Dylan McIlrath

[Brooklanders*]

As I recall the Rangers had no interest in Fowler.

Fowler was never considered with the pick.

NY was in love with Tarasenko but they had concerns on whether he would even actually leave Russia for the NHL or just stay and sign a lucrative KHL deal.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Thats great that Dallas really wanted him, I'll gladly let them make that mistake if I could do it over. Watch the draft video, Pierre starts cracking up at the pick.

"Skill level not overly high, not a great decision maker, he's just a whole lot of fury and a whole lot of anger and a whole lot of mean and a whole lot of big"

"Im blown away by the pick....Im blown away that Cam Fowler and Brandon Gormley, two elite level defensemen, haven't gone yet and Dylan McIlrath has"

"I cannot believe this, I'm in total shock when you look at Brandon Gormley and his consistency and Cam Fowler and his offensive expectancy"

Brandon Gormley's 6 games in the NHL have been incredible.

 

[Made Dan]

As I recall the Rangers had no interest in Fowler.

Fowler was never considered with the pick.

NY was in love with Tarasenko but they had concerns on whether he would even actually leave Russia for the NHL or just stay and sign a lucrative KHL deal.

Leslie, if I'm remembering correctly, posted that Gordie Clark loved Fowler. Have nothing to back this up but the Dylan pick to me just seems like a Glen move.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Leslie, if I'm remembering correctly, posted that Gordie Clark loved Fowler. Have nothing to back this up but the Dylan pick to me just seems like a Glen move.

That is the complete opposite of what was said the day and week following the draft by Gordie himself. In fact Gordie wanted Mcilrath and when Cam fell Gordie said that Slats went to him and gave Gordie the option to change his pick. Gordie chose to stay with the Mcilrath pick. When Gordie was asked about trading down he said Mcilrath was the guy he wanted and he was not sure he would be there two picks later.

 

[Raspewtin]

I maintain to this day, that Cam Fowler wasn't picked because John Tortorella was the coach. I have nothing to back this up with.

 

[Chaels Arms]

I maintain to this day, that Cam Fowler wasn't picked because John Tortorella was the coach. I have nothing to back this up with.

I still think Fowler wasn't picked because this team at the time thought Del Zotto was the next coming of Brian Leetch and basically didn't see the utility of having two "offensive" defensemen.

 

[TheTakedown]

I still think Fowler wasn't picked because this team at the time thought Del Zotto was the next coming of Brian Leetch and basically didn't see the utility of having two "offensive" defensemen.

Should have drafted him then developed him and traded if not necessary...

Not sure if sather understood the word depth back then

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

I still think Fowler wasn't picked because this team at the time thought Del Zotto was the next coming of Brian Leetch and basically didn't see the utility of having two "offensive" defensemen.

That's the way I remember it too--must have been exciting for them (and us) to think of a Del Zotto/McIlrath pair picking up where Leetchie and Beuk left off.

 

[NYR Viper]

I maintain to this day, that Cam Fowler wasn't picked because John Tortorella was the coach. I have nothing to back this up with.

I disagree. He wasn't picked because the Rangers didn't seem to want another soft puck mover ala Tom Poti. It wasn't just the Rangers who passed on him.

 

[Kaapo di tutti capi]

I still think Fowler wasn't picked because this team at the time thought Del Zotto was the next coming of Brian Leetch and basically didn't see the utility of having two "offensive" defensemen.

This was, and is, still my biggest problem with this pick. You draft the best player available, regardless of position or playing style, because guess what? If you find that you don't need him, you can trade him for something you do need. Drafting to fill a certain need that may not even exist by the time the pick is NHL ready is idiotic.

 

[offdacrossbar]

I disagree. He wasn't picked because the Rangers didn't seem to want another soft puck mover ala Tom Poti. It wasn't just the Rangers who passed on him.

there were questions about his compete level and his one dimensional play and how that translated to the pro game. looking back, those that passed were both right and wrong.

fowler is exactly the guy he was when he was drafted. hes an offensive dman who makes good smart passes, moves the puck efficiently and always joins the rush. hes a pp qb as well.

they were wrong in thinking that a guy like that wouldnt have a full time role on an nhl team.

and, for the record, i have no comment on how that relates to DM.

 

[NYR Viper]

This was, and is, still my biggest problem with this pick. You draft the best player available, regardless of position or playing style, because guess what? If you find that you don't need him, you can trade him for something you do need. Drafting to fill a certain need that may not even exist by the time the pick is NHL ready is idiotic.

Best at what? This isn't like picking the biggest and best piece of fruit in the store. There are so many factors that go into selecting an 18 year old.

 

[Kaapo di tutti capi]

Best at what? This isn't like picking the biggest and best piece of fruit in the store. There are so many factors that go into selecting an 18 year old.

True, but I don't think it takes a genius to figure out that one of Fowler/Gormley/Tarasenko was the BPA at that point in the draft.

 

[offdacrossbar]

This was, and is, still my biggest problem with this pick. You draft the best player available, regardless of position or playing style, because guess what? If you find that you don't need him, you can trade him for something you do need. Drafting to fill a certain need that may not even exist by the time the pick is NHL ready is idiotic.

bpa has always been the standard.

who you draft and WHEN you draft them matters. both who and when.

none of these kids are potentially bad picks if taken in context of what round they were drafted in.

thats the kicker here. you take the bpa- especially in the top 60 picks, when you step up rather than reaching for a project.

in fishing, we call it never leave fish to find more fish.

in hockey its, never pass talent to try to find hidden talent.

and, again, i have no specific comment on DM.

 

[Off Sides]

Bottom line to me, and I knew this before doing the analysis and am pretty happy the numbers bear it out, is that the McIlrath pick is defensible in a number of scenarios, but not one in which Fowler is available at 10.

This sums up how I feel about it pretty much to a tee.

 

[LeetchisGod]

Bjugstad's tearing up the league lately as well.

 

[Tawnos]

This was, and is, still my biggest problem with this pick. You draft the best player available, regardless of position or playing style, because guess what? If you find that you don't need him, you can trade him for something you do need. Drafting to fill a certain need that may not even exist by the time the pick is NHL ready is idiotic.

As far as I can tell, very few GMs actually ascribe to that philosophy in the first round.

 

[Dorado*]

Brock Nelson woulda been the guy to draft if going out on a reach . Really hope we swap this guy for another prospect . Fully developed d men on good contracts like Klein are what we should be looking for . Graves seems like a more new NHL type prospect IMO .

 

[silverfish]

Bjugstad's tearing up the league lately as well.

Kevin Hayes is our Bjugstad. Before this season started, Bjugstad is exactly what I thought the Rangers were missing. A legit 3C with size. I'd have done rotten things to get him in Rangers blue. This after I did rotten things to get him on my keeper team.

Now we have Hayes. It's all good

 

[Cassano]

Unless it's a goalie, you pick the player who is going to become the best.

Did our scouts believe Dylan would be the best player at 10?

 

[Tawnos]

Unless it's a goalie, you pick the player who is going to become the best.

Did our scouts believe Dylan would be the best player at 10?

I'm going to repeat my last post in this thread: as far as I can tell, very few GMs actually ascribe to that philosophy in the first round.

It's a pretty often repeated mantra around here. I'm starting to wonder if it's apocryphal.

 

[surf]

Plus management at the time thought MDZ was a potential 50 point PMD so Fowler wasn't a need

I disagree. He wasn't picked because the Rangers didn't seem to want another soft puck mover ala Tom Poti. It wasn't just the Rangers who passed on him.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Plus management at the time thought MDZ was a potential 50 point PMD so Fowler wasn't a need

Bobby Sanguinetti was just about to hit his stride too.

Talk about depth son!

 

[Thirty One]

Unless it's a goalie, you pick the player who is going to become the best.

Did our scouts believe Dylan would be the best player at 10?

Clark basically admitted they didn't.

"Last year with Dylan, we knew there was going to be some players maybe, that did a lot of things better than him. Fowler… we thought a lot of Fowler, but it was just something we made a decision we needed a certain kind of player to bring into this organization to add to the kind of talent that we have. It was that abrasive, tough defenseman who, yeah it happens he can fight. But he can play the game."

 

[Dorado*]

More penalty minutes than time on the ice last game .... Apparently Gordo he can't SMH .... Please cut bait on this guy it's like perpetual salt in a wound . BELAK 2.0