Been a lot of talk recently about Sather and his shitty drafting up until recently but I think It's time to compare ourselves to the rest of the Atlantic division. For the first time since 94' the Rangers this year have a chance (a great one really) to capture the division title. Whether or not they win more of these really is going to come down to how well they draft compared to the rest of the division.
2000-2004: Teams draft picks that made it to the NHL and have had decent careers.
Funny to look back on this right? Who really drafted the worst during this time period? The Islanders clearly. They didn't get one star. The Rangers got Lundqvist, while the other teams got Parise, Carter, Richards, Malkin, Fleury. Looking back at this the Rangers didn't draft as bad as people think compared to the rest of the atlantic.
Let's look at 2005 until now: *NOTE: for how recent players have been drafted the less amount of games will be less of a factor. For instance i'm going to throw Carl Hagelin on this list. This is more opinionated by me as i'm assuming they'll become decent NHLers.
From this group I think the Rangers stand with the best in terms of quality and quantity. Not to mention some of these teams definitely benefitted from having picks within the top 10 while the closest the Rangers got to the number 1 pick was pick number 10. All considering the Rangers did very well in these years compared to the Atlantic, and I think if you compare it to the rest of the league you'll see they did very well in that light as well.
So what do you think guys? You shocked, not surprised, or disappointed at the Rangers drafting? I thought they did pretty good even though they selected Hugh " Expletive " Jessiman. Also pissed how they took Bobby Sangs istead of Claude Giroux who went one pick later.