Who do you take at 9th Overall

[Ghost of jas]

I agree that he's the second best D prospect (though my viewings are far more limited than others), but that doesn't necessarily mean he's automatically worth picking over a Tkachuk or a Wahlstrom – and nor does it mean that the concussions aren't a concern.

Historically, it's always been easier to find the #1D later than it has to find the top line scoring threat...

(Which is not to say I still wouldn't take Boqvist over the other two if the doctors are okay with him. Just saying it's not an easy decision for me.)

I don’t think getting one is any easier than the other, and in this particular draft, there seem to be more opportunities to get a top line scoring threat than a 1D.

 

[MikeSteaks]

Give me Kotkaniemi over Bouchard, Boqvist, Dobson and Wahlstrom

 

[Gardner McKay]

Give me Kotkaniemi over Bouchard, Boqvist, Dobson and Wahlstrom

This is a serious question. I have to preface with that because it is going to come off the wrong way.

What do you know that most other scouts and people don't know?

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

This is a serious question. I have to preface with that because it is going to come off the wrong way.

What do you know that most other scouts and people don't know?

Kotkaniemi was ranked in Bob’s recent top-10 (which is a poll of several scouts).

General consensus for this draft is that 3/4-11/12 are pretty close in caliber.

So, with guys like Wahlstrom, Kotkaniemi, Boqvist, guys in that range, it really comes down to preference.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Kotkaniemi was ranked in Bob’s recent top-10 (which is a poll of several scouts).

General consensus for this draft is that 3/4-11/12 are pretty close in caliber.

So, with guys like Wahlstrom, Kotkaniemi, Boqvist, guys in that range, it really comes down to preference.

Most I have see have Kotkaniemi anywhere from 15-24? Putting that aside for a second... he is a C. Not that we should be drafting for need, you take BPA but nothing suggests this kid is the BPA at 9 and plays a position we are already sufficiently stocked.

 

[Edge]

Kotkaniemi is a potential high-reward type.

Some concerns with the skating, some concerns with the day-to-day effort, but if he hits you're looking at a damn good player.

 

[kovazub94]

Changed my initial vote from Dobson to Farabee. Really like both players, but after the U-18's i made the switch. #28 has impressed me more then any draft eligible forwards in the first round not named Svechnikov, or Zadina.

The Rangers depth at RD is ridiculously thin. If Gorton has them ranked in the same group I think he'd likely to go for a D.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Most I have see have Kotkaniemi anywhere from 15-24? Not to mention he is a C. Not that we should be drafting for need, you take BPA but nothing suggests this kid is the BPA at 9.

Bobs rankings are far more relevant than any of the other rankings

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

This is a serious question. I have to preface with that because it is going to come off the wrong way.

What do you know that most other scouts and people don't know?

I don't think what he said is too far fetched.

Not the way that I would go about it, but it's not crazy to consider that someone would value a long, rangy 2 way center who just led his team to gold at the U18 over the other guys. He produced at a very respectable rate in a mens league this season as well and has a ton of mass to pack onto that frame.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Kotkaniemi is a potential high-reward type.

Some concerns with the skating, some concerns with the day-to-day effort, but if he hits you're looking at a damn good player.

Bobs rankings are far more relevant than any of the other rankings

I don't think what he said is too far fetched.

Not the way that I would go about it, but it's not crazy to consider that someone would value a long, rangy 2 way center who just led his team to gold at the U18 over the other guys. He produced at a very respectable rate in a mens league this season as well and has a ton of mass to pack onto that frame.

Again, all fair points. But, if there are comparable players there at 9, why take the player that A. isn't the clear cut BPA and B. plays a position where we have the LEAST need?

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Again, all fair points. But, if there are comparable players there at 9, why take the player that A. isn't the clear cut BPA and B. plays a position where we have the LEAST need?

Gorton may think he is the clear cut “BPA”

 

[True Blue]

Am still on the Dobson kick, with Bouchard behind. I will say that in reading the tea leaves (character, compete, tougher to play against, etc.) makes me think that it will be Farabee at the end of the day.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Again, all fair points. But, if there are comparable players there at 9, why take the player that A. isn't the clear cut BPA and B. plays a position where we have the LEAST need?

I guess that depends.

What if he is the BPA on their board? The position argument doesn't make sense to me, guys who are natural centers can be shifted over to wing.

I wouldn't take him over Boqvist (concussion issues aside), Dobson or Wahlstrom, but I think the argument can at least be made.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Most I have see have Kotkaniemi anywhere from 15-24? Putting that aside for a second... he is a C. Not that we should be drafting for need, you take BPA but nothing suggests this kid is the BPA at 9 and plays a position we are already sufficiently stocked.

He’s a riser, and he’s coming off a great performance at the U18s. He could very well be the BPA, and unlike Chytil, who while having elite talent, may not be a center at the NHL, he could fill the role of legit #1C. He’s drawn Kopitar/Barkov comparisons.

 

[offdacrossbar]

I think it will be better than the Lias Andersson crucifixion. At least some posters are already prediction him as our selection, Lias was kind of a surprise.

not for all of us

 

[MikeSteaks]

Again, all fair points. But, if there are comparable players there at 9, why take the player that A. isn't the clear cut BPA and B. plays a position where we have the LEAST need?

Let's say all the Rangers C prospects reach their potential (WHICH THEY WILL NOT ) do you really think it's a problem to have too many young centers? Good centers can play wing... And are GREAT trade chips.

 

[Edge]

Again, all fair points. But, if there are comparable players there at 9, why take the player that A. isn't the clear cut BPA and B. plays a position where we have the LEAST need?

Can't disagree with you, it just comes down to whether the Rangers think they are comparable. I think some of us think he's in the mix, but for the Rangers he could be the guy they have ranked 4th or 5th.

If the Rangers view him as a being a high probability first line center, and some of the others guys as not being on that level (despite other opinions), than that could be the path for them.

The challenge for any draft is that there may be a difference of opinion with how guys are viewed. The idea of BPA is relatively straight forward, but it doesn't necessarily mean that everyone agrees on the BPA. There's differing criteria and values that play into that designation. I think a lot of fans tend to forget that. They assume BPA is a universal designation or that the guy they think is the BPA is who their team thinks is the BPA.

In other words, there are guys I like more than Kotkaniemi. However, I don't think the idea of him being the BPA in the Rangers eyes is far fetched. Now if they view Noel and Merkley as the BPA, then yes, I would consider that a little far out there.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Gorton may think he is the clear cut “BPA”

And if he does, fine by me. But I am not talking about Gorton, I am asking for the poster to explain his rationale. Kotkaniemi isn't a name I have seen a ton of and the other guys (from what I have seen) all seem to be ranked consistently higher.

I don't have as much time as I used to. Therefore I don't know as much about upcoming prospects.

I guess that depends.

What if he is the BPA on their board? The position argument doesn't make sense to me, guys who are natural centers can be shifted over to wing.

I wouldn't take him over Boqvist (concussion issues aside), Dobson or Wahlstrom, but I think the argument can at least be made.

If he is the BPA on their board, by all means and I am not making an argument based on position. Making an argument based on position is you take the best defenseman available regardless of what forwards are left on the board (and I think that is a stupid philosophy). I am saying, all things equal, If you have Wahlstrom, Boqvist, Dobson on the board, all comparable skill/potential with Kotkaniemi, why draft the position you are already stocked in? If Kotkaniemi was the clear cut BPA at that spot and he fell to us, of course you take BPA, even if you have Crosby - Mackinnon - Tavares - Malkin as your 4 centers.

But there isn't anything I have seen that suggests he would be the clear cut BPA and considering our astounding need for defense, if Boqvist or Dobson are there, I think it is a foolish move to draft Kotkaniemi.

 

[offdacrossbar]

farabee will be a kid we look at very very closely. if he's there in that 13-18 range where he's projected, he'll be a NYR.

i still believe we will draft 2 impact kids in the top 9-18 in this draft.

first will be the best righty Dman avail with our 1st pick (and we will make an effort to move up) ala boqvist or bouchard and then a slippery forward like farabee.

im sticking with that.

character plays an important role in this draft. talent and character. bouchard and farabee make too much sense.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Let's say all the Rangers C prospects reach their potential (WHICH THEY WILL NOT ) do you really think it's a problem to have too many young centers? Good centers can play wing... And are GREAT trade chips.

When you have no blue chip defensive prospects and there are equally talented skill/potential guys available? Then yes I think its a foolish move. If there is a run on defense in the first 8 picks, then by all means, take the forward you feel is BPA.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

And if he does, fine by me. But I am not talking about Gorton, I am asking for the poster to explain his rationale. Kotkaniemi isn't a name I have seen a ton of and the other guys (from what I have seen) all seem to be ranked consistently higher.

I don't have as much time as I used to. Therefore I don't know as much about upcoming prospects.



If he is the BPA on their board, by all means and I am not making an argument based on position. Making an argument based on position is you take the best defenseman available regardless of what forwards are left on the board (and I think that is a stupid philosophy). I am saying, all things equal, If you have Wahlstrom, Boqvist, Dobson on the board, all comparable skill/potential with Kotkaniemi, why draft the position you are already stocked in? If Kotkaniemi was the clear cut BPA at that spot and he fell to us, of course you take BPA, even if you have Crosby - Mackinnon - Tavares - Malkin as your 4 centers.

But there isn't anything I have seen that suggests he would be the clear cut BPA and considering our astounding need for defense, if Boqvist or Dobson are there, I think it is a foolish move to draft Kotkaniemi.

Fair and I don't disagree, but I'd hold off on looking at rankings for a bit. Most of them haven't been updated post u18.

For better or for worse, that tournament has a huge impact on where some of these kids end up. Strong showings shot both JT Miller and Filip Chytil up the Rangers' boards.

 

[Edge]

And if he does, fine by me. But I am not talking about Gorton, I am asking for the poster to explain his rationale. Kotkaniemi isn't a name I have seen a ton of and the other guys (from what I have seen) all seem to be ranked consistently higher.

I don't have as much time as I used to. Therefore I don't know as much about upcoming prospects.



If he is the BPA on their board, by all means and I am not making an argument based on position. Making an argument based on position is you take the best defenseman available regardless of what forwards are left on the board (and I think that is a stupid philosophy). I am saying, all things equal, If you have Wahlstrom, Boqvist, Dobson on the board, all comparable skill/potential with Kotkaniemi, why draft the position you are already stocked in? If Kotkaniemi was the clear cut BPA at that spot and he fell to us, of course you take BPA, even if you have Crosby - Mackinnon - Tavares - Malkin as your 4 centers.

But there isn't anything I have seen that suggests he would be the clear cut BPA and considering our astounding need for defense, if Boqvist or Dobson are there, I think it is a foolish move to draft Kotkaniemi.

Kotkaniemi has been steadily rising, not unlike a Kravtsov. The growth of their performance over the course of the season has raised their stock, though I'm not sure there's complete agreement on just what that means.

I've mostly seen Kotkaniemi rising into the mid-teens or a little higher over the last month or so. Top 10 is a little more rare, but not completely unheard of.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Fair and I don't disagree, but I'd hold off on looking at rankings for a bit. Most of them haven't been updated post u18.

For better or for worse, that tournament has a huge impact on where some of these kids end up. Strong showings shot both JT Miller and Filip Chytil up the Rangers' boards.

Fair enough. Part of this is me just genuinely asking and posing questions because I'm hoping for my fellow Rangers fans to inform me.

One of those picks turned out well for us, the other appears to be progressing nicely. It will be interesting for sure to see what the new rankings look like.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Kotkaniemi has been steadily rising, not unlike a Kravtsov. The growth of their performance over the course of the season has raised their stock, though I'm not sure there's complete agreement on just what that means.

I've mostly seen Kotkaniemi rising into the mid-teens or a little higher over the last month or so. Top 10 is a little more rare, but not completely unheard of.

If that is the case, see if you can swing a deal with Philly. 9 for 14 + 19. Four first round picks. Talk about restocking the cupboard real quick.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

I love this draft. There are honestly very, very few players I'd be upset to see them pick unless they go WAAAY off the board.

Noel at 9? Yeah, I'd be unenthused – but pretty much anyone else mocked in the top 15-18, sure, no problem.

Kotkaniemi? Means they believe he can be a 1C – if that's what the scouts think, go for it. Kravtsov? Means they think he's got the legit 1st line scoring wing potential – if that's what the scouts think, go for it. Etc., etc.

LOVE that we have three picks (and five in the top 60), and additional pieces to either add more, or move them up.