Not necessarily. In some cases, especially in the first round, there is a small, select group of players that seem to unanimously be a tier above the rest. It's usually within the first 5 (or sometimes, less) players but it does exist in almost every 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
- Status
Not necessarily. In some cases, especially in the first round, there is a small, select group of players that seem to unanimously be a tier above the rest. It's usually within the first 5 (or sometimes, less) players but it does exist in almost every draft.
It's BPA by your mgmt not anyone else.
What would a consensus have to do with it.
You should set your draft board & stick to it.
It's BPA amongst your own teams list. Not according to ISS or something.
You pick the player who you think has the highest ceiling and best chance of reaching said ceiling amongst those available. Drafting for need with a high first a bad move.
You pick the player who you think has the highest ceiling and best chance of reaching said ceiling amongst those available. Drafting for need with a high first a bad move.
You draft the best forward available because you have "need moar forwards". So you pass on a better D prospect.
It's idiotic.
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,300
- 21,901
Why does best forward available come with the assumption that there's a better D prospect available?
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,975
- 13,635
BPA to us may be different than BPA to the Rangers organization.
We may be able to get both a high end forward and a high end PMD this draft. Two of Dal Colle, Bennett, McCann, Ehlers, McKeown, DeAngelo, or Honka would be a fantastic draft.
We may be able to get both a high end forward and a high end PMD this draft. Two of Dal Colle, Bennett, McCann, Ehlers, McKeown, DeAngelo, or Honka would be a fantastic draft.
Im in love with Draisaitl but im assuming he'll be gone by the time we get a chance to pick
Good point, and it odd course differs from team to team what they think a good player should have.
As a general remark though in this discussion, often when you look back at a draft there was a "best" player available.
We are starting to see a good picture of the 08 draft. If we look at the 20 picks from 11-30 this is obvious:
1. You should have take E Karlsson. Nobody should have passed on him.
2. Of a total of 20 picks, ONLY 2 forwards has made it: Eberle and Ennis.
3. Myers, Carlsson, MDZ, Sbisa and Gardiner are the only other good players playing in the league out of those 20 picks.
Bottom line: 12 of 20 picks has yet to make it. Sure, someone could come from behind, but it's not a given.
Only 2 forwards made it.
One player was a planet above the rest.
The 08 draft is pretty representative. It's not an easy environment to go in and pick for need in. Washington went in and picked for need in Gustafsson in that draft. One of the worst 1at round picks in the last 20 years.
Brooks wrote about Zuccarello
http://nypost.com/2013/12/24/rangers-zuccarello-zooming-into-bigger-role/
Newport will use those numbers to build a strong arbitration case for their client.
He is on pace for 55 points. 18-37-55. If Zuccarello continues on the 55 point pace,will be a very rich man this summer and will be in position to command a lucrative long-term contract. Desharniers had 60 points before getting $14M which includes one group II year. Pat Brisson of CAA got him that contract.
The people on this board are funny. Underselling the Rangers players at contract time and having no issue overpaying another player.
If you look at their points per game,no major difference.
.58 to .56 in favor of Desharniers
The Rangers will have to make yet another major decision on giving Zuccarello a long term contract. If the Rangers don't feel comfortable paying Zuccarello,they should move him. Its not any different than Girardi and Callahan.
Its not a bad thing to trade a player when he is playing well. In the fall of 2006,the Hawks liked Prucha. There was a thought that Brent Seabrook might be available for a trade involving Prucha. Whether that was BS or they couldn't reach a deal,Prucha was a popular player coming off a 30 goal season. If the Rangers had traded him,they would have traded him at the peak of his value. Shanahan took away his PP time in 06-07. Prucha wasn't the same player. 16 of the 30 goals came on the PP.
http://nypost.com/2013/12/24/rangers-zuccarello-zooming-into-bigger-role/
Newport will use those numbers to build a strong arbitration case for their client.
He is on pace for 55 points. 18-37-55. If Zuccarello continues on the 55 point pace,will be a very rich man this summer and will be in position to command a lucrative long-term contract. Desharniers had 60 points before getting $14M which includes one group II year. Pat Brisson of CAA got him that contract.
The people on this board are funny. Underselling the Rangers players at contract time and having no issue overpaying another player.
If you look at their points per game,no major difference.
.58 to .56 in favor of Desharniers
The Rangers will have to make yet another major decision on giving Zuccarello a long term contract. If the Rangers don't feel comfortable paying Zuccarello,they should move him. Its not any different than Girardi and Callahan.
Its not a bad thing to trade a player when he is playing well. In the fall of 2006,the Hawks liked Prucha. There was a thought that Brent Seabrook might be available for a trade involving Prucha. Whether that was BS or they couldn't reach a deal,Prucha was a popular player coming off a 30 goal season. If the Rangers had traded him,they would have traded him at the peak of his value. Shanahan took away his PP time in 06-07. Prucha wasn't the same player. 16 of the 30 goals came on the PP.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
A couple of things about this:
1- the Rangers are 27th in the league in scoring and trading away their 2nd leading scorer might not be such a great idea
2- the Prucha "sell high" infers that this is MZA's career year. It might not be. He's got less than a season and a half under his belt. Imagine if he gets traded and has BETTER years?
3- the Rangers aren't in a position to trade talented forwards. They don't have enough on the team, don't have enough in the system, and signing top UFA's isn't happening because nearly every team is protecting their top players by signing them to extensions before they ever hit the market.
I don't trade MZA. I sign him.
- Sep 17, 2007
- 24,926
- 22,848
The problem is, you keep assuming that MZA is going to regress from what he is now. What if he keeps playing this way? Wouldn't he then be worth 3.5 a year? Wouldn't it then be in our best interest to keep him?
I agree an evaluation has to be done, but you've obviously long since made up your mind.
Zucc has 25 pts the last 28 games. He could have had more, it's not like he had one of those stretches where the pts has been piling up by themselves.
I agree with RB for sure in principle, but with money it comes down to one thing. How can you best spend it? You know, I just have a very hard time seing that we could spend that 3.5m on a better option than Zucc. And it's always a risk at making a move. You disrupt chemistry. Zucc alone made Kreider's game work. Right now he is getting BR and Brass going. Our PP is good when Zucc is one it. Move him now and those things could go in an opposite direction.
I think it's pretty much a no-brained to resign Zucc. I mean, I doubt the market is that great for him anyway. He needs to do what he does now for a longer time.
Also, Zucc has improved on a regular basis for a long time now. He has handled pressure extremely well, his career always seem to be on the line. He could definitely keep improving. He knows what he is doing on the ice.
The Prucha comparision is somewhat flawed. He scored on what, 27% of his shots when he net 30. Zucc is complete offensively. He is making it happen by himself. I was tremendously impress by two plays he made on Phaneuf on Monday. They got in each other's face and talked a bit. The puck was dropped and both Zucc and Phaneuf got a stick on it. Zucc just "outmuscled" (could get his body behind his stick) Phaneuf. The shift after, Zucc cut infront of Dion and put his shoulder on him. Got speed from it and broke loose and made a play. I mean, it's impressive stuff. The small plays he is making at the absolute highest level of hockey in the world.
I definitely don't think now is the time to move him.
I agree with RB for sure in principle, but with money it comes down to one thing. How can you best spend it? You know, I just have a very hard time seing that we could spend that 3.5m on a better option than Zucc. And it's always a risk at making a move. You disrupt chemistry. Zucc alone made Kreider's game work. Right now he is getting BR and Brass going. Our PP is good when Zucc is one it. Move him now and those things could go in an opposite direction.
I think it's pretty much a no-brained to resign Zucc. I mean, I doubt the market is that great for him anyway. He needs to do what he does now for a longer time.
Also, Zucc has improved on a regular basis for a long time now. He has handled pressure extremely well, his career always seem to be on the line. He could definitely keep improving. He knows what he is doing on the ice.
The Prucha comparision is somewhat flawed. He scored on what, 27% of his shots when he net 30. Zucc is complete offensively. He is making it happen by himself. I was tremendously impress by two plays he made on Phaneuf on Monday. They got in each other's face and talked a bit. The puck was dropped and both Zucc and Phaneuf got a stick on it. Zucc just "outmuscled" (could get his body behind his stick) Phaneuf. The shift after, Zucc cut infront of Dion and put his shoulder on him. Got speed from it and broke loose and made a play. I mean, it's impressive stuff. The small plays he is making at the absolute highest level of hockey in the world.
I definitely don't think now is the time to move him.
Fitzy
Very Stable Genius
- Jan 29, 2009
- 36,353
- 24,150
So we can create an endless cycle of trading off all players who are performing well before they land good contracts, in exchange for picks to draft players who we'll then trade as soon as they start producing.
But especially Zuccarello. Quickly, before he becomes a point per game player and we're really in trouble as a franchise.
But especially Zuccarello. Quickly, before he becomes a point per game player and we're really in trouble as a franchise.
You need to give up good pieces to get good pieces. We need to right this ship and I agree with the principle of making some players available.
Carl Hagelin is a player I would consider moving if we get really good value for him. We are short on some things, and Hagelin doesn't help us much in those areas. It was the opposite under Torts when we just fired puck up ice and desperately needed someone who could chase them down. Under AV we don't have that problem at all. Our biggest weakness under AV is a lack of a true PF and an offensive minded RD. Someone that can beat the forecheck and make good plays on a shift by shift basis. Scoring is also a bit of an issue.
I think Hagelin is very valuble to us, it's depth like him that makes me believe that we will make the POs this year. But if a player becomes available that would really help us I would consider moving him.
Its hard to guess what value Marc Staal have, but if its still high he is also a player that you gotta explore what you can get in return for.
I don't know what Girardi is asking for. But if it just is too much, you should move him. Now, I am not afraid for most numbers mentioned. But if it's up towards 6.5m per, you gotta make a decision. But you also gotta replace him with a top pairing capable right handed shot. That seems to be extremely hard to do.
What value does Boyle have? To me he just seem like a fairly good value player for us. He is valuble for us, what would we get in return if we moved him? "More"?
Carl Hagelin is a player I would consider moving if we get really good value for him. We are short on some things, and Hagelin doesn't help us much in those areas. It was the opposite under Torts when we just fired puck up ice and desperately needed someone who could chase them down. Under AV we don't have that problem at all. Our biggest weakness under AV is a lack of a true PF and an offensive minded RD. Someone that can beat the forecheck and make good plays on a shift by shift basis. Scoring is also a bit of an issue.
I think Hagelin is very valuble to us, it's depth like him that makes me believe that we will make the POs this year. But if a player becomes available that would really help us I would consider moving him.
Its hard to guess what value Marc Staal have, but if its still high he is also a player that you gotta explore what you can get in return for.
I don't know what Girardi is asking for. But if it just is too much, you should move him. Now, I am not afraid for most numbers mentioned. But if it's up towards 6.5m per, you gotta make a decision. But you also gotta replace him with a top pairing capable right handed shot. That seems to be extremely hard to do.
What value does Boyle have? To me he just seem like a fairly good value player for us. He is valuble for us, what would we get in return if we moved him? "More"?
Last edited:
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Is it necessarily? The argument could be made that some of the Rangers offensive woes have their root in picking too many defensemen in the first round. (Note: I said some)
Nope.
Just a few handful clueless posters if anything who can't gauge skill and potential.
SlingshotVv
arm-bar all the things
Just for fun, look back through the old Zucc threads. It's the same posters that want MDZ gone largely. It's also one that compares Hagelin to Rico Fata and *****ed about his flowing locks and wanted to "sell high" on him. It's all the same people that want Girardi moved like yesterday. That wanted Lundqvist moved and Talbot starting from now on. That hate Bran Boyle with passion. Would rather hope for a loss to put more pressure on AV or Slats than a hard fought victory. That every faulter of every Torts season called him a clown, and begged for the losing to continue so he'd be fired. Endlessly talk about Richards not being worth his contract.
In short, yes, there were a lot of people that wanted him waived. The same corps that's idea of fandom is to just replace everyone with perfection, trade everyone you get bored of for prospects that take forever to make the big show, tank half a decade to rebuild through top 5 picks, etc.
The obnoxious shiny new-toy crew for the most part. They're always proud that they disliked a player long before everyone else, and "called it". Well when you consider everyone who isn't the BP at his exact line and position a waste of space, of course you're going to get opportunities to gloat. Unfortunately the local bar I like to watch games at has a few of these jack *****. The smugness every time MDZ makes a tiny error is so cringe worthy that i can't help but laugh. These people aren't NYR fans, they're fans of their own delusional hockey IQ, and the NYR are just unfortunate to be their local market and therefore target. They wear their scorn like a badge, and never really get that everyone around them thinks their obnoxious blow-hards. Oh boy, you guys are always right, if NYC was only lucky enough to have Dolan look to hfboards for the next GM, we'd be a dynasty in no time!
Last edited:
Paulie Walnutz
HFNYR JUST AS SOFT AS NYR
- Oct 1, 2008
- 11,135
- 9,418
And let's keep everybody from the current team and continue as normal. Because hey we're right at that 8th seed and anything can happen in the playoffs!
PlamsUnlimited
Big Church Bells
I was one who hated Zucc earlier but he made me eat my words and i'm proud of it. One of our best forwards this season hands down
SlingshotVv
arm-bar all the things
if you think the opposite of being an obnoxious team hater is to just keep everyone and continue as normal, it's pretty obvious what camp you're in. Sorry you root for a team you hate
I just would rather see players elevate their games, become unified, and accomplish something together, Miracle on ice style; than constantly search for the next savior. Players fighting through adversity and/or reclaiming star status is far more interesting to me than bringing in the next hired gun, so we can all turn to the next player we dump on and want removed.
Jagr's no superstar at this point, but his storyline is probably only second to AO completely destroying the NHL. Staal returning from eye injury and regaining a level close to all the promise he held is far more compelling than bringing in a new guy to play the position for him. Richards reclaiming some level of star status before our eyes is more enjoyable than bringing in a star #1. MDZ going from a kid to a man, and maybe one day fighting like hell through a playoff run would be give me way more connectiont han watching (insert latest rumo rhere) coming in and having a strong 3 or 4 seasons). Watching a team fight it's way into the 8th seed, will always be more compelling than being a perennial loser powerhouse like Pittsburgh. Being so insanely bad as to require the NHL to give you the next BPA every damn year just so you ca get a Cup and fill some seats.
Last edited:
Bullseyes
Registered User
- Aug 16, 2013
- 4,450
- 0
if you think the opposite of being an obnoxious team hater is to just keep everyone and continue as normal, it's pretty obvious what camp you're in. Sorry you root for a team you hate
I just would rather see players elevate their games, become unified, and accomplish something together, Miracle on ice style; than constantly search for the next savior. Players fighting through adversity and/or reclaiming star status is far more interesting to me than bringing in the next hired gun, so we can all turn to the next player we dump on and want removed.
That doesn't happen that often and relying on them to get hot one playoffs and magically win it all isn't a good plan.
They don't have to get rid of everyone, but trade some players? Why not? This is not a good hockey team. Continually being mediocre isn't that fun to watch IMO.
Kokoschka
Registered User
- May 13, 2012
- 3,166
- 50
tbh, the last few games, the way DZ played, no way I trade that guy for something short of severe overpayment. Def not for Cody ****ing Franson. Very effective bringing the puck out of our end, making good passes, pinching in when possible. Just need to trust that guy. I've a feeling he's due for a few standout games soon.
- Status
