An examination of Ranger youth

I have decided that I'd try to look at the Ranger organization and try to identify the depth of players by position and try to include a projection of where they might end up in terms of position. I will try to include only players with a realistic chance of making this team over the next three to five years. (That means no Sven Helfensteins or Stefan Lundquists.) I'm also not going to include college players sign to ATOs. Here goes:

Left Wings

Garth Murray - possible 2nd/more likely 3rd line grinder
Nigel Dawes - 2nd line
Marcus Jonasen - possible 2nd line
Alexander Giroux -2nd/3rd
Mike Walsh - possible 2nd line/more likely 3rd
Chad Wiseman - 4th liner
Ken Roche - 2nd/3rd
Petr Prucha - 2nd line
Nathan Martz -3rd/4th

Centers

Jamie Lundmark - 2nd
RJ Umberger - possible 1st/more likely 2nd
Jarkko Immonen - 2nd
Dominick Moore - 3rd
Blair Betts - 3rd
Dwight Helminen- 3rd/4th
Lee Falardeau - 3rd/4th
Ivan Dornic - ?

Right Wings

Hugh Jessiman - 1st
Jozef Balej - 2nd
Jed Ortmeyer - 3rd
Rich Kozak - 3rd
Greg Moore - possibly 2nd/more likely 3rd
Rob Flynn - ?

Defensemen

Fedor Tyutin - 1st pairing
Karel Rachunek - 2nd pairing/puck-mover
Thomas Pock -2nd pairing/puck mover
Maxim Kondratiev - 2nd pairing
Bryce Lampman - 3rd pairing
Ivan Baranka -2nd pairing
David Liffiton - 2nd pairing/crerase-clearer
Jake Taylor - 2nd/3rd pairing/crease clearer
Nate Guenin - 2nd/3rd pairing/crease-clearer
Corey Potter - ?
Dylan Reese - ?
Martin Grenier - 3rd pairing/7th d-man

Goaltenders

Dan Blackburn - starting goalie (possible franchise caliber)
Henrik Lundquist - starting goalie (?)
Jason Labarbera - backup/AHL caliber starter

If my presumptions are near the mark, this team has three cleear holes in the organization - (1) Top line center, franchise type center; (2) Top line LW; and (3) 1st pairing, crease clearing d-man.

This draft offers options at all three holes. If Sather could somehow come away with Rob Schremp, Andrew Ladd and Boris Valabik, he would have gone a long way towards soldifying the overall depth of this organization.

I'm sure there will be some debate on different players. However, my point was to try to look at the overall composition of the organization. Clearly, there is new found depth, due to the fire sale. But, holes clearly remain.

the Rangers have a bunch of mediocre prospects and nobody that may be an impact player, except, possibly, for a few flawed players.

the Rangers have a bunch of mediocre prospects and nobody that may be an impact player, except, possibly, for a few flawed players.


I thought that was a given...

What this tells me is that we have some decent defensive prospects and a real shortage of forwards. I think that what the defense needs is a real BIG, NASTY crease clearer to go along w/ Liffiton. I think that having getting a Valabik or a Barker (pipe dream) would go a long way. Between Liffiton, Tyutin, Baranka, Pock (cautious here as he played very little), Rachunek & Kondratiev, we have a pretty good base for a pretty good defense. If Taylor turns out to be anything (including a Tinordi clone) I would jump for joy.
Where we are hurting is top 2 line forwards. Marcus Jonasen has not shown that he is a possible top 2 line forward. IF Jessiman is handled properly (and that means lots of patience and coaching), he could be the top line power forward we need. However, he should be no less than 2 years away from the NHL and another several years after that until he can make any type of impact.
Balej has impressed me. He has top 2 line potenetial. So does Lundmark, but the braintrust has to decided quickly if his future is as a wing or center and stop screwing w/ the kid. It's time to play him in one position and to stop jerking him around.
Sorry Jas, but like Jonasen, I don't know how you can view him as a possible 2nd line forward. To me, he looks like he can be another Darren Mcarty or Dan Hinote, if we are lucky.
Nigel Dawes is a big question mark. I can't make a projection on him. He cannot be counted upon for anything. Ditto for Mike Walsh. I've no idea how he can be projected as a 2nd line forward.
Betts looks to be a 4th liner and Ortmeyer is a 3rd liner if he develops enough scoring touch to score up to 10 goals, if not, then he is a 4th liner.
All of this is just pointing to the fact that the most important thing that Jackass has to be doing is working the draft. Between the 2 first roudners and the 2nd rounders that we have, he has got to get it right. He cannot afford to have slipups here. He has to emerge with several players. Like Edge has been saying, the firesale was not enough. It's all the extra picks that are important.

Lundmark needs to be a winger!

Lundmark needs to be a winger!

Or a center. Either way, that needs to be decided and stuck with. But I agree with you, he is better suited to be a wing in the NHL.

Lundmark needs to be a winger!

Lundmark needs to be on Pitts, Chi, or Columbus. :banana:

We need some frontline talent, and a top pairing crease clearing defenseman like stated above. I could see Tyutin-Kondratiev being a solid second pairing so we really need to nail a top pairing player in this draft.

As for forwards I believe we need to step up if we feel there is a guy who could be a major first line player - otherwise take Ladd.... I'd rather have a 25 goal winger who's tough and brings something to the table, then an ice cold russian. Of course if you see that Russian as a 1st line center then thats a hole thats to difficult to fill so you have to make the pick.

Lundmark needs to be a winger!

Lundmark needs to learn how to work.

my point was not that Jonasen was a bona fide 2nd line winger; rather, I tried to put players where their talent could psooibly top out. To say that Jonasen, who scored 16 goals in 27 games, and four goals in six playoff games, does not have 2nd line potential is inaccurate. And, Walsh, as a sophomore, was playing on the top scoring line at ND. There is potential there to be a 2nd line scoring winger. But, all I am saying is that this is the best we could hope for in the case of these players. What this team has is a lot of role players. There are are only two to three players whith what anyone would consider top end talent.

I have decided that I'd try to look at the Ranger organization and try to identify the depth of players by position and try to include a projection of where they might end up in terms of position. I will try to include only players with a realistic chance of making this team over the next three to five years. (That means no Sven Helfensteins or Stefan Lundquists.) I'm also not going to include college players sign to ATOs. Here goes:

Left Wings

Garth Murray - possible 2nd/more likely 3rd line grinder
Nigel Dawes - 2nd line
Marcus Jonasen - possible 2nd line
Alexander Giroux -2nd/3rd
Mike Walsh - possible 2nd line/more likely 3rd
Chad Wiseman - 4th liner
Ken Roche - 2nd/3rd
Petr Prucha - 2nd line
Nathan Martz -3rd/4th

Centers

Jamie Lundmark - 2nd
RJ Umberger - possible 1st/more likely 2nd
Jarkko Immonen - 2nd
Dominick Moore - 3rd
Blair Betts - 3rd
Dwight Helminen- 3rd/4th
Lee Falardeau - 3rd/4th
Ivan Dornic - ?

Right Wings

Hugh Jessiman - 1st
Jozef Balej - 2nd
Jed Ortmeyer - 3rd
Rich Kozak - 3rd
Greg Moore - possibly 2nd/more likely 3rd
Rob Flynn - ?

Defensemen

Fedor Tyutin - 1st pairing
Karel Rachunek - 2nd pairing/puck-mover
Thomas Pock -2nd pairing/puck mover
Maxim Kondratiev - 2nd pairing
Bryce Lampman - 3rd pairing
Ivan Baranka -2nd pairing
David Liffiton - 2nd pairing/crerase-clearer
Jake Taylor - 2nd/3rd pairing/crease clearer
Nate Guenin - 2nd/3rd pairing/crease-clearer
Corey Potter - ?
Dylan Reese - ?
Martin Grenier - 3rd pairing/7th d-man

Goaltenders

Dan Blackburn - starting goalie (possible franchise caliber)
Henrik Lundquist - starting goalie (?)
Jason Labarbera - backup/AHL caliber starter

If my presumptions are near the mark, this team has three cleear holes in the organization - (1) Top line center, franchise type center; (2) Top line LW; and (3) 1st pairing, crease clearing d-man.

This draft offers options at all three holes. If Sather could somehow come away with Rob Schremp, Andrew Ladd and Boris Valabik, he would have gone a long way towards soldifying the overall depth of this organization.

I'm sure there will be some debate on different players. However, my point was to try to look at the overall composition of the organization. Clearly, there is new found depth, due to the fire sale. But, holes clearly remain.What do ya think of Valiquette? I realy like him but I am not sure how far he will go. I was hopeing he could push dunham out. Although it should not be hard.

What do ya think of Valiquette? I realy like him but I am not sure how far he will go. I was hopeing he could push dunham out. Although it should not be hard.

Valiquette is an AHL'er. I would assume Dunham is out, I really don't see the Rangers front office wanting him back next year. I don't know how they'll get rid of him, but I wouldnt be surprised to see the Rangers eat half of his contract or just buy him out.

I think you'll see us sign a UFA goaltender. I'm not sure about Mclennans status, but I wouldnt be surprised to see LaBarbera back-up this year with Blackburn and Lundvquist splitting time in Hartford. Of course we'd love to see Lundvquist excel in training camp, and start with the big club starting 35 games, but you certainly can't count on that.

What this tells me is that we have some decent defensive prospects and a real shortage of forwards. I think that what the defense needs is a real BIG, NASTY crease clearer to go along w/ Liffiton. I think that having getting a Valabik or a Barker (pipe dream) would go a long way. Between Liffiton, Tyutin, Baranka, Pock (cautious here as he played very little), Rachunek & Kondratiev, we have a pretty good base for a pretty good defense. If Taylor turns out to be anything (including a Tinordi clone) I would jump for joy.
Where we are hurting is top 2 line forwards. Marcus Jonasen has not shown that he is a possible top 2 line forward. IF Jessiman is handled properly (and that means lots of patience and coaching), he could be the top line power forward we need. However, he should be no less than 2 years away from the NHL and another several years after that until he can make any type of impact.
Balej has impressed me. He has top 2 line potenetial. So does Lundmark, but the braintrust has to decided quickly if his future is as a wing or center and stop screwing w/ the kid. It's time to play him in one position and to stop jerking him around.
Sorry Jas, but like Jonasen, I don't know how you can view him as a possible 2nd line forward. To me, he looks like he can be another Darren Mcarty or Dan Hinote, if we are lucky.
Nigel Dawes is a big question mark. I can't make a projection on him. He cannot be counted upon for anything. Ditto for Mike Walsh. I've no idea how he can be projected as a 2nd line forward.
Betts looks to be a 4th liner and Ortmeyer is a 3rd liner if he develops enough scoring touch to score up to 10 goals, if not, then he is a 4th liner.
All of this is just pointing to the fact that the most important thing that Jackass has to be doing is working the draft. Between the 2 first roudners and the 2nd rounders that we have, he has got to get it right. He cannot afford to have slipups here. He has to emerge with several players. Like Edge has been saying, the firesale was not enough. It's all the extra picks that are important.

I don't think they are counting on Jonasen, and Dawes to be 2nd liners, but just projecting their upside. If you have 5 guys who could be 2nd liners, then hopefully 1 if not 2 can actually make it.

the Rangers have a bunch of mediocre prospects and nobody that may be an impact player, except, possibly, for a few flawed players.

Too early too tell. Most will be nothing but career AHLers, but I would be shocked if at least a few of your prospects dont turn out to be real gems. Welcome to the rebuilding process.

The Rangers dont need that much top end talent (with the exception of goaltending). With your resources, you can buy all the talent you need. What you really need is good coaching and attention to defense.

balej, tjutin and dawes are possible first liners, no doubt in my mind, jessiman is a bonafide first line prospect, that is what we are lacking

i think farladaeu and everyone with a ? are too raw and far away for any judgement

Too early too tell. Most will be nothing but career AHLers, but I would be shocked if at least a few of your prospects dont turn out to be real gems. Welcome to the rebuilding process.

The Rangers dont need that much top end talent (with the exception of goaltending). With your resources, you can buy all the talent you need. What you really need is good coaching and attention to defense.

In Blackburn and Lundquist, there is top talent at the goalie position. This team lacks type "A" prospects at the forward position. Only Jessiman, Umberger and possibly Balej have that kind of talent. This team has depth, but it does not have the top end talent that other organizations such as Edmonton and Florida have.

This list illustrates quite clearly that we lack top line prospects. So, at least to me, this is why quibling w/ Umberger over $400k is insane. If nothing else, the kid definetly has top 2 line potentia. Moreso than Jonasen or most of the others. Sign the kid.

again, the quibbling is over $1+ million. He wants $1 million, and that's the price the Rangers will have to pay. They're not debating whether or not they should pay him VAN's offer, or if they should pay him $1 million. Essentially, I don't see it as nickeling and diming at this point as opposed to the Rangers, either having a totally different agenda that nobody knows about, or, if Brooks' rumor is true, do not have real interest in him because they don't think he's the real deal.

Essentially, I don't see it as nickeling and diming at this point as opposed to the Rangers, either having a totally different agenda that nobody knows about, or, if Brooks' rumor is true, do not have real interest in him because they don't think he's the real deal.
If they have no interest in him, it's pretty stupid to just let a talented first rounder just slip through their fingers. Especially when you consider the lack of top line prospects that we have. And if their agenda is to get the 46th overall pick, again I think it's pretty stupid for the exact same reasons.

We're quite a bit removed from draft day. How do you know the Rangers don't look at him, and see NO top line potential. Maybe they consider him a mediocre prospect with a questionable attitude.

Just an idea...

To bash the Rangers about Umberger right now is premature.

To bash the Rangers about Umberger right now is premature.
IMO, no. To me, there's reasons enough. We have a HUGE, gaping dearth of top line prospects. So here is a kid who is a 1st round pick with top 2 line potential. To just let him waltz away is one of the many reasons this organization is a league-wide joke.

Sorry Jas, but like Jonasen, I don't know how you can view him as a possible 2nd line forward. To me, he looks like he can be another Darren Mcarty or Dan Hinote, if we are lucky.


Actually, I could see him being a Tomas Holmstrom type, IF he fully develops - you, know, big body, drives to the net, soft hands.

IMO, no. To me, there's reasons enough. We have a HUGE, gaping dearth of top line prospects. So here is a kid who is a 1st round pick with top 2 line potential. To just let him waltz away is one of the many reasons this organization is a league-wide joke.
I agree wholeheartidly. To spend however many million on Ulanov, Ciger, Karpa ,ect, and then skimp on the money with a recent 1st rounder is just insane. So what if we overpay a little and give him 1.0 mill a year. WOOOW, an entire 1/83rd of our payroll last year. True we haven't seen him play enough recently to confirm beliefs that he has top line potential but it goes both ways then. We also haven't seen enough of him to say that he is not top line potential. All we can go on are those draft reviews and scouting reports and they seem to have a pretty good opinion of him. Yea, I'll take the risk on him. Like I said, would you trade our 1st rounder this year for an early 2nd rounder in a couple of years? I sure wouldnt

I agree wholeheartidly. To spend however many million on Ulanov, Ciger, Karpa ,ect, and then skimp on the money with a recent 1st rounder is just insane. So what if we overpay a little and give him 1.0 mill a year. WOOOW, an entire 1/83rd of our payroll last year. True we haven't seen him play enough recently to confirm beliefs that he has top line potential but it goes both ways then. We also haven't seen enough of him to say that he is not top line potential. All we can go on are those draft reviews and scouting reports and they seem to have a pretty good opinion of him. Yea, I'll take the risk on him. Like I said, would you trade our 1st rounder this year for an early 2nd rounder in a couple of years? I sure wouldnt

Who says that it's a question of money? It's obvious that Vancouver didn't have a great opinion of him because they wouldn't even match his contract to a significantly lower pick in Kesler.

I'm just saying that maybe the guys stock has dropped the last X amount of years. I don't know if we should sign him or not, but you have to believe the Rangers have taken a LONG look at him. If they don't sign him its for a reason, and I really don't think the deciding factor is money. If it was, then I would jump right in with the Karpa-Kamensky comparisons like you guys do.

All I'm saying is that you can't just make your decision based on the fact he was picked 16th. Plenty of players who are picked at that point have their stock drop over the next 2-3 years. Just look at the last draft which we are less then one year removed from. If it was held again there would be major differences.

If the Rangers don't sign him then there will be a reason behind it. I don't care when he was picked or that he was a Hobey Baker finalist. Someone recently posted a list of former winners, and their was a 50% success rate so it really doesn't mean to much to me.

To be honest I'm leaning towards signing the guy myself, but if they don't then I will reserve my judgement because there are different factors at play here.

Remember, there is no pressing need to sign Umberger now. They made the choice NOT to sign him quickly and get him to HAR to skate, so now they have until deadline day to make a decision. There is no need to sign him today, or next week - or a month from today. As the playoffs progress and teams are eliminated, they will make decisions about their personnel for the upcoming year. The impending lockout will seem all the more/less likely as time moves forward. Finally, the details on a possible salary cap will slowly emerge. The Free spending, millions for Karpa, Quintal, Skrudland, Kamensky types are over.

i had heard somewhere probably here that mcgill didn't like umbergers work ethic?

assuming sather wants to move up in the draft or maybe make a blockbuster trade, what would have greater value? a secound round pick or umberger signed at the rookie max?

All I'm saying is that you can't just make your decision based on the fact he was picked 16th.
Didn't we go through this already? There are more reasons that just his draft position.