Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XVI

[Edge]

A lot of my cynicism also comes from other factors regarding the Rangers' scouting and development. I don't trust Gordie Clark in the first round, period, and I'll leave it at that. There's also the issue that the Rangers haven't developed an elite positional player since Brian Leetch 30 years ago, so Im a bit skeptical about the notion on this board that this is the dawn of a new day.

I am curious as to what this is based upon.

If you look at the Rangers pickings beyond the first round, at worst, they're firmly in the top half of the league, and arguably closer to the top 1/3.

I genuinely ask because I often see blanket statements about the Rangers drafting, but I don't really see a lot of citations to support the claim.

Now, the comment about finding elite talent certainly has merit. But, I often come back to follow-up points:

1. What elite talents do we feel the Rangers have routinely missed out on based on their draft positions and picks?

and

2. Is there a whole of ground to cover between classifying a team "great" for finding elite talent later in the draft, and awful because they haven't? For example, there could be 10 teams better at finding late round talent than the Rangers over the last 14 years. But that still means they were better than 19 or 20 other teams.

 

[Machinehead]

I like this version of MachineHead better than the one who is rage-tastic

I try my best. I'm working on my temper.

Funny thing is, hockey is really the only thing I have a temper over. People know me as laid back.

 

[True Blue]

I'm fairly confident that the team will make a decision on Hayes prior to the deadline meaning he will be re-signed long-term or moved. There is no in between option like Yandle I can envision them pursuing.

I agree. There will be no in between. I think that Gorton is waiting on the right trading partner. In perfect world, it wold be a middle of the pack team that is in a win now mode and goes all in.

 

[EpicDing]

I try my best. I'm working on my temper.

Funny thing is, hockey is really the only thing I have a temper over. People know me as laid back.

The firing of a certaon gum-chewing moron has certainly helped, I'm sure.

 

[Machinehead]

The firing of a certaon gum-chewing moron has certainly helped, I'm sure.

David Quinn has been like a xanax and chamomile tea for me.

 

[LORDE]

We already are doing something different. I don't see many people criticizing the approach of aiming for a #1 pick. That would be great. But it's largely out of our control. You have 82 games to decide a season, with injuries and luck and young players developing, and then a lottery. People are so fixated on the 1OA and it's not a viable end game strategy. It's the best result of a rebuilding strategy, not the sole goal. There are loads of other pieces and actions you can take to reach your end game.

How this team plays is completely out of our control. They've done the right things thus far. If they buy at the deadline, I'll be 1000% on board with outrage b/c it would be beyond stupid. But other than a Larry Brooks opinion piece, we've seen no sign of this being part of the plan.

And seriously what is the alternative here? Freaking out about us playing too well through 26 games? Sending Chytil, Lias and Howden down. Bench ADA and ride McQuaid, Staal, Smith, Shatty. Trade Zucc, Kreider, Hayes. Profit?

I don't see anyone (Brooks or anyone on this board) who want or would approve of the "alternative" you suggest with tongue firmly in cheek.

But we all can agree that this team has nice pieces, just not game breaking elite yet. That is what we need and how we get it is the hard part. Lottery or via trade or UFA

We've been down the UFA route a few times if memory serves.

 

[True Blue]

But we all can agree that this team has nice pieces, just not game breaking elite yet. That is what we need and how we get it is the hard part. Lottery or via trade or UFA

Kreider has very much stepped into a legit top line forward role. Do we not believe he is a game breaker or elite? If so, and this is a real question, where does the line get drawn? He is a player who should be here on the other side of the rebuild.

 

[Edge]

I agree. There will be no in between. I think that Gorton is waiting on the right trading partner. In perfect world, it wold be a middle of the pack team that is in a win now mode and goes all in.

Without getting too far into reading tea leaves, I think they end up moving him --- and not just because I think that's the way to go.

Based on certain comments and approaches, I think the Rangers realize that Hayes is only driving his value higher. They don't necessarily want to telegraph to everyone that they're not keeping him. This way they can always say, "Well, we don't have to move him for what you're offering. We could move him to another team, or we could resign him. We have the money."

So the longer Gorton plays that card, and he's not on the clock yet, it only serves to support his purpose.

Right now, I don't think he has an offer on the table that he can't live without --- assuming he has a firm offer at all. Not unlike McD, I think he has a firm vision for what he's looking for --- and that's a plus version of the Stastny deal last year. I think he wants a legit prospect or young talent, a first round pick, and another asset. It's a three piece deal for him. Though I think the picks can be negotiated down if the Rangers love the prospect/young player.

Zucc's injury doesn't appear to be anything major, and I doubt it impacts his value one way or the other. I think he's viewed as a good complimentary player for a playoff bound team, and a relatively low-risk/higher return investment. I think he's more a pick-based acquisition for the Rangers.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I don't see anyone (Brooks or anyone on this board) who want or would approve of the "alternative" you suggest with tongue firmly in cheek.

But we all can agree that this team has nice pieces, just not game breaking elite yet. That is what we need and how we get it is the hard part. Lottery or via trade or UFA

We've been down the UFA route a few times if memory serves.

Chytil is a game-breaking talent. Kravtsov and Miller are future game-breaking talents. Yes, the Rangers need more, but, they are not devoid of game-breaking talents. And, as @True Blue posted, Kreider has become a legitimate 1st line talent with game-breaking ability. And I would submit that Zibanejad is not that far behind.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

David Quinn has been like a xanax and chamomile tea for me.

Yet, if AV was handing Pionk top pairing minutes, you'd be having an coronary. Thats not hypocritical or anything.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Chytil is a game-breaking talent. Kravtsov and Miller are future game-breaking talents. Yes, the Rangers need more, but, they are not devoid of game-breaking talents. And, as @True Blue posted, Kreider has become a legitimate 1st line talent with game-breaking ability. And I would submit that Zibanejad is not that far behind.

Zibanejad has been our best forward this year.

Kreider is right there, but Z has been the player we hoped we were getting. Just need to stay on the ice and get him some actual linemates.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I firmly believe that we as fans are truly in unfamiliar territory. We keep waiting for the same old Ranger approach to show up. And it’s difficult for observers, be it fans, Brooks or even the rest of the hockey media, (which was convinced the Rangers were going to pursue Tavares, or at least use some of the picks and prospects they’ve acquired for Karlsson), to believe that Gorton isn’t suddenly going to throw this all away and make short term moves.

 

[Off Sides]

Admittedly, that's a big wait and see.

However, thus far, there are some promising signs:

The Rangers have seemingly done a good job of identifying young talent --- be it guys they couldn't acquire (Keller, Pettersson), or guys who are stepping up to the NHL (Pionk, ADA, Howden, Chytil, Andersson, Georgiev).

Other prospects are having very strong D+1 and D+2 seasons --- Keane, Miller, Lundkvist, Barron, etc.

I think Hajek and Lindgren haven't looked overwhelmed at the AHL level as rookies, especially within the context that the Pack's young defensemen don't really put up eye-catching offensive numbers and instead really focused on defensive fundamentals.

So I guess I don't view it as a quantity vs. quality, so much as quantity and quality. And to the latter point, I think the early returns are about as good as anyone could've expected --- across the globe, in multiple leagues, and at multiple levels.

It's interesting, while I agree with what you are conveying, I am not sure I see that whole group becoming all that much better than the past 2 iterations of groups they have had come up.

Perhaps I am more pessimistic in nature, to me that whole group outside of possibly Miller, Kravtsov, Chytil seems more like a group of possible good players they will first try to augment with some free agent signing, where eventually they will end up trading off some of them for what they think is better. I'm not sure I consider that to be drastically different than what they basically did with the past iterations.

Not trying to contend it's not steps in what I'd consider the right direction, more so my image of the end game is leading more towards a team that eventually has something like 3 2nd lines, one top pair defender mixed in with a bunch of 2nd and 3rd pair guys.

Of course as they develop that can change, as they draft more or trade for more prospects, yet overall I can not get rid of the premonition that this may kind of just be history repeating itself. Perhaps that repeat makes less errors/shows more patience/whatever along the way but I'm not super confident even as good as say Howden has been that he ends up better than Hayes, or that Chytil/Kreider, Lias/Stepan Miller/McD, Kravtsov/Nash and so on and so forth. So far I am just not seeing that element that makes me believe most/some/all of those players do not end up eventually playing against (mostly in the playoffs) peers who are just a bit better than they are.

To try to not be misunderstood, it's not as if I am complaining, it's more I'm just not sure they see any of their recent history as coming up short due to anything other than bad luck (or whatever they want to attribute it to) rather than seeing it as coming up short because they made some mistakes.

If they think it was just bad luck or whatever it will make sense for them to basically repeat what they did in the past, and try to get back to where that left off as soon as possible, yet if they see it as even slight mismanagement perhaps they decide to keep on this track for a bit longer.

 

[offdacrossbar]

I try my best. I'm working on my temper.

Funny thing is, hockey is really the only thing I have a temper over. People know me as laid back.

stop caring so much.....

 

[Machinehead]

Yet, if AV was handing Pionk top pairing minutes, you'd be having an coronary. Thats not hypocritical or anything.

I am having a coronary about Pionk. I just spent three days having a coronary about Pionk. Read the Pionk thread.

But coaches aren't perfect and Quinn has done other things well. Pionk has also quietly had his usage adjusted the past few games. Quinn tries different things. If AV piloted the Titanic he'd still be at the bottom of the Atlantic tying to float the damn thing.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Zibanejad has been our best forward this year.

Kreider is right there, but Z has been the player we hoped we were getting. Just need to stay on the ice and get him some actual linemates.

I would agree in terms of all-around game. But, Kreider has shown the ability to score game-affecting goals this year, which is what qualifies him in the game-breaker category, IMO.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Eh, Chytil will have to show me more consistency for me to consider him a game breaker. His 5 game goal streak has been a revelation, but I want to see him sustain his production over a greater than 5 game sample.

 

[LORDE]

Chytil is a game-breaking talent. Kravtsov and Miller are future game-breaking talents. Yes, the Rangers need more, but, they are not devoid of game-breaking talents. And, as @True Blue posted, Kreider has become a legitimate 1st line talent with game-breaking ability. And I would submit that Zibanejad is not that far behind.

Kravtsov and Miller we HOPE are... neither are here yet and one has been playing his position for two years.

Chytil is looking great but he too is unproven yet. Zbad and Kreider are nice pieces and certainly looking like the guys we had hoped they would be, but again... it's 20 games.

I'm not trying to pick all of them apart at all... but we just don't know yet.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I try my best. I'm working on my temper.

Funny thing is, hockey is really the only thing I have a temper over. People know me as laid back.

You’ve been awesome the past six months to argue with. You start out on the extreme, but you’ve adjusted your POV based on what you’ve witnessed. Gorton and Quinn are slowly gaining your trust. Your opinion of both Kravtsov and Miller has shifted. At one point a couple of weeks ago, you were even disappointed by the Rangers winning a shootout because it inflated their point totals. It was glorious.

 

[Tawnos]

A lot of my cynicism also comes from other factors regarding the Rangers' scouting and development. I don't trust Gordie Clark in the first round, period, and I'll leave it at that. There's also the issue that the Rangers haven't developed an elite positional player since Brian Leetch 30 years ago, so Im a bit skeptical about the notion on this board that this is the dawn of a new day.

Hasn’t he only been in charge of the draft since 2010 or am I misremembering? Their first round picks since then are McIlrath, Miller, Skjei, Andersson, Chytil, Kravtsov, Miller, and Lundkvist. Of the 3 that are old enough to draw a conclusion, 2 are middle-6/middle-pair players. All other 5 look like they were very good picks at this early stage.

I would say the Rangers have been very very good about developing guys to their max potential, it’s just that as it turned out, the last youth movement didn’t have a player with elite max potential.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Hasn’t he only been in charge of the draft since 2010 or am I misremembering? Their first round picks since then are McIlrath, Miller, Skjei, Andersson, Chytil, Kravtsov, Miller, and Lundkvist. Of the 3 that are old enough to draw a conclusion, 2 are middle-6/middle-pair players. All other 5 look like they were very good picks at this early stage.

I would say the Rangers have been very very good about developing guys to their max potential, it’s just that as it turned out, the last youth movement didn’t have a player with elite max potential.

I also want to add to this and say it seems like they’ve changed their draft strategy since Gorton became the GM, it feels like they’re taking bigger/bolder swings on upside earlier than they used to

 

[Ghost of jas]

Kravtsov and Miller we HOPE are... neither are here yet and one has been playing his position for two years.

Chytil is looking great but he too is unproven yet. Zbad and Kreider are nice pieces and certainly looking like the guys we had hoped they would be, but again... it's 20 games.

I'm not trying to pick all of them apart at all... but we just don't know yet.

That’s a different subject. All the players I listed have game-breaking ability. That’s a far cry from what we’re used to seeing in the organization. I can remember looking at the prospect pool back after Kreider being drafted and while liking what was there, realizing there wasn’t anyone aside Kreider and maybe MDZ that had a chance to be difference maker. This is far ahead of that group by far. @Steve K, who has been very tough on the Ranger drafting results has said that both Chytil and Kravtsov are high end forwards that you can build around. People may have been excited in the past about our prospects, but, I find it hard to believe anyone than the most cynical can’t see the differences between now and then.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I also want to add to this and say it seems like they’ve changed their draft strategy since Gorton became the GM, it feels like they’re taking bigger/bolder swings on upside earlier than they used to

Which is exactly what they did in the first round this year.

 

[East Coast Bias]

I don't see anyone (Brooks or anyone on this board) who want or would approve of the "alternative" you suggest with tongue firmly in cheek.

But we all can agree that this team has nice pieces, just not game breaking elite yet. That is what we need and how we get it is the hard part. Lottery or via trade or UFA

We've been down the UFA route a few times if memory serves.

Oh there's definitely one prominent voice here screaming for this. One that freaks out any time Brooks suggests signing Hayes. Or Panarin. Or anyone really.

I don't think we really disagree here. I find myself struggling to root for loses. I understand the highest pick is best, and I wince a little hwen I see the standings, but being god awful for years to get top picks is harder to come back from than most people want to admit.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Hasn’t he only been in charge of the draft since 2010 or am I misremembering? Their first round picks since then are McIlrath, Miller, Skjei, Andersson, Chytil, Kravtsov, Miller, and Lundkvist. Of the 3 that are old enough to draw a conclusion, 2 are middle-6/middle-pair players. All other 5 look like they were very good picks at this early stage.

I would say the Rangers have been very very good about developing guys to their max potential, it’s just that as it turned out, the last youth movement didn’t have a player with elite max potential.

2007 I believe.

Which will take you to Chereponov, DZ, Kreider amongst those listed.

One of them we obviously lost to Tragedy, the other 2 have been solid to better regulars.

McIlrath is the only one who they really missed on with Andersson, Chytil, Kravstov, Miller and Lundkvist still TBD (though it looks like they've hit on the first 2 to an extent.)