Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XL

[pld459666]

Immediately before getting Fleury, Quintal, Lefebvre, Kevin Hatcher in July 1999, we had 3 top-10 picks in 1998 and 1999. We also had a top prospect in Mike York who went on to score 50 points as a rookie that year (because you know how no rookie ever regresses or stops improving at the age of 21?). We had Nedved in his prime getting about ppg for years. We had Schneider in his prime. Todd Harvey just had .9 ppg as a 23 year old. We had a very highly hyped 22-year-old Dvorak. Burke Henry was talked up as a blue chip prospect after 2 seasons with over ppg in the Juniors as a two-way defenseman. Holmqvist was the original Swede picked in the 7th round who was supposed to become our star goalie of the future after getting 2.59 GAA as a teenager in the Swedish league, then second-best in the world.

Now, those names mean nothing to people today. I'm sure most of those too young to remember 20 years ago are thinking, "why are you bringing up random scrubs? What could Burke Henry have in common with K'Andre when one is a minor leaguer and the other is a great prospect? What does Malhotra have in common with Lias? Brendl with Kakko? Those guys are all minor leaguers or garbage NHLers." Except that's not at all how anyone viewed them in the summer of 1999 when the Rangers went on a massive UFA shopping spree. There was just as much hype in 1999 as in 2019, maybe more. Now we know those guys were a disaster. But we do not know what the future holds for the current group. First, we find out, then we buy UFAs. Not for nothing, but even if they succeed, how do we know that we need wingers and not defensemen? Centers and not goalies?

There's no comparing the system we have today to the barren waste land of a system we had in 99 and that's AFTER the draft.

For all the promise Brendl and Lundmark carried, that was it. York was a nice player, but beyond those kids, there was nothing of note on the team or in the system.

Now, point conceded that we have no idea if we have a bunch of Brendls and Lundmarks, but without a shadow of a doubt, we have more of them in the system today than what er had then..

 

[Ola]

Big win for Dallas, it was nervy at the end but since they hanged on for this one they have -- every -- opportunity to take this series. Maybe its still basically a coin-flip, but a pretty good one to be a part of for us.

And almost as importantly, Zucc had a great game. That should bode well for their decision on whether to keep him or not.

MZA bringing the MSL return, wouldn't that have a nice ring to it.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Miller committed to staying in school next year already so I would think 2020-21 at the earliest. Lundkvist might be here first.

Lundkvist is staying at least one more year. He said in an interview last week that he has not heard from the Rangers yet (after elimination).

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

I like how people are referring to Quinn as "DQ." Guys, 33 isn't OLD, is it?

 

[Shesterkybomb]

The only way Lundqvist goes to another team this year is if he wants to continue playing after this contract. Otherwise he will retire a ranger at the end of his contract

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

The only way Lundqvist goes to another team this year is if he wants to continue playing after this contract. Otherwise he will retire a ranger at the end of his contract

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Zucc had been quiet for most of the last few games.

Nice of him to put together a strong performance. Carry that into the next round.

 

[Cag29]

I don't think the Rangers are in as much of a hurry to move Staal as the fans are. Despite being a shell of his former self, he's still an intelligent veteran player who has spent a lot of time matching up against some of the best players in the league. Not a bad guy to be mentoring your up-and-coming group of Rykov, Lindgren, Hajek, and Miller.

He also has suffered several bad injuries and has comeback and played well. He deserves respect.
I’ve been watching since 1975 and I don’t think I can name 5 better defensemen that have played with the Rangers at least 3 seasons?
Leetch.
Buekeboom
Zubov
McDonagh
Staal
Girardi?
Nordstrom was a King. Though we drafted him.
Greshner was very good but Staal better.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

If Staal never got that eye injury he would have had a better career, he was actually playing really well at that point, it is a real testament to his skill level that he can still play with limited vision in one eye. I have no idea how he does it in that league, probably helps that his is a big lad.

 

[Mikos87]

This.

Staal’s biggest problem is his contract. Take away that number and he is a reasonable 4-5=defenseman in the league.

Smith is the guy taking up space. He’ll be gone soon enough.

Shattenkirk will probably get one more season to rehabilitate his career. He’s still a brand name, albeit tarnished. He could recover some value. He could also help the team and mentor some of the young RHD.

I agree that one of the biggest disconnects between the board and the brass is Staal. I don't think Marc's spot is at risk by any stretch on one he current roster.

Sure he's overpaid, and many nights he's not fully engaged, but Staal's worst season was probably 2 years ago under AV.

He's a grossly overpaid 5-6 guy but of his minutes are kept at PK only with third pair 5v5 minutes, he's an effective NHLer.

Problem is that tbe Rangers don't have more players higher in the depth chart.

 

[Beacon]

Smith got here in 1989 and won the Stanley Cup in 1994. The second half of his resume wasn't good. Gorton has a long way to go to match the first half.

The first half wasn't good at drafting either. He was lucky to get here at a time when a lot of future All Stars were already on the team, and then lucked into Zubov and Weight in later rounds. In all his drafts from 1989 to 1999, he got one good player (Kovalev) in the first round. All other first rounders were total busts or 3/4 line role players. Since it takes time for draftees to mature, his misses weren't obvious until the second half of the 90s when he stripped the team of all the young talent in awful trades. Weight, Amonte, Zubov, Nedved, Kovalev, York, Savard all were sent away for lesser, older players (except Savard who was traded for Lundmark, who was technically younger, but was a bust).

His trades early on were better. The trades of Messier and Gartner (getting him, not trading him away) worked out well. The signing of Graves worked out. Nicholls for Sandstrom and Granato was a loss though. Pretty much every trade after the Cup was a loss. Also, Neil Smith forgot - FORGOT! - to put Ray Sheppard on the restricted FA list and he became unrestricted. The guy was already a young second liner who was obviously going to be a first liner, and he went on to score almost 100 points for Detroit.

His biggest move (Messier) worked out and that's all anyone remembers anymore, but his overall tenure was awful. I suspect if he did nothing and just kept all our budding stars, we would've won more than one Cup. There was just too much talent there. By 1992, the team had 10 guys whowould go on to play in multiple All Star Games in the future. It's pretty amazing that this team had only one Spring when it was viewed as a serious contender. Again, it worked out that one spring, but we had such a plethora of talent and then our window was one season?

 

[Beacon]

Are you trying to make a comparison between now and summer of 1999? I didn’t even need to be a fan 20 years ago to tell you it’s not even close.

First, based on the names of UFAs it’s clear that the Rangers defense was in shambles and there were absolutely no impactful prospects to talk about.

Obviously you decided to respond without even reading. You judge prospects at the time based 20/20 hindsight. You assume they are great today because you assume none will bust. Do you think anybody in the summer of 1999 felt that all 3 of our 1998 and 1999 top-10 picks will be busts? Yes, today you're very smart and you know that Brendl, Lundmark and Malhotra were a waste, but do you think anybody viewed them that way in 1999?

1. In 1999, Burke Henry was at least equal to K'Andre today.
2. Holmqvist was viewed similarly to Shesterkin, maybe slightly below.
3. Brendl was seen as superior to Kakko. Neil Smith said he'd have taken him first overall if he had that pick, and a good number of neutral observers agreed. Kakko is viewed as a good first liner, but not necessarily a superstar, whereas the hype around Brendl was that he was a superstar.
4. Malhotra was viewed as better than Lias at the same age. He made the NHL as an 18 year old and was pretty decent.
5. Mike York looked far better at the time than Howden today. Not in the same ballpark.
6. Lundmark was a 9OA pick, just as Kravtsov was, except Lundmark was not viewed as a reach by anybody.
7. Bryan Swanson was easily superior to Morgan Barron. He had much more than a point per game in all 4 college seasons, finishing with 232 points in 167 NCAA games. The season before we went on a big UFA shopping spree, he had 66 points in 42 games.

3 first round picks in two years is far cry, mildly put, from what looks like 9-10 picks in ‘17-‘19, one of which is top2!

We have 7 picks, not 9 or 10. Yes, one is a #2 overall, but Brendl was seen as arguably the most talented player in the 1999 draft. Again, it is widely known that Smith would've taken him first overall if that was the pick he had.


I'm not saying 2019 is like 1999, but we also don't know that 2019 will be just like 1990 when most prospects made it - though even then first rounders Rice (1989) and Stewart (1990) were busts. Even when your prospects work out amazingly, you still have some high profile misses.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

We have 7 picks, not 9 or 10. Yes, one is a #2 overall, but Brendl was seen as arguably the most talented player in the 1999 draft. Again, it is widely known that Smith would've taken him first overall if that was the pick he had.

Uhm, we have 10 draft picks this year.

1st round: 2 picks
2nd round: 3 picks
3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th round: 1 pick

 

[Beacon]

Uhm, we have 10 draft picks this year.

1st round: 2 picks
2nd round: 3 picks
3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th round: 1 pick

I thouht were were talking about the number of first rounders 2017-2019.

 

[haohmaru]

I thouht were were talking about the number of first rounders 2017-2019.

Jury is still out on that. Could be 8.

 

[Elliman]

A.Panarin - K.Kakko - P.Buchnevich
F.Chytil - M.Zibanejad - V.Kravtsov
B.Lemieux - L.Andersson - R.Strome
J.Fast - B.Howden - V.Meskanen

Erik Karlsson - Fredrik Cleasson
Jacob Trouba - Tony DeAngelo
Adam Fox - Libor Hajek

H Lundqvist
I Shestyorkin


Traded/Bought Out: Shattenkirk, Georgiyev, Staal, Smith, Pionk, Skjei, Vesey, Namestinkov, Kreider.

 

[haohmaru]

A.Panarin - K.Kakko - P.Buchnevich
F.Chytil - M.Zibanejad - V.Kravtsov
B.Lemieux - L.Andersson - R.Strome
J.Fast - B.Howden - V.Meskanen

Erik Karlsson - Fredrik Cleasson
Jacob Trouba - Tony DeAngelo
Adam Fox - Libor Hajek

H Lundqvist
I Shestyorkin


Traded/Bought Out: Shattenkirk, Georgiyev, Staal, Smith, Pionk, Skjei, Vesey, Namestinkov, Kreider.

Show me how this works under the cap.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

A.Panarin - K.Kakko - P.Buchnevich
F.Chytil - M.Zibanejad - V.Kravtsov
B.Lemieux - L.Andersson - R.Strome
J.Fast - B.Howden - V.Meskanen

Erik Karlsson - Fredrik Cleasson
Jacob Trouba - Tony DeAngelo
Adam Fox - Libor Hajek

H Lundqvist
I Shestyorkin


Traded/Bought Out: Shattenkirk, Georgiyev, Staal, Smith, Pionk, Skjei, Vesey, Namestinkov, Kreider.

Can we please stop putting players at center who aren't a center?

 

[E-Train]

1. In 1999, Burke Henry was at least equal to K'Andre today.

3. Brendl was seen as superior to Kakko. Neil Smith said he'd have taken him first overall if he had that pick, and a good number of neutral observers agreed. Kakko is viewed as a good first liner, but not necessarily a superstar, whereas the hype around Brendl was that he was a superstar.

4. Malhotra was viewed as better than Lias at the same age. He made the NHL as an 18 year old and was pretty decent.

None of these are facts. No chance Burke Henry was considered in the same stratosphere as Miller. I came to rivals.com in 1999. There were question marks on Malhotra from the start and not too long after on Brendl.

 

[Beacon]

None of these are facts. No chance Burke Henry was considered in the same stratosphere as Miller. I came to rivals.com in 1999. There were question marks on Malhotra from the start and not too long after on Brendl.

I followed our prospects very closely at the time and I assure you, those are facts. Nobody today views it as such because hindsight is 20/20, but in 1999, we thought things were looking up. Nobody thought the light at the end of the tunnel was merely an oncoming train.

 

[Zibanejbread]

what the hell, fanatics? one of these is not like the others...

 

[Uncle Dru]

Big win for Dallas, it was nervy at the end but since they hanged on for this one they have -- every -- opportunity to take this series. Maybe its still basically a coin-flip, but a pretty good one to be a part of for us.

And almost as importantly, Zucc had a great game. That should bode well for their decision on whether to keep him or not.

MZA bringing the MSL return, wouldn't that have a nice ring to it.

Even better, we dont have to watch our GM shell out tons of money to a player who's body is clearly going to break down on him at any moment.

Really couldn't have gone much better to this point...

 

[Beacon]

For all the promise Brendl and Lundmark carried, that was it. York was a nice player, but beyond those kids, there was nothing of note on the team or in the system.

Again, hindsight is 20/20. How would people here react if we had a college kid who scored 66 points in 42 games and a Junior Defenseman who had 76 points in 68 games?

I'm not suggesting that 9OA Kravtsov will be like our 1999 9OA (Lundmark), for all I know he may be as good as our 1986 9OA. I'm merely suggesting that we do not yet know where we are. Merely having a bunch of players who perform at lower levels proves nothing. Look at Dube with 150 Junior points. Look at the two Ferraro twins (one a first rounder) who had 1.5 points per game as college freshmen. Look at Holmqvist who was a good starting goalie in Sweden as a teenager. Look at Olympic star goalie Corey Hirsch. Look at Grachev.

We need to figure out who is Holmqvist and who is Lundqvist, who is McDonagh and who is McIlrath, who is Zubov and who is MDZ, who is Kovalev and who is Grachev.

 

[E-Train]

I followed our prospects very closely at the time and I assure you, those are facts. Nobody today views it as such because hindsight is 20/20, but in 1999, we thought things were looking up. Nobody thought the light at the end of the tunnel was merely an oncoming train.

They’re not facts though. Malhotra’s offensive upside was a question mark on draft day. Far before Mucker’s comment. Burke Henry was not a Miller level prospect. Not close. I went to the 1998 draft party, I had all of the Blueshirt Bulletins. Lundmark and Brendl were Trottier and Bossy until they weren’t.

 

[Tawnos]

I followed our prospects very closely at the time and I assure you, those are facts. Nobody today views it as such because hindsight is 20/20, but in 1999, we thought things were looking up. Nobody thought the light at the end of the tunnel was merely an oncoming train.

I too followed our prospects very closely then. In 1999, Burke Henry was not considered at the level we think of Miller at today. I specifically remember there being a bunch of concern about how Henry didn’t show much progression for Brandon in his D+2 after an excellent D+1. But obviously, Miller might have the same problem next year. And even so, Miller’s absolute peak potential is a Norris Trophy contender. Henry’s was never that, but more like a decent 1st pairing guy.

I do agree that we thought things were looking up in 1999 and we were very wrong.

There are really two ways to go about this. One is to act as if your plan with your youth is going to go right (the optimistic approach). The other is to assume it won’t and to wait until you’re sure you have the pieces you want (the pessimistic approach). I don’t think there’s anything wrong with either approach, though personally I tend to be more of an optimist, with some prudence. The Rangers should not be signing a slew of UFAs right now like the 99 team did. But if one right guy is there? Sure, they should go after him.