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.
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Yes, and that's a good thing. They are trying new things and if it doesn't work out, they cut ties. Medvescak is now in the EBHL. Better for them, but having played in the KHL for a few years, it did help progress hockey in Croatia.
Click to expand...
Are they really trying new things? Expansion certainly isn't new. The only thing that's even somewhat new about what they're doing is that their method for expansion is to poach the best teams from surrounding areas. Does that help the countries that are losing their top team? I mean, you say it helped Croatia that Zagreb left. I remember when that happened, it was controversial because immediately after they announced they'd be joining the KHL, they cut all of the Croatia and Slovenian players on the team and replaced them with North Americans and Europeans from more established countries. Then they go and suck for a few years and hightail it back to a lesser league. Is that improving things for anyone?

I don't see anything noble or innovative about the KHL. It's a league always teetering on the brink of financial insolvency that tries to grow by picking up top clubs from rival leagues, which is not a new strategy. The league is what it is--very talented and somewhat unstable.
 
nyr2k2 said:
Are they really trying new things? Expansion certainly isn't new. The only thing that's even somewhat new about what they're doing is that their method for expansion is to poach the best teams from surrounding areas. Does that help the countries that are losing their top team? I mean, you say it helped Croatia that Zagreb left. I remember when that happened, it was controversial because immediately after they announced they'd be joining the KHL, they cut all of the Croatia and Slovenian players on the team and replaced them with North Americans and Europeans from more established countries. Then they go and suck for a few years and hightail it back to a lesser league. Is that improving things for anyone?

I don't see anything noble or innovative about the KHL. It's a league always teetering on the brink of financial insolvency that tries to grow by picking up top clubs from rival leagues, which is not a new strategy. The league is what it is--very talented and somewhat unstable.
Click to expand...

Medvescak, to give an example, didn't leave the Croatian league to join the KHL. The team that was in the Slovenian league made the jump to the KHL. Their 2nd team has won 21 out of 27 championships since the inaugural season of the Croatian Hockey League.

The best team in Slovenia, HDD Olimpija, played in the EBHL for 10 years.

The best team in the Netherlands, Tilburg Trappers, moved to the German Oberliga, which is basically the 3rd level in Germany.

This is what happens. The best team of shitty countries usually jump to better leagues and it benefits those countries because it attracts fans, getting to see better teams and better players when attending games.
 
This debate has been going on for years in English/Scottish football, e.g. having Celtic and Rangers join the EPL. Risk vs benefit, same rules apply
 
  • Like
Reactions: nyr2k2
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Medvescak, to give an example, didn't leave the Croatian league to join the KHL. The team that was in the Slovenian league made the jump to the KHL. Their 2nd team has won 21 out of 27 championships since the inaugural season of the Croatian Hockey League.

The best team in Slovenia, HDD Olimpija, played in the EBHL for 10 years.

The best team in the Netherlands, Tilburg Trappers, moved to the German Oberliga, which is basically the 3rd level in Germany.

This is what happens. The best team of ****ty countries usually jump to better leagues and it benefits those countries because it attracts fans, getting to see better teams and better players when attending games.
Click to expand...
OK now we're kind of talking in circles. You said the KHL is trying something new, and I said they're really not, that leagues expand by picking up top clubs from other leagues all the time. Now, here, you've said, "This is just what happens!" which necessarily implies that what the KHL is doing is not new.

And again, in terms of benefits to the team/fans/country, I don't know. Maybe in certain instances. I did a Google search and it says Zagreb left the KHL in bad financial shape. So, the club didn't benefit, and while there may have been some relative increase in attendance which in turn creates additional exposure, what would have happened had the club suspended operations or folded? Did the country's hockey program benefit when the club cut almost all the native players? I don't know. I'm not an expert but it seems there's potential benefits as well as potential risks for a team like Zagreb to do as they did. I think it all depends on circumstance. Has Jokerit benefited from moving? Maybe. Has hockey in Finland been better for not having Jokerit around Liiga? Doubtful. Now, a team like Kunlun? That's great--bringing hockey to a new market. I can get behind that and see little to no downside. For the established teams that jump ship, I think the upside/downside would have to be evaluated case by case.

Anyway, I don't particularly care to keep arguing the point, which for me was that the KHL isn't doing anything new or noteworthy (which wasn't even the reason it was being discussed). So, nice discussion, last word is yours. :)

Lindberg Cheese said:
This debate has been going on for years in English/Scottish football, e.g. having Celtic and Rangers join the EPL. Risk vs benefit, same rules apply
Click to expand...

Right, same thing here. The KHL is just doing what other sporting leagues across the globe do to expand.
 
Sidetracking a bit?:naughty:

The original discussion was whether the difference between the best and the worst teams in the NHL and KHL was comparable. I’d say— with about a month left to play in the regular season when the lines are clearly drawn, NHL division leaders are probably just as much ahead of the 4 worst team as similarly positioned team in the K. 7:1, 8:2 etc defeats occur with about the same frequency and bottom teams will occasionally earn points against division leaders.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Is the difference between Chicago, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles and Buffalo, Arizona, Vancouver really that much different from the difference in talent in the KHL?

The big difference with the KHL is that they bring in new teams to grow the sport, while the NHL went 12 years without any changes after the salary cap was introduced (Not counting the one relocation).
Click to expand...


Yes there is. Any bad nhl team can play a competitive game against a top team. Khl games are a joke half the time. It’s not close and you know it fully. You’re protecting the top euro league I get it but you know from watching both like you do this is a silly. Argument.
 
Can you guys give me some insight into these Rangers players who made their NHL debut last season? Specifically what type of player they are, if they have an NHL future and what role they project as in the long-term. Thanks!

Brandon Halverson
Alexandar Georgiev
Vinni Lettieri
Neal Pionk
Steven Fogarty
John Gilmour
 
Legionnaire11 said:
Can you guys give me some insight into these Rangers players who made their NHL debut last season? Specifically what type of player they are, if they have an NHL future and what role they project as in the long-term. Thanks!

Brandon Halverson
Alexandar Georgiev
Vinni Lettieri
Neal Pionk
Steven Fogarty
John Gilmour
Click to expand...

Halverson --- former prospect at this point. Maybe he puts it all together after spending extensive time in the minors, but it won't be here.

Georgiev --- definitely put himself in the conversation to serve as the backup next season. Not sure I see him as an NHL starter, but I would've said the same thing about Talbot when he first started out.

Lettieri --- has the potential to be an energy, bottom-six forward who pops in some points.

Pionk --- still think his longer term potential is probably as a third pair defenseman, albeit as a useful one.

Fogarty --- Never really developed into that two-way bottom six center the Rangers hoped. He's probably moving on.

Gilmour --- IMO, he seems like a AAAA defenseman who shuffles around the league as a placeholder/future journeyman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Legionnaire11
Legionnaire11 said:
Can you guys give me some insight into these Rangers players who made their NHL debut last season? Specifically what type of player they are, if they have an NHL future and what role they project as in the long-term. Thanks!

Brandon Halverson
Alexandar Georgiev
Vinni Lettieri
Neal Pionk
Steven Fogarty
John Gilmour
Click to expand...

Edge said:
Halverson --- former prospect at this point. Maybe he puts it all together after spending extensive time in the minors, but it won't be here.

Georgiev --- definitely put himself in the conversation to serve as the backup next season. Not sure I see him as an NHL starter, but I would've said the same thing about Talbot when he first started out.

Lettieri --- has the potential to be an energy, bottom-six forward who pops in some points.

Pionk --- still think his longer term potential is probably as a third pair defenseman, albeit as a useful one.

Fogarty --- Never really developed into that two-way bottom six center the Rangers hoped. He's probably moving on.

Gilmour --- IMO, he seems like a AAAA defenseman who shuffles around the league as a placeholder/future journeyman.
Click to expand...

nyr2k2 said:
Agree with the above but I think Pionk's upside is higher.
Click to expand...
Like @nyr2k2, I think that Pionk's upside is higher than @Edge describes (I think if everything falls into place he can be a right-handed Krug) and am perhaps a touch more sanguine about Georgiev projecting as a full-time starter, but in general I agree with those assessments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Legionnaire11
Edge said:
I'm somewhat torn on Pionk.

I think second pairing is a possibility, though I have a feeling he ends up third pair on a deeper team.
Click to expand...

Pionk's place in the lineup moving forward will be contingent in a lot of ways on the development of his counterparts on the left side. I can see him pairing well with a physical, defensive D-man like Lindgren or Hajek, and if either of the latter two proves to be at least a capable second-pairing player, then he may be best-fit to slide in beside them in the top-four. In the worst-case scenario of a total failure of all of the teams' deadline acquisitions, Pionk may have to play second pairing regardless of where he is best-fit due to a lack of defensive depth. Chemistry, playstyle, and progression of existing pieces in the pipeline will all play their parts into shaping Pionk's future on the team, and that role isn't necessarily dependant on his individual capabilities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeetchisGod
Edge said:
I'm somewhat torn on Pionk.

I think second pairing is a possibility, though I have a feeling he ends up third pair on a deeper team.
Click to expand...

Depends on who he plays well with. He is very much the type of blueliner that partners very effectively with a star LHD. I think his highest upside is the 4th best blueliner on a good team, but since he could feasibly play both PP and PK minutes, and on the top pairing, if he has a good partner. Many teams have a top for in the vein of

#1-#4
#2-#3

Depending on chemistry and handedness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doomscroll and LeetchisGod
Limited viewings but Pionk did not look out of place in his NHL time. No way I can predict much from that, except I'd be surprised if he did not find himself in the NHL in some capacity.

Troy Stecher is something along the lines of how I feel about Pionk, just hopefully Pionk can sustain what he was doing and improve on it.

Georgiev, I just can not bring myself to gauge goalies but he looked good to me.

Gilmour I thought was more of a depth player, yet I would not totally count him out as finding a small role eventually, mostly his skating.

Lettieri, similarly I think maybe NHL depth but every once in a while there was a glimpse there was something more there, mostly his shooting.

All in all I'd try all of them over some of the stuff that the Rangers have tried in the past, Stoll, Malone, Rismiller, Reitz, Halpern, Powe, etc as even if it's a small chance they may work out that is a more forward thinking direction than going the other way.
 
Pionk has definite 2nd pair upside. The RH Krug comparison was pretty spot on IMO. Maybe a little more defensively sound, and a little less offensively gifted, but very similar. He got lost in the D zone at times, but he just has way too much poise to think he won't progress from his rookie season. Also, he's pretty young for a college UFA, coming out after his Sophomore season. There's definite reason to believe he can see significant development.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brooklyn Rangers Fan and nyr2k2
I think pionk is a solid third pairing righty D on a playoff team. anything more than that I think you're probably pushing it. if he's playing in your top 4 you probably aren't a Cup Contender. but I think he's a real solid player that battles. he's improving everyday and is surprisingly strong for his size.

DeAngelo is more the question mark right now and I like him a lot but he's got a lot to prove. He won't be useful if he can't play in the top 4 and put up points on the powerplay. he's not going to be a bottom pairing guy.
 
What Door said:
Pionk has definite 2nd pair upside. The RH Krug comparison was pretty spot on IMO. Maybe a little more defensively sound, and a little less offensively gifted, but very similar. He got lost in the D zone at times, but he just has way too much poise to think he won't progress from his rookie season. Also, he's pretty young for a college UFA, coming out after his Sophomore season. There's definite reason to believe he can see significant development.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And also, as has been mentioned before with regards to him looking lost at times, he went from playing college hockey to defense on a horrendous Hartford team to essentially first pairing minutes in the NHL. He's not a blue-chip, stud prospect, so that progression is pretty damn difficult. Had we been decent and able to ease him into more responsibility, he probably would have fared even better, but we just threw him into the fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haveandare, Mac n Gs, Brooklyn Rangers Fan and 2 others
nyr2k2 said:
Agreed. And also, as has been mentioned before with regards to him looking lost at times, he went from playing college hockey to defense on a horrendous Hartford team to essentially first pairing minutes in the NHL. He's not a blue-chip, stud prospect, so that progression is pretty damn difficult. Had we been decent and able to ease him into more responsibility, he probably would have fared even better, but we just threw him into the fire.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was going to mention the step up in competition. It's very hard to maintain your style of play as the competition gets more difficult. I was very surprised (in a good way) with how Pionk was able to handle himself towards the end of the season. I expect him to open up his game a little more as he get's comfortable. Whether that is a 2nd or 3rd pair guy, is anyone's guess. My money is on him figuring it out. There's no panic in his game. Those types usually figure out how to be contributors.
 
Legionnaire11 said:
Can you guys give me some insight into these Rangers players who made their NHL debut last season? Specifically what type of player they are, if they have an NHL future and what role they project as in the long-term. Thanks!

Brandon Halverson
Alexandar Georgiev
Vinni Lettieri
Neal Pionk
Steven Fogarty
John Gilmour
Click to expand...

I don't know about Georgiev being a backup. He's really young and almost every single time he played Steve Valiquette--an ex-NHL goaltender raved about him. Specifically Steve was pointing out things that Georgiev was doing at 21 years old that he said that most NHL goalies don't figure out until their mid to late 20's if they figure it out at all. I see him becoming an NHL starter. With Shesterkin coming after next year the Rangers should be set in goal for a long time between those two.

The other possible ace here is Neal Pionk. A smallish right handed D--very good grasp of the game--moves the puck very well. Could be a 2nd pair--could be a 3rd pair. But he's a really good young player.

Lettieri could work out to be a bottom 6 winger--more than likely a 4th liner though. The guy is a shooter though and plays an involved game--kind of maybe like a poor man's Ryan Callahan.

Fogarty-no--his game played came from being a good soldier. Halverson-not a particularly good first two years pro--he got to play part of a game because of an emergency. Gilmour--can skate and move the puck---not that hot defensively. Still his game progressed in his second year. To me he might stick somewhere for a couple few years hanging on to 6-7 D spots. Great f***ing skater.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom