Draft 2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part VII

[Shesterkybomb]

No chance I’m taking a defenseman at 22. You can find a quality defenseman in the later rounds

They should be taking another forward with that pick

I would be surprised if they didn't take a center with that pick, if they don't deal it.

 

[Matz03]

I think you could make the argument that someone like Perrault would become the most natural goal scorer of our young forwards/prospects. You could make the argument that a healthy Lapierre is as good as any young center we have. There are a few other options who would compare favorably in our system.

Wallinder is steady, but not necessarily someone who jumps out as a better prospect than Miller, Robertson and company. I think he'll be good, but I don't know if he's the type I'd pass on some of the other options for --- at least not at 22.

Wallinder is still super raw and I'm not sure I'd even call him steady, one of the younger players in this draft and already 6'4 190. He's a high-end skater already, really good puck skills for a d, super dangerous on the rush, and super inconsistent in his own zone. He'd immediately be above Robertson in our prospect pool on my list because of that upside. Adding a natural goal scorer would definitely fill a major need but an undersized center with health concerns whos not a great skater is a major red flag for an nhl player. I'm not interested in adding centers just because we need centers. I'm sure that management will do their homework and project out into the future a bit to take bpa. I'd be fine if its another lefty D when that upside is a big mobile top 4D.

I'm not advocating going Wallinder at 22, but I can be convinced he's bpa there depending on how the board shakes out. I don't touch Lapierre anywhere in the first.

 

[NYblades]

I would be surprised if they didn't take a center with that pick, if they don't deal it.

I hope there's a center worth taking at 22 when we pick, as well as explore a move up a few spots to target one.

 

[DutchShamrock]

Opinions on value, or input on likeliness of the following swaps:

Ottawa #28 (Isles) and #33 for #22
Anaheim #27 (Boston) and #36 for #22
San Jose #30/31 (Tampa) and #34 for #22

Lots of wrangling to move up in discussions lately. With the evenness of the tier #22 is in and the lack of a second, maybe moving the other way is the option.

 

[Edge]

Wallinder is still super raw and I'm not sure I'd even call him steady, one of the younger players in this draft and already 6'4 190. He's a high-end skater already, really good puck skills for a d, super dangerous on the rush, and super inconsistent in his own zone. He'd immediately be above Robertson in our prospect pool on my list because of that upside. Adding a natural goal scorer would definitely fill a major need but an undersized center with health concerns whos not a great skater is a major red flag for an nhl player. I'm not interested in adding centers just because we need centers. I'm sure that management will do their homework and project out into the future a bit to take bpa. I'd be fine if its another lefty D when that upside is a big mobile top 4D.

I'm not advocating going Wallinder at 22, but I can be convinced he's bpa there depending on how the board shakes out. I don't touch Lapierre anywhere in the first.

I think he's steady in the sense that he does a lot of things well, and with a good amount of consistency --- especially as the season progressed.

But I've also never quite been wowed by him either. He's a guy who checks well across the boards, but I don't know if I see that one trait that's going to take him to a higher level.

I think at that point there are going to be more dynamic, "big swing" types on the board. And I don't know if I'd use either of those terms to describe Wallinder.

He's a candidate for sure, just wouldn't be my top choice.

 

[Edge]

Opinions on value, or input on likeliness of the following swaps:

Ottawa #28 (Isles) and #33 for #22
Anaheim #27 (Boston) and #36 for #22
San Jose #30/31 (Tampa) and #34 for #22

Lots of wrangling to move up in discussions lately. With the evenness of the tier #22 is in and the lack of a second, maybe moving the other way is the option.

Definitely an option. Would be off the beaten path for the Rangers. But this is the type of draft you consider it for.

 

[bl02]

Opinions on value, or input on likeliness of the following swaps:

Ottawa #28 (Isles) and #33 for #22
Anaheim #27 (Boston) and #36 for #22
San Jose #30/31 (Tampa) and #34 for #22

Lots of wrangling to move up in discussions lately. With the evenness of the tier #22 is in and the lack of a second, maybe moving the other way is the option.

Im not sure if those teams are willing but I would trade down since I would rather grab two more guys in the top 36 since it could be a good chance the guy they grab at 22 could be available little later in first. We shall see.

 

[Matz03]

I think he's steady in the sense that he does a lot of things well, and with a good amount of consistency --- especially as the season progressed.

But I've also never quite been wowed by him either. He's a guy who checks well across the boards, but I don't know if I see that one trait that's going to take him to a higher level.

I think at that point there are going to be more dynamic, "big swing" types on the board. And I don't know if I'd use either of those terms to describe Wallinder.

He's a candidate for sure, just wouldn't be my top choice.

Interestingly your post here is exactly what I'd describe Matthew Robertson, and why I wouldn't hesitate looking to add to lefty D depth. I can see it apply to Wallinder to an extent with his inconsistent play and how conservative he played in the mens league, but I do see dynamic potential there myself. Especially his skating, mobility, and puck rushing for someone his age and size. He'd be 4-5 year project no doubt though.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

I’d love to add a 2nd to snag someone like Colangelo

 

[Edge]

Interestingly your post here is exactly what I'd describe Matthew Robertson, and why I wouldn't hesitate looking to add to lefty D depth. I can see it apply to Wallinder to an extent with his inconsistent play and how conservative he played in the mens league, but I do see dynamic potential there myself. Especially his skating, mobility, and puck rushing for someone his age and size. He'd be 4-5 year project no doubt though.

And that kind of guys back to my first point that I don't necessarily see a guy who is head and shoulders above what we have. Now, that's not a bad thing if we land a second round pick (where we grabbed a falling Robertson last year), but I go back to wondering if that's enough to pass on some of the other options that will be on the board at 22.

Now, having said that, Wallinder was a kid the Rangers expressed interest in earlier this year.

 

[eco's bones]

Opinions on value, or input on likeliness of the following swaps:

Ottawa #28 (Isles) and #33 for #22
Anaheim #27 (Boston) and #36 for #22
San Jose #30/31 (Tampa) and #34 for #22

Lots of wrangling to move up in discussions lately. With the evenness of the tier #22 is in and the lack of a second, maybe moving the other way is the option.

Dropping 5 or 6 or 8/9 spots is quite a lot--don't know if i'd want another pick like a 3rd or 4th. I don't see San Jose--they need quality but they need quantity of high prospects too and they're a bit short on picks as is.

Ottawa 28, 33 and either 71 or 95.
Anaheim 27, 36 and either 67 or 104.

Keeping in mind we've got quantities of prospects and quality is something we should always work at enhancing.

 

[RangerBlues]

Im more into moving up to get another first.

 

[Leetch3]

Dropping 5 or 6 or 8/9 spots is quite a lot--don't know if i'd want another pick like a 3rd or 4th. I don't see San Jose--they need quality but they need quantity of high prospects too and they're a bit short on picks as is.

Ottawa 28, 33 and either 71 or 95.
Anaheim 27, 36 and either 67 or 104.

Keeping in mind we've got quantities of prospects and quality is something we should always work at enhancing.

if we trade down in a deal like that, which the rangers haven't done in the past, it probably means that none of the players they really like are still on the board and we've dropped to the next tier of players and if they think they can get similar players in the late 20s/early 30s that they can get at 22 you make the deal if a team like anaheim or ottawa loves a player at 22.

the extra pick is nice but the downside is that it probably means everyone being discussed is gone.

 

[Edge]

if we trade down in a deal like that, which the rangers haven't done in the past, it probably means that none of the players they really like are still on the board and we've dropped to the next tier of players and if they think they can get similar players in the late 20s/early 30s that they can get at 22 you make the deal if a team like anaheim or ottawa loves a player at 22.

the extra pick is nice but the downside is that it probably means everyone being discussed is gone.

I think quite a few of the guys we’ve talked about will be in the board. It could just be that the Rangers don’t like them quite as much as some fans.

We’ve been spoiled in the sense that there was no debate in 2019, and there’s no debate with our first pick in 2020.

Should the Rangers keep the 22nd pick, it’s really the first draft day debate we’ll have since 2018.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

I want Ozzie Wiesblatt at 22. Thats a superstar name.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I want Ozzie Wiesblatt at 22. Thats a superstar name.

I rather not draft a player too high simply for his funny name. Add a 2nd rounder and target Wiesblatt that way

 

[gravey9]

Seeing the aggregate rankings now, I think some of the guys who were ranked in the 40+ range aren't hiding anymore. To me, I go upside all the way with the CAR pick. It would have been off the board earlier, but he's climbed up too many rankings. Unless you get a Dawson Mercer at that slot, I'm swinging for William Wallinder.

IMO- Best skating defenseman in the draft who is rail thin, with silky hands. He's 4 years away. Beyond the size issue, he was terrible defensively at times. If he ends up on a team like CLB, he will be a stud. To me, he's got Thomas Chabot like upside. I've watched a lot of hockey, and it is very rare that you see a 6'4" defensemen that can skate like that. I think he can end up pushing Sanderson and Drysdale as far as being top 3 defensemen from this draft class. But you may have to wait 6-7 years to say that.

Oh and he's smart with the puck. He's very very smart.

I also am high on Wallinder. If the Rangers middle of round 1 forward targets aren't there at 22, I would absolutely pick Wallinder. Yes, the Rangers have good prospect depth at D. But, if this guy takes 3-5 years to fill out and develop, he can do most of that overseas in pro leagues. And the Rangers won't need to rush him because they'll be sorting out the guys ahead of him. In a way, the Rangers are an ideal team for Wallinder to land with. They can afford to be patient. And he can come over when he's ready. Having too many great D prospects will allow them to address other needs as they come up.

If Amirov is somehow hanging around at 17, then I would def be willing to move Georgy + 22 for him. I don't know if I do that for Holloway.

I think my top 3 in that range are Amirov, Wallinder and Holloway.

After that, Gunler,

And then, Marat K, Perraeult, Brisson. I would trade up to grab one of the above 3 before going to the next 4.

Brisson kinda reminds me of Brad Richards. he's not the biggest, not the fastest, but has a pretty good feel for the game. Good shot. Good hands. Some question marks about his speed/size combo translating. But he's in that Brad Richards mold.

 

[eco's bones]

if we trade down in a deal like that, which the rangers haven't done in the past, it probably means that none of the players they really like are still on the board and we've dropped to the next tier of players and if they think they can get similar players in the late 20s/early 30s that they can get at 22 you make the deal if a team like anaheim or ottawa loves a player at 22.

the extra pick is nice but the downside is that it probably means everyone being discussed is gone.

Well one thing I would say to this is I would not go outside the first round---that's just dropping too many. For us to move up 5 spots it would cost us---now that would be into a higher stratosphere but still for us to go down 5 to 9 spots shouldn't be cheap either.

I'm figuring these guys are going to be off the board by 22--Lafreniere, Stutzle, Byfield, Drysdale, Rossi, Raymond, Holtz, Lundell, Perfetti, Jarvis, Sanderson, Mercer, Quinn, Askarov and probably Guhle, Schneider. If we want one of the above really bad they're probably going to have to be around 13 to 16. That's about the earliest we can reach somebody. I wouldn't move up to take Schneider I don't think. If he was there at 22 I'd consider him.

There are still guys the Rangers may be interested in--Holloway, Zary, Amirov, Gunler, Reichel, Wallinder, Mysak, Khusnutdinov, Peterka, Perreault, O'Rourke--probably missing a name or two. But there also may be some other name that most wouldn't put up there yet---which kind of happened with Chytil. The Rangers always work off their own list. That could be a Greig, Wiessblatt or a Neighbours or I wouldn't mind a Heineman. Guys like that though might be reason for us to make that move down and pick up extra picks.

Anyway I wouldn't pick Lapierre because of the injuries. I wouldn't pick Foerster or Hirvonen because of their skating. I wouldn't pick Poirier because he's a bad (Sheldon Souray) defenseman. I might pick Lapierre if he were available later (which he won't be unless we come up with a 2nd rounder....maybe).

 

[cmdevisser]

I know he's on the smaller side and doesn't get a lot of hype on these boards, but I would love the Rangers to pick Marat Khusntdinov with 22.

His game seems perfect for a winger-driven offense given his elite ability to gain the zone with control and his Andrea Pirlo-esque ability to keep the team moving and control the direction of play.

 

[True Blue]

Guhle could even be a top 10 pick if a GM really knows what he wants and Guhle fits that bill. Or fall quite a bit if GMs for depth charts reasons or whatever want something else.

I really cannot see that. That would be quite a reach. Drysdale and Sanderson, yeah. but I would have a hard time taking Schnieder in top-10 and I like him by quite a lot over Guhle.

 

[True Blue]

I like the Lapierre gamble if he's still there

This is the last of the asset gathering drafts. It is the cherry on top of the rebuild. Cannot justify the health scare pick. I would much rather draft the detested "safer"player at 22.

 

[Mikos87]

I also am high on Wallinder. If the Rangers middle of round 1 forward targets aren't there at 22, I would absolutely pick Wallinder. Yes, the Rangers have good prospect depth at D. But, if this guy takes 3-5 years to fill out and develop, he can do most of that overseas in pro leagues. And the Rangers won't need to rush him because they'll be sorting out the guys ahead of him. In a way, the Rangers are an ideal team for Wallinder to land with. They can afford to be patient. And he can come over when he's ready. Having too many great D prospects will allow them to address other needs as they come up.

If Amirov is somehow hanging around at 17, then I would def be willing to move Georgy + 22 for him. I don't know if I do that for Holloway.

I think my top 3 in that range are Amirov, Wallinder and Holloway.

After that, Gunler,

And then, Marat K, Perraeult, Brisson. I would trade up to grab one of the above 3 before going to the next 4.

Brisson kinda reminds me of Brad Richards. he's not the biggest, not the fastest, but has a pretty good feel for the game. Good shot. Good hands. Some question marks about his speed/size combo translating. But he's in that Brad Richards mold.

I think so- to me there are a lot of forwards with middle six upside, and that's where you can bet wrong by picking the wrong player. Nothing stands out there. But with a guy like Wallinder, you have a couple of things you can't coach or train. His short comings require time, training, and a pro style system. When you take that, with the upside... I'm swinging. Really like what guys like Holloway & JJP bring. Think that Guhle and Schneider are good options, both very safe picks that might not be there.

Heard good things about Brisson, Perreault, and Amirov. Amirov in particular, but those guys are not the type of asset you have to pay a large premium for at the NHL level. If you need a Vlad Namestnikov, they are out there for a low pick every year. These are good players who can contribute, Vlad had a number of good games as a Ranger, as a Senator, and as an Av. But jack of all trades middle six options are not hard to come by.

But a cost controlled Carl Hagelin (JJP), or a cost controlled Chimera/Bonino (Holloway) make for good sensible picks if you aren't going for the swing.

 

[True Blue]

Right now, as a guess, I'm thinking Drysdale, Sanderson, Guhle and Schneider all go in the top 15.

That makes for one of the forwards that we described to potentially drop into the range where one would consider a move. Especially if Askarov goes before 15.

 

[Ola]

I really cannot see that. That would be quite a reach. Drysdale and Sanderson, yeah. but I would have a hard time taking Schnieder in top-10 and I like him by quite a lot over Guhle.

I think it comes down to philosophy. When it comes to forwards, size is literary a flaw 9/10 times. The guys 5’11-6’1 just do better than the taller forwards most of the time (of course not always). What you gain in reach and strength cannot make up for what the law of physics takes from your acceleration/agility. I love going back and check like rankings of top prospects outside the NHL because it really opens your eyes to have wrong some of these notions can lead you. Button has Barzal 28th in his top 50 like a year before MB started to destroy the NHL. Why? His size is a down side. Guys like Joel Eriksson-Ek, Adrian Kempe, Vlad Kamenev, Timo Maier and the likes are ranked way above him because they have “awsome size”. Why is size even a factor? It doesn’t even remotely in any significant way help someone that is big to compete with someone that is smaller but that can skate.

BUT, on the defense, I am far from convinced that the same is true and I think that many GMs out there are far from convinced of it also. There is of course no general rule that you must have 6 guys on the blueline built one way or the other. But it can definitely be that we a few years from now find it quite clear that to contend, you need 4 guys built one way and 2 guys the other.

When it comes to finding someone that is big, can play with an edge, clear the crease, be effective along the boards defensively, step up high defensively, they aren’t made that much better than Guhle. He — really — fits that bill.

 

[True Blue]

Why is size even a factor? It doesn’t even remotely in any significant way help someone that is big to compete with someone that is smaller but that can skate.

Because bigger players, if they have been trained to do so, can physically impose their will. The playoffs are a war of attrition. And for as much as people constantly claim that you cannot hit what you cannot catch, over the course of a series size matters more and more as players get him more and more.