Team Board Mock Draft

  • 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

Who will the Rangers pick?

  • Sean Behrens (D) U.S. National U18 Team

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Tristan Broz (F) Fargo Force

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Corson Ceulemans (D) Brooks Bandits

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sebastian Cossa (G) Edmonton Oil Kings

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Aleksi Heimosalmi (D) Ässät U20

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Evan Nause (D) Québec Remparts

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Oskar Olausson (LW/RW) HV71

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Brennan Othmann (LW) Olten

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Simon Robertsson (RW) Skellefteå AIK

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Matthew Samoskevich (C) Chicago Steel

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Stanislav Svozil (D) HC Kometa Brno

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    148
  • Poll closed .
Wallstedt, for me. Shesty is turning 26 in December and is already having groin troubles. Could be too expensive to sign past 30. Keep the depth going in NYR and get a cost-controlled stud in the process.

I like the idea of potentially trading down from here and see where Chibrikov, Raty, Svechkov, Pinelli, and ZLH end up and also grab a 2nd in the process (preferably in 2022). But to pass on Wallstedt, who can be a stellar goalie in the NHL real soon, is a tough pill to swallow.

If this were the real draft, I think Wallstedt goes before No. 15...
 
There are like 50 good goalies and if you need an especially good one, the team is flawed.

Although, if you're drafting Wallstedt to not re-sign Shesty, that's actually based.

I'd draft him to have the option.

I see the kid as nearly NHL ready. That's around seven cost controlled seasons including an ELC.

I'm already on team 'one year bridge' for Shesterkin. Then you have him RFA protected, posed to make a trade or a signing. I love his stickhandling and athleticism but I want to see more than 47 NHL games before we give him a long term commitment. There's a number of reasons for this

1) I dont know how his size will hold up in the new NHL, where screens and deflections comprise a huge percentage of goals scored.

2) He's had injury issues

3) Certain posters have overstated this, but he has had a tendency to give up bad goals at extremely inopportune times.

I think the prevailing attitude on the boards is that Shesty will give us another 12-15 year Hank-esque career, but there's no reason to assume that at this juncture. Nor is there any reason to assume that this is the way to build a proper contender.

Worst case scenario you end up like Anaheim with Gibson and Andersen and just keep the one you like more.

Throw in the fact that I think maybe 1 in 5 players picked in the second half of the first round will have lengthy NHL careers.

Askarov and Knight are both looking real good atm
 
I'd draft him to have the option.

I see the kid as nearly NHL ready. That's around seven cost controlled seasons including an ELC.

I'm already on team 'one year bridge' for Shesterkin. Then you have him RFA protected, posed to make a trade or a signing. I love his stickhandling and athleticism but I want to see more than 47 NHL games before we give him a long term commitment. There's a number of reasons for this

1) I dont know how his size will hold up in the new NHL, where screens and deflections comprise a huge percentage of goals scored.

2) He's had injury issues

3) Certain posters have overstated this, but he has had a tendency to give up bad goals at extremely inopportune times.

I think the prevailing attitude on the boards is that Shesty will give us another 12-15 year Hank-esque career, but there's no reason to assume that at this juncture. Nor is there any reason to assume that this is the way to build a proper contender.

Worst case scenario you end up like Anaheim with Gibson and Andersen and just keep the one you like more.

Throw in the fact that I think maybe 1 in 5 players picked in the second half of the first round will have lengthy NHL careers.

Askarov and Knight are both looking real good atm
Even if he did give us a Hank-esque career, I wouldn't take that if you offered it to me.

A goalie of that caliber commands $11m a year. More average goalies have won the Stanley Cup than great ones.

I'd rather spend that extra $6-7m on almost anything else.

Matt Murray got nearly run out of the league this year. Put a good enough team in front of him, and he wins back to back Cups.

I know everyone clings to the fantasy of being Montreal but I watched this team win playoff games getting outshot 40-21 for years. It got old. I'd rather be the team with 40 and Joe Schmo between the pipes.
 
I'd draft him to have the option.

I see the kid as nearly NHL ready. That's around seven cost controlled seasons including an ELC.

I'm already on team 'one year bridge' for Shesterkin. Then you have him RFA protected, posed to make a trade or a signing. I love his stickhandling and athleticism but I want to see more than 47 NHL games before we give him a long term commitment. There's a number of reasons for this

1) I dont know how his size will hold up in the new NHL, where screens and deflections comprise a huge percentage of goals scored.

2) He's had injury issues

3) Certain posters have overstated this, but he has had a tendency to give up bad goals at extremely inopportune times.

I think the prevailing attitude on the boards is that Shesty will give us another 12-15 year Hank-esque career, but there's no reason to assume that at this juncture. Nor is there any reason to assume that this is the way to build a proper contender.

Worst case scenario you end up like Anaheim with Gibson and Andersen and just keep the one you like more.

Throw in the fact that I think maybe 1 in 5 players picked in the second half of the first round will have lengthy NHL careers.

Askarov and Knight are both looking real good atm

The worst case scenario is that he is not an NHL goalie, a bad goalie, or takes very long to become one and it happens for another team (Campbell for example). Vasilevskiy, Price, Fleury are like the only first round pick goalies to have worked out in the last 20 years. First round goalies...

Askarov - too early
Knight - too early
Oettinger - was good this year
Samsonov - been decent
Vasilevskiy - best goalie
Subban - bust
Campbell - didn't turn into anything for like 10 years on a different team
Visentin - bust
Pickard - bust
McCollum - bust
Bernier - fine goalie who played a total of like 60 games for the team that drafted him
Helenius - bust
Varlamov - same situation as Bernier but a better goalie
Irving - bust
Price - up and down, at times the best, awful contract
Rask - very good but never played for the team that drafted him
Montoya - bust
Dubnyk - did nothing in EDM
Schwarz - bust
Schneider - I guess it worked since he was good and got traded for the 8th pick or something
Fleury - good

so...Price/Fleury/Vasilevskiy are like the only ones who even did anything long term for the teams that drafted them. Price has a bad contract which provides negative value and we will see how it ends up with Vasilevskiy's.

All of that combined with the fact that goalies have very little trade value (this is not the earlier 2000s where guys like Bernier/Schenider got good returns) make taking someone like a Wallstedt a very bad investment. Even if you take a skater and he isn't looking good you can usually recoup a pick for him with someone who will take a chance (see Lias Andersson).
 
Last edited:
The worst case scenario is that he is not an NHL goalie, a bad goalie, or takes very long to become one and it happens for another team (Campbell for example). Vasilevskiy, Price, Fleury are like the only first round pick goalies to have worked out in the last 20 years.
And whether Fleury "worked out" is subjective. He's just another random guy that's spent his whole career attached to outstanding teams.

You could have gotten that in UFA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Irishguy42
Did I miss a bunch of his groin injuries?

I mean he had a pretty big scare this season and also tweaked it before the play-in rounds last year and Lundqvist had to start those first few games against CAR...

Nonetheless, I'm looking at this as a cap/depth thing. Shesty is an RFA this year and could be signed for something that could lead him into (or at) his 30's. The Rangers haven't really had another keeper challenge him yet. Georgiev was supposed to, but that didn't happen. Huska and Wall might not be able to. The jury is out on Garand and Ollas, Lindbom might not even be signed.

With Wallstedt, you're seeing him potentially compete for a role in 2-3 years. He took over the starting position in Lulea over an SHL mainstay in David Rautio so the skill and experience will add up quick. He could sign his ELC at 20/21 years old and Shesterkin will be about 28/29. The transition seems perfect for NYR to have these two in their lineups. Wallstedt would be off his ELC at about 23/24 and Shesty would be well into his 30's.

It makes a lot of sense to get Wallstedt on a transaction note, but the potential game-changing ability that he brings would be something NYR fans will crave after losing Lundqvist.
 
The worst case scenario is that he is not an NHL goalie, a bad goalie, or takes very long to become one and it happens for another team (Campbell for example).

so...Price/Fleury/Vasilevskiy are like the only ones who even did anything long term for the teams that drafted them. Price has a bad contract which provides negative value and we will see how it ends up with Vasilevskiy's.

All of that combined with the fact that goalies have very little trade value (this is not the earlier 2000s where guys like Bernier/Schenider got good returns) make taking someone like a Wallstedt a very bad investment. Even if you take a skater and he isn't looking good you can usually recoup a pick for him with someone who will take a chance (see Lias Andersson).

I'd contest that this is the best time to take Wally because we are approaching a critical juncture with Shesterkin where we either have to commit to him or move on.

The opportunity cost has never been lower considering the kind of draft we are looking at this season.

I wouldn't weep if we took Raty at 15, but most of the rest of these guys are 2nd-3rd round projects at best in a normal year.
 
I'd contest that this is the best time to take Wally because we are approaching a critical juncture with Shesterkin where we either have to commit to him or move on.

The opportunity cost has never been lower considering the kind of draft we are looking at this season.

I wouldn't weep if we took Raty at 15, but most of the rest of these guys are 2nd-3rd round projects at best in a normal year.

The opportunity cost is huge because it is way easier to get a solid goalie in FA on a reasonable short term deal than it is to get a forward or a defenseman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Sides
I'd contest that this is the best time to take Wally because we are approaching a critical juncture with Shesterkin where we either have to commit to him or move on.

The opportunity cost has never been lower considering the kind of draft we are looking at this season.

I wouldn't weep if we took Raty at 15, but most of the rest of these guys are 2nd-3rd round projects at best in a normal year.

And this is the thing. We aren't looking at a bunch of top20 guys to pick from. There's a top10 talent goalie, and then perhaps some top30 skaters.
 
My thing is, really, some goaltenders save more goals than others, but they all give up stupid ones.

People will point to Fleury the other night and it's like "oh, well that's why you need somebody reliable." Every goaltender gives up horrible goals at horrible times.

Lundqvist got beat clean from the blueline in the 2015 ECF in overtime. Our first SCF home game in 20 years, he gets lit up -- 3 goals on 17 shot *attempts* for LA.

They all do it. Jonathan Quick is regarded as a clutch goalie and half the goals he gives up in the playoffs are from out of the zone. Marty Brodeur has like 13,000 wins and gave up more stupid f***ing goals than any goalie I've ever seen. Tim Thomas had the best run a goalie ever had in 2011 and every goal he gave up in that run, he practically put in his own net.

The team has to be good enough to bail them out when the inevitable happens. The best way to do that is not spend an arm and a leg on the goaltender.
 
There are like 50 good goalies and if you need an especially good one, the team is flawed.

Although, if you're drafting Wallstedt to not re-sign Shesty, that's actually based.
You’re drafting Wallstedt because in 4-5 years Shesty will be 30/31 and looking for a retirement contract and Wallstedt will be 22/23 and ready for action.

This team had to re-sign guys like Girardi, Staal, Lundqvist and more recently Kreider because of the lack of depth in our system.

I don’t like drafting goalies in the 1st round but this is an absolute no brainer.

Edit: Should have read Joey’s post before responding.
 
You’re drafting Wallstedt because in 4-5 years Shesty will be 30/31 and looking for a retirement contract and Wallstedt will be 22/23 and ready for action.

This team had to re-sign guys like Girardi, Staal, Lundqvist and more recently Kreider because of the lack of depth in our system.

I don’t like drafting goalies in the 1st round but this is an absolute no brainer.
We had options besides Girardi and Staal at the time. We signed them because of the whole "it doesn't matter if we give up shots" mentality.

Building around goaltending fosters a toxic mentality towards roster building.

That's why I wouldn't do Hank again if you gave me a time machine.
 
My thing is, really, some goaltenders save more goals than others, but they all give up stupid ones.

People will point to Fleury the other night and it's like "oh, well that's why you need somebody reliable." Every goaltender gives up horrible goals at horrible times.

Lundqvist got beat clean from the blueline in the 2015 ECF in overtime. Our first SCF home game in 20 years, he gets lit up -- 3 goals on 17 shot *attempts* for LA.

They all do it. Jonathan Quick is regarded as a clutch goalie and half the goals he gives up in the playoffs are from out of the zone. Marty Brodeur has like 13,000 wins and gave up more stupid f***ing goals than any goalie I've ever seen. Tim Thomas had the best run a goalie ever had in 2011 and every goal he gave up in that run, he practically put in his own net.

The team has to be good enough to bail them out when the inevitable happens. The best way to do that is not spend an arm and a leg on the goaltender.
You’re still looking for an impact player with the 15th overall pick. I guess I like Raty and Svechkov - but I don’t see a real difference maker in either of them. Neither player is NHL ready either imo. Wallstedt’s ceiling is massive. If he’s available Drury should sprint to the podium.
 
We had options besides Girardi and Staal at the time. We signed them because of the whole "it doesn't matter if we give up shots" mentality.

Building around goaltending fosters a toxic mentality towards roster building.

That's why I wouldn't do Hank again if you gave me a time machine.
What were our options?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad