Player Discussion Alexis Lafrenière: Part II

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

After watching this, I will say, I have not seen this type of play sustained from him in the NHL. Part of me wonders if it would be smart to give him a short stint in the AHL. Build the confidence, hell, maybe even piss him off a bit.

 

[deathb4disco]

After watching this, I will say, I have not seen this type of play sustained from him in the NHL. Part of me wonders if it would be smart to give him a short stint in the AHL. Build the confidence, hell, maybe even piss him off a bit.

Yeah where is this guy? I do believe he's a team 1st guy and defers too much to anyone on his line. Gallant needs to tell him to be selfish shoot the puck, take the body the assists will come.

 

[Kocur26]

That’s softer than drug store cotton

 

[brakeyawself]

Generally speaking, I'm very optimistic about what the rangers have built here for this year and the future. But my take on Laf is not optimistic relative to expectations...and I doubt it will be popular.

Laf will top out as a middle six, possibly third line player. And to be that he's going to have to embrace a less skill oriented game...and we're going to have to be accepting of it. He's not fast. His instincts relative to offensive creativity are not great and actually look clumsy, particularly on the PP. His shot is average. Hands average at best. There simply are no flashes of elite level skill...ever. Seriously, I can't think of one time he did something and I said, oh there it is...I get what his skill can be. Has anybody else?

The above said, he is pretty big and seems to have a compete level and decent nose for dirty scoring areas on the ice. Run with that. Play like a Blais or a Hunt or a Goodrow...and for now play with one of these guys and someone else with a straight line game...like Chytil. Bang and be defensively responsible. Chip in on offense.

Maybe that will help develop a level of confidence that will allow us to see another level. Maybe not...but at least he'll be a good, useful nhl player, which right now he's not. All of this of course assumes we can accept a not elite Laf as a fan base, on not run him out of town to potentially go be that good middle six guy somewhere else.

So, I hope you are dead wrong about the part in bold. But unfortunately, I think you might be correct.

And IF that is the case, which I think it's still way too soon to determine, then picking him will go down as one of the biggest blunders in Ranger history. EVEN IF he ends up a "good middle 6" guy. That would unfortunately, not be enough to dismiss criticism in hindsight when we could have had one of numerous "franchise" players.

And yea, what's the point of saying this now, when there is no way to go back, and at that time he was the consensus number 1? Well, I think it is a perfect example of the issues with Rangers upper management. A lot of these concerns were spoken of and clear from day 1, yet the hockey world, not just Ranger fans, were in some way "mesmerized" by the lore and narrative surrounding Laf. And this is one of the things, or the type of thing, that good organizations generally see beyond. They don't let narrative and rhetoric drive their decision making, but base their decisions on actual hockey intelligence, the reality before the fiction. And I think this is a strong case of MANY, not just the Rangers, in the hockey world, media, scouts and fans a like, being taken in, swayed by popular persuasion. Which is something good organizations and hockey minds should be able to navigate around.

And I see so many similarities between the situation surrounding Laf and the situation surrounding Dylan Strome when he was drafted. The warning signs and questions were all there from the beginning, yet narrative and perception drove decision making in both cases.

Unfortunately, if we could go back, I think many fans and possibly the organization, would claim they would not do anything differently and still draft him. Which to me is a worrying sign of stubbornness and lack of ability to evolve and focus in on the important details rather than the "hype".

And sadly, I am not sure the Rangers will be in a position to have their pick of "franchise" level talents in the near future. What worries me most about this team, the last thing I would want to see, is getting stuck in limbo, a mediocre team neither good enough to win a Cup or bad enough to get players that can win you a Cup. Which would mean a sort of perpetual retooling. And in that process, even with the change in upper management, I have seen no real signs of that type of decision making changing. Which says to me it's something deeper within the organization and not just the GM/Coach combo.

I question if Drury was the right man for the job and whether this was the correct time to go with Gallant, who has a rather questionable history of being booted from relatively successful teams after his 2nd year. It's happened to him 3 times in a row, and it could happen a 4th time if things continue as they are. One of the biggest blunders the organization could make right now is thinking we are actual contenders when we are not. Unfortunately, I think this is the mindset of Drury and Gallant both and the organization as a whole.

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

So, I hope you are dead wrong about the part in bold. But unfortunately, I think you might be correct.

And IF that is the case, which I think it's still way too soon to determine, then picking him will go down as one of the biggest blunders in Ranger history. EVEN IF he ends up a "good middle 6" guy. That would unfortunately, not be enough to dismiss criticism in hindsight when we could have had one of numerous "franchise" players.

And yea, what's the point of saying this now, when there is no way to go back, and at that time he was the consensus number 1? Well, I think it is a perfect example of the issues with Rangers upper management. A lot of these concerns were spoken of and clear from day 1, yet the hockey world, not just Ranger fans, were in some way "mesmerized" by the lore and narrative surrounding Laf. And this is one of the things, or the type of thing, that good organizations generally see beyond. They don't let narrative and rhetoric drive their decision making, but base their decisions on actual hockey intelligence, the reality before the fiction. And I think this is a strong case of MANY, not just the Rangers, in the hockey world, media, scouts and fans a like, being taken in, swayed by popular persuasion. Which is something good organizations and hockey minds should be able to navigate around.

And I see so many similarities between the situation surrounding Laf and the situation surrounding Dylan Strome when he was drafted. The warning signs and questions were all there from the beginning, yet narrative and perception drove decision making in both cases.

Unfortunately, if we could go back, I think many fans and possibly the organization, would claim they would not do anything differently and still draft him. Which to me is a worrying sign of stubbornness and lack of ability to evolve and focus in on the important details rather than the "hype".

And sadly, I am not sure the Rangers will be in a position to have their pick of "franchise" level talents in the near future. What worries me most about this team, the last thing I would want to see, is getting stuck in limbo, a mediocre team neither good enough to win a Cup or bad enough to get players that can win you a Cup. Which would mean a sort of perpetual retooling. And in that process, even with the change in upper management, I have seen no real signs of that type of decision making changing. Which says to me it's something deeper within the organization and not just the GM/Coach combo.

I question if Drury was the right man for the job and whether this was the correct time to go with Gallant, who has a rather questionable history of being booted from relatively successful teams after his 2nd year. It's happened to him 3 times in a row, and it could happen a 4th time if things continue as they are. One of the biggest blunders the organization could make right now is thinking we are actual contenders when we are not. Unfortunately, I think this is the mindset of Drury and Gallant both and the organization as a whole.

Sorry, but in the off chance that Laffy busts, it has nothing to do with the org's decision making. All 31 teams would pick him there. He was consensus, period.

 

[Sayba]

After watching this, I will say, I have not seen this type of play sustained from him in the NHL. Part of me wonders if it would be smart to give him a short stint in the AHL. Build the confidence, hell, maybe even piss him off a bit.

There is a lot more time and space and his skating isn't a weakness against his peers. We haven't seen any of the stick handling or assertiveness here with the puck . Have to just hope it eventually clicks for him and he becomes this player at the NHL level.

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

There is a lot more time and space and his skating isn't a weakness against his peers. We haven't seen any of the stick handling or assertiveness here with the puck . Have to just hope it eventually clicks for him and he becomes this player at the NHL level.

The vision and passion in traffic we haven't seen much of either. A lot of his highlights in junior he was practically standing still but used his patience/hands & vision to create offense. In the NHL a majority of the time he's making rushed decisions and clearly is not as confident.

 

[Ned Braden]

So, I hope you are dead wrong about the part in bold. But unfortunately, I think you might be correct.

And IF that is the case, which I think it's still way too soon to determine, then picking him will go down as one of the biggest blunders in Ranger history. EVEN IF he ends up a "good middle 6" guy. That would unfortunately, not be enough to dismiss criticism in hindsight when we could have had one of numerous "franchise" players.

And yea, what's the point of saying this now, when there is no way to go back, and at that time he was the consensus number 1? Well, I think it is a perfect example of the issues with Rangers upper management. A lot of these concerns were spoken of and clear from day 1, yet the hockey world, not just Ranger fans, were in some way "mesmerized" by the lore and narrative surrounding Laf. And this is one of the things, or the type of thing, that good organizations generally see beyond. They don't let narrative and rhetoric drive their decision making, but base their decisions on actual hockey intelligence, the reality before the fiction. And I think this is a strong case of MANY, not just the Rangers, in the hockey world, media, scouts and fans a like, being taken in, swayed by popular persuasion. Which is something good organizations and hockey minds should be able to navigate around.

And I see so many similarities between the situation surrounding Laf and the situation surrounding Dylan Strome when he was drafted. The warning signs and questions were all there from the beginning, yet narrative and perception drove decision making in both cases.

Unfortunately, if we could go back, I think many fans and possibly the organization, would claim they would not do anything differently and still draft him. Which to me is a worrying sign of stubbornness and lack of ability to evolve and focus in on the important details rather than the "hype".

And sadly, I am not sure the Rangers will be in a position to have their pick of "franchise" level talents in the near future. What worries me most about this team, the last thing I would want to see, is getting stuck in limbo, a mediocre team neither good enough to win a Cup or bad enough to get players that can win you a Cup. Which would mean a sort of perpetual retooling. And in that process, even with the change in upper management, I have seen no real signs of that type of decision making changing. Which says to me it's something deeper within the organization and not just the GM/Coach combo.

I question if Drury was the right man for the job and whether this was the correct time to go with Gallant, who has a rather questionable history of being booted from relatively successful teams after his 2nd year. It's happened to him 3 times in a row, and it could happen a 4th time if things continue as they are. One of the biggest blunders the organization could make right now is thinking we are actual contenders when we are not. Unfortunately, I think this is the mindset of Drury and Gallant both and the organization as a whole.

I get what you're saying here...right up until you start talking about franchise level talents. The Rangers may have missed on Laf being a franchise guy. Possibly Kakko too, though I see more potential there. Definitely on Krav. But Fox is 100% a franchise guy coming from a place you don't expect to get one. Zib is a top center. Panaran is an elite offensive talent. Getting bogged down in top picks being "busts" misses the point...which is to construct a good team. If Laf can be a good, cost effective middle piece of that we are not obligated to feel bad about him not being elite.

Also, I get your point about it possibly being a mistake to have gone along with consensus in picking Laf (though I think 32 teams would have made this mistake). But if you are going to take that position you should absolutely love Drury. Trading Buch for a guy like Blais was not a consensus or popular move. At all. Drury identified Blais and trusted his instincts...and the Rangers are better for it. We all make fun, half ass attempts here at assembling Rangers lines...I can't be the only one who would like to put Blais on every one of them. Dude is a player. Ditto to a lesser extent for Hunt. Drury being able to identify these guys is what makes me optimistic.

 

[brakeyawself]

Sorry, but in the off chance that Laffy busts, it has nothing to do with the org's decision making. All 31 teams would pick him there. He was consensus, period.

Did you ever watch a game show, where the contestant was leaning towards a particular choice, but the audience were all shouting another choice that led the contestant to go with the popular opinion, only to end up being wrong? With the correct answer being the original choice the contestant was dissuaded from. That's pretty much how I see this situation. All though, not that the Rangers necessarily had a different opinion, but there were many people, fans, some in the media, who did. And those voices were largely lost in the roar of the crowd despite having very real and accurate concerns.

I'm not sure all 31 teams would have. I know he was the "consensus". I know what media, fan and most hockey opinions were suggesting. But I do not think that necessarily means all 31 teams would have done the same. Most? Sure. But all? Questionable. There's a good chance at least a handful of teams would have taken Byfield in that position for various, previously spoken about reasons. Which include having the higher physical and athletic ceiling and raw tools. Which if groomed properly, gave him a higher ceiling than Laf. Laf was seen as a "safe" pick, which we now see, was not necessarily the case.

Leading up to the draft, there were people questioning whether Byfield would be the better pick, especially for a Ranger team with enough wingers. Now many people might have talked themselves out of that position due to the extent of the perception surrounding Laf, but that is exactly what I am talking about.

"On the off chance that Laffy busts, it has nothing to do with the org's decision making." ? Really? So you mean the very real and spoken of concerns that some raised going into the draft, which have so far seemed accurate, are completely meaningless? And you know that there is an "off chance" of him busting because? Because of hype and rhetoric is the answer.

Again. I am not stating he will or will not bust. I am stating if he does bust, the concerns and questions were all there and apparent from the beginning, regardless of what public perception seemed to be. And if you want to ignore those, that's your choice. But these questions were raised at the time of the draft and largely dismissed because of the lore surrounding him rather than the reality. He was never the level of prospect that many touted him as. Not to suggest he wasn't a top 5 talent, or even a top 2 talent. But the hype went WAY beyond that into talk of "generational" talent and "can't miss prospect" which seemed wildly off the mark then and even more so now.

 

[brakeyawself]

I get what you're saying here...right up until you start talking about franchise level talents. The Rangers may have missed on Laf being a franchise guy. Possibly Kakko too, though I see more potential there. Definitely on Krav. But Fox is 100% a franchise guy coming from a place you don't expect to get one. Zib is a top center. Panaran is an elite offensive talent. Getting bogged down in top picks being "busts" misses the point...which is to construct a good team. If Laf can be a good, cost effective middle piece of that we are not obligated to feel bad about him not being elite.

Also, I get your point about it possibly being a mistake to have gone along with consensus in picking Laf (though I think 32 teams would have made this mistake). But if you are going to take that position you should absolutely love Drury. Trading Buch for a guy like Blais was not a consensus or popular move. At all. Drury identified Blais and trusted his instincts...and the Rangers are better for it. We all make fun, half ass attempts here at assembling Rangers lines...I can't be the only one who would like to put Blais on every one of them. Dude is a player. Ditto to a lesser extent for Hunt. Drury being able to identify these guys is what makes me optimistic.

I think the Kakko situation is wholly different. As much as he was touted, there wasn't the same level of hype surrounding him, not overall at least.

But I do not see how the existence of players that have become franchise players, who were not necessarily deemed with that upside, alters anything I said. Yes, "constructing a good team" is the point. And when you are in a situation to have your choice of players, meaning having a top 2 pick or top 5 or whatever, blowing that has real ramifications on "constructing a good team". In this you are assuming that we will construct a good team whether Laf succeeds or not, which is not necessarily true. It also suggests that Laf making it or not, doesn't really matter in the long term which simply isn't the case. Just because there are various ways to go about constructing a good team does not mean that blowing opportunities to be better is not an issue. Both of those things can be true.

And I think it's completely fallacious reasoning to suggest that because I may agree with one heterodox opinion that means I should ALWAYS support and go with such heterodox opinions. There is no "standard" here. It's situational. And we are comparing apples to hamburgers when talking about drafting Laf vs trading Buch for Blais and a 2nd. Two completely different situations with completely different effects, values and ramifications. I am not being contrarian for contrarian sake, I am speaking strictly on the issue of Laf, what was happening when we drafted him and what the reality WAS at that time versus the perception. Again, there were real concerns voiced about Laf that were almost, across the board, dismissed because of the narrative and appearance of consensus surrounding him. And my point is that such concerns and questions should never be dismissed if they are true, which they were and are. And to me this reflects how decisions are made, not a rule, not a standard of depending on outliers. Well, I don't think anyone anywhere would be wise to DEPEND on outliers, which is the difference in what you are suggesting compared to what I am saying. Going with an outlier on specific occasions because the information and situation pushes you in that direction is wholly different than just being contrarian and doing unpopular things for the sake of going against the grain. Hopefully we, and certainly hopefully Drury, aren't simply petulant teenagers that feel the need to do the reverse of whatever is popular. This isn't some act of rebellion. It's informed decision making and IMO, not being swayed by the opinion of others who are dismissing actual and very real concerns and just assuming things will go well because everyone else seems to think so.

Laf was always slow. Laf was almost always bigger than his same age competition. Laf was never an actual "generational" or IMO "near generational talent". He was a big kid with a lot of great aspects to his game. A big kid who had an advantage over the competition which would not convert to an NHL advantage. A relatively slower player entering an increasingly faster NHL game. A player who was being irrationally compared to players, who at the same age had shown far more complete skill, speed and athleticism. At least in terms of comparisons to actual "generational" players. Or even when compared to prospects coming up like Wright and Bedard. Now, I don't necessarily think either are "generational talents" either. But I do think they are both much closer to that than Laf ever actually was. But we will see. Both or neither may be overhyped as well and end up not achieving what people expect from them. Heck, Byfield might never turn out to be "better" either. But in his case, I think it's clear that he has the raw tools, that if groomed properly, would give him a higher ceiling than Laf and I think that was the case on draft day. The Rangers went with the supposed "safe" choice. When in that situation, I tend to think teams should aim for the highest potential rather than "safe". Partly because no prospect is actually "safe".

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

Did you ever watch a game show, where the contestant was leaning towards a particular choice, but the audience were all shouting another choice that led the contestant to go with the popular opinion, only to end up being wrong? With the correct answer being the original choice the contestant was dissuaded from. That's pretty much how I see this situation. All though, not that the Rangers necessarily had a different opinion, but there were many people, fans, some in the media, who did. And those voices were largely lost in the roar of the crowd despite having very real and accurate concerns.

I'm not sure all 31 teams would have. I know he was the "consensus". I know what media, fan and most hockey opinions were suggesting. But I do not think that necessarily means all 31 teams would have done the same. Most? Sure. But all? Questionable. There's a good chance at least a handful of teams would have taken Byfield in that position for various, previously spoken about reasons. Which include having the higher physical and athletic ceiling and raw tools. Which if groomed properly, gave him a higher ceiling than Laf. Laf was seen as a "safe" pick, which we now see, was not necessarily the case.

Leading up to the draft, there were people questioning whether Byfield would be the better pick, especially for a Ranger team with enough wingers. Now many people might have talked themselves out of that position due to the extent of the perception surrounding Laf, but that is exactly what I am talking about.

"On the off chance that Laffy busts, it has nothing to do with the org's decision making." ? Really? So you mean the very real and spoken of concerns that some raised going into the draft, which have so far seemed accurate, are completely meaningless? And you know that there is an "off chance" of him busting because? Because of hype and rhetoric is the answer.

Again. I am not stating he will or will not bust. I am stating if he does bust, the concerns and questions were all there and apparent from the beginning, regardless of what public perception seemed to be. And if you want to ignore those, that's your choice. But these questions were raised at the time of the draft and largely dismissed because of the lore surrounding him rather than the reality. He was never the level of prospect that many touted him as. Not to suggest he wasn't a top 5 talent, or even a top 2 talent. But the hype went WAY beyond that into talk of "generational" talent and "can't miss prospect" which seemed wildly off the mark then and even more so now.

If using hind sight in this situation gives you some whacky sense of control, go for it, condemn the Rangers. He was the consensus pick. Sometimes it's not in your control. The entire hockey world would have been shocked if they didn't pick Laffy. He was the consensus #1 by a wide margin.

All this discussion, and the kid still has a bright future. Can't wait until this topic is completely moot.

 

[brakeyawself]

If using hind sight in this situation gives you some whacky sense of control, go for it, condemn the Rangers. He was the consensus pick. Sometimes it's not in your control. The entire hockey world would have been shocked if they didn't pick Laffy. He was the consensus #1 by a wide margin.

All this discussion, and the kid still has a bright future. Can't wait until this topic is completely moot.

Nothing to do with hindsight. I thought we should have picked Byfield from day 1 for the reasons mentioned along with our need for a young center and due to the wingers we had recently drafted, Kakko and Kravtsov, and those we all ready had on the team in Buch, Panarin and Kreider. Nothing to do with "control" either. Not quite sure why you think there must be some psychological issue rather than simply attempting to gauge the realities of the situation. Which you are NOT doing if you believe there is still such a certainty he ends up a successful NHL, impact player.

My point is, the concerns were there and signs existed, to the extent that I don't think his current pace of progress is a huge surprise. Again, you keep referring to things like "the entire hockey world would have been shocked if they didn't pick Laffy." And? Well, no, not the "entire" hockey world, as again, there were those that voiced their concerns at that time. But this is the same fallacious "appeal to authority" that I am suggesting can become a problem in itself and perhaps was in this case.

My personal opinion has not changed. I truly hope my concerns prove unwarranted. But I do not think anything happening with him now is a huge shock. He's also a power forward of sorts, or at least, big and not especially fast, and players like that often take longer to develop. So that's a bright side at least. But I am not going to feign optimism or pretend there aren't doubts for the sake of it either.

 

[Synergy27]

I mean, Byfield has done even less than Laf. I have heard next to no hype surrounding him at all. Has he looked good in LA? Doesn’t seem to have played a game yet this year.

Another take (maybe hot) on Laf here. It’s almost like he’s known he’s going pro forever and now that he’s there he has to “play like one”. A lot of young players have a hard time because they don’t leave junior bad habits in junior, even though the best players are the ones that can pull off junior style plays in the pros. It’s almost like Laf refuses to make junior style mistakes, like he thinks that that kind of stuff has no place in the NHL, has known it forever, and doesn’t want to be seen as that kind of player.

 

[dangsLITE]

I mean, Byfield has done even less than Laf. I have heard next to no hype surrounding him at all. Has he looked good in LA? Doesn’t seem to have played a game yet this year.

Another take (maybe hot) on Laf here. It’s almost like he’s known he’s going pro forever and now that he’s there he has to “play like one”. A lot of young players have a hard time because they don’t leave junior bad habits in junior, even though the best players are the ones that can pull off junior style plays in the pros. It’s almost like Laf refuses to make junior style mistakes, like he thinks that that kind of stuff has no place in the NHL, has known it forever, and doesn’t want to be seen as that kind of player.

Byfield fractured his ankle during preseason

 

[Synergy27]

Byfield fractured his ankle during preseason

Oh. So he’s a bust too. Sweet.

 

[bouds]

There is a lot more time and space and his skating isn't a weakness against his peers. We haven't seen any of the stick handling or assertiveness here with the puck . Have to just hope it eventually clicks for him and he becomes this player at the NHL level.

I’m not even going to bring up his skating, but watching him have all that room in the video, yeah, you’re not getting that at this level, not even close. The one elite skill I’ve seen from him is in tight, great hands to finish, but you’re not going to get many of those opportunities in the bigs.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Its always been my coaching mentality that when a player is struggling that there's a couple different ways to approach it depending on the player but for me with a player like Lafreniere who is kinda feeling his way into this we need to bring him back to his roots and get him into the trenches. He's most effective when he plays like Crosby(he's not close to Crosby i know) but his game is a grinding with skill style game, i haven't seen it much from him, whether he is trying to be a skill guy or just isnt comfortable imposing himself on the opposition we need to bring him back to what has been his bread and butter. Put him with a couple grinder types and leave it for a while, my line would be Laf Goodrow/Chytil and Blais.

 

[Rempe73]

Kakko is starting to look the part

That’s right. Kakko will be our savior forward.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

God help us if Laf tops out as a third line talent.

I mean we get our only first overall in basically 100 years, that would be cruel.

But hey, we got Fox

 

[jay from jersey]

After watching this, I will say, I have not seen this type of play sustained from him in the NHL. Part of me wonders if it would be smart to give him a short stint in the AHL. Build the confidence, hell, maybe even piss him off a bit.

This video perfectly exemplified my point. You see him darting into all the high danger areas and not be afraid to get hit or catch a stick in the mouth.
Nhl LaF looks to pass/ wait for the play to come to him. It’s almost like he’s on permanent programming to defer scoring chances.
When he gets the puck on his stick, he’s not taking in to the center of the dots looking to rip a shot.
If he’s going to slow the game down the fox does with the puck on his stick, he’d better get a hell of a lot smarter.
On a personal note, Eichel would have been the much better center to pair with LaF. Eichel can score in buckets, but his speed and underrated passing ability would have helped LaF settle in to more of an opportunist trigger man role.
Don’t forget, he’s expected to produce. I think that fact that he’s not racking up goals and assists is killing him.
The biggest thing I’m concerned about is he is one of those players that can perform great for other teams but the pressure for the rangers is too great..
Not like we haven’t seen that before.that would be a tragedy with our 1st. 1OA in a century

 

[Raspewtin]

Lafreniere being the worst 1OA in recent memory would be some brutal karma for Fox becoming a franchise defenseman overnight.

 

[Miamipuck]

I will bet my left nut when all is said and done Laf will not be the worst 1OA in recent memory.

Wait what do we consider recent? lol

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

This video perfectly ex amplified my point. You see him darting into all the high danger areas and not be afraid to get hit or catch a stick in the mouth.
Nhl LaF looks to pass/ wait for the play to come to him. It’s almost like he’s on permanent programming to defer scoring chances.
When he gets the puck on his stick, he’s not taking in to the center of the dots looking to rip a shot.
If he’s going to slow the game down the fox does with the puck on his stick, he’d better get a hell of a lot smarter.
On a personal note, Eichel would have been the much better center to pair with LaF. Eichel can score in buckets, but his speed and underrated passing ability would have helped LaF settle in to more of an opportunist trigger man role.
Don’t forget, he’s expected to produce. I think that fact that he’s not racking up goals and assists is killing him

I really believe it's confidence. I think he needs to have his buttons pushed in one way or another. I still think potentially a small stint in the AHL could get his ass in gear. Remind him that he can't leave anything on the table, he needs to risk it all every single night. Also, pissing a guy like him off I think would be the opposite of like a Kravstov. I think he would get motivated fast.

 

[jay from jersey]

I really believe it's confidence. I think he needs to have his buttons pushed in one way or another. I still think potentially a small stint in the AHL could get his ass in gear. Remind him that he can't leave anything on the table, he needs to risk it all every single night. Also, pissing a guy like him off I think would be the opposite of like a Kravstov. I think he would get motivated fast.

It’s possible. Confidence can be a killer. I also think he thought the nhl would be a lot easier for him

 

[Raspewtin]

I will bet my left nut when all is said and done Laf will not be the worst 1OA in recent memory.

Wait what do we consider recent? lol

I don't either lol but just joining the pessimism party