Player Discussion Alexis Lafrenière: Part II

[Machinehead]

Ok, so the consensus is you and your friends. Got it.

And you seem to be pivoting. Is the consensus that the Rangers have a hard time developing forward or is it that first year players are not putting up more numbers than what you want?

Yeah, it's me and me my friends, it's not something 99% of hockey fans have said for 20 years like "the Bruins are tough" and "the Penguins score a lot."

 

[Machinehead]

What are some examples

Some examples of what?

 

[FireGerardGallant]

Some examples of what?

Of the Rangers failing to develop forwards

 

[True Blue]

Yeah, it's me and me my friends, it's not something 99% of hockey fans have said for 20 years like "the Bruins are tough" and "the Penguins score a lot."

You should have just said so. That I can understand. "My friends and I believe that the Rangers have a hard time developing forwards". Ok. Makes you no less wrong, but ok.

 

[Sayba]

I think so far he reminds me of Jimmy Vesey, a non discript average winger who does a little of everything. I don't expect him to remain that way, I'm just not sure what we're looking at in 2-3 years at this point from a comparable standpoint.

 

[Machinehead]

Of the Rangers failing to develop forwards

The last Rangers draft pick to score 70 points playing for the Rangers is Tony Amonte in 1993.

Saying that this is something the Rangers haven't been good at is like saying water is wet.

 

[romba]

The Rangers struggle at developing forwards is a falsehood largely due to the fact they have not drafted many year. In the last 20 years here are their R1 forwards:

Lafreniere
Kakko
Kravtsov

All 3 too early to say anything on.

Andersson - bust
Miller - good first line player
Kreider - good first line player
Cherepanov - died
Korpikoski - bust
Jessiman - bust

A total of 9 in 20 years. Late picks are mostly just luck. Andersson is also the only one of the 6 above who was a top 10 pick.

Nice post, Chytil too, who is developing pretty nicely imo

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Whose consensus?? Yours?

Cherapanov dies. Callahan seems to have developed just fine. So did Dubinsky. So did Stepan. JT Miller looks to be carving out a pretty good career for himself. Krieder is a legit top line player. Fast is an NHL player. Did I miss when Buchnevich struggled to be developed? Have you watched how Kakko and Chytil are playing this year? What are you going to do, bring up Andersson as evidence?

So again I ask who is making up this consensus?

I mean the fact that Miller is the most productive player on that list kind of says everything.

Career highs in points - Miller 72 (56 w NYR), Stepan 57, Callahan 54, Dubinsky 54, Kreider 53, Buch 46, Fast 33.

The Rangers do not exactly have the best track record of developing elite forward talent. To be fair, up until recently they have not had the draft capital to do so. I believe Lafreniere and Kakko will blow anything previous out of the water. But I get why people have varying levels of confidence based on what they have historically seen from this franchise over their lifetimes.

 

[Machinehead]

And like I said, this has always been something people said about the Rangers. It's only recently, with two draft picks we're invested in, that we want to pretend it never happened.

People have a right to question it. If ANY forward ever scored 1 point in 15 games, except like Glass or McLeod, we would say "hey, what's going on there?"

Every single possible explanation, most of them very reasonable, has been written off as people being impatient.

So, what, you think his poor start is statistical variance that happened for no reason? Fine, just say that and move on.

 

[TheDirtyH]

I mean the fact that Miller is the most productive player on that list kind of says everything.

Career highs in points - Miller 72 (56 w NYR), Stepan 57, Callahan 54, Dubinsky 54, Kreider 53, Buch 46, Fast 33.

The Rangers do not exactly have the best track record of developing elite forward talent. To be fair, up until recently they have not had the draft capital to do so. I believe Lafreniere and Kakko will blow anything previous out of the water. But I get why people have varying levels of confidence based on what they have historically seen from this franchise over their lifetimes.

And what theyve seen so far. Historically slow starts from the 2oa and 1oa.

Nobody needs to say bust, but there's plenty of reason why some struggle to surmount the optimism of others.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

"Laf is fine"

"Yes but he's struggling to score"

"Everyone is struggling to score"

"So it's the team"

"No it's the pandemic"

"Stuztle started in a pandemic"

"Yeah but he's on the Sens where he gets more opportunities"

"So then it is the team"

"It's not the team"

"Then it's Lafreniere?"

"Wow you're calling him a bust?"

-This thread

we really are reading different threads

 

[Shadowtron]

I mean the fact that Miller is the most productive player on that list kind of says everything.

Career highs in points - Miller 72 (56 w NYR), Stepan 57, Callahan 54, Dubinsky 54, Kreider 53, Buch 46, Fast 33.

The Rangers do not exactly have the best track record of developing elite forward talent. To be fair, up until recently they have not had the draft capital to do so. I believe Lafreniere and Kakko will blow anything previous out of the water. But I get why people have varying levels of confidence based on what they have historically seen from this franchise over their lifetimes.

And when they did...they never quite hit a homerun lol

 

[FireGerardGallant]

The last Rangers draft pick to score 70 points playing for the Rangers is Tony Amonte in 1993.

Saying that this is something the Rangers haven't been good at is like saying water is wet.

First that covers like 3 different regimes, what does the Neal Smith era of this team have to do with any recent history with this team. Unless your saying were cursed or something. And most of that time the Rangers have had fairly weak draft capital and they really made the most out of it. Guys like Stepan in the 2nd, Kreider and Jt in the mid-first, Buch in the 3rd, Callahan in the 4th those are great picks respective to where they were selected. We finally have 2 of those guys and its far too early to say if they are not going to develop in 70+ point players.

 

[Machinehead]

First that covers like 3 different regimes, what does the Neal Smith era of this team have to do with any recent history with this team. Unless your saying were cursed or something. And most of that time the Rangers have had fairly weak draft capital and they really made the most out of it. Guys like Stepan in the 2nd, Kreider and Jt in the mid-first, Buch in the 3rd, Callahan in the 4th those are great picks respective to where they were selected. We finally have 2 of those guys and its far too early to say if they are not going to develop in 70+ point players.

I don't think it's a curse but franchises absolutely develop cultures. We've been doing good but not great forwards for 30 years. 30 years isn't an accident.

I think draft position is a valid thing to bring up, but when your 2OA and 1OA picks struggle in back to back years, "hey, maybe the team has the wrong approach to this" is also a valid thing to bring up.

You can't even have a reasonable discussion about this without the same people saying that you're just impatient.

we really are reading different threads

Show me what you're seeing. Point me to he posts where people are being impatient.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I don't think it's a curse but franchises absolutely develop cultures. We've been doing good but not great forwards for 30 years. 30 years isn't an accident.

I think draft position is a valid thing to bring up, but when your 2OA and 1OA picks struggle in back to back years, "hey, maybe the team has the wrong approach to this" is also a valid thing to bring up.

You can't even have a reasonable discussion about this without the same people saying that you're just impatient.

Show me what you're seeing. Point me to he posts where people are being impatient.

how bout you develop some bitches

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

I don't think it's a curse but franchises absolutely develop cultures. We've been doing good but not great forwards for 30 years. 30 years isn't an accident.

I think draft position is a valid thing to bring up, but when your 2OA and 1OA picks struggle in back to back years, "hey, maybe the team has the wrong approach to this" is also a valid thing to bring up.

You can't even have a reasonable discussion about this without the same people saying that you're just impatient.

Show me what you're seeing. Point me to he posts where people are being impatient.

Look, I don't know why you're doing it, but I think you're better than trying to combine a variety of people's arguments to make it look like they're the ones being unreasonable here

 

[Machinehead]

how bout you develop some bitches

Yeah well maybe if we got rid of that old yee yee coach we'll get some bitches on our first line.

Better yet maybe Jack Eichel'll call our dog ass if he ever stop f***in with that AHL team or traveling circus he f***in with.

RAINJAH!

 

[Machinehead]

Look, I don't know why you're doing it, but I think you're better than trying to combine a variety of people's arguments to make it look like they're the ones being unreasonable here

I'm still waiting for somebody to send me a link to all these hot takes about being a bust.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

I'm still waiting for somebody to send me a link to all these hot takes about being a bust.

Cool, keep track of the people complaining about other people doing that and ask them

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Yeah well maybe if we got rid of that old yee yee coach we'll get some bitches on our first line.

Better yet maybe Jack Eichel'll call our dog ass if he ever stop f***in with that AHL team or traveling circus he f***in with.

RAINJAH!

rainjahs pls

 

[Machinehead]

Cool, keep track of the people complaining about other people doing that and ask them

Then what's the issue?

Why do you keep saying we're reading different threads?

You specifically brought it up twice and now you're talking about all these other people.

 

[True Blue]

I mean the fact that Miller is the most productive player on that list kind of says everything.

Career highs in points - Miller 72 (56 w NYR), Stepan 57, Callahan 54, Dubinsky 54, Kreider 53, Buch 46, Fast 33.

The Rangers do not exactly have the best track record of developing elite forward talent. To be fair, up until recently they have not had the draft capital to do so. I believe Lafreniere and Kakko will blow anything previous out of the water. But I get why people have varying levels of confidence based on what they have historically seen from this franchise over their lifetimes.

Miller is not more productive than Buchnevich or Kreider.

Let's go back the last 10 years. In 2011, Miller is taken in the first round, at 15. He was developed. In 2012, Skeji was taken in the first and Nieves in the second. In, 2013, no first or second round pick. But look, Buchnevich taken in the third. I would say that his career arch is looking pretty well. In 2014, once again no first rounder. First forward is someone named Keegan Iverson in the third. In 2015, once again, no first round pick. Gropp and Kovac taken in 2nd and 3rd and both are busts. But they are not exactly top notch first rounders. In 2016, no first or second round pick at all. 2017 brought Andersson and Chytil. One is looking like a bust (nothing to do with developent) and one had this place raving. 2018 brought Kravstov, who after a stumble, picked up his play this year and looks great. Or at least like the player we all had hope for. 2019 brought Kakko and 2020 brought Lafreniere.

4 out of these 10 years had no first round pick. 2 had no first or second round pick. The forwards that were taken in the first round, aside from Andersson, are looking fine (this includes Lafreniere in my eyes). They also found Buchnevich in the third round. When during the course of a decade, only 60% of it has a first round pick, your evaluation model shrinks. But in the other 6 years, it looks like at least 3 NHL players are being produced that are forwards. So is the argument that the Rangers have a hard time developing forwards or that they need to do better in finding forwards to develop in the latter rounds? Or is it none of the above and under Gorton, the development of prospects taken has been just fine?

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

I tend to side with Scouching on this one, though I'm probably a little harsher on Lafreniere overall. He shows bad habits that were likely picked up from getting bored in the Q, combined with a lack of playing time over the span of 10 months and no proper training camp to get him up to speed. Further hampering him is his decent skating ability, which while above average doesn't really allow him to standout in today's NHL like Stutzle, the latter being the best overall skater of the 2020 draft class and will likely recognized be one of the best skaters in the NHL in short order.

If I'm the Rangers, with Panarin out I definitely put Lafreniere on PP1 and let him develop some confidence. This dude's bread and butter in the Q was his ability to control the play with his eyes and hands; give him a few games to establish some rhythm and tell Zibanejad to get his stick ready on the opposite side for slappers.

I think people are correct to be worried about Lafreniere's start since the law of averages doesn't explain all of his production woes, but this is basic stuff here. If the Rangers are more interested in winning hockey games today and tomorrow with a system that stifles creativity, then they were honestly better off trading the pick for veteran insulation.

 

[SA16]

Nice post, Chytil too, who is developing pretty nicely imo

Not sure how I missed him. I guess just because he wasn't the first guy on the list in the draft so I glossed over him.

 

[FireGerardGallant]

I think draft position is a valid thing to bring up, but when your 2OA and 1OA picks struggle in back to back years, "hey, maybe the team has the wrong approach to this" is also a valid thing to bring up.

You can't even have a reasonable discussion about this without the same people saying that you're just impatient.

I do def agree with this and believe it is valid to look at our current coaching staff and ask questions of them and their struggles of developing talented forwards. The cultural thing just makes no sense to me because there have been numerous regimes with different cultures and coaches. The truth is the Rangers have never had young players with this much potential possibly ever, compared to everything before them they both blow others out of the water. I just personally can't see this becoming a long term issue with either, by year 3-4 im confident both will have figured it out and show that potential.