Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXX

[TheBloodyNine]

But not elite. Just like you don't know if this year's #4 will ever become elite either. Would I love the 4 pick, yes. Am I willing to tear the team down to the studs and purposely ice an AHL squad for that opportunity? No way.

Why not? What are we gaining by NOT doing that? We aren't winning anything this year so there is literally nothing to lose by doing that.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

None of those players change a franchise though, which is what many pro-tank fans are expecting (and use as their argument for tanking and getting a top-4 pick).

But if you want to use this argument then one could argue "Hey we shouldn't draft 1st overall because we could draft Yakupov!"

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Why not? What are we gaining by NOT doing that? We aren't winning anything this year so there is literally nothing to lose by doing that.

Because if you purposely tank and miss on that pick you set your franchise back 5 years. Personally, I'd rather do what they are doing now. Move UFAs, keep their better players, make the most out of wherever they pick, use assets collected to make a trade, sign a FA is the fit is right. I can live with that.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Also, if the Rangers completed that trade for 4th overall in 2016 with the Oilers, they were gonna take Keller.

Anyone here not want him on this team?

 

[mrhockey193195]

But if you want to use this argument then one could argue "Hey we shouldn't draft 1st overall because we could draft Yakupov!"

Not quite. The argument is more, "drafting 1st, while giving you the best chance at a franchise player, does not guarantee that outcome" and extends to "if given the choice of the 3rd overall pick, or the 7th & 15th overall pick, I'd take the latter" (depending on the draft, of course).

In a nutshell, I personally want a handful of picks in the top two rounds. Obviously, tanking is not mutually exclusive from that - it's better to have a handful of picks where one of them is top-3. But in reality, I'm not upset that we're winning games. We're winning because guys like Hayes and Zucc are playing great, and their trade value is now potentially a 1st round pick+ instead of a 2nd round or 3rd round pick had they been playing like crap. The fact that our native 1st will be 10th overall instead of 4th is a good tradeoff in my opinion (completely neglecting the other positives of winnings games vis-a-vis the development of our young guys like ADA, Chytil, and Howden)

 

[brians1128]

Since 09 (not counting the 18 draft), here's who was taken at 4:

E. Kane
Johansen
Larrson
Reinhart
Jones
Bennet
Hanafin
Puljarvi

How many are elite?

Your missing Marner in 2015.
And another thing that needs to be taken into account is not just who was taken at 4 but rather soon after. The Rangers were in talks to trade for the 4th in 2016. thats Jesse P but the Ranger pick would have been Keller, not saying Keller is elite but hes much better then PoolParty. I would also bet that if the Rangers had the 4th in 2017, we would be walking away with Petterson who is looking elite.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Because if you purposely tank and miss on that pick you set your franchise back 5 years. Personally, I'd rather do what they are doing now. Move UFAs, keep their better players, make the most out of wherever they pick, use assets collected to make a trade, sign a FA is the fit is right. I can live with that.

The possibility of "Maybe" missing on a pick is a rediculous excuse. You are much more likely to miss on a pick in the later 1st round than you are at the top of the draft.

What you are advocating for is mediocrity. It's essentially the same thing the Rangers have been doing for years and it's produced exactly zero championships.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Only Larsson then?

Seth Jones.

 

[Edge]

Well to be somewhat fair, we have been giving up A LOT of our picks.

but I'd raid TB org and pay all of their scouts

And I think you have to look at how much elite was passed up by the Rangers even with the picks.

I think we hold them to the standards of a team consistently picking in the top 10.

But from 2005-2012, we're talking about picking 12, 21, 17, 20, 19, 10, 15, 28.

So between 2005 and 2016 the Rangers had a first round pick 8 out of 12 drafts, or only 66 percent of the time. And when they did, it was at an average position of 17.75, so let's say 18th overall.

The list of elite talent left on the board. when the Rangers actually had picks, requires a fair bit of scrolling even with the benefit of hindsight.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

The possibility of "Maybe" missing on a pick is a rediculous excuse. You are much more likely to miss on a pick in the later 1st round than you are at the top of the draft.

What you are advocating for is mediocrity. It's essentially the same thing the Rangers have been doing for years and it's produced exactly zero championships.

Huh? You'd call what the team is doing the last two years they same thing they've been doing for years? On what planet?

 

[NYRKING30]

People like Mika Zibanejad right? Where was he selected? 5th overall. It's not about getting the 1st or 2nd pick, it's about getting the highest pick you possibly can.

 

[duhmetreE]

And I think you have to look at how much elite was passed up by the Rangers even with the picks.

I think we hold them to the standards of a team consistently picking in the top 10.

But from 2005-2012, we're talking about picking 12, 21, 17, 20, 19, 10, 15, 28.

So between 2005 and 2016 the Rangers had a first round pick 8 out of 12 drafts, or only 66 percent of the time. And when they did, it was at an average position of 17.75, so let's say 18th overall.

The list of elite talent left on the board. when the Rangers actually had picks, requires a fair bit of scrolling even with the benefit of hindsight.

Maybe I'm being naive but I have higher hopes with Gorton and co.

I know we liked Keller. I know we liked Petterson. I'm really happy with Kravstov and Miller.

So, with all that's been added so far and with what we will add this draft ( hopefully another VK74 and Miller type talent, or who knows, winning the lottery ) , I don't think we're that far off.. Just need to take time for the kids to develop.

We will need a 2C and 1RHD.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

And I think you have to look at how much elite was passed up by the Rangers even with the picks.

I think we hold them to the standards of a team consistently picking in the top 10.

But from 2005-2012, we're talking about picking 12, 21, 17, 20, 19, 10, 15, 28.

So between 2005 and 2016 the Rangers had a first round pick 8 out of 12 drafts, or only 66 percent of the time. And when they did, it was at an average position of 17.75, so let's say 18th overall.

The list of elite talent left on the board. when the Rangers actually had picks, requires a fair bit of scrolling even with the benefit of hindsight.

Are you inferring that you can find a very good hockey player outside of the top 5? Blasphemy.

 

[duhmetreE]

People like Mika Zibanejad right? Where was he selected? 5th overall. It's not about getting the 1st or 2nd pick, it's about getting the highest pick you possibly can.

6th

 

[FIRE DRURY]

Because if you purposely tank and miss on that pick you set your franchise back 5 years

Really? 5 years? Is this a fact?

 

[NYRKING30]

6th

Now that Strome is here i always forget which one was first since they were back to back. Point still stands, you want to get the highest you possibly can. It's one thing if we are intentionally going into any season with the goal to get 1st overall, that is silly and our team wouldn't do that. I just don't want to be stuck in the middle for years straight. When we actually won a cup, where was our 2nd most important piece drafted? 9th overall.

 

[Off Sides]

Not quite. The argument is more, "drafting 1st, while giving you the best chance at a franchise player, does not guarantee that outcome" and extends to "if given the choice of the 3rd overall pick, or the 7th & 15th overall pick, I'd take the latter" (depending on the draft, of course).

In a nutshell, I personally want a handful of picks in the top two rounds. Obviously, tanking is not mutually exclusive from that - it's better to have a handful of picks where one of them is top-3. But in reality, I'm not upset that we're winning games. We're winning because guys like Hayes and Zucc are playing great, and their trade value is now potentially a 1st round pick+ instead of a 2nd round or 3rd round pick had they been playing like crap. The fact that our native 1st will be 10th overall instead of 4th is a good tradeoff in my opinion (completely neglecting the other positives of winnings games vis-a-vis the development of our young guys like ADA, Chytil, and Howden)

While I think you make a good point, that is where things get a little bit more foggy to me.

I think the earlier picks would more than make up for them losing a little more now, hypothetically if they do end up with the 10th pick, had they ended up with the 4th if they used it to trade down to 10 they'd likely be getting a greater asset in that trade than they would by maybe taking lesser value on Hayes/Zucc where unless they were playing horribly I think the value in return is similar rental like value regardless, if traded one for one.

 

[Edge]

Are you inferring that you can find a very good hockey player outside of the top 5? Blasphemy.

Haha, I've always maintained that high picks don't ensure your success. But I also 100 percent feel that your odds of finding top-end talent is significantly higher when you get in the top 5 or top 10 in most drafts.

With regards to Gorton and company, the talent they acquire from 2016-2020, both via trade and via the draft, is going to be what they're judged by.

We can cite history and precedent and anything else we want. At the end of the day, it's talent born of a 5 year period that is going to determine their drafting legacy.

 

[LORDE]

None of those players change a franchise though, which is what many pro-tank fans are expecting (and use as their argument for tanking and getting a top-4 pick).

I’d kill for a top - 4 pick this yr

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Really? 5 years? Is this a fact?

If you ice a team devoid of any talent with the intent of picking as high as possible and you miss on that pick. 5 years easily. As factual as the idea that you can only win a championship drafting 1st or 2nd.

 

[Matt Rentfree]

I’d kill for a top - 4 pick this yr

There are a few people I intensely dislike - put your money where your mouth is.

 

[mrhockey193195]

I’d kill for a top - 4 pick this yr

Don't people say that almost every year though? You're probably right though, some of those prior years were known to not have the most high-end talent. That being said - the endless pimping of every top 30 prospect in every draft year, both by the media and the fanbases of the teams that draft those players - has me jaded. A bunch of "can't miss" prospects actually do miss.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

If you ice a team devoid of any talent with the intent of picking as high as possible and you miss on that pick. 5 years easily. As factual as the idea that you can only win a championship drafting 1st or 2nd.

5 years easily?



You seem to be one of those guys that likes throwing his opinions around like they’re facts.

 

[LORDE]

There are a few people I intensely dislike - put your money where your mouth is.

We might have the same ex... is her name Lauren???

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Haha, I've always maintained that high picks don't ensure your success. But I also 100 percent feel that your odds of finding top-end talent is significantly higher when you get in the top 5 or top 10 in most drafts.

With regards to Gorton and company, the talent they acquire from 2016-2020, both via trade and via the draft, is going to be what they're judged by.

We can cite history and precedent and anything else we want. At the end of the day, it's talent born of a 5 year period that is going to determine their drafting legacy.

Which was kind of my point. Strome was drafted at 5 and is serviceable NHL player, Zibenajad at 6 is a legit #1 center. Rangers ended up with both, lol, even though they drafted neither.