Player Discussion Alexis Lafrenière: Part II

[CLW]

The problem with the organization has always been that they always think they can make the playoff and are usually capped out. Chytil, Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller all should have started in the AHL, but we got the shiny new thing, had no cap space to add meaningful players and the solution is to use kids who aren't ready. The only caveat is that with Covid Lafreniere never really had that option but he probably should have went back to junior.

This is kind of the same problem Montreal has (see Kotkaniemi, Caufield etc etc). Huge, original six organizations that always think

- they have to be in the playoffs,
- always are making reactionary moves to LOOK the part, image over substance
- lots of focus on PAST greats, rather than take care of current culture
- who are satisfied with kicking the can down the road rather than accept true rebuilds (rebuilds take too long with no playoffs),
- who have lots of previous players in management/organizational jobs
- previous players who are happy to lift their fat paychecks and will throw any number of prospects under the bus to protect their jobs and image keeping the cycle of underperformance rolling

Kakko has been open about the culture shock he had when he came to New York. He's talked about having to rework his game to "what works in the NHL". Strome of all people have had the gall to point a finger at Kakko and say the same thing. I think reality is that he has had to adapt to the RANGERS, and behind that glitzy "bro culture" a lot of guys in that locker room are very busy looking out for #1 rather than bend for very young rookies that "haven't earned it".

The culture crash between Kakko and Quinn was epic, I've talked about this a lot before. It's not only Quinn of course but the Rangers and I think Laf has a similar problem going.

Now if you take what I said above to the extreme it may become unfair, but I am pointing to underlying dynamics that make it difficult for people to get on the same page and commit to staying on the same page, past easy platitudes to the media and fans.

It will take very strong leadership to tame this culture and get everyone in this huge organization to pull in the same direction. I don't think Drury is that guy, but by all means let him prove me wrong.

 

[CLW]

"hate to lose" types aren't always a positive. they can be some of the most annoying players to play with.

I agree with this. I don't think Colorado for example is best served with MacKinnon having a meltdown and starting to trash other players if things are not going smoothly enough. This is very much a double edged sword.

 

[TheDirtyH]

The problem with the organization has always been that they always think they can make the playoff and are usually capped out. Chytil, Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller all should have started in the AHL, but we got the shiny new thing, had no cap space to add meaningful players and the solution is to use kids who aren't ready. The only caveat is that with Covid Lafreniere never really had that option but he probably should have went back to junior.

That's a big part of what the last 2 years have been in this org. There are some kids that we hear it's not worth them coming to the NHL just to be 4th line players and get no special teams looks. That's what we heard when Lias Andersson and Chytil didn't make the team as 18 year olds. It's what we heard when Lias didn't make the team the second year and after Chytil was demoted. It's what we heard about Kravtsov. We heard it about Miller, Fox, Shesterkin, Barron, Jones, Schneider. It was explained that Brett Howden was in the NHL so early because he could develop appropriately in that kind of role.

For some reason, Kakko and Lafreniere ... that whole conversation disappeared. Why was Kakko brought to the NHL right away? Why did he stay instead of being released at the WJC and perhaps playing the rest of the year in Finland when it became clear neither he nor the team was ready for him to be a top-6, PP player? It would've been stranger not to see Lafreniere in the league the whole year last year, and he was by most counts a better, solid NHLer than Kakko in his D+1 year. At the same time, his usage was very off the board. A bottom six player with minimal to no powerplay time.

For whatever reason, Kakko and Lafreniere have never been understood as player who need to be helped along as much as player who will just naturally arrive into their own. Maybe if they were a Matthews level prospect we would see that, but then again...

Matthews in his rookie year scores 2.12 p/60 at 5v5. Extrapolated to Lafreniere's 686.15 mins at 5v5 his rookie year, you get 24 5v5 points. Lafreniere had 20.

Matthews was also second on the Maple Leafs in PP TOI as a rookie. Total and per game, 201:28 and 2:27/g . He added 18 points to his season on the PP. Lafreniere finished his rookie season with 71:37 of PP time and 1:17/g, ranking 7th and 10th, respectively. If Matthews rate of scoring 5v4 as a rookie were assumed to be the same (which is generous) it would extrapolate to 6 points over the ice time Lafreniere got.

So Matthews--if nothing changed and the rates were simply exchanged across Lafreniere's minutes--would've scored 30 points to Lafreniere's 20.
______________________________________

Of course Matthews did exceptionally well in those minutes. Of course, he had already played pro hockey, played on team North America before his rookie year, and scored 4 goals in game 1. There's no need or reason to speculate whether Lafreniere would've just leapt to the forefront of NHL stardom with similar usage. But accounting for these differences in roles on their respective team does illustrate some of the potential impact those differences can have on our perceptions of the player--and why not, at least potentially, on the player's development.

Matthews as a rookie played approximately 85% of his 5v5 minutes with Hyman and one of Nylander or Connor Brown. No other forward was on the ice more than 6% of Matthews 5v5 time.

Lafreniere, by contrast, played no more than 35.7% with any single other Rangers forward (Chytil). He played at least 7% of his 5v5 minutes with 10 other players.

We want 'flashes' but relative to other top picks, Lafreniere doesn't see minutes where he's likely to have the puck on his stick nearly as much. We want consistency but Lafreniere doesn't see consistent linemates to even close the level of other top picks.

____________________________________________________________________

I'm not saying Lafreniere hasn't been disappointing, or that he's blown the lid of his minutes and 'earned' a huge role. But it's hard to argue that the Rangers have done much to develop him into that kind of player. Instead he's been used in exactly the way we're told top prospects shouldn't be used, and the pressure and the responsibility is completely shifted to the player for not developing himself. What is the difference between Kravtsov and Lafreniere that we don't want Kravtsov to play for the Rangers unless its in a top-6 role but Lafreniere can be bounced around everywhere with no pp time and the Rangers think it won't affect his play or development?

 

[CLW]

Re: Kravtsov. It was crystal clear last season that playing with Howden et al was way below his talent grade. At the same time, this is one kid who needs to learn that it's ok to buckle down and learn to work past setbacks instead of demanding the solution on a silver platter served by his personal butler ie everybody else.

Re: ADA. Can't fix stupid. When a player shoots himself in the foot, serially, and then shoots the organization as well there will be consequences.

Re: Square pegs. This org has a major problem with square pegs in round holes and different standards for different situations and people. This is an issue from leadership at the very top, and nothing much will happen until management can sort itself out.

Re: Cry me a river. Can the mods please create a Cry Me a River thread where people can cry about ex-Rangers moving on for better or worse?

 

[Bob Richards]

This has become a f***ing sad, disenchanting mess

If Kakko and Laf bust it would really snuff out all of my interest in this team lmfao.

 

[Machinehead]

That's a big part of what the last 2 years have been in this org. There are some kids that we hear it's not worth them coming to the NHL just to be 4th line players and get no special teams looks. That's what we heard when Lias Andersson and Chytil didn't make the team as 18 year olds. It's what we heard when Lias didn't make the team the second year and after Chytil was demoted. It's what we heard about Kravtsov. We heard it about Miller, Fox, Shesterkin, Barron, Jones, Schneider. It was explained that Brett Howden was in the NHL so early because he could develop appropriately in that kind of role.

For some reason, Kakko and Lafreniere ... that whole conversation disappeared. Why was Kakko brought to the NHL right away? Why did he stay instead of being released at the WJC and perhaps playing the rest of the year in Finland when it became clear neither he nor the team was ready for him to be a top-6, PP player? It would've been stranger not to see Lafreniere in the league the whole year last year, and he was by most counts a better, solid NHLer than Kakko in his D+1 year. At the same time, his usage was very off the board. A bottom six player with minimal to no powerplay time.

For whatever reason, Kakko and Lafreniere have never been understood as player who need to be helped along as much as player who will just naturally arrive into their own. Maybe if they were a Matthews level prospect we would see that, but then again...

Matthews in his rookie year scores 2.12 p/60 at 5v5. Extrapolated to Lafreniere's 686.15 mins at 5v5 his rookie year, you get 24 5v5 points. Lafreniere had 20.

Matthews was also second on the Maple Leafs in PP TOI as a rookie. Total and per game, 201:28 and 2:27/g . He added 18 points to his season on the PP. Lafreniere finished his rookie season with 71:37 of PP time and 1:17/g, ranking 7th and 10th, respectively. If Matthews rate of scoring 5v4 as a rookie were assumed to be the same (which is generous) it would extrapolate to 6 points over the ice time Lafreniere got.

So Matthews--if nothing changed and the rates were simply exchanged across Lafreniere's minutes--would've scored 30 points to Lafreniere's 20.
______________________________________

Of course Matthews did exceptionally well in those minutes. Of course, he had already played pro hockey, played on team North America before his rookie year, and scored 4 goals in game 1. There's no need or reason to speculate whether Lafreniere would've just leapt to the forefront of NHL stardom with similar usage. But accounting for these differences in roles on their respective team does illustrate some of the potential impact those differences can have on our perceptions of the player--and why not, at least potentially, on the player's development.

Matthews as a rookie played approximately 85% of his 5v5 minutes with Hyman and one of Nylander or Connor Brown. No other forward was on the ice more than 6% of Matthews 5v5 time.

Lafreniere, by contrast, played no more than 35.7% with any single other Rangers forward (Chytil). He played at least 7% of his 5v5 minutes with 10 other players.

We want 'flashes' but relative to other top picks, Lafreniere doesn't see minutes where he's likely to have the puck on his stick nearly as much. We want consistency but Lafreniere doesn't see consistent linemates to even close the level of other top picks.

____________________________________________________________________

I'm not saying Lafreniere hasn't been disappointing, or that he's blown the lid of his minutes and 'earned' a huge role. But it's hard to argue that the Rangers have done much to develop him into that kind of player. Instead he's been used in exactly the way we're told top prospects shouldn't be used, and the pressure and the responsibility is completely shifted to the player for not developing himself. What is the difference between Kravtsov and Lafreniere that we don't want Kravtsov to play for the Rangers unless its in a top-6 role but Lafreniere can be bounced around everywhere with no pp time and the Rangers think it won't affect his play or development?

You bring up a very good point.

I think the main issue is that if Lafreniere didn't start in the NHL after going 1st overall, it would have been a big f***ing circus in the media. Maybe we care about that, maybe we don't. It's impossible to say how it would have affected the player.

But yeah, we're kind of in this middle ground now. He hasn't earned top six minutes and in his defense, it hasn't been easy. Our top six is not normal for a rebuilding team. We were 37-28-5 and picked 1st overall. At the same time, we wanted to avoid sending him somewhere else. Now it's all this.

As frustrating as it is that the net seems to be 2×1 when Kakko is on the ice, you can see that patience with him in the top six has at least gotten him chances.

 

[EdJovanovski]

I honestly dont know what the hell it is. What could this organization be doing differently than others?

I mean they have the best facilities, all of the players rave about how great they are taken care of by the team. Many FA come here and cite that. So it cant be anything about not being put in a good environment to be developed...right?

Both Laf and Kakko were given plenty of playing time. Sure, not a lot on special teams, but would that have made a big difference? Kakko is playing top 6, and Laf was given top 3 time for the entire start to the season.

What could be pointed to with the Rangers that would lead to such a thing? The way management and coaching communicates with them? They've changed their coach and they have actively regressed in output - so it cant be that...

Unfair or misinterpreted expectations? All the Rangers brass and MSG media have preached patience with a purpose, like it's a mandate with these two and all of the other youngens. Yet, as you have mentioned, 2 other top first rounders have left the team and the Rangers management of them doesnt pass the smell test.

So maybe there is something to that, but what exactly? The players play the game on the ice. There are always outside factors to deal with, all young players have to contend with. In the end - they've been given the opportunity to shine.

It's just really odd, watching these two players and what they looked like before they were drafted and now. Its like their confidence has been completely drained and they have lost the instincts for the game.

Recently, it's really hit me watching Höglander and the effect he's had on the Canucks. His poise with the puck, his speed, just playing the game loosely and with a smile and then comparing that to how Kakko and Laf are like zombies in their attack styles, at times. Laf moreso than Kakko. But you can literally SEE them thinking instead of just playing out there.

I feel like we need Short Round to burn them with a lit torch to release them from whatever spell they are under.

It's confusing, bewildering and f***ing weird to me what is going on with these two - and I wish we had an answer and could attribute it to something the team is doing. Because that would mean it could be resolved. But im not sure anyone knows what the hell it is.

At times you watch these two players and they are literally different hockey players than the studs they drafted. I mean lets remind ourselves of who these players were D-1. When the Rangers won Laf I was beside myself. History changing. Life changing as a fan.

If anyone has read my posts, ive been patient and will continue to be, because as a fan (especially a Rangers fan) its all about hope. And I know that the special unique player the Rangers drafted #1 and #2 respectively is still in there, somewhere.

But are those players fading away or are they just taking longer to develop at the NHL level?

This has become a f***ing sad, disenchanting mess

I don't want to be a downer but seriously, people are making so many excuses and trying to convince themselves this is fine, I don't know if it's because some fans don't actively watch other teams games; but as a Ranger fan living in Vancouver I watch a lot of them too. and man... Even Podkolzin looks 10x better than Laf or Kakko. All these young guys on other teams, who weren't anywhere near as highly touted as Laf or Kakko are visibly noticeable every game, they're impact players even when they're not scoring you can see the high end skill.

Go back and read threads or watch YouTube videos talking about Laf & Kakko around the time of the drafts or leading up to it. They were both penciled in to be 70pt guys in their rookie seasons. Laf was supposed to be "Best since McDavid". Kakko at the draft they displayed a graphic on Sportsnet "Room for Improvement: None". If you went back in time and told Ranger fans that Kakko would have ZERO points through the first 9 games of his THIRD NHL season while playing on a line with Panarin... people would call you a troll

 

[TheDirtyH]

You bring up a very good point.

I think the main issue is that if Lafreniere didn't start in the NHL after going 1st overall, it would have been a big f***ing circus in the media. Maybe we care about that, maybe we don't. It's impossible to say how it would have affected the player.

But yeah, we're kind of in this middle ground now. He hasn't earned top six minutes and in his defense, it hasn't been easy. Our top six is not normal for a rebuilding team. We were 37-28-5 and picked 1st overall. At the same time, we wanted to avoid sending him somewhere else. Now it's all this.

As frustrating as it is that the net seems to be 2×1 when Kakko is on the ice, you can see that patience with him in the top six has at least gotten him chances.

It's not only the question of whether Lafreniere was good enough to be a good top six player last year or if our top six was better than other situations, it's that the Rangers have lacked any coherent vision or timeline for themselves outside of stockpiling assets and 'getting better every day".

In Kakkos case, he could've been released to the WJC and played in Finland without causing panic. What would our roster have lost? A bad 5v5 player who didn't play pp anyway. Option 2 was to leave him in the top 6 and on the PP. Maybe we would been a worse team overall, but his counting numbers would've been much better, his confidence and fans confidence in him would be better, and as far as playoffs go, what would've changed? We didn't make the dance anyway, and the " play in" we got gifted amounted to an 0-3 smackdown.

Last year we also did not make the playoffs. Frankly we didn't even challenge for a spot.

The narrative has been that any coach will play the lineup to win games, but that's clearly not the directive for every team. Blashill is hardly on the hot seat. Hasn't been. DJ smith. Even David Quinn wasnt a 'winning coach'.

Basically it's obvious that the Rangers had no plan or vision for these kids or for this team. It's every year make big moves and see where the chips fall. They talk about building, but they operate as though 'building' means watching something build itself.

 

[jay from jersey]

This is kind of the same problem Montreal has (see Kotkaniemi, Caufield etc etc). Huge, original six organizations that always think

- they have to be in the playoffs,
- always are making reactionary moves to LOOK the part, image over substance
- lots of focus on PAST greats, rather than take care of current culture
- who are satisfied with kicking the can down the road rather than accept true rebuilds (rebuilds take too long with no playoffs),
- who have lots of previous players in management/organizational jobs
- previous players who are happy to lift their fat paychecks and will throw any number of prospects under the bus to protect their jobs and image keeping the cycle of underperformance rolling

Kakko has been open about the culture shock he had when he came to New York. He's talked about having to rework his game to "what works in the NHL". Strome of all people have had the gall to point a finger at Kakko and say the same thing. I think reality is that he has had to adapt to the RANGERS, and behind that glitzy "bro culture" a lot of guys in that locker room are very busy looking out for #1 rather than bend for very young rookies that "haven't earned it".

The culture crash between Kakko and Quinn was epic, I've talked about this a lot before. It's not only Quinn of course but the Rangers and I think Laf has a similar problem going.

Now if you take what I said above to the extreme it may become unfair, but I am pointing to underlying dynamics that make it difficult for people to get on the same page and commit to staying on the same page, past easy platitudes to the media and fans.

It will take very strong leadership to tame this culture and get everyone in this huge organization to pull in the same direction. I don't think Drury is that guy, but by all means let him prove me wrong.

Good post. But as far as knowing the type of personalities of players and the culture we need to import, I trust drury more in that department then the old regime.
He had a solid NHL career and was around some serious leaders. He also realized that lack of physicality we had and tried to import the right guys, instead of just any tough guys. Some he paid a premium for like Goodrow, others like Hunt he got on a good deal in hopes of them making themselves better here. He also identified Rooney as the guy that should have been kept in EXP when he could have easily kept Blackwell to appease the Panarin/Strome sewing circle.
I also think he realized the importance of a coaching change. I have no doubt Drury was a big Quinn guy as they are both a part of the Boston Mafia, but he recognized Quinn wasn’t getting thru to guys from even a year prior.
I’m sure Drury, and Gallant for that matter, know there’s things that need to be done to this team in order to get it to the next level.
Right now they are both deploying what they have, rather then what they want or need.
Truth be told, covid didn’t only affect teams caps, I think it also affected the trade market as a whole. Swinging a deal for the type of player/s they need isn’t an easy task right now. Because the finances are so tight for the next 2 years many teams are gun shy and rather hold on to what they have until they get a clearer picture.
Compound that with Laf/Kakko underperforming and not really having a true 82 game season and proper offseason, and here we are.
This team is not a finished product yet. We might get into the playoffs this year, but this is not the core we’ll be contenders with.
That doesn’t mean we are so far off either.
We have some really good pieces on the farm that are sure bets to be good NHL players. Others that have more 50/50 odds, but if half of them pan out, we’re in real good shape.
The only 2 main things I can really think where drury screwed time pooch was keeping strome and Georgiev in the offseason, but I at least understand why he did.
He know Zibby/strome/Chytil/Rooney is not a center corps we contend with.
They obviously have massive stock in Barron and he’ll presumably be our 3C going Fwd by the end of the year, maybe sooner. I think he makes an effort to resign Rooney if he can as well. Rooney has certainly stepped up his play this year and is a good locker room guy.
Right now, this season, was mainly about Gallant establishing his presence, shifting our culture, and getting our young guys Fox/Miller/LaF/Kakko etc more experience and hopefully larger roles. Some have delivered, some haven’t yet.
I think it’s important to sneak in the playoffs this year. But next year going fwd is where were truly start to contend.
Line up next season
LaF -Zibby-Kreider
Panarin-Trade/UFA /?-Blais/kakko
Goodrow- Barron-Blais/Kakko
Hunt-Rooney-Reaves
Lindgren-Fox
miller-Trouba
Nemeth/Jones-Schneider
Shesty
Huska/UFA/Trade

or move panarin up with kreider/Zibby and let Laf/Kakko play 2nd line with the new guy

I think we’re far better off with Barron as a permanent C to give us a different look style wise.
Also losing strome, Georgiev from the locker room.
Chytil and Lundkvist with likely be solid nhl players but I don’t think either is in our long range plans. I see both of them traded along with kravtsov.
I know many like to give Drury the business over the Buch trade. But paying him 6 mill per on multi-year deal would be foolish considering what we have here and the fact that he’s projected good numbers but not produced them over an 82 GM season ever. I think he targeted Blais as one of the “ Right guys” so to speak. And also added a 2nd in a good draft. If we get another Cuylle or Pinelli this turns out to be a real solid deal when you factor in cap space, skill sets, and pt totals.
The future is bright.... we’re 1-2 moves away from being a really dangerous team for a long time.
For Laf/Kakko, if they look like this at the start of next season, I’d sound the alarms.
But for this year, I’ll chalk it up as their first full learning season.
LaF needs to be a better skater, kakko needs to put up points. Both have to be more decisive with the puck and stop deferring to older players

 

[CasusBelli]

That's a big part of what the last 2 years have been in this org. There are some kids that we hear it's not worth them coming to the NHL just to be 4th line players and get no special teams looks. That's what we heard when Lias Andersson and Chytil didn't make the team as 18 year olds. It's what we heard when Lias didn't make the team the second year and after Chytil was demoted. It's what we heard about Kravtsov. We heard it about Miller, Fox, Shesterkin, Barron, Jones, Schneider. It was explained that Brett Howden was in the NHL so early because he could develop appropriately in that kind of role.

For some reason, Kakko and Lafreniere ... that whole conversation disappeared. Why was Kakko brought to the NHL right away? Why did he stay instead of being released at the WJC and perhaps playing the rest of the year in Finland when it became clear neither he nor the team was ready for him to be a top-6, PP player? It would've been stranger not to see Lafreniere in the league the whole year last year, and he was by most counts a better, solid NHLer than Kakko in his D+1 year. At the same time, his usage was very off the board. A bottom six player with minimal to no powerplay time.

For whatever reason, Kakko and Lafreniere have never been understood as player who need to be helped along as much as player who will just naturally arrive into their own. Maybe if they were a Matthews level prospect we would see that, but then again...

Matthews in his rookie year scores 2.12 p/60 at 5v5. Extrapolated to Lafreniere's 686.15 mins at 5v5 his rookie year, you get 24 5v5 points. Lafreniere had 20.

Matthews was also second on the Maple Leafs in PP TOI as a rookie. Total and per game, 201:28 and 2:27/g . He added 18 points to his season on the PP. Lafreniere finished his rookie season with 71:37 of PP time and 1:17/g, ranking 7th and 10th, respectively. If Matthews rate of scoring 5v4 as a rookie were assumed to be the same (which is generous) it would extrapolate to 6 points over the ice time Lafreniere got.

So Matthews--if nothing changed and the rates were simply exchanged across Lafreniere's minutes--would've scored 30 points to Lafreniere's 20.
______________________________________

Of course Matthews did exceptionally well in those minutes. Of course, he had already played pro hockey, played on team North America before his rookie year, and scored 4 goals in game 1. There's no need or reason to speculate whether Lafreniere would've just leapt to the forefront of NHL stardom with similar usage. But accounting for these differences in roles on their respective team does illustrate some of the potential impact those differences can have on our perceptions of the player--and why not, at least potentially, on the player's development.

Matthews as a rookie played approximately 85% of his 5v5 minutes with Hyman and one of Nylander or Connor Brown. No other forward was on the ice more than 6% of Matthews 5v5 time.

Lafreniere, by contrast, played no more than 35.7% with any single other Rangers forward (Chytil). He played at least 7% of his 5v5 minutes with 10 other players.

We want 'flashes' but relative to other top picks, Lafreniere doesn't see minutes where he's likely to have the puck on his stick nearly as much. We want consistency but Lafreniere doesn't see consistent linemates to even close the level of other top picks.

____________________________________________________________________

I'm not saying Lafreniere hasn't been disappointing, or that he's blown the lid of his minutes and 'earned' a huge role. But it's hard to argue that the Rangers have done much to develop him into that kind of player. Instead he's been used in exactly the way we're told top prospects shouldn't be used, and the pressure and the responsibility is completely shifted to the player for not developing himself. What is the difference between Kravtsov and Lafreniere that we don't want Kravtsov to play for the Rangers unless its in a top-6 role but Lafreniere can be bounced around everywhere with no pp time and the Rangers think it won't affect his play or development?

I would, however, that Matthews consistently faced first pairing defensemen his first year. We can’t say that about our third liners (13 and 24).

 

[huerter]

If you think the vitriol and hysteria after poor team play would be lessened by Laf and Kakko having expanded roles, it's time to #getserious.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Its gonna take longer than we thought but he's still gonna be a good player.

 

[TheDirtyH]

I would, however, that Matthews consistently faced first pairing defensemen his first year. We can’t say that about our third liners (13 and 24).

To be really clear, I'm not saying that Lafreniere is like a Matthews level player or prospect. And I'm not saying that if he got those minutes he would've consistently crushed them. But nothing I saw from him, and not much in his numbers indicates to me that Lafreniere wasn't capable of at least being 'good' in that kind of role--even if only from a counting stats pov. On the other hand, I'm really saying that based on where he's at now, I think there's room to wonder if he couldn't be much better now than he is if he had gotten that kind of usage as a rookie.

 

[CLW]

Basically it's obvious that the Rangers had no plan or vision for these kids or for this team. It's every year make big moves and see where the chips fall. They talk about building, but they operate as though 'building' means watching something build itself.

"Basically it's obvious that the Rangers had no plan or vision for these kids or for this team."

I think they do, only it's just a very generic one. "Power forwards", "build them up slowly". "Don't rock the boat because the vets are better on the PP for now." They envision the kids will play like the Perfection line one day, but how to get there is unclear, especially when the team is allowed to play pond hockey and the stars to float about. Who in management is taking responsibility for this situation?

"It's every year make big moves and see where the chips fall."

I talked about this in a post above. Generic kicking the can down the road, if there is too much hassle (ie impatience with a rebuild) the org will cut the rebuild short and get some stars and flash for the cameras again.

"They talk about building, but they operate as though 'building' means watching something build itself."

Again a generic, kick the can down the road, reactive approach. Case in point, Strome, the fact that he can't be moved for any decent return should have the alarm bells ringing, it's a sign NOT to keep him, not to keep him around just because they can't move him because there is no real return. The entire league knows exactly what he is, but keeping him around and accepting broken lines because he is on the ice is just lazy, generic, unimaginative stuff from management.

My hope in all this is that Gallant is working on the problems at ice level. He has chosen not to come in with the flame thrower scorching everything like a Torts would have, but I'm hoping there's a steel spine inside that teddy bear and that things will improve gradually as Gallant fine tunes the team.

At management level the GM and President has to prove himself a highly intelligent, capable operator. No more generic reactivity but proactive problem solutions based on a clear vision. Look at the moves Zito has pulled off in Florida, not many duds so far and all of the moves based on a clear vision how to take the team forward. Taken one by one the moves may not look very sexy, but collectively they add up.

 

[TheDirtyH]

I guess my whole point is that 1) we as fans would likely feel better about Kakko and Lafreniere if they'd paced between 40-50 points as rookies EVEN IF they're underlying ("possession") stats were poor. 2) Kakko and Lafreniere may (or may not) be better offensive players today having amassed more points, played in more offensive situations with better players, and had the puck on their sticks more in NHL games to this point. 3) from the standpoint of the organization--its vision for the future and the 'build', as well as its role in developing its players, the NHL minutes and roles these two kids have gotten to this point reflect huge deviations from the norm and have not resulted in either team nor individual success or growth. Instead the org has Flatliners across the board .

I'm not saying Laf and Kakko would be Matthews level performers. I'm not saying they might not be worse prospects than the whole world thought originally. I'm just pointing out that what they are may not singularly be the result of them as individuals or players but may owe something and potentially a lot to how they have or haven't been developed by the organization . It's not making excuses. But it's true I'm more inclined to think systemically than individually, so people who assign responsibility in the opposite manner would necessarily read me as making excuses.

 

[duhmetreE]

That's a big part of what the last 2 years have been in this org. There are some kids that we hear it's not worth them coming to the NHL just to be 4th line players and get no special teams looks. That's what we heard when Lias Andersson and Chytil didn't make the team as 18 year olds. It's what we heard when Lias didn't make the team the second year and after Chytil was demoted. It's what we heard about Kravtsov. We heard it about Miller, Fox, Shesterkin, Barron, Jones, Schneider. It was explained that Brett Howden was in the NHL so early because he could develop appropriately in that kind of role.

For some reason, Kakko and Lafreniere ... that whole conversation disappeared. Why was Kakko brought to the NHL right away? Why did he stay instead of being released at the WJC and perhaps playing the rest of the year in Finland when it became clear neither he nor the team was ready for him to be a top-6, PP player? It would've been stranger not to see Lafreniere in the league the whole year last year, and he was by most counts a better, solid NHLer than Kakko in his D+1 year. At the same time, his usage was very off the board. A bottom six player with minimal to no powerplay time.

For whatever reason, Kakko and Lafreniere have never been understood as player who need to be helped along as much as player who will just naturally arrive into their own. Maybe if they were a Matthews level prospect we would see that, but then again...

Matthews in his rookie year scores 2.12 p/60 at 5v5. Extrapolated to Lafreniere's 686.15 mins at 5v5 his rookie year, you get 24 5v5 points. Lafreniere had 20.

Matthews was also second on the Maple Leafs in PP TOI as a rookie. Total and per game, 201:28 and 2:27/g . He added 18 points to his season on the PP. Lafreniere finished his rookie season with 71:37 of PP time and 1:17/g, ranking 7th and 10th, respectively. If Matthews rate of scoring 5v4 as a rookie were assumed to be the same (which is generous) it would extrapolate to 6 points over the ice time Lafreniere got.

So Matthews--if nothing changed and the rates were simply exchanged across Lafreniere's minutes--would've scored 30 points to Lafreniere's 20.
______________________________________

Of course Matthews did exceptionally well in those minutes. Of course, he had already played pro hockey, played on team North America before his rookie year, and scored 4 goals in game 1. There's no need or reason to speculate whether Lafreniere would've just leapt to the forefront of NHL stardom with similar usage. But accounting for these differences in roles on their respective team does illustrate some of the potential impact those differences can have on our perceptions of the player--and why not, at least potentially, on the player's development.

Matthews as a rookie played approximately 85% of his 5v5 minutes with Hyman and one of Nylander or Connor Brown. No other forward was on the ice more than 6% of Matthews 5v5 time.

Lafreniere, by contrast, played no more than 35.7% with any single other Rangers forward (Chytil). He played at least 7% of his 5v5 minutes with 10 other players.

We want 'flashes' but relative to other top picks, Lafreniere doesn't see minutes where he's likely to have the puck on his stick nearly as much. We want consistency but Lafreniere doesn't see consistent linemates to even close the level of other top picks.

____________________________________________________________________

I'm not saying Lafreniere hasn't been disappointing, or that he's blown the lid of his minutes and 'earned' a huge role. But it's hard to argue that the Rangers have done much to develop him into that kind of player. Instead he's been used in exactly the way we're told top prospects shouldn't be used, and the pressure and the responsibility is completely shifted to the player for not developing himself. What is the difference between Kravtsov and Lafreniere that we don't want Kravtsov to play for the Rangers unless its in a top-6 role but Lafreniere can be bounced around everywhere with no pp time and the Rangers think it won't affect his play or development?

Adding to all of this, his centers have been bad.

He shows life when his centers are playing well. He's not a line driver at this point in his career. I think Laf Zibs Kreider can work but Zibs has been atrocious for waaaay too many games at 5v5. IMO it's becoming clear that covid was an excuse for last years start.... or did he get covid again?
_________

On a similar note... I want Laf and Kakko in the top6. Playing to their strengths. That's Panarin, Laf, Zibs, Kreider and Kakko. With whoever is the 2C.

It creates a weird dynamic when the Vets are not held to the same standard of 'effort'. Laf will say all the right things but it has a negative effect. Having Strome over Laf and/or Kakko on the right wall is criminal.

 

[jay from jersey]

"Basically it's obvious that the Rangers had no plan or vision for these kids or for this team."

I think they do, only it's just a very generic one. "Power forwards", "build them up slowly". "Don't rock the boat because the vets are better on the PP for now." They envision the kids will play like the Perfection line one day, but how to get there is unclear, especially when the team is allowed to play pond hockey and the stars to float about. Who in management is taking responsibility for this situation?

"It's every year make big moves and see where the chips fall."

I talked about this in a post above. Generic kicking the can down the road, if there is too much hassle (ie impatience with a rebuild) the org will cut the rebuild short and get some stars and flash for the cameras again.

"They talk about building, but they operate as though 'building' means watching something build itself."

Again a generic, kick the can down the road, reactive approach. Case in point, Strome, the fact that he can't be moved for any decent return should have the alarm bells ringing, it's a sign NOT to keep him, not to keep him around just because they can't move him because there is no real return. The entire league knows exactly what he is, but keeping him around and accepting broken lines because he is on the ice is just lazy, generic, unimaginative stuff from management.

My hope in all this is that Gallant is working on the problems at ice level. He has chosen not to come in with the flame thrower scorching everything like a Torts would have, but I'm hoping there's a steel spine inside that teddy bear and that things will improve gradually as Gallant fine tunes the team.

At management level the GM and President has to prove himself a highly intelligent, capable operator. No more generic reactivity but proactive problem solutions based on a clear vision. Look at the moves Zito has pulled off in Florida, not many duds so far and all of the moves based on a clear vision how to take the team forward. Taken one by one the moves may not look very sexy, but collectively they add up.

Yes and no.
There are a lot of facts supporting your statements
For me, 1 of Quinn’s greatest blunders was not putting LaF on 1 PP and leaving him there. I don’t care if he was on 3rd line all year, not switching him and strome did damage. Imo it’s still doing damage.
Quinn had no problem taking the point away from ADA for fox. Ada was/is one of the best in the business running the pp.
Whoever disputes that either just flat out hates him or doesn’t know hockey.
Fox had a rough go of it at 1st but he came around and was a beast.
Not giving laf that easier offensive opportunity in a position where it could bring the best or jump start his offense 5v5 and his overall confidence in favor of strome is wrong.
Having him there a full year by now, I think you would be watching a more confident kid right now.
He did it with fox?? Why not LaF??? Or even kakko for that matter.
Strome continues to be on 1 PP and it’s mind-blowingly stupid.
As a HC, how do you not know this??? How do you not prioritize your young offensive cornerstone player???
Same shit is going on under Gallant, which leads me to believe panarin is lobbying for strome to be there and Gallant doesn’t want to go toe to toe against a 12 mill dollar player. At this point in time, he can’t afford that. Not on his first year.
I keep saying, just 2 simple changes like Barron as your everyday 3C and LaF stapled to 1PP are 2 moves that can have a tremendous impact on the overall group. That’s without making a hasty trade.
I’m really worried Panarin got too spoiled under the Gorton/Quinn regime and he think he can dictate things over the coach now.
If that’s indeed the case, that’s a very slippery slope they're heading down.
I’d promote Barron immediately. Get rid of Strome/Georgiev immediately. Put LaF on 1 PP in Stromes spot for the rest of the season no matter what...Evaluate from that point.......Then later in the year, TDL/Offseason, trade chytil/Lundkvist/kravtsov

 

[Peltz]

It's just frustrating to, after two previous top-10 picks walked away, now have two kids picked top-2 who were the consensus selections there, struggle as well.

I'm not expecting them to be McDavid-level. I just want them to be more than Nail Yakupov/Nolan Patrick level. Is that too much to ask? And I don't buy the "But we weren't a bottom team, we have better players" argument.

1. Laine, Svechnikov and Heiskanen were in the same position. A higher ranked team winning the lottery, and they didn't miss a beat
2. You can't really bring up the depth as something holding this team back when we have guys like Blackwell, Blais and Goodrow in the top-6 during their tenure.

Something is fundamentally wrong in this org and I just want them to fix whatever is causing this. It's not as if Kakko and Lafrenière didn't have any groundbreaking skill pre-draft. They just seem like different players, while others like Lundell, Raymond, Stützle, Zegras, Höglander, Cozens etc are playing (or are allowed to play) their own game. Whatever it is, it needs to be fixed.

I don't understand how you can watch Kakko play, and not at least see something good brewing there. It's coming.

Laf is struggling - no doubt. But he's only got like 60-something games under his belt.

 

[Unpredictable1]

I don't want to be a downer but seriously, people are making so many excuses and trying to convince themselves this is fine, I don't know if it's because some fans don't actively watch other teams games; but as a Ranger fan living in Vancouver I watch a lot of them too. and man... Even Podkolzin looks 10x better than Laf or Kakko. All these young guys on other teams, who weren't anywhere near as highly touted as Laf or Kakko are visibly noticeable every game, they're impact players even when they're not scoring you can see the high end skill.

Go back and read threads or watch YouTube videos talking about Laf & Kakko around the time of the drafts or leading up to it. They were both penciled in to be 70pt guys in their rookie seasons. Laf was supposed to be "Best since McDavid". Kakko at the draft they displayed a graphic on Sportsnet "Room for Improvement: None". If you went back in time and told Ranger fans that Kakko would have ZERO points through the first 9 games of his THIRD NHL season while playing on a line with Panarin... people would call you a troll

I have to agree with you. Living in Calgary, I see lots of west coast games as well. Other kids just have that jump and drive that I long for Laf to show, even if it's inconsistently at first.

Kakko is starting to show it this season, he just needs to bury a couple greasy ones to start producing more.

 

[jay from jersey]

I don't want to be a downer but seriously, people are making so many excuses and trying to convince themselves this is fine, I don't know if it's because some fans don't actively watch other teams games; but as a Ranger fan living in Vancouver I watch a lot of them too. and man... Even Podkolzin looks 10x better than Laf or Kakko. All these young guys on other teams, who weren't anywhere near as highly touted as Laf or Kakko are visibly noticeable every game, they're impact players even when they're not scoring you can see the high end skill.

Go back and read threads or watch YouTube videos talking about Laf & Kakko around the time of the drafts or leading up to it. They were both penciled in to be 70pt guys in their rookie seasons. Laf was supposed to be "Best since McDavid". Kakko at the draft they displayed a graphic on Sportsnet "Room for Improvement: None". If you went back in time and told Ranger fans that Kakko would have ZERO points through the first 9 games of his THIRD NHL season while playing on a line with Panarin... people would call you a troll

I thought kakko is the best he looked since he’s been here prior to injury. He’s just snakebit when it comes to scoring right now.
LaF has a legit skating issue. He’s not good at change of pace, nor does he have an explosive first 2-3-4 steps. But beyond that, he possesses everything else to be a real dangerous fwd.
Add in Shitty confidence with below average footwork and that’s the guy we’re seeing

 

[Zivkovic]

Just rewatched the draft selection of Lafreniere.



"He's ready to contribute. You're going to get 60 points or more in his first season"
"He has an edge to his game"
"Skills, skating, power. He delivers it all for a team"
"He's physically, emotionally and mentally ready"
"This is a VERY special player"

It's still early days but it kind of stings watching this just a year later. First overall with all that hype and praise and here we are. I don't think anyone can be blamed for being disappointed.

 

[Machinehead]

It's not only the question of whether Lafreniere was good enough to be a good top six player last year or if our top six was better than other situations, it's that the Rangers have lacked any coherent vision or timeline for themselves outside of stockpiling assets and 'getting better every day".

In Kakkos case, he could've been released to the WJC and played in Finland without causing panic. What would our roster have lost? A bad 5v5 player who didn't play pp anyway. Option 2 was to leave him in the top 6 and on the PP. Maybe we would been a worse team overall, but his counting numbers would've been much better, his confidence and fans confidence in him would be better, and as far as playoffs go, what would've changed? We didn't make the dance anyway, and the " play in" we got gifted amounted to an 0-3 smackdown.

Last year we also did not make the playoffs. Frankly we didn't even challenge for a spot.

The narrative has been that any coach will play the lineup to win games, but that's clearly not the directive for every team. Blashill is hardly on the hot seat. Hasn't been. DJ smith. Even David Quinn wasnt a 'winning coach'.

Basically it's obvious that the Rangers had no plan or vision for these kids or for this team. It's every year make big moves and see where the chips fall. They talk about building, but they operate as though 'building' means watching something build itself.

Right and they sold us on the idea that we're not completely tanking because we don't want a sour culture. That sounded good in theory.

In reality, we've gone to the other extreme. The vets run the show, there's no discipline, and bad habits are commonplace. It doesn't seem like a place where young forwards can flourish because of lack of time and lack of good examples.

Either the Rangers had no idea how to execute this whole thing, or they deep down wanted to stay competitive while tying to convince themselves they were doing something else.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

I thought kakko is the best he looked since he’s been here prior to injury. He’s just snakebit when it comes to scoring right now.
LaF has a legit skating issue. He’s not good at change of pace, nor does he have an explosive first 2-3-4 steps. But beyond that, he possesses everything else to be a real dangerous fwd.
Add in Shitty confidence with below average footwork and that’s the guy we’re seeing

I've seen Laf up close and personal a few times this season and, just my opinion, he doesn't have a skating issue. He has an attitude issue. By that I mean, he has no urgency in his game. For as poor (by his standards) as Panarin has been this season, he's a pit bull along the boards. He fights for pucks. Laff doesn't do that, yet. He's much too passive and I think that's whats holding him back.

I agree with you about Kakko though, zero points aside, he absolutely looks like he belongs in the top 6 on an NHL roster.

 

[CLW]

I've seen Laf up close and personal a few times this season and, just my opinion, he doesn't have a skating issue. He has an attitude issue. By that I mean, he has no urgency in his game. For as poor (by his standards) as Panarin has been this season, he's a pit bull along the boards. He fights for pucks. Laff doesn't do that, yet. He's much too passive and I think that's whats holding him back.

I agree with you about Kakko though, zero points aside, he absolutely looks like he belongs in the top 6 on an NHL roster.

Hm, Gallant has hinted at the same thing.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Hm, Gallant has hinted at the same thing.

Let's hope Gallant knows how to fix it.