 9.
Click to expand...

Personally, I've never expected that Hughes, Wahlstrom or Tkachuk would be available at 9.

Boqvist perhaps.

My concern is borne less in "all the good guys getting taken" and more in that I worry about Bouchard measuring up to the guys taken around him, and my preference for not taking a centre (Kotkaniemi) with our #9.
 
Harbour Dog said:
Personally, I've never expected that Hughes, Wahlstrom or Tkachuk would be available at 9.

Boqvist perhaps.

My concern is borne less in "all the good guys getting taken" and more in that I worry about Bouchard measuring up to the guys taken around him, and my preference for not taking a centre (Kotkaniemi) with our #9.
Click to expand...

I agree that it is likely Bouchard is the one left on the board at 9. I've seen him projected to go anywhere from 5 to 10. Do you think he is really much less of a prospect than Hughes or Dobson?
 
broadwayblue said:
I agree that it is likely Bouchard is the one left on the board at 9. I've seen him projected to go anywhere from 5 to 10. Do you think he is really much less of a prospect than Hughes or Dobson?
Click to expand...

My opinion shouldn't be regarded as highly as many guys on here, but yes, I do.

Hughes has played well against men already, and Dobson's game should translate easily.

Bouchard is an offensive defenseman who isn't a great skater and who, despite having a great slapshot, scores a high percentage of his goals atypically for his position. Just screams PPQB who doesn't have his offense translate 5-on-5 to me. Potentially an elite PPQB, but I just find myself drawn to the potential of the guys around him so much more.
 
Last edited:
Edge said:
In fairness, we’ve said that about several kids now, depending on if they were playing and the hype train was in full swing.

We’ve said it for everyone from Boqvist to Hughes to Bochard to Wahlstrom at some point.

At least one of them will be there at 9.
Click to expand...

Doesn't mean that none of them are busts, especially whoever falls to number 9, that is why I think we need to trade up at least to #5 and make sure we get a winger that we need.
 
WeNeverGetaGoodCoach said:
Doesn't mean that none of them are busts, especially whoever falls to number 9, that is why I think we need to trade up at least to #5 and make sure we get a winger that we need.
Click to expand...

you make it sound like we are hoping a player drops to the 3rd round. the odds of a player busting at 9 isn't that much different than busting at #5.
 
Leetch3 said:
you make it sound like we are hoping a player drops to the 3rd round. the odds of a player busting at 9 isn't that much different than busting at #5.
Click to expand...

I don't care what the odds are over the years, I look at top 10 and I see only 4 wingers and chances are they are all gone by #9, and Dobson and Dahlin are the only Dmen I would feel comfortable drafting in the top 10. And we need wingers a lot more than Dmen.
 
WeNeverGetaGoodCoach said:
they are all centers though...
Click to expand...

It's safe to say that at least one of them will end up on wing. I'm not really disagreeing with you though; the cupboard is pretty bare as far as high end prospects at either position.

I'm of the mind that our C prospect depth helps to mask the lack of wingers. Andersson, Chytil and Howden are all guys that could end up as top 6 wingers, but there's no way that they become top 4 defensemen.
 
Harbour Dog said:
It's safe to say that at least one of them will end up on wing. I'm not really disagreeing with you though; the cupboard is pretty bare as far as high end prospects at either position.

I'm of the mind that our C prospect depth helps to mask the lack of wingers. Andersson, Chytil and Howden are all guys that could end up as top 6 wingers, but there's no way that they become top 4 defensemen.
Click to expand...

no, it will not mask it completely, we need to draft a winger or 2 or 3 in the 1st round (preferably 2 wingers and 1 Dman). All we have is Ronning, Gettinger, and Morgan Barron(long shot). Defense is also a position that is often easier to fill with a good veteran than develop your own.
 
WeNeverGetaGoodCoach said:
no, it will not mask it completely, we need to draft a winger or 2 or 3 in the 1st round. All we have is Ronning, Gettinger, and Morgan Barron(long shot). Defense is also a position that is often easier to fill with a good veteran than develop your own.
Click to expand...

That is generally untrue. How often do elite or even 1st pairing D come along? Rarely, and when they are available in trade they are very costly. Signing a scoring winger is a different story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom