2018 NHL Draft: Quantity vs. Quality?

[Tawnos]

Quality should be priority, because we already got quantity.

We do?

Our prospect pool has no depth at wing or D, but sure... plenty of quantity.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

We do?

Our prospect pool has no depth at wing or D, but sure... plenty of quantity.

We just signed 2 depth wingers. We will probably draft wingers with our picks in the 20s and 30s range

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

We just signed 2 depth wingers. We will probably draft wingers with our picks in the 20s and 30s range

And we just traded for 4 Dmen prospects and started developing 3 more young Dmen.

 

[Tawnos]

And we just traded for 4 Dmen prospects and started developing 3 more young Dmen.

Yes, I know we did... but we were pretty much starting from zero, so the depth is still pretty thin.

I honestly would say the same about the center position if Andersson and Chytil hadn’t already pushed their progress to the next level and we hadn’t acquired Howden. The overall need at center is lower.

 

[SA16]

The mistake is thinking organizations can identify quality with such precision in order to make it more valuable than quantity. They can't.

 

[Tawnos]

The mistake is thinking organizations can identify quality with such precision in order to make it more valuable than quantity. They can't.

Totally agree with this.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

The mistake is thinking organizations can identify quality with such precision in order to make it more valuable than quantity. They can't.

Agreed in general – with the one exception of trading up to get into a higher talent tier, or to snag a guy who's dropping.

I have little interest in moving from 9 to 7 or even 5, (unless the price is comparatively low), but if somehow against all reason Svechnikov is still available at that point? By all means, make the move.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

Yes, I know we did... but we were pretty much starting from zero, so the depth is still pretty thin.

I honestly would say the same about the center position if Andersson and Chytil hadn’t already pushed their progress to the next level and we hadn’t acquired Howden. The overall need at center is lower.

Good thing about centers is most of them can play wing as well, so there is more versatility making them the most valuable commodity.

 

[Tawnos]

Good thing about centers is most of them can play wing as well, so there is more versatility making them the most valuable commodity.

Overstated. Hayes can play wing, but that doesn’t mean he should.

 

[ponytrekker]

Agreed in general – with the one exception of trading up to get into a higher talent tier, or to snag a guy who's dropping.

I have little interest in moving from 9 to 7 or even 5, (unless the price is comparatively low), but if somehow against all reason Svechnikov is still available at that point? By all means, make the move.

Be like the Jets. Trading up to 2 or 3 does it. Trading from 9 to 6, save you money.

 

[Edge]

The mistake is thinking organizations can identify quality with such precision in order to make it more valuable than quantity. They can't.

I think it depends on the context.

Alot of people tend to view it as an either/or scenario and I don't find that to be accurate.

Not sure the answer is in proposals to trade every asset we have to land in the top 3 , but I'm also not convinced that trading down a few times to get an extra pick or two is the answer either.

I could live with the Rangers identifying targets they like before 9 and before 26 and using some assets to move up a few slots if they feel there is a significant risk of losing their guy.

If that means having two first rounders, one second and two thirds instead of 3+2+2, I can live with that.

 

[True Blue]

I could live with the Rangers identifying targets they like before 9 and before 26 and using some assets to move up a few slots if they feel there is a significant risk of losing their guy.

If that means having two first rounders, one second and two thirds instead of 3+2+2, I can live with that.

This is valid. I just do not like the "at any cost" contemplation.

 

[Edge]

This is valid. I just do not like the "at any cost" contemplation.

Yeah, I'm not in favor of the at any cost mentality. I'd be okay with a balance.

I'm also pretty intrigued to see which conversations, if any, resume from the trade deadline. If, by some chance, there is a window to add a first in a Zucc trade, and if we end up with another 2019 pick because Tampa wins, that gives us a lot of ammunition --- even if we bundle some picks in deals.

 

[True Blue]

I'm also pretty intrigued to see which conversations, if any, resume from the trade deadline. If, by some chance, there is a window to add a first in a Zucc trade, and if we end up with another 2019 pick because Tampa wins, that gives us a lot of ammunition --- even if we bundle some picks in deals.

Those are intriguing thoughts. Admit to rooting for Tampa for those reasons.

Getting another 1st in a Zucc trade should absolutely be looked at. He can be an asset to a team with contender aspirations, looking to add some secondary scoring.