Hockey's Future's Top 50 Prospects: 26-50

[Mess]

It's your loss. Besides, this season doesn't even count when considering the prospects on the list (not saying Lundqvist wasn't impressive in earlier seasons.)

Why do you feel that results from this current season do not count ???

Last season they say they even projected anticipated NHL games played to rule on prospect eligibility ... and if they were expected to exceed the 40 game rule, were not included in last year list ...

I see no reason why Lundqvist stellar play from this season could not be factored in...before the final list is complied and released .. omitting guaranteed results would be a big mistake IMO .. and will come back to haunt the selection committee even more than the lists do already .. If they are ignoring current results then that explains why they are recieving so much flack ..

 

[NYRangers]

It's your loss. Besides, this season doesn't even count when considering the prospects on the list (not saying Lundqvist wasn't impressive in earlier seasons.)

That shouldn't matter. Lundqvist has a career .928 save % in the SEL. Thats a career number.

And before this season he has dominated international play too.

 

[David A. Rainer]

Why do you feel that results from this current season do not count ???

Last season they say they even projected anticipated NHL games played to rule on prospect eligibility ... and if they were expected to exceed the 40 game rule, were not included in last year list ...

I see no reason why Lundqvist stellar play from this season could not be factored in...before the final list is complied and released .. omitting guaranteed results would be a big mistake IMO .. and will come back to haunt the selection committee even more than the lists do already .. If they are ignoring current results then that explains why they are recieving so much flack ..

Again, you are way out in left field on some of this. The project began way back in September. None of the seasons had even started yet (or they were just beginning) when the lists were first compiled. What is the committee supposed to do, go back and change the list everytime someone plays a game?

 

[andora]

Birthdays can become an issue in the development tracks of two players. Suppose Bob was born in June 1984 while Tim was born in December 1982. Bob is six months older than Tim and aside from playing six more months of hockey than Tim, Bob has other advantages.

Because the Junior Hockey Season starts in September, in 1987, Bob is five years old by the time September rolls around with Tim is still four. Bob's dad eagerly enrolls in organized hockey and Bob begins playing right away. By next year when Tim begins organized hockey, Bob already has learned how to skate, pass and shoot.

Thirteen years later, Bob has played one more extra year of organized hockey but will be drafted earlier than Tim. That extra year in which Bob has played is in a higher league (suppose Bob and Tim are both drafted in the 1st round, Bob's extra year of development is in a tougher league - the AHL or the NHL). Even if Bob and Tim are identical in talent, Bob will be better simply because he has played one more year of organized hockey in a tougher league (even if both Bob and Tim are in the CHL, because Bob has played 4 years and Tim 3, Bob will be a the 1st line while Tim will be on the 2nd).

well ok, that's the case for bob and tim. is the case for kesler and steen the same? has kesler played another year of hockey in his life than steen because of that six month thing?

and also, steen never played under north american rules/guidelines, so this birthday thing and canadian standards etc.. doesn't really pertain to him, correct?

 

[sunb]

well ok, that's the case for bob and tim. is the case for kesler and steen the same? has kesler played another year of hockey in his life than steen because of that six month thing?

and also, steen never played under north american rules/guidelines, so this birthday thing and canadian standards etc.. doesn't really pertain to him, correct?

Kesler grew up in Michigan so their junior rules could be different.

Steen grew up in Winnipeg (his dad played with the Jets) so he spent the first 14 years of his life in Canada so he did begin junior hockey under Canadian regulations.

 

[Buffaloed]

I equate the Schremp ordeal similar to the Randy Moss of the Vikings ordeal.

Moss slipped all the way to the 17th (around there) in the NFL draft about 7 years ago. The reason he dropped was the uncertainty surrounding his attitude and behaviour.

Sounds like a similar situation here for Schremp. And I believe, like Moss, Schremp will fight his attitude demons and get over himself or whatever it is that has brought this upon him, and become a star.

There was never any question that Moss could, and would apply his talent on the field. The concern with him was whether he'd be jailed, suspended, disruptive to the team, or bringing so much embarassment to the organization that he wouldn't be available to play. Motivation and competitiveness for playing the game wasn't why he dropped in the draft. That's where the doubts arise with Shremp. Shremp dropped due to fear he's another Pavel Brendl.

 

[An Ape called Yoko]

Its pretty sick to listen to you people speculate and the logic you present. Because its based on how players performs over in North America. If a european player has moved over to WHL his stock increases among you people directly. But if he plays in Europe, he is regarded as a total loser.

I would like to quote Brendan Morrison who said this: "If you compare the players on Vancouver Canucks and Linköpings(his team in the swedish league) team. The players here in Linköping are overall much more skilled players". NHL is the most overrated league in the world. A lot of defensman in NHL would never be regulars in SEL or SM-liiga, as they lack the hockeysense that is required to play here. In NHL, you just go over the redline and dump the puck in the zone.

And some of you even think the draft is a guide or a way to show who is more talented than the other player. Lots of the talented players doesn´t even get drafted every year.

And its all about hype... hype hype hype. Niklas Kronwall have never been hyped, so basically its ****in impossible for him to be a top 50 prospect, although he even showed he is already a great defenseman in NHL. Henrik Lundqvist leads goaltending in Sweden. On Second place is NHLs BEST goalie, Miika Kiprussof. But of course, regarding to your logic, Henrik Lundqvist plays in europe, and therefore he can´t be as talented as Kari Lehtonen who plays in AHL. Ok, maybe Lehtonen is a bit more talented, but is Henrik Lundqvist that much less talented? HELL no. They are pretty close. Just look at how Kiprussof is no better than Lundqvist in SEL. You have no idea how incredible good this kid is.

 

[ginner classic]

Its pretty sick to listen to you people speculate and the logic you present. Because its based on how players performs over in North America. If a european player has moved over to WHL his stock increases among you people directly. But if he plays in Europe, he is regarded as a total loser.

I would like to quote Brendan Morrison who said this: "If you compare the players on Vancouver Canucks and Linköpings(his team in the swedish league) team. The players here in Linköping are overall much more skilled players". NHL is the most overrated league in the world. A lot of defensman in NHL would never be regulars in SEL or SM-liiga, as they lack the hockeysense that is required to play here. In NHL, you just go over the redline and dump the puck in the zone.

And some of you even think the draft is a guide or a way to show who is more talented than the other player. Lots of the talented players doesn´t even get drafted every year.

And its all about hype... hype hype hype. Niklas Kronwall have never been hyped, so basically its ****in impossible for him to be a top 50 prospect, although he even showed he is already a great defenseman in NHL. Henrik Lundqvist leads goaltending in Sweden. On Second place is NHLs BEST goalie, Miika Kiprussof. But of course, regarding to your logic, Henrik Lundqvist plays in europe, and therefore he can´t be as talented as Kari Lehtonen who plays in AHL. Ok, maybe Lehtonen is more talented, but is Henrik Lundqvist that much less talented? HELL no. Just look at how Kiprussof is no better than Lundqvist in SEL.

A.) Everyone knows that players in the SEL are skilled, that is no surprise. That does not mean their games translate well to the NHL. There is a massive amount of evidence that backs that up. Husselius is just one example. In a normal year, a washed up, injury prone player like Renberg can come in and dominate the league. It is clearly not even close to the same calibre as the NHL.

B.) I would be careful about calling Kipper the best goalie in the NHL, when that is clearly not the case. Everyone here is prone to hyperbole, but this is a bit much.

C.) Goalies are tough for even NHL quality scouts to rate, even if they are 20-21. Don't be too upset if the HF crew miss your guy, it is not necessarily a reflection on his potential.

 

[andora]

Kesler grew up in Michigan so their junior rules could be different.

Steen grew up in Winnipeg (his dad played with the Jets) so he spent the first 14 years of his life in Canada so he did begin junior hockey under Canadian regulations.

ok, my mistake..

aside from your description of the two kids, is there anything that would suggest kesler's six month differential is an advantage?

 

[Epsilon]

Its pretty sick to listen to you people speculate and the logic you present. Because its based on how players performs over in North America. If a european player has moved over to WHL his stock increases among you people directly. But if he plays in Europe, he is regarded as a total loser.

I would like to quote Brendan Morrison who said this: "If you compare the players on Vancouver Canucks and Linköpings(his team in the swedish league) team. The players here in Linköping are overall much more skilled players". NHL is the most overrated league in the world. A lot of defensman in NHL would never be regulars in SEL or SM-liiga, as they lack the hockeysense that is required to play here. In NHL, you just go over the redline and dump the puck in the zone.

And some of you even think the draft is a guide or a way to show who is more talented than the other player. Lots of the talented players doesn´t even get drafted every year.

And its all about hype... hype hype hype. Niklas Kronwall have never been hyped, so basically its ****in impossible for him to be a top 50 prospect, although he even showed he is already a great defenseman in NHL. Henrik Lundqvist leads goaltending in Sweden. On Second place is NHLs BEST goalie, Miika Kiprussof. But of course, regarding to your logic, Henrik Lundqvist plays in europe, and therefore he can´t be as talented as Kari Lehtonen who plays in AHL. Ok, maybe Lehtonen is a bit more talented, but is Henrik Lundqvist that much less talented? HELL no. They are pretty close. Just look at how Kiprussof is no better than Lundqvist in SEL. You have no idea how incredible good this kid is.

I was right with you until that last paragraph. Lundqvist isn't even close to Lehtonen. But otherwise your point is well-taken. If this board existed in 1992, people would be complaining about Teemu Selanne being ranked highly, because he was over in Finland for three years and not playing in the AHL or something.

 

[An Ape called Yoko]

A.) Everyone knows that players in the SEL are skilled, that is no surprise. That does not mean their games translate well to the NHL. There is a massive amount of evidence that backs that up. Husselius is just one example. In a normal year, a washed up, injury prone player like Renberg can come in and dominate the league. It is clearly not even close to the same calibre as the NHL.

Yea i guess Huselius is one of those players. Because on the big ice he is one of the absolute best players in the world. But i disagree regarding Renberg. He is quite far from being one of the best players in SEL. He has had one good game so far. I don´t expect him to dominate anything. But i wanted to make a point. Fransson is playing so GREAT in SEL. He could play in NHL right now, and do well. He is playing on a much higher level than a lot of those guys who are on that list who plays in WHL and other Junior-leagues. But somehow... he is left out from these list. And that is just crazy.

 

[andora]

ok, my mistake..

aside from your description of the two kids, is there anything that would suggest kesler's six month differential is an advantage?

actually, a different question, when did each of these guys begin playing hockey?

 

[Mess]

Again, you are way out in left field on some of this. The project began way back in September. None of the seasons had even started yet (or they were just beginning) when the lists were first compiled. What is the committee supposed to do, go back and change the list everytime someone plays a game?

Well that just further puts more credibility in question in the whole assignment ... and timing ... that if the assignment started in September based on historical facts and then released 2 months later ..and you do not see the delay as a problem.??.

So this is basically the TOP 50 PROSPECT list from 2003-04 season you are releasing now .. When will you be releasing the TOP 50 PROSPECTS report for the current 2004 year?? .. or will I have to wait till Nov 2005 (a year from now) to see how current propects are performing against each other??.

My gosh I hope you are doing the assignment and using a word processor that you could cut and paste a few rankings up and down based on a final meeting of the committee just before its released. Realistically how difficult an assignment would that be for someone to go look up current stats of 50 propects and then factor in current info just before it is released?.. If new information is available why not take advantage of that. We are talking prospects here and development and progress and to ignore that ..well to me that seems wrong but to each his own I guess..

So it will be even harder to explain away the Kesler massive drop and other last year TOP prospects if you really are only basing it on the last 2 months (March & April) of last season .. NO ???

I don't think I am in left field here .. I am just asking questions and making assumption thinking the committee is trying to put out the Best and most accurate and current list it can. You guys are the ones keeping everything secret, how are we as readers going to know.

I think you are in fact out in left field on this one .. If you are now telling the readers to disregard what prospects are currently doing that is not important ...Our lists are old and outdated and Deal with it, we do not factor in current info, and the main reason is "ITS TOO MUCH WORK" ...

Is that a fair way to sum up your response to me ????

I am just pointing out the flaws, and if you have a problem with that well then that's unfortunately your own problem to deal with .. Constructive criticism is often good I find as it emphasizes possible problems that may or may not be addressed .. but to be critical of the people who question it when you realize yourself that there are problems and consistency issues well that is just being irrational IMO ...

Last year you did use projections and current season info.. this year you are not
Last year it was 40 games rule, this year its 65
Last year the project was released in February, this year November
etc etc etc ..

Pretty soon you are comparing APPLES to the TITANIC .... and you are wondering why the project is sunk even before it is released !!!...

Its a fun read and good for debates and lively discussion for a message board ..but other than that ... well ???

 

[Aaron Vickers]

Montoya could bust whereas Auld already looks like a competant NHL backup at the least. Auld has succeeded at a much higher level of hockey than Montoya has.

And the only reason he's done so is because he's older. Being older doesn't necessarily equate being better.

I'd say backstopping your country to a World Junior title is more then anything Auld has done.

Even to take it one step further, I dont think it's out of the question to say that Montoya will at least be given every opportunity to play AT LEAST in the AHL as a goaltender for Hartford. That is about where I'd equate Auld to at the moment.

 

[Mizral]

And the only reason he's done so is because he's older. Being older doesn't necessarily equate being better.

I'd say backstopping your country to a World Junior title is more then anything Auld has done.

Even to take it one step further, I dont think it's out of the question to say that Montoya will at least be given every opportunity to play AT LEAST in the AHL as a goaltender for Hartford. That is about where I'd equate Auld to at the moment.

I didn't say Auld WILL be better, I'm saying he's better now, which is obvious.

Auld playing in big NHL playoff games I'd say is more significant than a World Junior Gold medal.

Well, you may equate Auld to an AHL goaltender, but there is little doubt he would be on the NHL roster should there be no lockout. Nonis has said so many times, and it's clear when you consider the Canucks don't have any other backup goaltenders aside from him.

I could make the same arguement for New Jersey's Ari Ahonen too, actually.

 

[Mizral]

If the SEL is so great, rivercanyon, and if Linkoping is a more talented squad than the Canucks are, why does Brendan Morrison come in 2nd (or 3rd most years) in points on the Canucks, and often well into the 20's or lower in the NHL in total, yet in the SEL he leads the league?

It's because the SEL relies less on size. Skill can mean many things. Is hitting a skill? Is taking a hit a skill? Is making room around the net a skill? I say they are. I have little doubt the puck skills of the SEL players are about on par with most NHL teams. However, there are a great deal of 'other' skills these players lack that make a league like the SEL second best.

I don't mean to disparage the Swedish league, I think it's great. As is the RSL. However there are other skills that don't involve puck skills that many of the successful players in European leagues lack compared to the top NHL players.

 

[NYRangers]

If the SEL is so great, rivercanyon, and if Linkoping is a more talented squad than the Canucks are, why does Brendan Morrison come in 2nd (or 3rd most years) in points on the Canucks, and often well into the 20's or lower in the NHL in total, yet in the SEL he leads the league?

It's because the SEL relies less on size. Skill can mean many things. Is hitting a skill? Is taking a hit a skill? Is making room around the net a skill? I say they are. I have little doubt the puck skills of the SEL players are about on par with most NHL teams. However, there are a great deal of 'other' skills these players lack that make a league like the SEL second best.

I don't mean to disparage the Swedish league, I think it's great. As is the RSL. However there are other skills that don't involve puck skills that many of the successful players in European leagues lack compared to the top NHL players.

That has no effect on shooting. Hes talking about goalies.

 

[Mizral]

You certainly have a strange way of looking at things ..

While it is true any drafted prospect that has not played in the NHL could bust ..

but you are suggesting you always take a safer player even if he may be just a good NHL backup over a hot shot young prospect that may become a FRANCHISE player ...

(Skipping some pointless stuff)...

Bottom line : How is your stance any different than say I'll take Jason King over Sidney Crosby ... because King has proven he can play at a much higher level and Crosby may bust .....

Messenger, you perhaps didn't read my post, or I am not doing a very good job explaining things. Organizational rankings for the teams are NOT based on potential alone. This ranking here obviously put potential on a higher slate than most team pages have their rankings at. It's a completely different situation.

And no, I would not take King over Crosby. I would however take King over Kesler, or King over F. Fedorov, or King over Kirrill Koltsov, because while he is not as skilled as them, it's not a big gap, and the fact that he is closer to the NHL shows me that he's made the leaps that the others have yet to make.

Take a bust for example: Pavel Brendl is a good example. Say you were to compare Brendl to say, Robyn Regehr if we did this after the draft in 1999. Regehr is closer to the NHL, but Brendl looks like he could be a super star or he could bust. Who do you put ahead? On a ranking like this, you might put Brendl ahead, but on a team ranking I would place Regehr ahead, since while Brendl is more talented, it's not a *massive* gap either, and Regehr is so close to being in the NHL. What Regehr has proven over Brendl is that he's made the leaps to become an NHL player whereas Brendl is less proven.

This does not mean we ignore potential all-together. Myself and Sukhwinder tried to balance the two factors (closeness to the NHL & potential) when we came up with our list.

The very fact that Auld has made those 'leaps' that other goaltenders is important to me when I do my rankings. That said, this ranking it looks like did NOT put the emphasis on closeness-to-the-NHL that the team rankings did. Therein lies the difference, Messenger.

Furthermore, when it comes to Auld, we projects to be a starting goaltender, not a 'good NHL backup'. We are not the only people to do this either, several other scouting websites project similar things for Auld (one website lists him as the Canucks top prospect, for example, ahead of Corey Schneider who has more potential).

 

[Epsilon]

Take a bust for example: Pavel Brendl is a good example. Say you were to compare Brendl to say, Robyn Regehr if we did this after the draft in 1999. Regehr is closer to the NHL, but Brendl looks like he could be a super star or he could bust. Who do you put ahead? On a ranking like this, you might put Brendl ahead, but on a team ranking I would place Regehr ahead, since while Brendl is more talented, it's not a *massive* gap either, and Regehr is so close to being in the NHL. What Regehr has proven over Brendl is that he's made the leaps to become an NHL player whereas Brendl is less proven.

I would say that was a really poor example to try and make your point (which was perfectly good in general). I don't remember anything from that season that would have made me think Regehr was that much closer to making the NHL than Brendl, given that Brendl clearly outclassed Regehr and basically everyone else in the WHL that year. Plus you add the fact that Regehr broke his legs in a car accident. It's really easy to talk about guys having bust or boom potential in hindsight (Daigle is a great example where every armchair draft fan nowadays claims they knew he would be a bust and lists all the reasons why, which were suppodly apparent to everyone back then). If you were an NHL team in 1999, no way were you picking Regehr over Brendl.

 

[Mess]

Messenger, you perhaps didn't read my post, or I am not doing a very good job explaining things. Organizational rankings for the teams are NOT based on potential alone. This ranking here obviously put potential on a higher slate than most team pages have their rankings at. It's a completely different situation.

And no, I would not take King over Crosby. I would however take King over Kesler, or King over F. Fedorov, or King over Kirrill Koltsov, because while he is not as skilled as them, it's not a big gap, and the fact that he is closer to the NHL shows me that he's made the leaps that the others have yet to make.

Take a bust for example: Pavel Brendl is a good example. Say you were to compare Brendl to say, Robyn Regehr if we did this after the draft in 1999. Regehr is closer to the NHL, but Brendl looks like he could be a super star or he could bust. Who do you put ahead? On a ranking like this, you might put Brendl ahead, but on a team ranking I would place Regehr ahead, since while Brendl is more talented, it's not a *massive* gap either, and Regehr is so close to being in the NHL. What Regehr has proven over Brendl is that he's made the leaps to become an NHL player whereas Brendl is less proven.

This does not mean we ignore potential all-together. Myself and Sukhwinder tried to balance the two factors (closeness to the NHL & potential) when we came up with our list.

The very fact that Auld has made those 'leaps' that other goaltenders is important to me when I do my rankings. That said, this ranking it looks like did NOT put the emphasis on closeness-to-the-NHL that the team rankings did. Therein lies the difference, Messenger.

Furthermore, when it comes to Auld, we projects to be a starting goaltender, not a 'good NHL backup'. We are not the only people to do this either, several other scouting websites project similar things for Auld (one website lists him as the Canucks top prospect, for example, ahead of Corey Schneider who has more potential).

You Nucks site must be one of the few that puts emphasis on Closeness to the NHL ... I never even heard of that stat or figure into PROSPECT PROJECTIONS .. in all my years ..

These rankings and others is based on what the player is going to expected to perform at once he gets to the NHL.....not the timing when that is going to occur so then you would always rank an AHL prospect ahead of and CHL (junior) one based on CLOSENESS ....

You can't base that on anything factual either ... If Nucks training camp was to happen now and Auld and Schneider went head to head in a battle for the backup job and the more talented Schneider wins the battle ..your CLOSENESS point is irrelevant ... Do you believe teams in a fair and open competition take the lesser player or the better player ?? and Explain the drafting of Schneider in the first place ?? They lost Umberger (2001) , 2002 (traded), and now the 2004 draft comes up and Canucks have only Kelser to show in the prior years and Nucks take a goalie in the 1st round with your Auld already ranked as your NEXT #1 keeper.. combined with the fact the nucks gave away their 2nd to get Hedberg as a short term rental.. To me this goes not look like Nucks management is thinking along your lines ...

Team pass on Franchise goalies in the 1st round all the time in order to take a different one if they feel they already have one in the near future .. Washington, Pitts, Atl, etc etc all passed on goalies ...but not the Canucks ...Why ??

Also by your flawed logic IMO ..

Tell me the difference between Tellqvist and Auld in the closeness stat ... and rankings as both are scheduled to replace the current teams starter eventually ..

also If Leafs would have drafted potential Franchise goalie AL Montoya as a hypothical last season to find their goalie of the future ... Your rankings in a TOP prospect list would always have Telly ahead and rated higher because of the closeness factor and what he has accomplished...

That just does not make any sense to me .. ??? An NHL Entry draft and selection is always Based on BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE theory .... and teams take players they think will be the greatest reward.. they don't rank them as Closeness to the NHL .. neither does any Scouting Service ... Closeness is all relevant to surroundings as well and circumstances a prospect can't control ..If NJ drafted Montoya while having Brodeur as is STAR GOALIE .. then Montoya Closeness would be different than had he been drafted as a LEAF or NUCK in this case ..

but you did help explain the team rankings now if you are using this made up Closeness thing .. Nucks top 4 prospects are all in the AHL currently .. So they could be called up to the NHL at any time .. Teams whose top picks and prospects are still in Junior or College or Europe are ranked lower because of Closeness ..

I would love for you to show me any professional scouting source .. CSB, Redline, ISS, HOCKEY NEWS , etc etc etc .. that discusses this Closeness theory ...

I would rather have a player that is going to make the NHL in 5 years and produce 80+ points a season then one that will make the NHL in 1 year and record 40 points consistently.

Taking King over Kesler makes no sense to me unless you only believe KING is the better player ..not now but in the future as well... He is 5 years older than Kesler so obviously he is more mature both Physically and Mentally TODAY ... but that is not necessarily true when you project where Kesler will be in 5 years of development..

 

[Winston Wolf]

That shouldn't matter. Lundqvist has a career .928 save % in the SEL. Thats a career number.

And before this season he has dominated international play too.

If they don't count this season (which is what some of the writers said) then would you have honestly considered Lundqvist a top 50 prospect? If he was considered a top 50 prospect before this season, I'm doubting New York is picking Montoya.

 

[NYRangers]

If they don't count this season (which is what some of the writers said) then would you have honestly considered Lundqvist a top 50 prospect? If he was considered a top 50 prospect before this season, I'm doubting New York is picking Montoya.

You got me there. His 928 and 947 save % in the same league the two seasons before shouldnt help. Lets not forget his 939 save % at the WJC, 928 at the U20, and 925 save % at the WC last Fall. See what I'm getting at?

 

[xander]

If they don't count this season (which is what some of the writers said) then would you have honestly considered Lundqvist a top 50 prospect? If he was considered a top 50 prospect before this season, I'm doubting New York is picking Montoya.

montoya was picked becouse the rangers thought he was the best available prospect, regardless of position.

 

[Levitate]

there just really is no good reason for lundqvist not be considered a top 50 prospect at this point. as pointed out, his numbers have been gaudy, not even including this year. he was named swedens top prospect by one publication (or website or something, can't remember which one it was) after his performance in the world championships

and again it's not like he's only mopping up against the dregs of the european players...he played very well against NHL scorers, stopping guys like demitra on breakaways in the WC, he's stopping NHLers now in the swedish league, and he was stopping NHLers in the euro tournament recently. he deserves some credit. I'm not even gonna say he deserves to be in the top 10 or be considered a better goalie than whatever flavor of the month goalie is everyone's favorite now...but cmon...give one, just one good reason that he doesn't deserve to be in the top 50 prospects after everything he's done

 

[hockeyfan125]

montoya was picked becouse the rangers thought he was the best available prospect, regardless of position.

Yep. Most if not all teams draft by best avaliable in the 1st round. After that you can go for position....