Draft 2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part VI

[Barnaby]

Lecavalier could've been, and should've been, one of the top players in the league. The kid could do just about anything,

It took him a long time to really tap into his full game, and then partially due to injuries, he couldn't quite sustain it.

There was always a feeling that he had more to give. That for as much as the sum of his parts was nice, it wasn't as great as it should've been. There was some belief that he was a guy who needed someone to consistently push him or that he wasn't always driven to be "the guy" on his team.

It's interesting because in many ways, Lafreneire has made observers think the opposite thus far. Part of my thinks that if you gave Lafreniere some of the gifts that Lecavalier had, then you'd have that guy who a lot more people think could be generational. Or the "Michael Jordan of hockey" Lecavalier was unfortunately dubbed.

Totally agree on Lecavalier.

I wouldn’t label Lecavalier a bust but he definitely seemed to be somewhat disappointing. You kept waiting for him to be a superstar and he was good, but he could never seem to get to the pinnacle or be able to stay there. I always thought there was something to his make up. Not that he was a bad guy but maybe didn’t have the drive or confidence or something.

I love everything about the drive I’ve read about Lafreniere. I’m cautiously optimistic that we might finally have a potential captain.

 

[Joey Bones]

Lecavalier could've been, and should've been, one of the top players in the league. The kid could do just about anything,

It took him a long time to really tap into his full game, and then partially due to injuries, he couldn't quite sustain it.

There was always a feeling that he had more to give. That for as much as the sum of his parts was nice, it wasn't as great as it should've been. There was some belief that he was a guy who needed someone to consistently push him or that he wasn't always driven to be "the guy" on his team.

It's interesting because in many ways, Lafreneire has made observers think the opposite thus far. Part of my thinks that if you gave Lafreniere some of the gifts that Lecavalier had, then you'd have that guy who a lot more people think could be generational. Or the "Michael Jordan of hockey" Lecavalier was unfortunately dubbed.

Definitely agree that injuries killed his potential. Unfortunately, Lafreniere already has some knee injury bugs.

They both have the drive to be that "go-to guy", I just think Lafreniere has more of it with some added flair. He's shown to take the puck through players and bulldoze his way to the net. Lecavalier's stride was always clunky, too, which could've hindered the amount of scoring that could've been. I think Lafreniere is faster and more powerful to push off and create more. Who knows? Maybe he could very well turn generational.

 

[Edge]

Totally agree.

I wouldn’t label Lecavalier a bust but he definitely seemed to be somewhat disappointing. You kept waiting for him to be a superstar and he was good, but he could never seem to get to the pinnacle or be able to stay there. I always thought there was something to his make up. Not that he was a bad guy but maybe didn’t have the drive or confidence or something.

I love everything about the drive I’ve read about Lafreniere. I’m cautiously optimistic that we might finally have a potential captain.

And that's a good word for it --- disappointing.

I think there are a number of guys who have great careers, but still fall into the disappointing category.

Lafreniere, if he can stay healthy, and the Rangers can build that support system around him, has a chance to someday be in the conversation for greatest NY Ranger ever with Leetch and Lundqvist. His talent level is that high.

 

[Edge]

Definitely agree that injuries killed his potential. Unfortunately, Lafreniere already has some knee injury bugs.

They both have the drive to be that "go-to guy", I just think Lafreniere has more of it with some added flair. He's shown to take the puck through players and bulldoze his way to the net. Lecavalier's stride was always clunky, too, which could've hindered the amount of scoring that could've been. I think Lafreniere is faster and more powerful to push off and create more. Who knows? Maybe he could very well turn generational.

The turning point was that hit from Cooke. He was never the same after that, and I believe was only like 29 years old.

 

[Joey Bones]

I'd take him at 3.

*ducks*

Lolol, there's a lot to like. I do think that his offensive potential is a lot more questionable than some point out.

I think talent-wise he's in the later part of the top 10, maybe top 15. But seeing the teams in that top 10, needing defensemen and the lack of potential top defenders in the class, think he goes higher.

 

[Edge]

Lolol, there's a lot to like. I do think that his offensive potential is a lot more questionable than some point out.

I think talent-wise he's in the later part of the top 10, maybe top 15. But seeing the teams in that top 10, needing defensemen and the lack of potential top defenders in the class, think he goes higher.

I will say that there are quite a few teams that think Sanderson is the better defenseman than Drysdale. Some think that he's better now, and some think he's better a few years from now, but it's not really an unpopular opinion at this point.

Personally, I can't take him over some of the forwards that are in the top of the draft. I just can't.

I really like Sanderson. I think he plays a game tailor-made for today's NHL. But I don't know if I really see him as an upper echelon, elite-level defenseman.

I'll tell you another kid whose name comes up is Guhle. Most people have him behind Drysdale and Sanderson. Some have him behind Schneider. But there's a feeling that in terms of dynamic upside, he's actually the defenseman who could be the most exciting in 5 years.

There's more moving parts with him, he's not as polished as the other guys, but teams dig the offensive upside, the size/skill combination and the flashes he's shown of being able to take over a game.

 

[Joey Bones]

I will say that there are quite a few teams that think Sanderson is the better defenseman than Drysdale. Some think that he's better now, and some think he's better a few years from now, but it's not really an unpopular opinion at this point.

Personally, I can't take him over some of the forwards that are in the top of the draft. I just can't.

I really like Sanderson. I think he plays a game tailor-made for today's NHL. But I don't know if I really see him as an upper echelon, elite-level defenseman.

I'll tell you another kid whose name comes up is Guhle. Most people have him behind Drysdale and Sanderson. Some have him behind Schneider. But there's a feeling that in terms of dynamic upside, he's actually the defenseman who could be the most exciting in 5 years.

There's more moving parts with him, he's not as polished as the other guys, but teams dig the offensive upside, the size/skill combination and the flashes he's shown of being able to take over a game.

I think Drysdale is the best defenseman in this class. Everything he does just reminds me of another Scott Niedermayer. Sanderson looks fluid and can hit and clear creases. He jumps up in plays and has good awareness, but I really am not sure how offensive he could be.

Guhle is one I'm not as keen on. He has shown glimpses of over evaluating plays and gets caught when it goes the other way. For example, moving in to make a big hit when the play has moved on or jumping in a offensive play to then be caught coming back. He does have that boom of a shot and could create more offense as he develops, but those lapses in judgement have me weary a bit.

Schneider is underrated on this thread, but I also think he isn't as productive in the pro game either. Big hitting, defensive defender has a strong slap shot. But like Sanderson, not sure about the top end potential.

 

[Joey Bones]

Thought this was kind of cool. Gets to show you the sillier side of Lafreniere and some of the other prospects.

 

[Edge]

I think Drysdale is the best defenseman in this class. Everything he does just reminds me of another Scott Niedermayer. Sanderson looks fluid and can hit and clear creases. He jumps up in plays and has good awareness, but I really am not sure how offensive he could be.

Guhle is one I'm not as keen on. He has shown glimpses of over evaluating plays and gets caught when it goes the other way. For example, moving in to make a big hit when the play has moved on or jumping in a offensive play to then be caught coming back. He does have that boom of a shot and could create more offense as he develops, but those lapses in judgement have me weary a bit.

Schneider is underrated on this thread, but I also think he isn't as productive in the pro game either. Big hitting, defensive defender has a strong slap shot. But like Sanderson, not sure about the top end potential.

Drysdale is steady. Depending on who you talk with, that’s either his greatest strength or it makes them want something more dynamic.

He does everything very well, but he doesn’t necessarily do anything amazing. But that’s kind of the same thing people said about Pietrangelo, and that turned out pretty well for St. Louis.

 

[Edge]

Re-watching Lapierre video right now.

Damn is he a tempting.

Teams are going to lose sleep over what to do about this kid.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Re-watching Lapierre video right now.

Damn is he a tempting.

Teams are going to lose sleep over what to do about this kid.

You've mentioned he might be an option with the Carolina pick? Did that come from someone within the organization? Do the Rangers like this kid? He strikes me with even more boom potential than even Perrault, which is what I'd like the Rangers to shhot for with this pick.

 

[eco's bones]

You've mentioned he might be an option with the Carolina pick? Did that come from someone within the organization? Do the Rangers like this kid? He strikes me with even more boom potential than even Perrault, which is what I'd like the Rangers to shhot for with this pick.

I'd rather not gamble here. We already have a boom pick with Kravtsov and I'm leery of guys with extensive injury histories and Lapierre might be going that way. We have plenty of top end talent as is and I think we'd be better off making sure that we get a guy who will play for a long time and if he turns out to be a 2nd liner or even a very good 3rd liner I'd be fine with that. I like Peterka and I'd like Torgersson or someone like Greig here.

 

[Edge]

You've mentioned he might be an option with the Carolina pick? Did that come from someone within the organization? Do the Rangers like this kid? He strikes me with even more boom potential than even Perrault, which is what I'd like the Rangers to shhot for with this pick.

His name has come up in conversation with the Rangers and other orgs. I think he’s on everyone’s radar talent wise. But there’s no way of getting around the injury concerns - even if 1 or 2 weren’t concussions.

I honestly don’t know if the Rangers want to gamble that much. But if you’re Ottawa or NJ, that extra (third) first round pick could be too tempting not to use.

Talent wise, Lapierre is a legit first line prospect. At worst, he’s an extremely high end second line center.

But he could be a guy who never sniffs the NHL for reasons beyond his control.

 

[True Blue]

I think Drysdale is the best defenseman in this class. Everything he does just reminds me of another Scott Niedermayer. Sanderson looks fluid and can hit and clear creases. He jumps up in plays and has good awareness, but I really am not sure how offensive he could be.

Guhle is one I'm not as keen on. He has shown glimpses of over evaluating plays and gets caught when it goes the other way. For example, moving in to make a big hit when the play has moved on or jumping in a offensive play to then be caught coming back. He does have that boom of a shot and could create more offense as he develops, but those lapses in judgement have me weary a bit.

Schneider is underrated on this thread, but I also think he isn't as productive in the pro game either. Big hitting, defensive defender has a strong slap shot. But like Sanderson, not sure about the top end potential.

Agreed on Drysdale, but it's close to Sanderson. I think that both go top 10. Sanderson strikes me as the type of player who gets to be a fantastic #3 or also one of those partners to the dynamic top pairing offensive defenseman.

Ditto for Schneider, actually.... but to a lesser degree. Schneider is the defensive conscious of a pairing. The type that I would love to pair with DeAngelo. Would love to be able to get him if at all possible.

Don't love Guhle either.

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

And that's a good word for it --- disappointing.

I think there are a number of guys who have great careers, but still fall into the disappointing category

Do you think Rick Nash falls into that category?

 

[dshea19]

Do you think Rick Nash falls into that category?

He does for me.

 

[CaptTennille]

People tend to forget that Nash was literally a one man army for his first decade in the league. If you look at his line mates on some of those CBJ teams you can quickly see why he never hit the heights you thought he could. By the time he got to New York, he wasn’t the same guy. The concussions obviously didn’t help.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

A healthy Rick Nash finishes his career with over 500 goals.

He still had 400+. I can't really paint that as a disappointment.

 

[NYblades]

Can someone tell me again where we could be picking with the Carolina pick, as to best and worst case?

 

[True Blue]

People tend to forget that Nash was literally a one man army for his first decade in the league. If you look at his line mates on some of those CBJ teams you can quickly see why he never hit the heights you thought he could. By the time he got to New York, he wasn’t the same guy. The concussions obviously didn’t help.

Injuries had a big role. Not handling the spotlight well was another. Playoff performance drives that. Nash was great at being one of the guys, not THE guy. Unfortunately, he was brought to NY to be the player he could not be.

I see why some are disappointed, but he was a fantastic player when healthy. At least in the regular seaon. It will be interesting if he goes to HOF.

 

[dshea19]

Injuries had a big role. Not handling the spotlight well was another. Playoff performance drives that. Nash was great at being one of the guys, not THE guy. Unfortunately, he was brought to NY to be the player he could not be.

I see why some are disappointed, but he was a fantastic player when healthy. At least in the regular seaon. It will be interesting if he goes to HOF.

Completely agree. He was brought in to be the missing piece for a cup. His failure to produce when he had the chance is what will always color my perception of him. Is it fair? In the broad picture, probably not. In the context of why the Rangers got him, I think it is more fair to be disappointed.

 

[bl02]

Can someone tell me again where we could be picking with the Carolina pick, as to best and worst case?

21st best scenario if islanders Vancouver and Dallas win. 24th would be worst case.

 

[bigdog16]

Stepan was pretty bland, too, and came out to be one of the better 1C's in recent memory for NYR.

Fair enough. And I agree with you.

I guess its just my personal preference to look for a higher ceiling

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Completely agree. He was brought in to be the missing piece for a cup. His failure to produce when he had the chance is what will always color my perception of him. Is it fair? In the broad picture, probably not. In the context of why the Rangers got him, I think it is more fair to be disappointed.

It's a good thing the Rangers traded one guy and then the other fell apart and got bought out who Nash was supposed to come in and compliment. I think he was also dealing with some concussion stuff in that cup run, so that certainly didn't help things either

 

[Edge]

Do you think Rick Nash falls into that category?

I'd put him in the same vegin as Lecavalier in the sense that I think he should've been a bit more. And like VL, it's not all on him - there were injury issues as well.

But Nash, even going back to his junior days, kind of had a rap as someone who didn't totally know or fully embrace how good he was. Even as a teenager you heard coaches talk about how Nash just wanted to be one of the guys but he couldn't be with his talent level.

Even healthy, his career wasn't going to be on the level of guys like Shanahan or Iginla. Talent-wise, it probably should've been. Nash was seen as being that talented. But I don't think he had the same mentality as those two guys.