Staple Rangers Lose More Scouting Staff: Kevin Maxwell and Chris Morehouse Leave for Other NHL Jobs

[Drew a Penalty]

48 minutes ago, Pete said:

Day had well known issues on and off the ice. IIRC He was our first pick in that draft, we needed a sure thing, not a big swing at that point of the draft. 

 

Might have been the right kind of player, but it was the wrong time to make a play like that IMO. 

 

Day was such a physical specimen that he was supposed to be a sure thing. He's a giant with incredible skating. The development never came because the dude has issues with depression and couldn't stay in the right headspace or shape to develop. I disagree that he was the wrong pick. The Rangers hadn't had a first round pick in a number of years and he was supposed to be a lottery pick. There's no better value there. Day might still even be an NHLer though not a star or for the Rangers.

[Pete]

17 minutes ago, Drew a Penalty said:

 

Day was such a physical specimen that he was supposed to be a sure thing. He's a giant with incredible skating. The development never came because the dude has issues with depression and couldn't stay in the right headspace or shape to develop. I disagree that he was the wrong pick. The Rangers hadn't had a first round pick in a number of years and he was supposed to be a lottery pick. There's no better value there. Day might still even be an NHLer though not a star or for the Rangers.

Yes like I said, he had well known off ice issues. He went from exceptional status to 3rd rounder. His stock was falling, he was trending down. 

[Dunny]

How are you drafting a sure thing in the 3rd round?

[Pete]

4 minutes ago, Dunny said:

How are you drafting a sure thing in the 3rd round?

There were safer picks then Sean Day. Didn't think that needed explaining. Guess it did. 

[Dunny]

There were 2 needle-in-a-haystack picks after Day for the rest of the draft, in Brat and Mete. Mete sucks, anyways.

 

It was an attempt to swing big in the 3rd because they had nothing in the 1st or 2nd. I like that play. It didn't work out, but not much did after Day, anyways.

[Phil]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

Day had well known issues on and off the ice. IIRC He was our first pick in that draft, we needed a sure thing, not a big swing at that point of the draft. 

 

Might have been the right kind of player, but it was the wrong time to make a play like that IMO. 

 

There's no such thing as a "sure thing" in the middle of the third round. I'm not that upset over Day. I'm still annoyed as fuck at Lindblom and Gropp.

[Phil]

41 minutes ago, Pete said:

There were safer picks then Sean Day. Didn't think that needed explaining. Guess it did. 

 

Who?

 

These are the guys who immediately went after him:

 

Carsen Twarynski

Wouter Peeters

Matthew Cairns

Joshua Mahura

Casey Fitzgerald

Garrett Pilon

Connor Ingram

Linus Nassen

Fredrik Karlstrom

Filip Berglund

 

I don't even know who the hell any of them even are.

 

Adam Brooks at 92, I guess? I mean, have you actually seen this draft recently? It's an endless list of garbage.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NHL_Entry_Draft#Round_three

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

Who?

 

These are the guys who immediately went after him:

 

Carsen Twarynski

Wouter Peeters

Matthew Cairns

Joshua Mahura

Casey Fitzgerald

Garrett Pilon

Connor Ingram

Linus Nassen

Fredrik Karlstrom

Filip Berglund

 

I don't even know who the hell any of them even are.

 

Adam Brooks at 92, I guess? I mean, have you actually seen this draft recently? It's an endless list of garbage.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NHL_Entry_Draft#Round_three

Ross Colton was there. 

 

Look, all I'm saying is Day's issues were known. Why take a project with your first pick in that draft?

 

The fact of the matter is they didn't find that gem, and that's why they're not scouting for the Rangers anymore. Moves like that. 

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

There's no such thing as a "sure thing" in the middle of the third round. I'm not that upset over Day. I'm still annoyed as fuck at Lindblom and Gropp.

OK, then they needed more of a sure thing if you want to be myopic about it.

 

Again, this kid went from exceptional status to third rounder in a matter of two years, why were you taking a player who's trending down instead of a player who was trending up?

[Phil]

18 minutes ago, Pete said:

Ross Colton was there. 

 

Look, all I'm saying is Day's issues were known. Why take a project with your first pick in that draft?

 

The fact of the matter is they didn't find that gem, and that's why they're not scouting for the Rangers anymore. Moves like that. 

 

I guess, yeah, but was Ross Colton really a "safer" pick? Like, I'm asking earnestly. As I understand drafting, outside the first round, really, it's very much a roll of the dice, and strong drafting (and lucky) is what separates the winners from the losers. I just don't think they really went all that wrong on Day. They had just sacrificed so much of their future for those runs prior to this. I think they probably saw Day as big opportunity at a really low risk position. I can't really fault them all that much for it. It just didn't work out. Gropp and Lindblom were bad picks. If they were first-rounders, they'd be ranking as high as McIlrath, Jessiman, and Lias Andersson.

 

In fact, Andersson is about the definition of "safe pick." He was basically billed as Palat. No frills, low maintenance, steady quality. Look how well that turned out.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

I guess, yeah, but was Ross Colton really a "safer" pick? Like, I'm asking earnestly. As I understand drafting, outside the first round, really, it's very much a roll of the dice, and strong drafting (and lucky) is what separates the winners from the losers. I just don't think they really went all that wrong on Day. They had just sacrificed so much of their future for those runs prior to this. I think they probably saw Day as big opportunity at a really low risk position. I can't really fault them all that much for it. It just didn't work out. Gropp and Lindblom were bad picks. If they were first-rounders, they'd be ranking as high as McIlrath, Jessiman, and Lias Andersson.

 

In fact, Andersson is about the definition of "safe pick." He was basically billed as Palat. No frills, low maintenance, steady quality. Look how well that turned out.

Yes, of course... So like I said... Why pick a player who's trending down. 

[Phil]

27 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yes, of course... So like I said... Why pick a player who's trending down. 

 

Because the alternative was players with no upside?

[LindG1000]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

 

Because the alternative was players with no upside?

 

You can argue this til you're blue in the face but every time you review any draft, there's massive hindsight bias. You can argue that we should have taken Victor Mete, Ross Colton, and Jesper Bratt in that draft. They are the exceptions, not the rules. You're hoping for "plays in NHL" by the time you're in round 3, and by round 4 you're hoping for "anything better than ECHL".

 

Finding the Bratts and Palats and even the Buchneviches of the world that deep in the draft is rare as hell, and an attempt to argue "well they were there" ....yeah, they were, and got passed on 40+ more times until they got drafted.

[Pete]

7 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

You can argue this til you're blue in the face but every time you review any draft, there's massive hindsight bias. You can argue that we should have taken Victor Mete, Ross Colton, and Jesper Bratt in that draft. They are the exceptions, not the rules. You're hoping for "plays in NHL" by the time you're in round 3, and by round 4 you're hoping for "anything better than ECHL".

 

Finding the Bratts and Palats and even the Buchneviches of the world that deep in the draft is rare as hell, and an attempt to argue "well they were there" ....yeah, they were, and got passed on 40+ more times until they got drafted.

Yeah and yet some teams make a living off of finding those players, like the Tampa Bay lightning.

 

So maybe there's a reason these guys got fired?

 

Nah, can't be. Day was a great pick.

[Pete]

21 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Because the alternative was players with no upside?

Really?

[Dunny]

39 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yeah and yet some teams make a living off of finding those players, like the Tampa Bay lightning.

 

So maybe there's a reason these guys got fired?

 

Nah, can't be. Day was a great pick.

 

Day was a good enough pick at 80. He's played in the NHL, and likely will play more in the NHL lmao. Who did he play for? The Tampa Bay Lightning lol  so I guess their super scouts saw something, eh?

Edited August 16, 2022 by Dunny

[Pete]

6 hours ago, Dunny said:

 

Day was a good enough pick at 80. He's played in the NHL, and likely will play more in the NHL lmao. Who did he play for? The Tampa Bay Lightning lol  so I guess their super scouts saw something, eh?

And yet they didn't spend a pick on him, did they, eh? LOL

 

Because they were dumpster diving and bargain hunting with Cups in tow. 

 

They didn't spend multiple firsts THEN. decide "let's use our best pick in this draft on a guy we can have later for... Nothing at all. "

 

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Pete

[Phil]

17 hours ago, Pete said:

Really?

 

Ross Colton has "upside?"

 

Look at that draft list again, dude. There were basically three NHL players, period, taken after Sean Day. Jesper Bratt, who sure, would have been a better pick, but at the time, wasn't pegged as a star, Victor Mete, who kinda sucks, and Ross Colton.

 

I'm just failing to follow you here. You're panning the organization for taking with its first pick in the draft a kid who had first-round talent but fell out of favor instead of taking, in effect, a guaranteed non-NHL player. What's the difference? I shoot for the moon there, every single time.

[BrooksBurner]

In my opinion, when you don’t have 1st or even 2nd round picks, the best “blanket” strategy is to take a swing or two for the fences. But it all depends on current state of roster. If the team is competitive and needs plugs, it makes a lot of sense to go for a guy who is closer to the NHL, with a low ceiling but a higher floor/probability of filling a bottom 6 role.

[Long live the King]

16 hours ago, Pete said:

And yet they didn't spend a pick on him, did they, eh? LOL

 

Because they were dumpster diving and bargain hunting with Cups in tow. 

 

They didn't spend multiple firsts THEN. decide "let's use our best pick in this draft on a guy we can have later for... Nothing at all. "

 

 

 

They may not have picked Day, but they picked Hajek over DeBrincat and Girard in the second round.

[Phil]

1 hour ago, rmc51 said:

In my opinion, when you don’t have 1st or even 2nd round picks, the best “blanket” strategy is to take a swing or two for the fences. But it all depends on current state of roster. If the team is competitive and needs plugs, it makes a lot of sense to go for a guy who is closer to the NHL, with a low ceiling but a higher floor/probability of filling a bottom 6 role.

 

Right, but at the time, they needed anything. Everything, even. Hartford was a total mess, lead by a cast of all-star scrubs like Ty Ronning, Ryan Gropp, Robin Kovacs, etc.

 

Brandon Halverson was still a thing then. They were trash.

[Drew a Penalty]

14 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Right, but at the time, they needed anything. Everything, even. Hartford was a total mess, lead by a cast of all-star scrubs like Ty Ronning, Ryan Gropp, Robin Kovacs, etc.

 

Brandon Halverson was still a thing then. They were trash.

 

Ronning was drafted that year, but otherwise yes.

[Ozzy]

....it's definitely August, eh fellas???   LOL

[siddious]

Just now, Ozzy said:

....it's definitely August, eh fellas???   LOL

When the fuck is traverse city? Isn’t that usually late august? Is that even a thing anymore? 

[Drew a Penalty]

3 minutes ago, siddious said:

When the fuck is traverse city? Isn’t that usually late august? Is that even a thing anymore? 

 

The Rangers left and haven't rejoined.