Goaltending prospect depth

[Jacob]

Fleury-Chiodo-Goepfert-West-Duba for Pittsburgh is a strong one

I agree. I'd also throw in Mikka Lehto as an honorable mention.

I'd wager they have the best combination of top end talent (Fleury) and depth in the league.

 

[Kubera55]

BPA - always. If the Rangers felt Montoya was the best guy at that spot, the only thing they do by selecting another player is to give the team drafting after them a gift.

I'm sure the Rangers explored their options to trade down, but they didn't like what they heard. So they took the goalie, and figured if they ended up with a surplus of quality goalies, they could always trade one away later.

Besides, does everyone realize the fail rate of even top ten picks? The odds that Blackburn, Lundqvist, Montoya, and Labarberra all make it is infinitesimal. The odds that three of them make it is miniscule. The odds that two of them make it? Still probably less than 50%. And that has nothing to do with the Rangers scouting. That's just those are just the historical probabilities.

In the end, if the Rangers get one top quaility young goalie, they made out like bandits. How many draft picks would you give, top ten or otherwise, to have a Luongo, Turco, or Theodore on your team?

 

[Marshall]

The Caps' depth:

Ouellet - Stana - Daigneault - Eddy

I'm assuming that the Caps are going to try and move Kolzig.

 

[NYIsles1*]

In the end, if the Rangers get one top quaility young goalie, they made out like bandits. How many draft picks would you give, top ten or otherwise, to have a Luongo, Turco, or Theodore on your team?

I think your missing the point. One or both of them could be franchise goaltenders down the road, only one of them can start for the Rangers. A top ten draft pick will be leaving the organization at some point, it will not bring a player equal to that potential when that time comes.

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

Forgot Detroit...they have Liv and Howard, good prospects there...

As for NY Rangers, good depth but questionable...

Blackburn is very questionable, Lundqvist is playing in the Euro leagues, Montoya is the only solid guy and I never heard of Holt???

Personally I like Boston more...

Toivonen, Raycroft (though he did graduate), Sigalet, Brown, Regan...

Boston has a ridiculous amount of very solid goaltenders.

How can you mention Liv as a good prospect and yet question Lundqvist because he's "playing in the Euro Leagues"? Seems to me that they are at least equal and if anything Lundqvist is leading by a substantial margin after a good World Championship, being named to the World Cup team and completely dominating the SEL this season (continuing and adding to his last two seasons there).

Credit where credit is due.

 

[mazmin]

I pick the Rags, the Blues and the Sens as the top 3.

Just cuz no one has mentioned... Carolina is decent with both Ward and Nastiuk

 

[Gwyddbwyll]

Raycroft isnt a prospect any longer.. bona fide NHL goalie.

Rangers have the best IMO. Three very high quality prospects. Most teams have one and a bunch of OK prospects that nobody but their own fans know.

 

[leafaholix*]

Not a top 10 group, but Toronto has:

Mikael Tellqvist
Justin Pogge
JF Racine

As well as Todd Ford, he's a big question mark.

 

[Tronador]

The Caps' depth:

Ouellet - Stana - Daigneault - Eddy

I'm assuming that the Caps are going to try and move Kolzig.

and Robert Müller

 

[Bad News Benning]

I'll go with Boston, Toivonen is right up there with the Top goalie prospects. I think he'll have a great future, although maybe somewhere else because the Bruins already have a great young goalie. I'm a big fan of Jordan Sigalet too, ever since his days with the Victoria Salsa, and he's had a great career with Bowling Green. I just don't understand why he's 11th on the B's prospect list, he deserves to be ahead of some of those guys in the Top 10, but oh well.

I'm surprised not many people have mentioned San Jose, they seem to have hit a bit of a gold mine in Germany. They seem to draft talent and develop these goalie prospects like no other organization. They just keep pumping these good goalie prospects through their system year in year out(Nabokov, Kiprusoff, Toskala, etc). I wouldn't be surprised to see Patzold turn into a great NHL goalie, and some of their other goalies could be good with some development as well (Schaefer, Ehelechner, Greiss, Churchill).

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Why does everyone stock up on pitching in baseball? You only need 5? Its the most important position.

Yes, you need 5 starting pitchers, and then another 5 or 6 relief pitchers.

You only need one catcher, one shortstop etc. etc.

It's also far more difficult to find good pitching than it is to find good goaltending.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

BPA - always. If the Rangers felt Montoya was the best guy at that spot, the only thing they do by selecting another player is to give the team drafting after them a gift.

I'm sure the Rangers explored their options to trade down, but they didn't like what they heard. So they took the goalie, and figured if they ended up with a surplus of quality goalies, they could always trade one away later.

Take a look at teams that have had a "surplus" of quality goalies in recent years. What have they gotten in return, when they dealt that goalie ???

Buffalo - still stuck with all three.
Montreal - Garon - they got a 3rd round pick
Anaheim - Gerber - Malec and a 3rd
San Jose - Kipper - 2nd round pick

Goalies have very very little trade value.

 

[Kubera55]

I think your missing the point. One or both of them could be franchise goaltenders down the road, only one of them can start for the Rangers. A top ten draft pick will be leaving the organization at some point, it will not bring a player equal to that potential when that time comes.

On what do you base that?

If the Rangers suceed in developing two young franchise goalies, why can't they trade one for value? Is there some reason that a young franchise goalie can't be traded and get a decent return? And isn't depth, especially in goal, a good thing? What if your starter gets hurt? People on this thread keep saying that 'you only need one goaltender,' which, frankly, is not true. You only *arguably* need one goaltender if you've got Marty Brodeur or Patrick Roy. Everyone else gets hurt, goes through slumps, needs a night off, has contract squabbles, etc. Most teams need two good goalies, not one, to get by.

Look at it from the Rangers perspective... what's the worst that could happen? Blackburn comes back and plays like Patrick Roy and the Rangers are *forced* down the road to trade Montoya or Lundqvist (with the other backing up Blackburn)? Is that a bad thing? If Montoya or Lundqvist is playing well, why wouldn't the Rangers get fair value for him? Couldn't they just stash him in the AHL (much like the Devils seem to be doing with Ahonen) until they hear an offer they like? And if Blackburn doesn't come back from injury, and/or Lundqvist doesn't adapt to the NA game, isn't it great that they've got another blue-chipper already in the pipeline?

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Look at it from the Rangers perspective... what's the worst that could happen? Blackburn comes back and plays like Patrick Roy and the Rangers are *forced* down the road to trade Montoya or Lundqvist (with the other backing up Blackburn)? Is that a bad thing? If Montoya or Lundqvist is playing well, why wouldn't the Rangers get fair value for him? Couldn't they just stash him in the AHL (much like the Devils seem to be doing with Ahonen) until they hear an offer they like? And if Blackburn doesn't come back from injury, and/or Lundqvist doesn't adapt to the NA game, isn't it great that they've got another blue-chipper already in the pipeline?

When was the last time any goalie, let alone a young "unproven" goalie brought back significant value in a trade ???

I can only think of it happening once in the last 10 years, and that was an all-time bonehead move by Milbury.

 

[Levitate]

frankly what the rangers desperatly need in their system is a top line forward or a #1 defenseman...they weren't going to get either in the 2003 draft where they picked. yeah they still picked high, but frankly every defenseman and forward beyond the top 3 in last years draft has question marks...there was no sure fire thing at that spot, so the rangers took who they felt was the best player at that spot.

honestly i'm sure we can go around and around and around about what the rangers should have done there...but as an organization they know a hell of a lot more about their prospects and about the draft picks than any of us do. maybe they made a mistake, maybe they didn't...but there is absolutely no way to say for sure at this point. what if lundqvist and blackburn bust and montoya pans out to be a great goalie? was it stupid to pick montoya then? or even if blackburn and lundqvist don't pan out as #1's...or hell even if montoya doesn't pan out as a #1 but one of the others do...but he's still a good backup. there are lots of possibilities and it's still too early to tell what's going to happen

anyways, on the original question...i definatly think the rangers should be considered as one of the best in terms of prospect depth...2 high draft picks and a goalie who's absolutely lighting it up in a league with NHLers and who enjoyed success on the international stage as well. the only thing that bring it down IMO is blackburn's injury status...which does blow. oh yeah and holt is a pretty good goalie too...

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

I like NJ's depth in goal.

Ahonen
Clemmensen
Disher
Smith
Kostur

The first three have NHL potential.

 

[Gwyddbwyll]

When was the last time any goalie, let alone a young "unproven" goalie brought back significant value in a trade ???

I can only think of it happening once in the last 10 years, and that was an all-time bonehead move by Milbury.

Any goalie?

Khabibulin for Paul Mara, Mike Johnson, Ruslan Zainullin and a 2nd (31st overall that was used on Matt Spiller I think). He wasnt a young unproven goalie though.

It was a somewhat unusual situation - Gretzky wanted to keep Khabibulin but contract negotiations proved impossible.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Any goalie?

Khabibulin & Neckar for Paul Mara, Mike Johnson, Ruslan Zainullin and a 2nd (31st overall that was used on Matt Spiller I think). He wasnt a young unproven goalie though.

It was a somewhat unusual situation - Gretzky wanted to keep Khabibulin but contract negotiations proved impossible.

True, I forgot about that one. That being said, Khabibulin had sat out nearly two full NHL seasons.

 

[Kevin Forbes]

True, I forgot about that one. That being said, Khabibulin had sat out nearly two full NHL seasons.

which arguably should of decreased his value

 

[dawgbone]

I don't think it is anywhere near the Boston's, Washington's or Ranger's (the top 3 IMO... ranking is irrelevant)... but the Oilers have an interesting collection:

Deslauriers
Dubnyk
Morrison

Morrison had a great season in the AHL last season, and I got to watch him a lot in Toronto. He's a competetive guy, who's done nothing but get better every season.

His top end is only an NHL backup, but I seriously think that is what he will do.

 

[BlueBleeder]

Rangers and Blues are my top 2.

I can't wait until the WJC, I want to see Barulin in action. I did not get to see enough of him at training camp last year. I'm hoping he crosses over next year to play in AHL.

 

[Drake1588]

Goaltending has become so technically strong, across a rising number of developmental leagues, that you can probably make the case that there are more NHL teams with a wealth of goaltending prospect riches than those without right now... not just teams with that one guy projected to do well, but teams with two-to-four legitimate NHL goalie prospects.

It's startling when you look at the sheer number of quality prospects on the farm on so many NHL teams, and then consider that there are a growing number of teams that also have two or more graduated pro goalies cluttering up their NHL rosters as well. It explains why goalies, even good young ones, carry so little trade value. "We have a cracker jack young goalie to shop around..." "Oh yeah? Get in line. We all do."

It's to the point that starters projected to fall into the good-but-not-great category are a dime a dozen. Only the truly elite-level goalie prospects can yield much in trade these days. There are just so many fundamentally sound goaltenders plying their trade in the NHL's feeder systems.

 

[JackDaniel]

I'd like to think the Rangers are the head of the pack.

Blackburn (in hockey terms hes still a prospect) - Holt - Montoya - Lundqvist

Definately the best group. IMO Montoya is a bit over rated, but despite the fgact that Lundqvist and Blackburn dont have a lot of exposure, they are heck of goaltenders IMO.

Dont know a lot of Holt but eard good things.

JD

 

[JackDaniel]

Until they come to NA, I put all Euro prospects as good prospects but unproven.

Sushinky comes to mind as a great player in the Euro leagues that couldn't cut it in the NHL. Hannula too. And these are just Wild prospects.

I like Montoya and Lundqvist but I don't think Rangers head the pack. I think there are other teams with better goaltenders out there and better depth.

Any way how can you be a proven prospect?

If you are proven you are'nt a prospect anymore...? No?

I mean some guys like Horton, Zherdev, Semin can be consider as proven prospect IMO, but their situations are very rare.

JD

 

[montreal]

Rangers and Blues are my top 2.

I can't wait until the WJC, I want to see Barulin in action. I did not get to see enough of him at training camp last year. I'm hoping he crosses over next year to play in AHL.

Barulin is 20, so he won't be at the WJC's this year.