Player Discussion Alexis Lafrenière

[Pawnee Rangers]

LOL

Using naturalstattrick #'s is 'making up BS'

I'm the salty one making up things?

 

[duhmetreE]

So, I'm not making it up?

NaturalStatTrick had the HDC 22 to 11. I literally asked, 'was it that bad?' MoneyPuck had it very similar. "Making up BS" It's different sources. Vally's counts all strengths and is provided after the fact.

You'll be alright, learn to discern information and have a conversation without being CISed. Keep the topic on point, you're devolving into irrelevant points

 

[huerter]

 

[Good Intentions]

• New
• Add bookmark
• #3,787

13 will be a solid NHL player because he has attributes that make him an average or above average pro player. That doesn’t mean I want him on my team. There are plenty of decent 2-way 50 point scorers on the open market every summer. He’s not a guy that I believe in (as already discussed at length) and I am accepting a return on him if there’s a player or future that makes sense in exchange. With that said, the organization is still at fault for a lot of the prospect/developmental issues that we have. Separate conversation, and it is important to differentiate between the two.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

So, I'm not making it up?

NaturalStatTrick had the HDC 22 to 11. I literally asked, 'was it that bad?' MoneyPuck had it very similar. "Making up BS" It's different sources. Vally's counts all strengths and is provided after the fact.

You'll be alright, learn to discern information and have a conversation without being CISed. Keep the topic on point, you're devolving into irrelevant points

Why wouldn’t you count all strengths for totals? Because it doesn’t suit your narrative. CISed, lol ok buddy.

 

[duhmetreE]

Why wouldn’t you count all strengths for totals? Because it doesn’t suit your narrative. CISed, lol ok buddy.

Because that's how 99.9% of people use it? It's even footing. 5v5.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Because that's how 99.9% of people use it? It's even footing. 5v5.

Penalties are part of the game, a power play goal is the same as an even strength goal. The game was dead even last night, both teams generated the same amount of chances you just had two all world goalies in net. But you just want to be pissed because of hive fives and players not practicing or whatever so you can be salty. It’s ok, Laff will be back in the lineup soon .

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

It’s evident you’re salty and just making things up. Last night you posted some BS in the post game thread about Tampa out chancing the rangers 2-1 or something and that was BS too

Naturalstatrick had the high danger chances 22-11 in favor of TBL at 5v5. valiquettes reports always look better for the rangers because they include power plays for both teams. Rangers PP generated a ton last night but again had the same awkward handedness and structure issues

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Naturalstatrick had the high danger chances 22-11 in favor of TBL at 5v5. valiquettes reports always look better for the rangers because they include power plays for both teams. Rangers PP generated a ton last night but again had the same awkward handedness and structure issues

But PPs are part of the game and impact the game dramatically. Why wouldn’t you include them when evaluating a teams performance. And for the record I think the rangers have to improve 5x5.

 

[bhamill]

Naturalstatrick had the high danger chances 22-11 in favor of TBL at 5v5. valiquettes reports always look better for the rangers because they include power plays for both teams. Rangers PP generated a ton last night but again had the same awkward handedness and structure issues

If you (general you, not YOU) want to only count even strength then you need to SAY “out chanced at even strength”. If you just say “out chanced” I assume you mean for the entire game, and honestly that’s what counts, the entire game. We can’t cherry pick only circumstances that fit our narratives, the entire game counts, every second. No matter which way it breaks.

 

[zlev]

If you (general you, not YOU) want to only count even strength then you need to SAY “out chanced at even strength”. If you just say “out chanced” I assume you mean for the entire game, and honestly that’s what counts, the entire game. We can’t cherry pick only circumstances that fit our narratives, the entire game counts, every second. No matter which way it breaks.

the PP isn't counted because it just skews towards whoever has more power plays

 

[bhamill]

the PP isn't counted because it just skews towards whoever has more power plays

So? Doesn’t getting more power plays show you are forcing the other team to take penalties? More often than not a penalty is the result of good play by the team getting the power play. Often because a legit scoring chance was illegally taken away. Even if you want to say the team getting penalized isn’t being forced, so what? It’s part of play.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

But PPs are part of the game and impact the game dramatically. Why wouldn’t you include them when evaluating a teams performance. And for the record I think the rangers have to improve 5x5.

It’s fine to look at the totals overall but it doesn’t tell you anything about how your team played at 5v5 which is where 80% of the game is played. That’s how you end up scoring 1 even strength goal in 220 straight minutes of the conference finals and lose 4 straight

 

[bhamill]

It’s fine to look at the totals overall but it doesn’t tell you anything about how your team played at 5v5 which is where 80% of the game is played. That’s how you end up scoring 1 even strength goal in 220 straight minutes of the conference finals and lose 4 straight

Then Tampa should have won at even strength. No? Goals are scored at higher rates on the pp. it’s a huge part of the game. As I said if you mean outchanced at even strength, SAY out chances at even strength. Youre right it’s a big part of the game, it matters. How difficult is it to be specific though? Unless you just want to ignore all the chances on power plays because it doesn’t fit the narrative of being out chances in a game. All 60 or 65 minutes count. Again this is all “general you.”

 

[Crease]

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

It’s fine to look at the totals overall but it doesn’t tell you anything about how your team played at 5v5 which is where 80% of the game is played. That’s how you end up scoring 1 even strength goal in 220 straight minutes of the conference finals and lose 4 straight

I thought the rangers played a pretty solid road game last night. Had they converted on one of those breakaways (at 5x5) the outcome might have been different. Honestly, I was surprised to read they were out chanced 2-1 in the GDT because it was a pretty evenly played game, not realizing it was just 5x5 chances.

 

[ReddestRum]

Nevermind! Beaten!

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

I thought the rangers played a pretty solid road game last night. Had they converted on one of those breakaways (at 5x5) the outcome might have been different. Honestly, I was surprised to read they were out chanced 2-1 in the GDT because it was a pretty evenly played game, not realizing it was just 5x5 chances.

In terms of total scoring chances at 5v5 it was not 2:1. Scoring chances were 43-29 and high danger chances were 22-11 both in favor of TBL.

 

[LokiDog]

I think part of the issue is this:

The way the team is constructed, the age of the players, the salary structure, etc.

It doesn’t matter if we say well look at Tage, look at so and so, forget the expectations of being 1OA and just have patience.

Sure - maybe Laf can have a Tage like career and find his game at 25 and suddenly be a real star (also, how often does that happen without a trade - we can find top 3 picks who broke out late but how many stayed with their draft team?)

The problem is Shesterkin will be a UFA and going on 30. Kreider, Zib, Trochek, Trouba, Bread will be in there 30s.

If Laf was drafted 20th and the idea was patience, that would be fine - but the contracts given out, re-upping Zib, investing in Trochek, etc. was based partially on the presence of #1 and 2 OA picks who DON’T take 6 years to become impact players at the NHL level.

Am I saying we’d have let Zib walk? No, probably not but especially with a deep run last year and the reasonable expectation of the kids taking a step (or three) do we sign Trochek? Also if they were 20th overall type kids with a delayed ETA, and they had the other pieces locked in that they currently have, they may have moved one or made a major trade that changed the face of the team (Eichel?) that they wouldn’t make because of the “potential” the 1 and 2 OA carried.

We banked on these kids being able to make a DIFFERENCE in their first 3-5 years. Laf is on 3, KK is on 4 and (all credit to Kakko improving and showing promise) neither is genuinely a difference maker. So the whole plan is f***ed because - due to being a consensus 1OA - the plan wasn’t to wait until he’s in his 5th season for him to start making an impact. The plan was that winning the draft lottery twice was going to change the trajectory of the team dramatically.

So it isn’t as simple as “have patience”. Chytil is never going to be peak Zibanejad. Lafreniere is never going to be peak Panarin. When those guys are no longer contributing or have moved on, the guys in line to replace them are downgrades. The idea was for them to be impact players WHILE those guys were also impact players.

I also just genuinely feel Laf is a little too comfortable and cozy with his status as a 1OA NYR NHL player and he really hasn’t shown the hunger to keep growing and to be the best. There’s just a comfortable complacency vibe I get. The vets have it as well. It’s an organizational problem. Unless you have a true internal drive to be the best and not just “good” and “successful” this isn’t a franchise where you go to work hard and keep improving.

 

[LokiDog]

View attachment 628236

Realistically though, this is part of the “not taking being a pro serious enough” vibe some people have.

 

[duhmetreE]

I also just genuinely feel Laf is a little too comfortable and cozy with his status as a 1OA NYR NHL player and he really hasn’t shown the hunger to keep growing and to be the best. There’s just a comfortable complacency vibe I get. The vets have it as well. It’s an organizational problem. Unless you have a true internal drive to be the best and not just “good” and “successful” this isn’t a franchise where you go to work hard and keep improving.

 

[ReddestRum]

I think part of the issue is this:

The way the team is constructed, the age of the players, the salary structure, etc.

It doesn’t matter if we say well look at Tage, look at so and so, forget the expectations of being 1OA and just have patience.

Sure - maybe Laf can have a Tage like career and find his game at 25 and suddenly be a real star.

The problem is Shesterkin will be a UFA and going on 30. Kreider, Zib, Trochek, Trouba, Bread will be in there 30s.

If Laf was drafted 20th and the idea was patience, that would be fine - but the contracts given out, re-upping Zib, investing in Trochek, etc. was based partially on the presence of #1 and 2 OA picks who DON’T take 6 years to become impact players at the NHL level.

Am I saying we’d have let Zib walk? No, probably not but especially with a deep run last year and the reasonable expectation of the kids taking a step (or three) do we sign Trochek? Also if they were 20th overall type kids with a delayed ETA, and they had the other pieces locked in that they currently have, they may have moved one or made a major trade that changed the face of the team (Eichel?) that they wouldn’t make because of the “potential” the 1 and 2 OA carried.

We banked on these kids being able to make a DIFFERENCE in their first 3-5 years. Laf is on 3, KK is on 4 and (all credit to Kakko improving and showing promise) neither is genuinely a difference maker. So the whole plan is f***ed because - due to being a consensus 1OA - the plan wasn’t to wait until he’s in his 5th season for him to start making an impact. The plan was that winning the draft lottery twice was going to change the trajectory of the team dramatically.

So it isn’t as simple as “have patience”. Chytil is never going to be peak Zibanejad. Lafreniere is never going to be peak Panarin. When those guys are no longer contributing or have moved on, the guys in line to replace them are downgrades. The idea was for them to be impact players WHILE those guys were also impact players.

I also just genuinely feel Laf is a little too comfortable and cozy with his status as a 1OA NYR NHL player and he really hasn’t shown the hunger to keep growing and to be the best. There’s just a comfortable complacency vibe I get. The vets have it as well. It’s an organizational problem. Unless you have a true internal drive to be the best and not just “good” and “successful” this isn’t a franchise where you go to work hard and keep improving.

THIS. f***ING THIS ALL THE WAY.

A big part of this thread is that people are really content to just sit back and wait for all our young players to develop. I've heard things along the lines of, "Sometimes it takes 5-7 years for development to take place...". Meanwhile I'm like, we'll be full into another rebuild in 5-7 years. We didn't put together the team we have for a decade rebuild. You take the best choice at 1OA to make an almost immediate impact for your team when the bulk of your cap is going to high paid vets.

Things is, I don't know if we're even in a rebuild anymore. Making the finals was a blessing and a course, because now we're expected to follow that right back up to being that good to reach it again.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

Then Tampa should have won at even strength. No? Goals are scored at higher rates on the pp. it’s a huge part of the game. As I said if you mean outchanced at even strength, SAY out chances at even strength. Youre right it’s a big part of the game, it matters. How difficult is it to be specific though? Unless you just want to ignore all the chances on power plays because it doesn’t fit the narrative of being out chances in a game. All 60 or 65 minutes count. Again this is all “general you.”

Who said the power play doesn’t count or that it’s not a huge part of the game? I definitely didn’t lol.

Rangers didn’t play a bad game at all last night overall and both goalies were insane. But you need to split up 5v5 and 5v4 because we have stunk 5v5 since Gallant got here and 5v5 offense is still the teams biggest issue. That shouldn’t surprise anyone because even strength hockey is very difficult and requires actual modern coaching. Its where Gallants old man philosophy, poor/nonexistent systems, and horrendous lineup/deployment choices consistently hurt this team.

Until this team can consistently just be AVERAGE at 5v5 (~50% xGF) then the formula is going to have to be great PP + Igor carrying which is not a good one.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I think part of the issue is this:

The way the team is constructed, the age of the players, the salary structure, etc.

It doesn’t matter if we say well look at Tage, look at so and so, forget the expectations of being 1OA and just have patience.

Sure - maybe Laf can have a Tage like career and find his game at 25 and suddenly be a real star (also, how often does that happen without a trade - we can find top 3 picks who broke out late but how many stayed with their draft team?)

The problem is Shesterkin will be a UFA and going on 30. Kreider, Zib, Trochek, Trouba, Bread will be in there 30s.

If Laf was drafted 20th and the idea was patience, that would be fine - but the contracts given out, re-upping Zib, investing in Trochek, etc. was based partially on the presence of #1 and 2 OA picks who DON’T take 6 years to become impact players at the NHL level.

Am I saying we’d have let Zib walk? No, probably not but especially with a deep run last year and the reasonable expectation of the kids taking a step (or three) do we sign Trochek? Also if they were 20th overall type kids with a delayed ETA, and they had the other pieces locked in that they currently have, they may have moved one or made a major trade that changed the face of the team (Eichel?) that they wouldn’t make because of the “potential” the 1 and 2 OA carried.

We banked on these kids being able to make a DIFFERENCE in their first 3-5 years. Laf is on 3, KK is on 4 and (all credit to Kakko improving and showing promise) neither is genuinely a difference maker. So the whole plan is f***ed because - due to being a consensus 1OA - the plan wasn’t to wait until he’s in his 5th season for him to start making an impact. The plan was that winning the draft lottery twice was going to change the trajectory of the team dramatically.

So it isn’t as simple as “have patience”. Chytil is never going to be peak Zibanejad. Lafreniere is never going to be peak Panarin. When those guys are no longer contributing or have moved on, the guys in line to replace them are downgrades. The idea was for them to be impact players WHILE those guys were also impact players.

I also just genuinely feel Laf is a little too comfortable and cozy with his status as a 1OA NYR NHL player and he really hasn’t shown the hunger to keep growing and to be the best. There’s just a comfortable complacency vibe I get. The vets have it as well. It’s an organizational problem. Unless you have a true internal drive to be the best and not just “good” and “successful” this isn’t a franchise where you go to work hard and keep improving.

Not much to say other than you hit the nail on the head.

 

[LORDE]

I think part of the issue is this:

The way the team is constructed, the age of the players, the salary structure, etc.

It doesn’t matter if we say well look at Tage, look at so and so, forget the expectations of being 1OA and just have patience.

Sure - maybe Laf can have a Tage like career and find his game at 25 and suddenly be a real star (also, how often does that happen without a trade - we can find top 3 picks who broke out late but how many stayed with their draft team?)

The problem is Shesterkin will be a UFA and going on 30. Kreider, Zib, Trochek, Trouba, Bread will be in there 30s.

If Laf was drafted 20th and the idea was patience, that would be fine - but the contracts given out, re-upping Zib, investing in Trochek, etc. was based partially on the presence of #1 and 2 OA picks who DON’T take 6 years to become impact players at the NHL level.

Am I saying we’d have let Zib walk? No, probably not but especially with a deep run last year and the reasonable expectation of the kids taking a step (or three) do we sign Trochek? Also if they were 20th overall type kids with a delayed ETA, and they had the other pieces locked in that they currently have, they may have moved one or made a major trade that changed the face of the team (Eichel?) that they wouldn’t make because of the “potential” the 1 and 2 OA carried.

We banked on these kids being able to make a DIFFERENCE in their first 3-5 years. Laf is on 3, KK is on 4 and (all credit to Kakko improving and showing promise) neither is genuinely a difference maker. So the whole plan is f***ed because - due to being a consensus 1OA - the plan wasn’t to wait until he’s in his 5th season for him to start making an impact. The plan was that winning the draft lottery twice was going to change the trajectory of the team dramatically.

So it isn’t as simple as “have patience”. Chytil is never going to be peak Zibanejad. Lafreniere is never going to be peak Panarin. When those guys are no longer contributing or have moved on, the guys in line to replace them are downgrades. The idea was for them to be impact players WHILE those guys were also impact players.

I also just genuinely feel Laf is a little too comfortable and cozy with his status as a 1OA NYR NHL player and he really hasn’t shown the hunger to keep growing and to be the best. There’s just a comfortable complacency vibe I get. The vets have it as well. It’s an organizational problem. Unless you have a true internal drive to be the best and not just “good” and “successful” this isn’t a franchise where you go to work hard and keep improving.

Well put... I couldn't put it to words this way... i keep saying the timing is off on the way the rebuild went

But your way is more detailed and on the nose