Prospect Info: Rangers Prospects Thread (Stats in Post #1; Updated 5.29.18)

[Edge]

I think a huge amount of people with platforms are just HFBoards posters and that's not a big deal really

I think there are some writers out there with very good ability.

But I also think we need to acknowledge the difference between reporting and providing commentary.

Reporting involves covering breaking news, happenings, and providing context by utilizing sources connected to said news or happening.

Commentary, or writing as a columnist, revolves around providing one's opinion on a subject. It's primarily based on the concept of using the author's personal views as the basis for presenting a specific narrative or argument.

Bob McKenzie, or even Kyle Woodlief, tend to lean towards reporting a bit more. They will quote a scout or scouts, and they'll talk to an executive or two. HockeysFuture, at various times, has done that as well.

A lot of what you read out there, be it on social media, websites, whatever, is really commentary. There's nothing wrong with that, you just have to be aware that in some cases the opinions of said commentators could be even less informed than some of the posters you encounter on here.

That's not calling anyone out, or directed at any specific person. It's merely to provide context to the content you may be reading, and to help you keep in mind that the audience they're often communicating with doesn't know if they're full of crap or not.

On here, for better or worse, there are a handful of people who are likely to call B.S. on something, or at least providing an opposing take.

On some of the other platforms, the author is in charge and the audience is less likely to push back. Admittedly, some people like it that way.

 

[nyr__1994]

I think there are some writers out there with very good ability.

But I also think we need to acknowledge the difference between reporting and providing commentary.

Reporting involves covering breaking news, happenings, and providing context by utilizing sources connected to said news or happening.

Commentary, or writing as a columnist, revolves around providing one's opinion on a subject. It's primarily based on the concept of using the author's personal views as the basis for presenting a specific narrative or argument.

Bob McKenzie, or even Kyle Woodlief, tend to lean towards reporting a bit more. They will quote a scout or scouts, and they'll talk to an executive or two. HockeysFuture, at various times, has done that as well.

A lot of what you read out there, be it on social media, websites, whatever, is really commentary. There's nothing wrong with that, you just have to be aware that in some cases the opinions of said commentators could be even less informed than some of the posters you encounter on here.

That's not calling anyone out, or directed at any specific person. It's merely to provide context to the content you may be reading, and to help you keep in mind that the audience they're often communicating with doesn't know if they're full of crap or not.

On here, for better or worse, there are a handful of people who are likely to call B.S. on something, or at least providing an opposing take.

On some of the other platforms, the author is in charge and the audience is less likely to push back. Admittedly, some people like it that way.

Thanks @Edge !

You said what I was thinking. When you are reading someone outside of Brooks, Carp, or the other beat writers, all you are getting is opinions about what they think is going on. There is very little original information that has been available for the NYR over the past year, so all of these bloggers (I say that without a negative connotation) have to write about something, so they just write for the sake of producing content. Most of the NYR content that comes from the bloggers do a good job of presenting the statistical side of the game and the actual stats. But where most of them are lacking is how to apply those stats to what is happening in the game, or adding their own insight as to why the numbers are what they are.

I feel a lot of this is due to the cone of silence that surrounds most professional sports teams these days, and the cuts that have happened at a lot of the print media across the country. The Athletic is tryin to flip that dynamic back the other way, and seems to be doing a pretty good job of it. But time will tell. Until then, we have to have the filters on.

To stay on topic - What are your thoughts on Sean Day? Is he ever going to be able to put it together?

 

[Edge]

Thanks @Edge !

You said what I was thinking. When you are reading someone outside of Brooks, Carp, or the other beat writers, all you are getting is opinions about what they think is going on. There is very little original information that has been available for the NYR over the past year, so all of these bloggers (I say that without a negative connotation) have to write about something, so they just write for the sake of producing content. Most of the NYR content that comes from the bloggers do a good job of presenting the statistical side of the game and the actual stats. But where most of them are lacking is how to apply those stats to what is happening in the game, or adding their own insight as to why the numbers are what they are.

I feel a lot of this is due to the cone of silence that surrounds most professional sports teams these days, and the cuts that have happened at a lot of the print media across the country. The Athletic is tryin to flip that dynamic back the other way, and seems to be doing a pretty good job of it. But time will tell. Until then, we have to have the filters on.

To stay on topic - What are your thoughts on Sean Day? Is he ever going to be able to put it together?

I really need to see Day at the AHL level first. I still have concerns about his hockey IQ and awareness. But he's so naturally talented from a physical standpoint that he might be able to carve out a career for himself.

I would put somewhat moderate expectations on Day. I think his ceiling at this point is a second pair guy who is somewhat frustrating with his ability to bring it up a notch at times and in key moments. But a more likely upside/hope is that he finds a niche as a third pairing guy who occasionally steps up as needed.

 

[NYR Viper]

I really need to see Day at the AHL level first. I still have concerns about his hockey IQ and awareness. But he's so naturally talented from a physical standpoint that he might be able to carve out a career for himself.

I would put somewhat moderate expectations on Day. I think his ceiling at this point is a second pair guy who is somewhat frustrating with his ability to bring it up a notch at times and in key moments. But a more likely upside/hope is that he finds a niche as a third pairing guy who occasionally steps up as needed.

John Moore is who this sounds like which would be a real nice get at the spot he was chosen.

I was listening to XM a couple of days ago and there was a guy on (I was mowing so I was kind of half listening) who mentioned a couple of exceptional status guys (speaking of Veleno). He was saying Veleno may be taken too high because of this consideration but then he went on to mention Sean Day who he said the Rangers chose in the mid-rounds and thought had really developed well since after being drafted. He seemed pretty high on him and thought the Rangers had a solid player coming through the pipeline.

Thought it was interesting since it was a 2018 draft preview show

 

[Ghost of jas]

John Moore is who this sounds like which would be a real nice get at the spot he was chosen.

I was listening to XM a couple of days ago and there was a guy on (I was mowing so I was kind of half listening) who mentioned a couple of exceptional status guys (speaking of Veleno). He was saying Veleno may be taken too high because of this consideration but then he went on to mention Sean Day who he said the Rangers chose in the mid-rounds and thought had really developed well since after being drafted. He seemed pretty high on him and thought the Rangers had a solid player coming through the pipeline.

Thought it was interesting since it was a 2018 draft preview show

I think it was Mark Siedel.

 

[Shadowtron]

I'm oddly nervous about this draft. I afraid they're gonna make another McIlrath or Jessimen level blunder tomorrow.

 

[Blueshirt Special]

I'm oddly nervous about this draft. I afraid they're gonna make another McIlrath or Jessimen level blunder tomorrow.

Oh God, please no! I'm going to puke on the steps of the Garden if we do this again. The problem is we probably won't know for at least a year or two...

 

[kovazub94]

I really need to see Day at the AHL level first. I still have concerns about his hockey IQ and awareness. But he's so naturally talented from a physical standpoint that he might be able to carve out a career for himself.

I would put somewhat moderate expectations on Day. I think his ceiling at this point is a second pair guy who is somewhat frustrating with his ability to bring it up a notch at times and in key moments. But a more likely upside/hope is that he finds a niche as a third pairing guy who occasionally steps up as needed.

There will be a lot of bodies at LD this year in Hartford. Wouldn’t be surprised if Day starts out in the ECHL. Would they try him at RD (I seemed to recall that he played a bit on his off side in juniors)?

 

[Edge]

There will be a lot of bodies at LD this year in Hartford. Wouldn’t be surprised if Day starts out in the ECHL. Would they try him at RD (I seemed to recall that he played a bit on his off side in juniors)?

I think Day and Hajek could potentially see time on the right side.

 

[nyr2k2]

Bigras can play RD.

 

[NYR Viper]

I think it was Mark Siedel.

That is correct, just couldn't remember the guys name

 

[NYR Viper]

Bigras can play RD.

Depending on who is around, but Gilmour and O'Gara both play RD and LD as well.

 

[YoSoyLalo]

The problem is we probably won't know for at least a year or two...

I don’t know about that, I think everyone knew we blundered the second their (Jessiman/McIlrath) names were announced.

 

[nyr2k2]

I don’t know about that, I think everyone knew we blundered the second their (Jessiman/McIlrath) names were announced.

McIlrath I was furious over. I eventually came around as I watched him progress, but I was so mad Fowler and Tarasenko were on the board (more so Fowler). However with Jessiman, while I wasn't happy with the pick--I wanted Parise or (ugh) Nilsson--I thought there was still a decent chance that he would become an actual impact player. So I didn't totally lose it with Jessiman.

 

[nyr2k2]

I don’t know about that, I think everyone knew we blundered the second their (Jessiman/McIlrath) names were announced.

McIlrath I was furious over. I eventually came around as I watched him progress, but I was so mad Fowler and Tarasenko were on the board (more so Fowler). However with Jessiman, while I wasn't happy with the pick--I wanted Parise or (ugh) Nilsson--I thought there was still a decent chance that he would become an actual impact player. So I didn't totally lose it with Jessiman.

 

[Edge]

Jessiman I feared and hated immediately. I just did not like him as a prospect.

McIlrath disappointed me, but I thought he could make it as an NHL --- albeit a player who was going to be judged by the superior players selected after him.

And in both cases, it became apparent pretty quickly that they were not progressing like the Rangers hoped. Granted making such comments was met almost immediately with defenses of how it was too soon, or other factors (including injuries for both guys).

But the reality is that almost every Ranger first round pick since 2005 has shown immediately in their D-1 season whether they were going to make it, or be a mistake.

 

[Ranger Ric]

Tambellini out

According to a just published article by Rick Carpinello the Rangers qualified all of their RFAs except Adam Tambellini. The ten qualified RFAs would by O'Gara, Skjei, Gilmour, Biagras, Spooner, Hayes, Namestikov, Vessel, Nieves and Fogarty.

Not that surprised about Tambellini. Three years of similar mediocre production.

 

[Fvital92]

Tambellini out

According to a just published article by Rick Carpinello the Rangers qualified all of their RFAs except Adam Tambellini. The ten qualified RFAs would by O'Gara, Skjei, Gilmour, Biagras, Spooner, Hayes, Namestikov, Vessel, Nieves and Fogarty.

Not that surprised about Tambellini. Three years of similar mediocre production.

Man, for a moment I forgot of O'Gara's existence. Why did we qualify him? He won't win a spot with the Rangers and probably also with Hartford ( Bigras, Hajek, Lindgren and company). What a waste.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Man, for a moment I forgot of O'Gara's existence. Why did we qualify him? He won't will a spot with the Rangers and probably also with Hartford ( Bigras, Hajek, Lindgren and company). What a waste.

7th d-man on the NHL roster?

 

[Fvital92]

7th d-man on the NHL roster?

I was hoping Gilmour would be the 7 th D. Skjei, Shattenkirk, Staal, Pionk, Smith and DeAngelos as the regulars. But who knows?

 

[Fitzy]

Jessiman I feared and hated immediately. I just did not like him as a prospect.

McIlrath disappointed me, but I thought he could make it as an NHL --- albeit a player who was going to be judged by the superior players selected after him.

And in both cases, it became apparent pretty quickly that they were not progressing like the Rangers hoped. Granted making such comments was met almost immediately with defenses of how it was too soon, or other factors (including injuries for both guys).

But the reality is that almost every Ranger first round pick since 2005 has shown immediately in their D-1 season whether they were going to make it, or be a mistake.

With the possible exception of Sanguinetti.

People weren't completely sold on Miller or Skjei their post draft years either.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

I was hoping Gilmour would be the 7 th D. Skjei, Shattenkirk, Staal, Pionk, Smith and DeAngelos as the regulars. But who knows?

Think one of the younger guys will start in the AHL, or maybe Quinn loves to have 8 defensemen on the roster like AV did, but I guess we'll find out in like 90ish days or whenever training camp is going on

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Not very high on Fogarty, don’t see him developing into something useful outside of intangibles. Would rather keep that contract slot open....

 

[Dijock94]

Not very high on Fogarty, don’t see him developing into something useful outside of intangibles. Would rather keep that contract slot open....

Was literally going to post the exact same thing. I read that and thought to myself why are we qualifying this guy?

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

Tambellini out

According to a just published article by Rick Carpinello the Rangers qualified all of their RFAs except Adam Tambellini. The ten qualified RFAs would by O'Gara, Skjei, Gilmour, Biagras, Spooner, Hayes, Namestikov, Vessel, Nieves and Fogarty.

Not that surprised about Tambellini. Three years of similar mediocre production.

O'Gara makes no sense, what do they see in him, he has no NHL talent at all.

Not surprised about Tambellini, always hated that pick. They should have traded him for another prospect in a similar situation at the end of last season.