Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: Rangers Select Brandon Halverson (G - OHL) with 59th Overall Pick

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Really, really not a fan picking a goaltender with our earliest pick.

Gonna give him a chance though.
 
Raspewtin said:
Really, really not a fan picking a goaltender with our earliest pick.

Gonna give him a chance though.
Click to expand...

What does "earliest pick" have to do with anything? #59 is practically in the 3rd round already...there are no sure things at that point. Heck, if the selection actually makes your NHL team and can contribute in a bottom 6 role you've done well.
 
Based on the opinions here I think the Rangers should wait till Hank is in adult diapers and uses a walker and oxygen before picking another goalie, huge mistake.
 
Are you ****ing kidding me??! We drafted TWO goalies with TWO of our three highest picks when goalies were flying off the board in the picks ahead of us and we have TWO legitimate starting NHL goalies???

Are you ****ing kidding me? What a ****ing joke.
 
Rangers have the best goalie in the game signed long-term. Picking a goalie while having so few picks, reminds me of when they ****ed up and took Montoya.
 
Beacon said:
This.

Don't like the idea of taking a goalie with our top pick. Would've preferred a center or a defenseman.

Maybe this would've made more sense in two years.

That said, I hope he works out. Don't know enough about him, hoping for another Lundqvist-like draft steal.

Gotta trust Gordie, he is an amazing draft mind.
Click to expand...

Drafting a goalie is unexciting, but get mat be four years from the NHL, then maybe a backup for two and next thing You know Hank's contract is done and he's ready. One way of looking at it.
 
KingWantsCup said:
Are you ****ing kidding me??! We drafted TWO goalies with TWO of our three highest picks when goalies were flying off the board in the picks ahead of us and we have TWO legitimate starting NHL goalies???

Are you ****ing kidding me? What a ****ing joke.
Click to expand...

You actually expect to get anything of value after the 50th pick, especially in this draft? Halvorson is big and raw and has a chance to turn into something. Do you understand the chances that you get an every day NHLer passed the 1st round? Id be ecstatic if ONE of these picks turns into an NHLer. You must really love our ECHL affiliate because thats where these guys will most likely end up...
 
silverfish said:
Yes, because in 2004 everyone knew Henrik Lundqvist would be Henrik Lundqvist
Click to expand...

Yes, because Montoya went insanely high. I remember the announcers at that draft laughing at the pick. Not often you hear them goofing on your first rounder.
 
chosen said:
Rangers have the best goalie in the game signed long-term. Picking a goalie while having so few picks, reminds me of when they ****ed up and took Montoya.
Click to expand...

yeah a pick made with the second to last pick of round two should remind you of a pick made at #6 overall
 
xChrisTilDeathx said:
Agreed. Why make this pick? Trade bait someday?
Click to expand...

Talbot deserves 1 thing we can't offer, starting.
If Hank for Malkin is not happening -- and it isn't --- then at best Talbot maybe gives us a year or 2, demanding and extra dozen or so games each year to bulk his resume.

So we hope this guy can be ready in 3 ish years to be Hanks backup, and we trade Talbot as soon as there is enough overpayment on the table, not before.

Other things being =, I would have preferred another pick, but other things not = if there is truly huge upside, then this could be worth it.
 
bernmeister said:
Talbot deserves 1 thing we can't offer, starting.
If Hank for Malkin is not happening -- and it isn't --- then at best Talbot maybe gives us a year or 2, demanding and extra dozen or so games each year to bulk his resume.

So we hope this guy can be ready in 3 ish years to be Hanks backup, and we trade Talbot as soon as there is enough overpayment on the table, not before.

Other things being =, I would have preferred another pick, but other things not = if there is truly huge upside, then this could be worth it.
Click to expand...

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
 
I love this draft so far, because all of the regular Negative Nancies are out in full force. I've seen most of the regular whiners, still a few more though... :laugh:

In all honesty, I feel pretty happy with what we did.
 
Missiaen's a bust. Stajcer's a bust. Basically we have Lundqvist and Talbot and Shapski's the only one developing. It was an organizational need.

Anyway there's **** that happens. If Henrik gets hurt--god forbid--we'll be scrambling around for anything. Talbot's a potential UFA after next year. Got to have goalies in the pipeline--doesn't matter how good your No. 1 is.
 
eco's bones said:
Missiaen's a bust. Stajcer's a bust. Basically we have Lundqvist and Talbot and Shapski's the only one developing. It was an organizational need.

Anyway there's **** that happens. If Henrik gets hurt--god forbid--we'll be scrambling around for anything. Talbot's a potential UFA after next year. Got to have goalies in the pipeline--doesn't matter how good your No. 1 is.
Click to expand...

Two of our biggest organizational needs coming into today--goaltending depth and puckmoving defensemen--have been addressed, to varying degrees.

You can't completely restock a system in one draft, particularly without a first. They focused on a couple areas and grabbed some interesting players. Fine by me.
 
Some of the "Chicken Littles" on this board who think the sky is falling because of the Rangers draft strategy today completely embarrass me. Calm yourselves... You aren't scouts and you aren't general managers. Relax, enjoy the draft and complain about these selections 5 years from now if they don't pan out.
 
nyr2k2 said:
Two of our biggest organizational needs coming into today--goaltending depth and puckmoving defensemen--have been addressed, to varying degrees.

You can't completely restock a system in one draft, particularly without a first. They focused on a couple areas and grabbed some interesting players. Fine by me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's actually a nice mix. Considering we weren't getting a surefire 1st liner in thie draft I'm happy with the selections and moving down a couple times to add picks.
 
MortUWary said:
Some of the "Chicken Littles" on this board who think the sky is falling because of the Rangers draft strategy today completely embarrass me. Calm yourselves... You aren't scouts and you aren't general managers. Relax, enjoy the draft and complain about these selections 5 years from now if they don't pan out.
Click to expand...

Agree. I ****ing hated the Kreider pick when we took him. Since then? I never bash any of my team's drafts anymore. I don't have the necessary knowledge too. I trust the people who get paid to do this to do it well. Even if their track record isn't spectacular. ESPECIALLY with goalies :naughty:
 
nyr2k2 said:
I love this draft so far, because all of the regular Negative Nancies are out in full force. I've seen most of the regular whiners, still a few more though... :laugh:

In all honesty, I feel pretty happy with what we did.
Click to expand...

Yes, the absurdity of some of these complaints is very entertaining.

I liked the stockpiling mentality of this draft. Picked up a lot of later picks, stocked up on some types we need. Could use a draft of quantity with our pick situation.

Our third rounder also seems like a potential steal.
 
KingWantsCup said:
Are you ****ing kidding me??! We drafted TWO goalies with TWO of our three highest picks when goalies were flying off the board in the picks ahead of us and we have TWO legitimate starting NHL goalies???

Are you ****ing kidding me? What a ****ing joke.
Click to expand...
You are ridiculous
 
broadwayblue said:
What does "earliest pick" have to do with anything? #59 is practically in the 3rd round already...there are no sure things at that point. Heck, if the selection actually makes your NHL team and can contribute in a bottom 6 role you've done well.
Click to expand...

It's still our earliest pick, with players on board that we really could've used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom