Confirmed with Link: Tyler Wall signs ELC

[Joey Bones]

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I will say this: What Tyler Wall says here speaks volumes to our scouting. The "richer" teams in he NHL, in my opinion at least, seem to scout more frequently in the lower leagues like the GOJHL, AJHL, USHS-Prep, CISAA etc. Wall could have signed elsewhere to have an easier path to the NHL but he pays back the trust the org had in him when seemingly nobody else cared. I love that quote.

Our scouting really is not an issue

 

[cwede]

I will say this: What Tyler Wall says here speaks volumes to our scouting. The "richer" teams in he NHL, in my opinion at least, seem to scout more frequently in the lower leagues like the GOJHL, AJHL, USHS-Prep, CISAA etc. Wall could have signed elsewhere to have an easier path to the NHL but he pays back the trust the org had in him when seemingly nobody else cared. I love that quote.
Our scouting really is not an issue

My feeling had been that this thinking would lead him to sign w NYR.
Entering Hockey East as a drafted goalie had to be a great confidence boost.
The rest he earned on his own.

But throughout my (too many) years as a sports fan, many many stories of players who always remembered and appreciated the scouts that signed/drafted them

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

My feeling had been that this thinking would lead him to sign w NYR.
Entering Hockey East as a drafted goalie had to be a great confidence boost.
The rest he earned on his own.

But throughout my (too many) years as a sports fan, many many stories of players who always remembered and appreciated the scouts that signed/drafted them

When I spoke to Adam Edstrom last week, he said something similar. He did not expect to be drafted, and when he was, the team reached out to him and ever since they treat him as if he was a 1st round pick. They treat all their prospects as part of the organization, which is huge.

 

[nyr2k2]

When I spoke to Adam Edstrom last week, he said something similar. He did not expect to be drafted, and when he was, the team reached out to him and ever since they treat him as if he was a 1st round pick. They treat all their prospects as part of the organization, which is huge.

I know I'm risking sidetracking things--but these type of remarks from Wall and Edstrom are part of what makes it hard for me to believe we were in some way neglectful of the two guys we had issues with this year. Outside of the guys who maybe wanted to stay here, re-sign here, and are bitter it didn't happen, almost every player goes out of their way to talk about how well the organization treated them. Whether it's late round picks or stars. That's always been one of the things we've had going for us as an organization. And I'm not JD's biggest fan, but he's exactly the type of guy who would also emphasize this stuff.

 

[Larrybiv]

I more or less meant that I wouldn't put it past Gorton to move Georgiev around the draft if he had a good enough offer. Certainly wouldn't mind adding a 2nd rounder (and whatever else) being that we don't have one.

And I will expound on moving Georgiev just to get a 2nd rounder. This doesn't appear to be the 2nd coming of Talbot nor Raanta for that matter. This is a position of strength for us. Things are very much laid out to go smoothly (regardless of Hank's decision). I no sooner package Georgiev to a team in NEED to get what we NEED. We DON'T have to trade him. And then there's expansion to surpass as well. Keep him unless....., we don't need a 2nd rounder THAT badly.

 

[nyr2k2]

I've said this before, but positions matter in the draft. To me, the goalie position is similar to a punter or kicker in the NFL when it comes to the draft. Now, I am not saying goalies aren't important, but you are far more likely to find good goalies late in the draft than you are to find good centers, wingers, defensemen late in the draft. For that reason, I would never draft a goalie high. You use your high picks to fill positions you are far less likely to fill in later rounds.

I agree with this in principle.

The last four years on the NFL, there have been 22 drafted kickers and punters. With a handful of exceptions they've all been in the fifth or later. In contrast, there were 22 goalies drafted overall last year. So, it's not quite apples to apples, particularly given your punter could not appear at all in a game, or a kicker could appear just a couple times. But I know you know that, just reiterating it's a specialist position vs a position that can be the most important player in a given night (so can a K, but to a different degree, generally).

As I see it, when you're in the third round, particularly the middle or later, you're realistically hoping to find a middle-six forward at best. Maybe a bottom six guy. More of a depth player than a star. Of course you can find star players, but the odds are really slim. If you get depth players at forward and defense in the third round, you're doing a good job. So, given that goalies are still a very important component of a great teams (generally but not always), if you feel confident that there's a potential starting goalie available, I think it's completely reasonable to grab him in the third round. Maybe even the end of the second if it's someone really talented.

If everyone agreed that goalies should not go in the first round, or even the top half of the second round, you better believe I'd be okay taking Askarov or Samsonov or even Oettinger in the back half of the second or anywhere in the third. I don't think the position is so overvalued that grabbing a guy at 50+ is unreasonable.

And you just never know with goalies, which is why I'm always good with adding more. Washington, I remember all the talk here, between "Varly" and "Neuvy" they were going to be set in goal. And then years later both guys left and Holtby, with the second pick of the fourth round, ends up the guy who leads them to glory.

I wish we could have waited and got Annunen or Skarek. Those were the two I wanted. Skarek hasn't been great but Annunen looks promising. Had we been able to grab either with the Ragnarsson pick (I know Annunen was off the board) I would have liked those picks, even early third.

For me, I'd say 50+ is where you start looking for a goalie. I understand the idea behind only taking them in the fourth or fifth or whatever, but I think that is an undervaluation of the position and an overestimation of what you're otherwise likely to find at that spot.

 

[SA16]

I agree with this in principle.

The last four years on the NFL, there have been 22 drafted kickers and punters. With a handful of exceptions they've all been in the fifth or later. In contrast, there were 22 goalies drafted overall last year. So, it's not quite apples to apples, particularly given your punter could not appear at all in a game, or a kicker could appear just a couple times. But I know you know that, just reiterating it's a specialist position vs a position that can be the most important player in a given night (so can a K, but to a different degree, generally).

As I see it, when you're in the third round, particularly the middle or later, you're realistically hoping to find a middle-six forward at best. Maybe a bottom six guy. More of a depth player than a star. Of course you can find star players, but the odds are really slim. If you get depth players at forward and defense in the third round, you're doing a good job. So, given that goalies are still a very important component of a great teams (generally but not always), if you feel confident that there's a potential starting goalie available, I think it's completely reasonable to grab him in the third round. Maybe even the end of the second if it's someone really talented.

If everyone agreed that goalies should not go in the first round, or even the top half of the second round, you better believe I'd be okay taking Askarov or Samsonov or even Oettinger in the back half of the second or anywhere in the third. I don't think the position is so overvalued that grabbing a guy at 50+ is unreasonable.

And you just never know with goalies, which is why I'm always good with adding more. Washington, I remember all the talk here, between "Varly" and "Neuvy" they were going to be set in goal. And then years later both guys left and Holtby, with the second pick of the fourth round, ends up the guy who leads them to glory.

I wish we could have waited and got Annunen or Skarek. Those were the two I wanted. Skarek hasn't been great but Annunen looks promising. Had we been able to grab either with the Ragnarsson pick (I know Annunen was off the board) I would have liked those picks, even early third.

For me, I'd say 50+ is where you start looking for a goalie. I understand the idea behind only taking them in the fourth or fifth or whatever, but I think that is an undervaluation of the position and an overestimation of what you're otherwise likely to find at that spot.

This is the problem right here. You should never feel confident about this and if you are you are likely wrong. This is also why it makes sense to just draft one in the 6th or 7th every year so you can get a large pipeline of them and see which ones work out.

It's funny if you look at the history of Rangers goalie prospects let's say from 2014 and earlier:

Halverson - 59 ovr - bust
Shesterkin - 118 - looks great
Skapski - 170 - not a regular NHLer
Stajcer - 140 - bust
Lafleur - 48 - bust
Montoya - 6 - adequate backup for years for a bunch of teams
Holt - 180 - bust
Snee - 143 - bust
Lundqvist - 205 - elite for years

Basically completely random but grab a bunch of them late chances are someone will work out. Nine goalies in a 15 year period. 6 became nothing. One became elite. Another one looks like he might be. And then a journeman backup who lasted a long time taken early in the first. For what it's worth none of the skaters taken within like the next 10 picks after any of these guys turned into anything either (including Montoya as the first guy who became a decent NHL player after him was Stafford at 13).

 

[nyr2k2]

This is the problem right here. You should never feel confident about this and if you are you are likely wrong. This is also why it makes sense to just draft one in the 6th or 7th every year so you can get a large pipeline of them and see which ones work out.

It's funny if you look at the history of Rangers goalie prospects let's say from 2014 and earlier:

Halverson - 59 ovr - bust
Shesterkin - 118 - looks great
Skapski - 170 - not a regular NHLer
Stajcer - 140 - bust
Lafleur - 48 - bust
Montoya - 6 - adequate backup for years for a bunch of teams
Holt - 180 - bust
Snee - 143 - bust
Lundqvist - 205 - elite for years

Basically completely random but grab a bunch of them late chances are someone will work out. Nine goalies in a 15 year period. 6 became nothing. One became elite. Another one looks like he might be. And then a journeman backup who lasted a long time taken early in the first. For what it's worth none of the skaters taken within like the next 10 picks after any of these guys turned into anything either (including Montoya as the first guy who became a decent NHL player after him was Stafford at 13).

And that's kind of my point. I said if you're confident then it's fine in the third round. What if you feel confident about a skater in the third round? The chances are still really low. We hit home runs when we took Duclair and Buchnevich in the third but struck the f*** out with the guy we apparently liked best in Tambellini. What about Iverson, Kovacs, Zborovskiy? Keane looks like a hit. Taken before him was Ragnarsson who probably never even comes over. Saarela may be a hit. Day was an upside pick, but he failed like most third rounders (yeah, I'm projecting, whatever). Iverson? Fogarty? Ryan Bourque? Grachev, Kundratek, Hillier, Dupont? And on and on. The guys you pick in the third generally don't pan out, no matter the position. The third round from 2009-2014 gave us Binnington, Korpisalo, Murray, Andersen and Sorokin. From 2015-today I'm sure there are a number of other guys that will make it. Of course, there are plenty of failed picks as well.

I would wager that if you did a full rundown of how many third round picks of skaters from 2009-2014 turned into decent depth players for a couple years, the success rate would look pretty similar to how many guys turned into backup-caliber goaltenders for a couple years. And the ratio of career NHLers taken in the third round in that period would probably look pretty close to the ratio of failures vs those goalies I listed earlier.

So, if you are looking for goaltending for your system, I think the third round is a good starting point. Being confident, as I said, is obviously relative given that most guys taken at this stage fail. But the idea that you can't pick goalies here, because you should only be focusing on skaters, I think is a bit flawed. The chances that your goalie ends up a bust but the skater you could have picked ends up as a decent player is pretty small, just because most guys around in the third amount to little. The chances that your goalie is a failure and the skater you could have picked is top six/top four or a star is really, really small.

So yeah, I don't take a goalie in the first. I don't take one in the second unless he's considered a can't-miss type of player and I'm desperate for help. But in the third, and particularly the back half? I think that's kind of the sweet spot for where it makes sense from a value standpoint to start taking goalies.

 

[Edge]

I thought he was a lock to sign elsewhere?

Anyway, glad to have him on board. If Huska doesn't step it up, he could find himself in Maine next year, even if Georgiev is dealt.

I still don’t know why that became a concern for some posters.