The "22" Overall Pick Thread

[Joey Bones]

I am just disappointed there isn't a thread on the Columbus 4th rounder

Lolol

In all seriousness, though, this thread should be merged in with the draft thread. Better discussion and everyone can discuss the multiple picks that NYR have in June.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Meh. Not a bad pick, but not the one I'd go with, I think Albin Eriksson is the better Swede in that range. But I would go with Dorofeyev with the WPG pick. I've said it all season

Albin Eriksson was drafted last season

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Albin Eriksson was drafted last season

Oh damn. My brain is not working today. Game of Thrones on my mind I guess

I was talking about Albin Grewe

 

[Beacon]

Shestyorkin is someone I really don't want to trade. I know you have to give to get, and if that means we can't get the #4 pick then so be it. If the target is Cozens, there is still a shot at landing him at 5 or 6. I'd prefer to move Kreider for a later top 10 pick (7, 8 or 9) and draft Zegras or Turcotte. That would be a great pair to build around, and we'd still have a potential top flight starting goalie in Shestyorkin to develop.

Shesterkin is one of the few guys with superstar potential on the team. He can fail. Goalies are goalies. But you don't trade the chance that we might have another Lundvqist there. Imagine in 2004 we traded Hank to move up from #19 (Korpikoski) into the top 10 for the chance to draft Rostislav Olesz, Alexandre Picard, Ladislav Smid or Boris Valabik (7-10 picks that year).

 

[Edge]

I must have missed that. So we’re targeting one of the centers we probably would have been targeting in the 6th spot?

The part that's more or less confirmed is that the Rangers want to get a second pick in the top 10 and are prepared to be aggressive in doing so.

The part that's more of a mystery is who they might be targeted. The thought is that it's one of the centers they were were eyeing in their original draft position.

Zegras is a guy I suspect might be high on the list, for a variety of reasons. But that's not based on any thing I've actually heard --- it's just a guess on my part.

 

[Edge]

It wouldn't surprised me if they tried.....and if it happens it might not happen until the draft's already started. Colorado could be a team or Edmonton. I know a lot of people think Kreider + (Winnipeg's 1st? or our 2nd?) but a team trading for him might want some guarantee he's not just going to play that season and leave at the end as a UFA. And if I trade Kreider I'd be after Panarin though I'd probably be after Panarin anyway--unpopular as that may be. That guy is a good player and I don't see him fading anytime soon. He and Kakko could be roommates whenever we're on the road.

Something to keep in mind for a team in the teens, is that he's a rental+. Meaning they are acquiring him not just to help in the playoffs, but to help get them over the hump and into the playoffs in the first place.

So if a team is a renting a straight playoff rental for a pick that's anywhere between 16-31, with most falling in the 20s, it's not terribly out of left field to think they might be willing to move a mid-teen pick for a guy to play the entire season.

Their risk is also somewhat mitigated by the fact that if it doesn't work, they could theoretically move said player as a rental for another team.

So, for arguments sake, let's say the Rangers move Kreider for the 14th pick. Arizona is trying to get into the playoffs and to make some noise. If it doesn't work out, maybe they flip him to another team, in a similar position to Winnipeg this year, and get a pick and a prospect. In theory, even if it doesn't work, they essentially traded down from 14 to 22 for a chance at the playoffs.

Obviously that's a more straight forward example, but you get the general idea.

The risk for a team in the mid-teens is a bit more palatable than a team in the top 10. That's why I think that's more likely.

In turn, armed with say the 14th pick and the 22nd pick, I think getting to, say, 8-10 is a not a pipe dream. Similarly, a team like Arizona could be in a similar position next year, even if it didn't work (their pick, plus whatever they got for Kreider as a rental).

But it also comes down to how much of a premium the Rangers might want to pay. If they're sitting at 14 and 22, and Zegras is available at 9, does Anaheim want an extra first to move down five slots? Or do they love Zegras and run all the way to the bank?

 

[Beacon]

The part that's more or less confirmed is that the Rangers want to get a second pick in the top 10 and are prepared to be aggressive in doing so.

The part that's more of a mystery is who they might be targeted. The thought is that it's one of the centers they were were eyeing in their original draft position.

Zegras is a guy I suspect might be high on the list, for a variety of reasons. But that's not based on any thing I've actually heard --- it's just a guess on my part.

If we assume that Kreider cannot get us a top-10 picks or a #14 pick, is there another way to get a top-10 pick? A team with an early pick presumably is also rebuilding. Is there a young guy we'd be willing to give up?

 

[broadwayblue]

The part that's more or less confirmed is that the Rangers want to get a second pick in the top 10 and are prepared to be aggressive in doing so.

The part that's more of a mystery is who they might be targeted. The thought is that it's one of the centers they were were eyeing in their original draft position.

Zegras is a guy I suspect might be high on the list, for a variety of reasons. But that's not based on any thing I've actually heard --- it's just a guess on my part.

Very interesting and exciting! Are you hearing this from people who have sources inside the organization?

 

[effen]

If we assume that Kreider cannot get us a top-10 picks or a #14 pick, is there another way to get a top-10 pick? A team with an early pick presumably is also rebuilding. Is there a young guy we'd be willing to give up?

Packaging picks. A lot of them.

 

[Edge]

If we assume that Kreider cannot get us a top-10 picks or a #14 pick, is there another way to get a top-10 pick? A team with an early pick presumably is also rebuilding. Is there a young guy we'd be willing to give up?

That I am unsure of.

I think getting into the top 10, without Kreider involved in some capacity, would be difficult.

As for names that that could be involved, though not at the value point of a Kreider, include Skjei, maybe Andersson, maybe Buch --- though I have a hard time seeing him.

I've always felt the logical target is a team that has already stockpiled some young talent and is closer the playoffs than the top pick --- Florida and Arizona comes to mind. They might be more willing to push for the playoffs than a team in the top 10. So in that sense, I personally view it as a two step process.

You make the initial deal with a team looking to take the next step, and then you package your draft pick depth to approach a team in the top 10.

So while a team in the top 10 might feel Kreider is a piece that doesn't push them enough to climb all the way into the playoffs, they might be attracted to the concept of trading down a few slots with the opportunity to grab a second young talent in the first. In other words, a GM might feel, "Adding one player isn't going to push my team into the playoffs, but the Rangers are offering 14 and 22 because they want to grab Turcotte at 8 (or 9 or 10), and I'm perfectly alright grabbing Newhook and Brink with their picks."

And that's the benefit the Rangers have, if we find ourselves in a position where we have 3 first round picks, and another 3 second round picks. It's a little easier to "overpay" to move up, and it's tempting for a team that might have several guys in a cluster to add an additional pick or two, and not get a prospect they feel is inferior.

The only team in the top 10 who might not quite see themselves as being in a rebuild mode is Anaheim. They might feel that they want to take one last swing with Getzlaf and Pretty. Would they do 9 straight up for Kreider? Unlikely.

But they might move 9 and a third for Kreider and 22 --- also knowing that if it doesn't work out, they'd still have two firsts in this draft, and could flip Kreider for a first next year, giving them two firsts in that draft as well.

But the logical thought seems to be that you'd be looking at a two step-process for the Rangers. And assuming it happened, one of two scenarios would have to exist:

Either the Rangers are 100 percent sure that a guy they want will be there with their second top 10 pick, or they have a deal in place should one of those guys still be on the board.

My guess is that the former is more likely if we're talking about the top 8, whereas the latter is might be more likely if it's outside the top 8 (even 9 or 10).

 

[Edge]

Very interesting and exciting! Are you hearing this from people who have sources inside the organization?

As of right now, I've heard basically the same thing from 4 people.

Two of them are inside the organization, one of them is outside the organization with another team, and the third source is a "third party" who is very family with Rangers and would be able to verify hearing the same things, or having the same knowledge of what the Rangers are trying to do.

The responses all confirmed the same thing. The Rangers would love to add a second top 10 pick. The targets aren't totally known, but it's widely suspected its the centers they were scouting.

Now whether or not the Rangers can find a partner remains to be seen.

 

[broadwayblue]

As of right now, I've heard basically the same thing from 4 people.

Two of them are inside the organization, one of them is outside the organization with another team, and third source is a "third party" who is very family with Rangers and would be able to verify hearing the same things, or having the same knowledge of what the Rangers are trying to do.

The responses all confirmed the same thing. The Rangers would love to add a second top 10 pick. The targets aren't totally known, but it's widely suspected its the centers they were scouting.

Now whether or not the Rangers can find a partner remains to be seen.

Awesome. I'm all for making a splash this draft. Only downside with trading a bunch of picks to get back into the top 10 to grab a center is we'll still have to figure out our D. I was thinking they would select a couple blue-liners with our late 1st(s) and 2nds. But in fairness what we really need on the back end is top pairing prospects and those are hard to find after the first round anyway.

 

[Beacon]

My gut says the second pick will be a defenseman. You build a team from the inside out, not to mention the four top-10 picks [2017-2019] spent on forwards already (plus Chytil). Trading a bunch of assets (combine picks, etc) to acquire yet another top-10 forward draftee while defense is absolute trash seems like the wrong way to build a team. It seems like something only fans would do because forwards are flashier.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

That I am unsure of.

I think getting into the top 10, without Kreider involved in some capacity, would be difficult.

As for names that that could be involved, though not at the value point of a Kreider, include Skjei, maybe Andersson, maybe Buch --- though I have a hard time seeing him.

I've always felt the logical target is a team that has already stockpiled some young talent and is closer the playoffs than the top pick --- Florida and Arizona comes to mind. They might be more willing to push for the playoffs than a team in the top 10. So in that sense, I personally view it as a two step process.

You make the initial deal with a team looking to take the next step, and then you package your draft pick depth to approach a team in the top 10.

So while a team in the top 10 might feel Kreider is a piece that doesn't push them enough to climb all the way into the playoffs, they might be attracted to the concept of trading down a few slots with the opportunity to grab a second young talent in the first. In other words, a GM might feel, "Adding one player isn't going to push my team into the playoffs, but the Rangers are offering 14 and 22 because they want to grab Turcotte at 8 (or 9 or 10), and I'm perfectly alright grabbing Newhook and Brink with their picks."

And that's the benefit the Rangers have, if we find ourselves in a position where we have 3 first round picks, and another 3 second round picks. It's a little easier to "overpay" to move up, and it's tempting for a team that might have several guys in a cluster to add an additional pick or two, and not get a prospect they feel is inferior.

The only team in the top 10 who might not quite see themselves as being in a rebuild mode is Anaheim. They might feel that they want to take one last swing with Getzlaf and Pretty. Would they do 9 straight up for Kreider? Unlikely.

But they might move 9 and a third for Kreider and 22 --- also knowing that if it doesn't work out, they'd still have two firsts in this draft, and could flip Kreider for a first next year, giving them two firsts in that draft as well.

But the logical thought seems to be that you'd be looking at a two step-process for the Rangers. And assuming it happened, one of two scenarios would have to exist:

Either the Rangers are 100 percent sure that a guy they want will be there with their second top 10 pick, or they have a deal in place should one of those guys still be on the board.

My guess is that the former is more likely if we're talking about the top 8, whereas the latter is might be more likely if it's outside the top 8 (even 9 or 10).

Reading this and seeing Kreider and Anaheim has me thinking about this: Rangers can retain 50% on Kreider, and a team getting him could potentially have 25-30 goals for a little over $2m, for any team trying to get over the playoff bubble, that’s extremely valuable

 

[Edge]

Awesome. I'm all for making a splash this draft. Only downside with trading a bunch of picks to get back into the top 10 to grab a center is we'll still have to figure out our D. I was thinking they would select a couple blue-liners with our late 1st(s) and 2nds. But in fairness what we really need on the back end is top pairing prospects and those are hard to find after the first round anyway.

The defense is still a work in progress and will be. But you could have a scenario where the Rangers have a center, or centers, rated significantly higher than any or most defenseman in the draft.

At the very least, we know the Rangers will have two 1st round picks, and three 2nd round picks to work with.

Let's say the scenario we spitballed comes to pass --- they get the 14th pick, and package 14 and 22 to move up.

In theory, you could still have the 37th pick, along with two other second round picks in the 49-60 range.

You could also see a scenario where the Rangers bundle a couple of seconds to move up in that round as well.

So the Rangers could seek to turn 3 firsts and 3 seconds into 2 firsts and 2 seconds.

So 2, 14, 22, 37, 49 and 60 becomes 2, 9, 37 and 39.

 

[Good Intentions]

Having a higher WPG1 is a big win...far better than a pick 7 slots lower + TB1. I think we all make that trade up.

 

[Edge]

My gut says the second pick will be a defenseman. You build a team from the inside out, not to mention the four top-10 picks [2017-2019] spent on forwards already (plus Chytil). Trading a bunch of assets (combine picks, etc) to acquire yet another top-10 forward draftee while defense is absolute trash seems like the wrong way to build a team. It seems like something only fans would do because forwards are flashier.

Right now the belief is the Rangers have spent a lot of time dissecting the centers in this draft and like them.

Could they love a defenseman? Quite possibly. But at this point the "feeling" tends to be it's another forward. But that also means it could be a guy we aren't talking about as much. For all we know they think Newhook is every bit as good as the WHL and US centers.

That second part is unknown, but if I were to speculate, I think they'd love to come to away with a center, and maybe eye some of the under the radar defenseman in either the late first or early second.

 

[Edge]

Reading this and seeing Kreider and Anaheim has me thinking about this: Rangers can retain 50% on Kreider, and a team getting him could potentially have 25-30 goals for a little over $2m, for any team trying to get over the playoff bubble, that’s extremely valuable

Every person I talked to used the word bundle, or package. At least one (maybe two) used the word creative.

So I think there's a possibility the Rangers could be willing to work with teams, especially if it comes off the price tag.

If bundling is the their approach, any asset they save is potentially an asset to be used elsewhere.

So if they can save a second, say Dallas' pick, who's to say they might not see a guy fall who they love and decide to package 37 and the Dallas' pick to grab a guy 32?

 

[broadwayblue]

My gut says the second pick will be a defenseman. You build a team from the inside out, not to mention the four top-10 picks [2017-2019] spent on forwards already (plus Chytil). Trading a bunch of assets (combine picks, etc) to acquire yet another top-10 forward draftee while defense is absolute trash seems like the wrong way to build a team. It seems like something only fans would do because forwards are flashier.

Assuming Byram is off the board by 6 we probably don't have to trade back into the top 10 to get the next Dman.

 

[Edge]

Having a higher WPG1 is a big win...far better than a pick 7 slots lower + TB1. I think we all make that trade up.

Obviously the Rangers are strongly pulling for Tampa and Dallas to convert. But, if they had to choose any single team option to pull for, it would be the Winnipeg pick dropping.

Having picks 28 and 31 is great, and certainly better than having those picks at 50 and 60 respectively. But I can't help but feel that the Rangers would rather have the Jets pick be in the 19-22 range, than have two picks at 28 and 31.

In a nutshell, I don't think they'd trade a single pick at 19-22 for both the 28th and 31st picks. I could be wrong, but I think the thought of that second pick being higher excites them more.

And if the Dallas and TB picks end up being late seconds, I could see them using one to move up from 37 if they liked a guy, and possibly trying to flip the other for Fox.

Obviously not the grand slam of two top ten picks, or four first rounders, but I think they'd still be very happy with that out come.

 

[Edge]

Assuming Byram is off the board by 6 we probably don't have to trade back into the top 10 to get the next Dman.

I have no idea how the Rangers feel about the defenseman in this draft, or if they have strong feelings one way or the other.

Personally, I think if a defenseman is the target, then they'd likely be just fine hanging out with a pick in the mid-teens: either through a potential Kreider trade, or by moving up a few slots with the Jet's pick.

 

[broadwayblue]

The defense is still a work in progress and will be. But you could have a scenario where the Rangers have a center, or centers, rated significantly higher than any or most defenseman in the draft.

At the very least, we know the Rangers will have two 1st round picks, and three 2nd round picks to work with.

Let's say the scenario we spitballed comes to pass --- they get the 14th pick, and package 14 and 22 to move up.

In theory, you could still have the 37th pick, along with two other second round picks in the 49-60 range.

You could also see a scenario where the Rangers bundle a couple of seconds to move up in that round as well.

So the Rangers could seek to turn 3 firsts and 3 seconds into 2 firsts and 2 seconds.

So 2, 14, 22, 37, 49 and 60 becomes 2, 9, 37 and 39.

9 puts them squarely within the range of the 3rd tier of C if that's what they are in fact targeting.

 

[Edge]

9 puts them squarely within the range of the 3rd tier of C if that's what they are in fact targeting.

I'm not entirely sure if they view it as the third tier. I could see them viewing guys like Zegras and Turcotte as being in an overshadowed second tier behind Hughes.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Every person I talked to used the word bundle, or package. At least one (maybe two) used the word creative.

So I think there's a possibility the Rangers could be willing to work with teams, especially if it comes off the price tag.

If bundling is the their approach, any asset they save is potentially an asset to be used elsewhere.

So if they can save a second, say Dallas' pick, who's to say they might not see a guy fall who they love and decide to package 37 and the Dallas' pick to grab a guy 32?

I have a vacation scheduled between now and the draft and I’m more excited for the draft at this point. These next 2 months are going to feel longer than the full off seasons usually feel

 

[Ghost of jas]

I have a vacation scheduled between now and the draft and I’m more excited for the draft at this point. These next 2 months are going to feel longer than the full off seasons usually feel

I’m leaving on vacation on 6/20. I’ll be in a motel room on draft night.