Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXI

[The Crypto Guy]

It's 2 PM aka past noon....where's my Ville Meskannen at?!

huh

 

[The Crypto Guy]

If vesey has been good then Buch is godly for putting up similar p/g and being 2 year younger, but everyone wants to move off buch already

Vesey is what he is, a good 3rd liner putting up good numbers for what his role is. Buch is suppose to be providing a lot of offense for this team and is always letting down. We don't need another 3rd liner with Buch so if there is a team willing to overpay for him then i'd listen. It's still somewhat early,but Buch is starting to look like he won't put all the pieces together and ever reach his potential.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I blame the 2003 draft. Everyone remembers that we could have had Brown, Seabrook, Parise, Parise, Getzlaf, Burns, Kesler, Richards, Perry, and so on. You just remember all those guys in the teens and twenties, and then couple that with Sanguinetti instead of Giroux in the teens, Tarasenko and Kuznetsov going mid-to-late, etc. It happens, maybe even once in every draft, but it's still rare (2003 megadraft notwithstanding).

It's so easy to, in hindsight, focus on the exceptions that actually turn into great players.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

huh

Per the reporters Hayes was supposed to go on IR and someone be brought up. Meskannen has the hot hand lately.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

I blame the 2003 draft. Everyone remembers that we could have had Brown, Seabrook, Parise, Parise, Getzlaf, Burns, Kesler, Richards, Perry, and so on. You just remember all those guys in the teens and twenties, and then couple that with Sanguinetti instead of Giroux in the teens, Tarasenko and Kuznetsov going mid-to-late, etc. It happens, maybe even once in every draft, but it's still rare (2003 megadraft notwithstanding).

2003 draft was before Clark so he and his dept are exempt.

Two really bad mistake in 06 and 10s, with 2010 being the obvious one. I also was surprised by the Del Zotto pick. Thought it was 100% going to be John Carlson. Del Z was brought up too early. He wasn't mature enough to handle it. Him and Grachev from that draft both should have stayed behind an extra year.

 

[EpicDing]

Not every single prospect you acquire can be a boom bust guy, you need "safe" players who you can bank on being bottom 6 players to temper the possibility that none of the boom bust actually make it.

 

[Dijock94]

Vesey is what he is, a good 3rd liner putting up good numbers for what his role is. Buch is suppose to be providing a lot of offense for this team and is always letting down. We don't need another 3rd liner with Buch so if there is a team willing to overpay for him then i'd listen. It's still somewhat early,but Buch is starting to look like he won't put all the pieces together and ever reach his potential.

I’m kind of intrigued by the idea of playing him and Kravstov together in the future. See if they can’t grow their games together.

 

[Edge]

I blame the 2003 draft. Everyone remembers that we could have had Brown, Seabrook, Parise, Parise, Getzlaf, Burns, Kesler, Richards, Perry, and so on. You just remember all those guys in the teens and twenties, and then couple that with Sanguinetti instead of Giroux in the teens, Tarasenko and Kuznetsov going mid-to-late, etc. It happens, maybe even once in every draft, but it's still rare (2003 megadraft notwithstanding).

And I get that, but then we can't ignore Staal, Kreider, MDZ, Miller, Skjei, etc. who are standouts amongst many of the players in their neighborhood.

We have to careful about the selective memory we form. Yeah we remember some of those names, but we also tend to put our hands in our pockets and whistle when the names Carter Ashton, Jordan Schroeder, Joel Armia, Stefan Matteau, and Corey Emmerton come up. All of those guys would've won the popularity vote on draft day.

I just think it becomes very easy when we cherry pick the results after the fact --- which goes back to what you and I discussed earlier.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Buchnevich's drop off has been the most surprising. Since the season means little I wish they would put him back with Zibanajad and Kreider and see if that can get him goingm

 

[Avery16]

If vesey has been good then Buch is godly for putting up similar p/g and being 2 year younger, but everyone wants to move off buch already

different styles of play, but I'd hold onto Buch too

 

[Shesterkybomb]

2003 draft was before Clark so he and his dept are exempt.

Two really bad mistake in 06 and 10s, with 2010 being the obvious one. I also was surprised by the Del Zotto pick. Thought it was 100% going to be John Carlson. Del Z was brought up too early. He wasn't mature enough to handle it. Him and Grachev from that draft both should have stayed behind an extra year.

I never saw it with Grachev, everyone and their dog liked him and I felt he was just a bigger Zherdev.

 

[One Winged Angel]

This is on par with looking back 5 years ago and saying:

Well I made an investment in the stock market that made, on average 10% per year. Yay! But it wasn't worthwhile because this other investment made 12% per year. So my 10% per year is crap.

Can’t say I speak stock, sorry.

There is a pretty large chunk of 1st rounders who NEVER make the NHL. Just getting a good player out of any draft slot is an accomplishment and looking back years ago to say he was not the 'ideal' pick is fine but calling him 'not a 1st rounder' is the wrong way to go about it.

I guess that comes down to what your standards of “an accomplishment” are.

I never said he’s not a 1st rounder, I said I wouldn’t have taken him there. It’s a moot point, being that Gorton didn’t take him there, Yzerman did. What I’ve said is that I don’t like him being one of the major pieces in a deal for McDonagh and I said I didn’t like that deal from the start.

I think if you were to ask most GM's and Heads of Scouting departments, given the 27th pick in a draft, if they could get a guaranteed player like Howden, who projects as a 2/3C who excels at faceoffs and projects to about 45-50 with good 2-way play, they would jump at it.

I think we’re being way too generous with this 2/3C terminology. From what I’ve seen, he’s most likely a 3C who at his very best could be a fringe 2C. I hope I’m wrong.

To put this another way, if the Rangers, after this season, were to decide to shop Howden, I can almost guarantee teams would offer much more than just a late 1st round pick. There is inherent risk with a pick like that which you aren't taking into account.

I obviously have no way to say so for sure, but I SEVERELY doubt that. I don’t think there’s any team that would offer a first for him right now and if that was the case and Gorton didn’t deal him, he should be fired immediately.

Now, would it be great if the Rangers could find some elite talent through the draft? Of course. It's also important for the Rangers to build a team where the pieces they have fit the roles required on an actual team. That includes guys like Howden.

I won’t argue any of that.

McDonagh was never re-signing in NY. That's a moot point. They returned a young 20 year center who projects to a 2/3C in Howden and a defenseman who projects pretty safely to a second pairing guy who plays in all situations, a 1st rounder and possibly another 1st rounder. TB then gave McDonagh a long-term contract taking him to 36 years old. It's a package that, while it may be lacking a super high end piece, immediately replenished a good chunk of depth the Rangers system had been lacking in one fell swoop.

It’s not a moot point because he was the opening salvo in the rebuild. He was a piece that was worth as much as anyone this team had to sell off and they didn’t get back enough, in my opinion. Only time will tell if I’m wrong or right, but in no way, shape or form was or am I saying that we should have kept him.

I knew they weren’t getting an elite prospect or a young roster player for McDonagh, Sergachev and Point were nothing but unrealistic hopes and pipe dreams of Ranger fans.

 

[One Winged Angel]

I get this, and I can respect that.

But I have to be honest with you, usually the people I see making these comments are the ones who are miserable about almost everything and make some pretty over-the-top negative comments that go way beyond the premise of what they were trying to present. Then usually they get talked back down from the ledge.

I totally understand all of this, but looking back in my own analysis, I’ve never been one of those types. If others feel that I’ve been that way, they can feel free to say so, but I’ve been pretty realistic and level-headed for the most part, I’d say. Everyone has their moments though. Some just have them more so than others.

It's kind of like when people brag about being straight shooters. On the one hand, that's great, I know where they stand. But what if they're an a-hole and their opinions are usually wrong?

We both know that the people who are the former don’t need to brag about it. The people who are the latter are usually the ones bragging about it because they’re either A. unsure of themselves, B. can’t see or don’t know it or C. they know they’re that way and want to front as if they’re not.

We’ve both been on here long enough to know the difference.

 

[SA16]

Well Zherdev was an excellent player so a bigger Zherdev would have been elite.

61 points at age 23 in CBJ
58 points at age 24 in NYR
Extremely good on ice impacts.

And they walk away from him in arbitration. Lol.

 

[Webster]

Zucc is mad at himself. Interview with Norwegian media...

"I'm a professional, but I don't act like one. And my play sucks. I'm thinking too much and have allowed this to get into my head, it affects my play. These are tough times, all season really. I'm telling myself there's nothing I can do about the situation, but I'm only human, and sometimes I let emotions go too far. But it doesn't help me or my team, I have to pull myself together. I know that I'm probably going to be traded. But I don't know if I'm ready for it or not, I just have to take it as it is".

This little mental breakdown is kind of surprising, I don't know what to say, except that he earns $4.5 million a year and should be happy about that.

Link (in Norwegian) Zucca med nådeløs selvkritikk: – Jeg har ikke vært profesjonell nok

 

[True Blue]

People really have an overinflated view of what a low end first rounder is worth. You get more misses than hits and the hits are rarely of the superstar variety:

If nothing else, really drives home the fact that the draft is not quite the crapshoot that some love to make it out to be. Generally, your better players go sooner rather than latter. Both in the first round, and in the subsequent rounds or first round compared to later rounds.

 

[Zibanejbread]

I'm genuinely curious how the team responds once Zucc is gone. Love what he's done in the past, but can't help but think it'd be a breath of fresh air for everyone in the locker room to have that attitude removed.

 

[LORDE]

Another day, another roster building thread.

Someone wake Gorts up! We seem to be more concerned about this roster than he is!!!!

 

[offdacrossbar]

If nothing else, really drives home the fact that the draft is not quite the crapshoot that some love to make it out to be. Generally, your better players go sooner rather than latter. Both in the first round, and in the subsequent rounds or first round compared to later rounds.

rebuilding a team via the draft sounds sexy. do we have 5 years of this in the tank ?

we trade away the entire "core" and hope the draft rebuilds us.

and all the while relying on this scouting staff to drive the bus.

dunno.

 

[Edge]

If nothing else, really drives home the fact that the draft is not quite the crapshoot that some love to make it out to be. Generally, your better players go sooner rather than latter. Both in the first round, and in the subsequent rounds or first round compared to later rounds.

I think we've reached a point where some of the mystery has been taken out .

Yes, you're always going to have surprises and diamonds in the rough. But it's not like it was 30 or even 20 years ago where you were going to find multiple stars in the later rounds. They are fewer and farther between these days.

The reality is that there's a big drop off when you get outside the top 15-20 in most drafts, and the second rounds aren't quite the gold mines they used to be.

Again, not to say that you can't find excellent players. But from an "odds" standpoint, the draft isn't as much of a lottery as one might believe.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Well Zherdev was an excellent player so a bigger Zherdev would have been elite.

61 points at age 23 in CBJ
58 points at age 24 in NYR
Extremely good on ice impacts.

And they walk away from him in arbitration. Lol.

Ya he piggybacked off his linemates. Never did much after he left here. High skill, soft as baby poo.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

rebuilding a team via the draft sounds sexy. do we have 5 years of this in the tank ?

we trade away the entire "core" and hope the draft rebuilds us.

and all the while relying on this scouting staff to drive the bus.

dunno.

The other option is to be mediocre for 10 years.

 

[One Winged Angel]

The boom or bust vs "safe" thing depends on organizational preference and also where that organization is at the time. He was a Tampa pick. I don't know their philosophy and I don't know their situation headed into the 2016 draft. He could have been a perfect pick for that team. I don't know so I can't comment on that.

Fair enough, I look at the team and just in my analysis and opinion, they could have afforded to take a homerun swing. That’s my opinion. I obviously don’t have any type of inside knowledge or anything, so I won’t speak in an absolute that I can’t confirm.

Raddysh, again, fine. I don't care if Hart ends up a better goalie than Howden a center; I don't value goalies in the draft enough to go in round one. Especially when you can get a guy like him in round two. Why take a great goalie prospect in round one when you can generally get them later? Different conversation though.

I can understand not valuing the goalie, but my philosophy is BPA. I could be wrong, but I think you and most might agree that the first goalie that’s taken in drafts has to have at least potential to be a starter, no? Hypothetically speaking, if that’s the case, unless organizational need dictates otherwise, why not take the goalie if he’s the better player? Even if organizational depth takes a turn and he ends up being a redundant piece, you can always move him in a trade.

He was big-time. Not a superstar but very highly regarded. In his bantam draft he went right behind Steel and Nolan Patrick, right ahead of Jost, Fabbro, and Clague. He was one of the top handful of prospects potentially entering Major Junior that year.

I think you and I just have different definitions of that term, which is fine. That comes down to semantics and to me, that’s just a pointless and stupid argument to have in the middle of something constructive like this.

The "too much" refers to playing 16 minutes per night including a not-insignificant 1:40 on the PP and 1:15 on the PK when he's not ready. I think he's in over his head and they're asking him to do more than he's ready to do.

Fair enough, I have no problem with that angle. Personally, I feel like maybe he could use a slight reduction, probably in the special teams area, but with this the lack of depth that we agree on, where are we getting that production from? Certainly no Ryan Strome, FML.

I don't understand the last paragraph so I can't respond to it. Anyway, the whole point is "worthy of a first round pick" is being used pretty subjectively--that is, "I don't think he has that upside." I think if you look at where his junior career started, how it ended, all the steps along the way, the valuations and rankings of draft publications, compare him to other guys taken around him, etc., try to quantify things and make it more objective, he was an obvious first round pick.

As for the last paragraph, I thought your “too much” was an overall statement, not only about his assignments on ice. That’s my mistake then, wasn’t 110% sure of what you meant by that and probably should have asked for clarification.

It is subjective, that’s why I state that it’s my opinion and not fact. I don’t believe he was worth that selection. I’d rather have taken the others I listed in the prior post before him. The publications can say all they’d like, I just wouldn’t have taken him there. I think he would have been a better second round pick, that’s all.

 

[offdacrossbar]

The other option is to be mediocre for 10 years.

it wasnt that long ago that this organization led the league in wins over a substantial number of games/sesons and played the most playoff games in a 3-4 year period.

seems along time ago today.

this rebuild will be painful for a long time if we scrap everyone and think the draft will save us.

 

[SA16]

Ya he piggybacked off his linemates. Never did much after he left here. High skill, soft as baby poo.

He piggy backed off his linemates yet he was the one who led the team in points? He also had almost 25% of his ice time with Aaron Voros. His most common linemate was Dubinsky who put up 41 points.

The year before his most common linemates in CBJ were Michael Peca (34 pts in 65 games), Jason Chimera (31 pts), Rick Nash, and Jiri Novotny (22 pts in 65 games).

His linemates, outside of Nash, were far inferior players.

Zherdev is easily the most misunderstood Ranger since the lockout. Even more than Rick Nash I would say. And letting him go for nothing is among the worst decisions the organization has made.