Draft Round 3 #90: New York Rangers Select D Drew Fortescue (USNTDP)

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,924
10,639
Muse knew the kids name before today, so he already knows more than we do.

A late 3rd is a long shot anyway. I have no problem at all taking a defenseman whom the Rangers should be knowledgeable about, who is going to a very strong NCAA hockey program.

Let him simmer for 4 years and at the end we might have a player, or we might not.
This logic sucks.

A late 3rd is a long shot so let’s take guys Chris Drury knows since elementary school because it doesn’t matter anyway. Come on.

Yeah let him simmer. May as well. If Muse vouches for him over Minnetian, you kind of have to trust that but I don’t see a reason this guy should have been picked over Cagnoni besides height. The Swede the Rangers took next, Rasmus sounds a a lot like Drew. The Rangers didn’t get a player with the skill set they actually needed
 
  • Like
Reactions: RagFinMet

Zarao71

Registered User
Jul 19, 2021
358
359
Lol at guys expecting another Lindgren.
Odds are this guy will never sniff an NHL game.
Late 3rd round guys rarely make it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ecemleafs

Ruggs225

Registered User
Oct 15, 2007
8,486
4,260
Long Island, NY
Oh, stop.
He wasted an asset to move up one spot. Is absolutely dimb.

Other teams traded future pick of same round to move up which is a smart move as no assets are wasted. But no our genius of a gm felt the need to throw away a pick, one that probably wont make the nhl, but a 1% chance is better than nothing. Or that 7th could be getting a player at trade deadline.

Even if he knew pitt was going to take him… was he really that much better than what is still available? Especially since its the third round where the odds are against you.

Its just bad asset management. But drury has shown many times he likes to overpay or get poor returns on assets he is trading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RagFinMet

mike14

Rampage Sherpa
Jun 22, 2006
17,887
10,890
Melbourne
He wasted an asset to move up one spot. Is absolutely dimb.

Other teams traded future pick of same round to move up which is a smart move as no assets are wasted. But no our genius of a gm felt the need to throw away a pick, one that probably wont make the nhl, but a 1% chance is better than nothing. Or that 7th could be getting a player at trade deadline.

Even if he knew pitt was going to take him… was he really that much better than what is still available? Especially since its the third round where the odds are against you.

Its just bad asset management. But drury has shown many times he likes to overpay or get poor returns on assets he is trading.

Are you taking the piss, or was that mean to be serious?
And if you were serious, how is moving a 2023 7th a wasted asset, but moving a 2024 7th not?
 

bhamill

Registered User
Apr 16, 2012
3,791
4,448
He wasted an asset to move up one spot. Is absolutely dimb.

Other teams traded future pick of same round to move up which is a smart move as no assets are wasted. But no our genius of a gm felt the need to throw away a pick, one that probably wont make the nhl, but a 1% chance is better than nothing. Or that 7th could be getting a player at trade deadline.

Even if he knew pitt was going to take him… was he really that much better than what is still available? Especially since its the third round where the odds are against you.

Its just bad asset management. But drury has shown many times he likes to overpay or get poor returns on assets he is trading.
You seem to be saying a using a future 3rd round pick to move up is smarter than trading a 7th in the same draft which makes zero sense to me. So maybe that isn’t what you meant?
It’s a 7th round pick, it’s barely an asset at all, never mind bad asset management to use it to make sure you get a player you want in the 3rd. You aren’t getting a useful player at the TDL for a 7th. 1% chance a 7th rounder makes the NHL? There’s 32 7th rounders every year when is the last time one made a difference in the NHL? This is the most nit picky thing I’ve read for n this board in ages.
 

bhamill

Registered User
Apr 16, 2012
3,791
4,448
Are you taking the piss, or was that mean to be serious?
And if you were serious, how is moving a 2023 7th a wasted asset, but moving a 2024 7th not?
I took “of same round” to mean a future 3rd. Which is bizarre so you are probably right… though it is still a ridiculously nitpicky thing to go on about IMO.

Lol at guys expecting another Lindgren.
Odds are this guy will never sniff an NHL game.
Late 3rd round guys rarely make it.
I think people are saying it’s a possibility he will be that type player if he makes it, not an expectation that he does.
 

mike14

Rampage Sherpa
Jun 22, 2006
17,887
10,890
Melbourne
I took “of same round” to mean a future 3rd. Which is bizarre so you are probably right… though it is still a ridiculously nitpicky thing to go on about IMO.


I think people are saying it’s a possibility he will be that type player if he makes it, not an expectation that he does.
I took him to mean a future 7th (like we used), but regradless of round any daft pick is an asset so I really can't understand how using one is a waste but using another isn't (athough it is Friday arvo and I have been drinking...). Weird stuff
 

Ruggs225

Registered User
Oct 15, 2007
8,486
4,260
Long Island, NY
No i meant trading next uears 3rd for the pitt 3rd. And we kept our same third this year and have back to back picks.


There were a couple trades like that this year where one team traded their future pick of the same round for the current pick of the same round.

That is being smart.

Trading an extra pick to move up 1 spot in the third round is dumb.
 

Ruggs225

Registered User
Oct 15, 2007
8,486
4,260
Long Island, NY
To put it another way. If the rangers “knew” that Pitt was taking Fortescue then Pitt valued the extra 7th over him.

but again Drury is really bad at valuing draft picks.

We have seen it in the Buch trade, the overpayment to get rid of Nemeth. He has not maximized any deal yet.

Its not like a 7th rounder is a big deal. But there was absolutely no need to do this.
 

bhamill

Registered User
Apr 16, 2012
3,791
4,448
No i meant trading next uears 3rd for the pitt 3rd. And we kept our same third this year and have back to back picks.


There were a couple trades like that this year where one team traded their future pick of the same round for the current pick of the same round.

That is being smart.

Trading an extra pick to move up 1 spot in the third round is dumb.
Why would Pitt do that tho without a sweetener… like a 6th or 7th?
I maintain it’s wildly nit picky complaining over a 7th.
If you just said it was bad asset management to end up with no picks between 23 and 91, I’d get it. But spending a 7th to get your target Im fine with.
 

JHS

Registered User
Oct 11, 2013
1,690
1,288
classic pick- another bad skater who can’t do much! My god what is wrong with this organization…
 
  • Like
Reactions: RagFinMet

PuckLuck3043

Stairway To Heaven
Nov 15, 2017
9,852
14,775
Hudson Valley
classic pick- another bad skater who can’t do much! My god what is wrong with this organization…
What are you even talking about? He was projected to go right where he was picked and he is not a bad skater.

 

PuckLuck3043

Stairway To Heaven
Nov 15, 2017
9,852
14,775
Hudson Valley
To put it another way. If the rangers “knew” that Pitt was taking Fortescue then Pitt valued the extra 7th over him.

but again Drury is really bad at valuing draft picks.

We have seen it in the Buch trade, the overpayment to get rid of Nemeth. He has not maximized any deal yet.

Its not like a 7th rounder is a big deal. But there was absolutely no need to do this.
How do you know? Were you sitting at the table with Drury and co.? Obviously they weren't just going to give up a 7th rounder for no reason at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jacques Strap

JHS

Registered User
Oct 11, 2013
1,690
1,288
What are you even talking about? He was projected to go right where he was picked and he is not a bad skater.

Literally the second bullet point in his rundown from some scouting services is “mediocre skater.”
 

PuckLuck3043

Stairway To Heaven
Nov 15, 2017
9,852
14,775
Hudson Valley
Literally the second bullet point in his rundown from some scouting services is “mediocre skater.”
He’s a bigger defensemen,” added an NHL scout. “Even though he’s not necessarily a guy that’s gonna run you over, he’s physical and he has some real toughness to him. He’s not a super offensive guy but he moves pucks well, he starts plays in his own zone and he can skate. He defends well, he’s got the reach and he’s got a lot of the things that you want out of a defenseman.”

Literally copied from the article from a scout. Sounds like he can do stuff.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: maris

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
41,710
51,909
In High Altitoad
Very strong freshman year. Really needs to clean up his game with the puck on his stick but defending the rush? He's money. Not bad at leading the rush the other way either. Little bit of bite to his game too so the people who think that = good defense will enjoy him.

Would probably leave him at BC for another 2 years but we'll see where he's at after his Sophomore season. Still has a decent amount of physical growth to do but playing top 4 minutes on the national runner up in a very difficult conference and more than handling them is a good sign.

Mentioned this in other threads, but he absolutely devoured Frank Nazar in the FF semis. Nazar was arguably the best rush player in the NCAA last year and he stuffed him like a turkey.

I didn't like this pick when it was made as I felt there were better players on the board (Mostly Jayden Perron) and was a bit worried about it being a Drury nepo pick (Fortescue played with his son) but he's a legitimate NHL prospect.
jHm6dkN.png


Yup.

Nope

 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad