First Round Reactions

[Gravesy]

Yes.

[Pete]

So then you have your answer LOL.

[Guest]

McKenzie had Kravtsov at 12 and the only forward between he and Wahlstrom was Barrett Hayton, taken 5th overall by Arizona.

 

So for one of the most respected men in hockey, Wahlstrom and Kravtsov were right next to each other as far as forwards and only 3 picks apart. This wasn't a reach like taking someone ranked 18th overall in the 7th spot. It wasn't even the reach that Arizona made for Hayton because they wanted a center.

 

This was simply a matter of preference between two very similar in value prospects.

[josh]

Can we simulate a season or 2?

[Pete]

McKenzie had Kravtsov at 12 and the only forward between he and Wahlstrom was Barrett Hayton, taken 5th overall by Arizona.

 

So for one of the most respected men in hockey, Wahlstrom and Kravtsov were right next to each other as far as forwards and only 3 picks apart. This wasn't a reach like taking someone ranked 18th overall in the 7th spot. It wasn't even the reach that Arizona made for Hayton because they wanted a center.

 

This was simply a matter of preference between two very similar in value prospects.

Sure.

 

Unless we look at Wahlstrom who was highly rated all year vs a guy who flew up the ranks because of a hot playoff.

[Guest]

Sure.

 

Unless we look at Wahlstrom who was highly rated all year vs a guy who flew up the ranks because of a hot playoff.

Whalstrom dominated his peers as an 18 year old. Kravtsov flew up the rank because of success against the better teams of grown men in the KHL playoffs. He had already had success against players his own age when he was 17. I suspect if he stayed in the lower ranks in Russia he'd have been similarly as dominate.

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

I think the FO thought Wahlstrom would be off the boards when we were to make the pick, so they scouted the next best available winger (Kravstov) and fell in love with him.

[Gravesy]

So then you have your answer LOL.

 

McKenzie didn't describe the pick as shit, poor or a reach as far as I could hear.

[Vodka Drunkenski]

I?ll hold judgement on this pick for a couple of years.

[siddious]

McKenzie didn't describe the pick as shit, poor or a reach as far as I could hear.

 

I believe the exact words after he was drafted were something like ?this pick isn?t entirely off the boards?...

 

I think they were surprised we didn?t go Wahlstrom but then they had nothing but good things to say about Krav.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Pete]

McKenzie didn't describe the pick as shit, poor or a reach as far as I could hear.

Let's just call a spade a spade. There was no one here or on TV who saw us passing on Wahlstrom in that spot. Nobody.

 

Was this a reach of McIlrath proportions? No. But similar logic was used there..."Well Edmonton was going to take him, too..." That's an awful rationale.

 

End of day, I don't mind the pick really. I like the player. But I also feel we passed on a player who CAN be a Jamie Benn for one who MIGHT be Kuznetsov.

 

What I take issue with is the Monday morning quarterbacking by everyone here acting like we got the better player.

 

If he was the better player then why was he not on anyone's board for us?

[Future]

The guy had 3 goals and 4 assists in 35 games. WTF, I guess the rebuild is over.

Kuznetsov had 2 and 7 the year he was drafted. Kravtsov was 11 in 16 in the playoffs - that's when his stock skyrocketed.

[BrooksBurner]

Question for those that think we missed out on Wahlstrom: Why did 8 teams (not including Buff/Car) pass on Wahlstrom? Other teams besides the Rangers passed on Wahlstrom and arguably "reached more" than the Rangers. Montreal @ 3 with Kotkaniemi and Arizona @ 5 with Hayton. What did these teams see (or not see) in Wahlstrom?

[Guest]

Question for those that think we missed out on Wahlstrom: Why did 8 teams (not including Buff/Car) pass on Wahlstrom? Other teams besides the Rangers passed on Wahlstrom and arguably "reached more" than the Rangers. Montreal @ 3 with Kotkaniemi and Arizona @ 5 with Hayton. What did these teams see (or not see) in Wahlstrom?

 

First, I think you can call Kravtsov a reach in that he was the second best forward available taken when he was. The question is how much is the gap between he and Whalstrom? I don't think it's very big at all, so I don't mind the pick.

 

To your questions, those two franchises wanted centers, so they took the two best available at the time they drafted. It was drafting for need rather than skill.

[Guest]

For the discussion, here's what was said when the Rangers selected Kravtsov.

 

NBCSN:

 

 

"It's not an off the board pick, persey, but when you take a Russian in the top 10 and the player isn't likely to arrive in the NHL for another year or two, a lot of fans don't identify very much with that player..."

[Gravesy]

Let's just call a spade a spade. There was no one here or on TV who saw us passing on Wahlstrom in that spot. Nobody.

 

Was this a reach of McIlrath proportions? No. But similar logic was used there..."Well Edmonton was going to take him, too..." That's an awful rationale.

 

End of day, I don't mind the pick really. I like the player. But I also feel we passed on a player who CAN be a Jamie Benn for one who MIGHT be Kuznetsov.

 

What I take issue with is the Monday morning quarterbacking by everyone here acting like we got the better player.

 

If he was the better player then why was he not on anyone's board for us?

 

I think that’s a perfectly fair way of looking at it.

It’s also quite far from the reactions I was responding to initially. To be clear, I’ve not once said I think we got the better player. I don’t know that, and I don’t think anybody does. At the time, like everybody else, I was shocked when we left both Wahlstrom and Dobson on the board.

But after reading up a bit, I feel pretty confident this was not a “desperate reach”, not “same old Rangers trying to be clever”, certainly no reason to wish cancer on Gorton and his team. It was unexpected, but all of the writers I trust think it was a really good pick. And I’ve certainly not seen anyone murdering it or coming even close to how it was described on here.

[Future]

First, I think you can call Kravtsov a reach in that he was the second best forward available taken when he was. The question is how much is the gap between he and Whalstrom? I don't think it's very big at all, so I don't mind the pick.

 

To your questions, those two franchises wanted centers, so they took the two best available at the time they drafted. It was drafting for need rather than skill.

Well the Rangers had him graded as the #2 forward overall, so, presumably, he was the top player on their board when they picked. It's not a reach, in that sense.

[Pete]

I think that?s a perfectly fair way of looking at it.

It?s also quite far from the reactions I was responding to initially. To be clear, I?ve not once said I think we got the better player. I don?t know that, and I don?t think anybody does. At the time, like everybody else, I was shocked when we left both Wahlstrom and Dobson on the board.

But after reading up a bit, I feel pretty confident this was not a ?desperate reach?, not ?same old Rangers trying to be clever?, certainly no reason to wish cancer on Gorton and his team. It was unexpected, but all of the writers I trust think it was a really good pick. And I?ve certainly not seen anyone murdering it or coming even close to how it was described on here.

All fair points.

[Fatfrancesa]

I haven’t seen a post yet trashing the player. Hopefully Clarke and the rangers are right. History matters though. In the past we’ve had players (guys who were consensus top 10 guys for the past 6 months) fall into our laps only to draft a more unknown quantity. While the rangers might have had Kravtsov as the second best forward at the time of the pick, they didn’t draft jessiman or mcilrath with them not being the highest rated forward or defenseman available then either. Point is these guys are usually wrong. The crazy reactions to the pick is not about Kravtsov. It’s about three guys falling to the rangers, two in particular, that was a wet dream only a week ago. The Habs and coyotes go off the board opening the door for the rangers to get a possible top 5 guy. I’m sitting there thinking thank god they can’t fuck this up. And then they do what they’ve done every time. Maybe Kravtsov proves them right this time. If he doesn’t then what? This scouting group has already survived two enormous busts, jessiman being an all time one.

[josh]

McIlrath and Jessiman were both drafted to fill specific roles. Hence why a lot of fans stressed drafting "best player available"

[Gravesy]

Well, we’re currently posting in a thread you originally called ?awful? with an opening post of “fuck Glen Sather” so I’m sure you’ll excuse me for thinking that wasn’t a ringing endorsement of the pick, player and the guys responsible for it.

[Fatfrancesa]

Well, we’re currently posting in a thread you originally called ?awful? with an opening post of “fuck Glen Sather” so I’m sure you’ll excuse me for thinking that wasn’t a ringing endorsement of the pick, player and the guys responsible for it.

 

It’s not. Nothing against the player but Clarke, sather, and now Gorton continue to try to outsmart the league. While nobody here brought the player up pre draft at even being a possibility at our spot, especially with who was on the board, I don’t choose to close my eyes to possibility that once again these guys fucked up. So far there isn’t a time when going off the board to take their guy has worked. I’m not going to hold any of that against the player it has nothing to do with him. He’s a nice prospect and I hope he delivers. Sad thing is they can be wrong because lifetime contracts kind of stipulate that results don’t matter. If they did Clarke would not be here after mcilrath.

 

And josh drafting either of those players for whatever reason doesn’t matter. They never played a meaningful stretch in the nhl. They were top picks and the players drafted after them make it AWFUL.

[josh]

Kravtsov was discussed on here. Anywhere from 9 to late teens, and some optimistically wanted him at 26.

 

Yes, why they draft someone at the time does matter. Based on the draft this season, and the number of defensemaen they drafted, it seems like they were targeting the best all-around forward in the first. Previous management would have said “we need goal scoring”, and drafted a guy based solely on that. So we escaped that, thankfully, unlike drafts 10 seasons ago.

[Pete]

Kravtsov was discussed on here. Anywhere from 9 to late teens, and some optimistically wanted him at 26.

 

Yes, why they draft someone at the time does matter. Based on the draft this season, and the number of defensemaen they drafted, it seems like they were targeting the best all-around forward in the first. Previous management would have said “we need goal scoring”, and drafted a guy based solely on that. So we escaped that, thankfully, unlike drafts 10 seasons ago.

 

Sorry but there is not one person here who had Krav on their board over Wahlstrom. Anyone who had him at 9 had Walhstrom going to Chicago at 8.

 

That said, previous management said we needed a punishing defenseman for Torts, so they drafted a 5 year project. This time they drafted a 2 year project rather than someone likely to play right away, which I guess...helps?

[Vodka Drunkenski]

Dunny was calling for Him since April