Prospect Info: Morgan Barron

[egelband]

If someone drafted outside the first round, plays 100 NHL games, that's a great draft selection. Look at Colorado for instance. The last player even outside the top-10 who played 100 games for them was Tyson Barrie in 2009.

You need to draft contributors. We have done that. Fast, Buchnevich, Duclair, Stepan, Hagelin, Callahan, Anisimov, and Dubinsky are some examples of contributors drafted outside the 1st round in the salary cap era.

In the draft, the Rangers don’t hit many homers, but they do hit a good number of doubles.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

In the draft, the Rangers don’t hit many homers, but they do hit a good number of doubles.

And that results in some very valuable RBIs like Yandle or now DeAngelo

 

[True Blue]

And that results in some very valuable RBIs like Yandle or now DeAngelo

To further that, an initial double also turns into an inside the park home run

 

[EXTRAS]

Nerds.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

To further that, an initial double also turns into an inside the park home run

Easy on the Baseball lingo there haha. I am a n00b. 6 months ago I still referred to an RBI as an assist

 

[coz21]

I feel the more realistic scenario is a Dominic Moore-level player. 3rd/4th line center if everything works out

Moore is also a pretty realistic expectation.

BTW positionally I still think he ends up on the wing. They probably see him at center, but I do not.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I would love to have a bigger Dom Moore.

 

[charliemurphy]

Moore is also a pretty realistic expectation.

BTW positionally I still think he ends up on the wing. They probably see him at center, but I do not.

Been meaning to ask you about Barron's position. I caught about a handful of Cornell games last season and saw them again this past fall at MSG. Every time I've seen Barron he's started at C but I keep hearing from folks that he's been playing almost exclusively at LW. Just wondering if the games I saw were a fluke, lol or does he play better at LW? Because from what I saw he basically carried the team and stood out every game at C.

 

[coz21]

Been meaning to ask you about Barron's position. I caught about a handful of Cornell games last season and saw them again this past fall at MSG. Every time I've seen Barron he's started at C but I keep hearing from folks that he's been playing almost exclusively at LW. Just wondering if the games I saw were a fluke, lol or does he play better at LW? Because from what I saw he basically carried the team and stood out every game at C.

He played a little bit of center last year when they lost multiple centers to injury but other than taking the occasional faceoff, he didn't play center at all this year. I personally think he projects better at wing, but the Rangers drafted him as a center and still list him as one so idk what they think.

 

[HFBS]

If someone drafted outside the first round, plays 100 NHL games, that's a great draft selection. Look at Colorado for instance. The last player even outside the top-10 who played 100 games for them was Tyson Barrie in 2009.

You need to draft contributors. We have done that. Fast, Buchnevich, Duclair, Stepan, Hagelin, Callahan, Anisimov, and Dubinsky are some examples of contributors drafted outside the 1st round in the salary cap era.

Looking at your list, all were traded in what could be argued was their prime (OK, maybe not Duclair) with the exception of the first two, who were rumored to be traded a month ago, and may very well be traded soon.

 

[n8]

We ranked him 11th in our poll, but if you exclude "pro hockey players", the only people ahead of him were Miller and Jones. Which still seems appropriate. I think we have him rated correctly.

I think he has a chance to carve out a role as a big, strong, two-way middle-six player who can play in all situations. I think he more likely settles in as a third line-caliber guy, but we'll see how well his skating translates.

His defensive skills and size have "bigger Dominic Moore" written in his future. Loving the potential of him anchoring the 4th line, getting put out at the end of games to win faceoffs, hold the lead, and give top players the fits.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Looking at your list, all were traded in what could be argued was their prime (OK, maybe not Duclair) with the exception of the first two, who were rumored to be traded a month ago, and may very well be traded soon.

What's your point?

 

[HFBS]

My point is that why are you touting players as successes that have mostly been traded away? Lunqvist taken in the 7th round - now that's a winner.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

My point is that why are you touting players as successes that have mostly been traded away? Lunqvist taken in the 7th round - now that's a winner.

Because it is about identifying talent. About your scouts finding NHL caliber players outside the 1st round. That was my point. Trading away Callahan, Anisimov, Hagelin, Dubinsky etc later on in their career doesn't change that.

 

[GAGLine]

My point is that why are you touting players as successes that have mostly been traded away? Lunqvist taken in the 7th round - now that's a winner.

A successful draft pick is a successful draft pick, even if the only value we realize from it is in trade. Look at Keane. He was a 3rd round pick that we traded for a former 1st round pick who is more NHL ready and fills more of a need.

 

[007]

Looking at your list, all were traded in what could be argued was their prime (OK, maybe not Duclair) with the exception of the first two, who were rumored to be traded a month ago, and may very well be traded soon.

Most of them (all?) were traded when it became clear that they were going to be due new contracts that would hamstring the team. And, it turns out, when their play had reached a plateau. Also, none of them seemed to significantly improve after they left the Rangers (I figured Dubi was going to continue to improve to the level of a consistent 60-pt player and that Hags had enough in him to make 40 pts).

In short, they contributed to the team, then they were traded for assets, some of whom are still contributing for the Rangers. If Morgan Barron sticks with the Rangers his whole career as our Bobby Holik, amazing. If follows the same tragectory as the guys above, that's still fantastic.

 

[True Blue]

Looking at your list, all were traded in what could be argued was their prime (OK, maybe not Duclair) with the exception of the first two, who were rumored to be traded a month ago, and may very well be traded soon.

They weren't all traded immediately and many contributed to deep playoff runs.

 

[True Blue]

If Morgan Barron sticks with the Rangers his whole career as our Bobby Holik, amazing. If follows the same tragectory as the guys above, that's still fantastic.

The only comparisons are size wise. Barron is not anywhere near the physical force that Holik was.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

The only comparisons are size wise. Barron is not anywhere near the physical force that Holik was.

Holik was also pretty much a consistent 20+ goal scorer. All the while playing superb defense.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I think fans should be very careful with their expectations of Barron. Holik? That would be too good to be true, honestly.

 

[True Blue]

Holik was also pretty much a consistent 20+ goal scorer. All the while playing superb defense.

And an absolute belligerent battle ram

 

[True Blue]

I think fans should be very careful with their expectations of Barron. Holik? That would be too good to be true, honestly.

Yeah, am going with absolutely no chance.

And agreed about what they expect him to be.

 

[coz21]

I think fans should be very careful with their expectations of Barron. Holik? That would be too good to be true, honestly.

I agree. At one point Holik was the leading scorer on division winning teams.

 

[007]

Sorry, I thought after the fact I shouldn't have put the Holik reference in there. I meant it as an HF-fantasy, not a plausible outcome.

 

[bobbop]

How about Janny Erixon?