Player Discussion Alexis Lafrenière

[mas0764]

I’m conflicted about what’s becoming ghe trademark Lafreniere smirk. The kid seems awfully unconcerned about what’s happening out there. I might be reading too much into a facial expression but the fact that he doesn’t seem frustrated through all of this might be a good thing, but it’s probably a bad thing.

I think it's reading too much into it.

Trading a bunch of spare parts and prospects for a guy who would go on to win the Selke and Conn Smythe

And they were a one-off, 1 out of 15 teams in the last 15 years to win.

Not the odds that I'm chasing. The Rangers have better chances, given their good goaltending and defensive structure, to go chasing two more star forwards.

 

[mas0764]

I was at tonight’s game. Guys- it’s not good. Was sitting on the bridge and could see the entire game from above. Laf really has so many issues right now. He’s incredibly slow- like noticeably slower than most skaters out there. Second, I’m not sure what he’s doing but his away from the puck play is horrendous. He floats around the ice without any purpose. And worse than that- part of why he’s so ineffective is he often not in position to receive a pass and he’s rarely getting the puck because he’s not even a viable option most of the time because he’s even with the puck or so stationary that there are always better options to pass to.

This is why it's all mental and he needs coaching.

But hey, "the NHL is not a developmental league," so let's give him no instruction, no one work with him, and then when he fails we can pretend that ignoring the situation had nothing to do with it.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I think it's reading too much into it.



And they were a one-off, 1 out of 15 teams in the last 15 years to win.

Not the odds that I'm chasing. The Rangers have better chances, given their good goaltending and defensive structure, to go chasing two more star forwards.

Rangers have won 1 Cup in 83 years. I'll take a "one-off" Cup at this point. Sure, I wish my favourite team could be a dynasty and win multiple cups but for me that's not a realistic expectation.

The Penguins won back-to-back Cups and were the first team to do so since the Red Wings in the 1990s. It's a league where a bunch of teams can win.

 

[LokiDog]

Rangers have won 1 Cup in 83 years. I'll take a "one-off" Cup at this point. Sure, I wish my favourite team could be a dynasty and win multiple cups but for me that's not a realistic expectation.

The Penguins won back-to-back Cups and were the first team to do so since the Red Wings in the 1990s. It's a league where a bunch of teams can win.

Is it really though? Oilers and Islanders basically split the 80s. Pens won twice to start the 90s, Devils, Red Wings and Avs went 3, 3, 2 from 95-2003. Dallas snuck in and got one during that stretch. Wings had the last of that stretch in 02 and then are back in 08, before we see Chicago x3, Pittsburgh x3, Tampa x2, LA x2. Between 2002-2008 we had some variety. From 1980-2002 and from 2008-present, it’s been a lot of the same teams in the mix for 5-10 year stretches. Won’t be surprised to see Colorado again soon. Or Tampa.

I mean, I do agree that there’s a lot of teams that could win in each year and parity is huge right now, but there also is a bit of a trend of building a winning core and finding the right mix of support to go around it and then being, if not a repeat champion, definitely a team that’s in the hunt every single year for like a full decade. We clearly aren’t figuring that mix out just yet.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

I mean, I do agree that there’s a lot of teams that could win in each year and parity is huge right now, but there also is a bit of a trend of building a winning core and finding the right mix of support to go around it and then being, if not a repeat champion, definitely a team that’s in the hunt every single year for like a full decade. We clearly aren’t figuring that mix out just yet.

I always suspected this was Gort's intention when he was hired....as much as most fans despise the Bruins, one couldn't help but admire the success they had year after year. Add JD to that mix (look at the players he drafted/brought in in Columbus and St. Louis: those guys were big, had good speed AND talent).

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Is it really though? Oilers and Islanders basically split the 80s. Pens won twice to start the 90s, Devils, Red Wings and Avs went 3, 3, 2 from 95-2003. Same teams always in the mix with Philly and Dallas, who snuck in and got one during that stretch. Wings get the last of that stretch in 02 and then are back in 08, before we see Chicago x3, Pittsburgh x3, Tampa x2, LA x2. Won’t be surprised to see Colorado again soon. Or Tampa.

I mean, I do agree that there’s a lot of teams that could win in each year and parity is huge right now, but there also is a bit of a trend of building a winning core and finding the right mix of support to go around it and then being, if not a repeat champion, definitely a team that’s in the hunt every single year for like a full decade. We clearly aren’t figuring that mix out just yet.

The closest thing we had to a dynasty in the salary cap era (Which drastically changed everything), is the 2009-2015 Blackhawks who won 3 cups in 6 seasons. I don't think that's comparable to the Oilers and Islanders in the 1980s. The dominance in that era goes beyond the teams who win. Look at the teams that reached the final. Bizar difference (IMO)

In the 15 years from 1980 to 1994, only 11 teams made it to the Stanley Cup Finals, 2 of which only reached the final once.

EDM (x6)
NYI (x5)
PHI (x3)
MTL (x4)
BOS (x3)
CGY (x2)
MNS (X2)
PIT (x2)
VAN (x2)
CHI
LAK

In the first 15 years of the salary cap era, that number is drastically different. 18 teams in total, 12 of which only reached the final once.

PIT (x4)
TBL (x4)
CHI (x3)
BOS (x3)
LAK (x2)
DET (x2)
CAR
EDM
ANA
OTT
PHI
VAN
NJD
NYR
SJS
NSH
VGK
WSH

 

[CLW]

I remember people on this board giving Miller so much shit his first few years here. Didn't so much as get a whiff of leniency in his play as Laf does (and still), and with both of them playing just about the same amount of games, Miller looks three times the offensive player than Laf as a D-man. It's sickening. No one ever said it was the organization's fault that Miller, as a kid D-man, was struggling. It was all him. He worked hard on his game and it now shows. Yet the Laf coddling continues even after his low IQ game tonight. And now you guys are frothing at the mouth for him to replace Kreider on his line and PP1. f*** that. No gimmies for this guy at all.

Putting Laf on the top line would hopefully do the same thing as being glued to the 2nd pairing did for Miller. There is no hiding for a D and in the same vein it's time to shine the spotlight on Laf and make him take responsibility for his own game. Bad coaching is one thing, but the player has to own his own game too. Laf can't be this goofy kid forever. Laf can't get away with existing in this weird limbo state he is in right now. That's on the org as much as him probably, but that doesn't really matter either. Something needs to change for the better.

I've never doubted any of the kids, Miller, Kakko, Chytil, Schneider, Kravtsov - but Laffy seems to be a bit "special" for better and worse. Laffy is a kid whose main attribute are twitch reflexes and innate coordination, that's his path to success and the Rangers need to facilitate that game or trade him. This is not a brainiac kid - he'll never be Bergeron, he'll never be a Lehtinen and he'll never make for a good Ortmeyer.

The Rangers better figure something out fast. The Rangers need to create the best version Lafreniére possible and right now they are doing anything but.

 

[McRanger92]

Kreider potentially missing time would be the best thing to happen to Lafreniere. He wouldnt have his usual excuses to bail him out. If CK is fine, I am in favor of swapping Chytil & Trocheck.

Panarin-Chytil-Krav
Laf-Trocheck-Vesey

Not that I mind the lines now because the team is playing very well, but it could help get Laf & Panarin going more consistently

 

[bhamill]

Assuming the same people defending giving Laf an opportunity are the same as the people who were naysaying Miller is a ridiculous assumption because there's nothing that says there's any overlap between these two groups.

Most fans saw the potential with Miller and were decidedly NOT "giving him shit" and also recognized that it often takes defensemen longer to come into their own than it does forwards.

What I DON'T understand is the desire to slow play Laf and think he's going to turn elite that way. Or the constant desire of some posters in this thread to just habitually shit talk him as if there's no solution other than burying him in the depth chart, but keeping him, because they're scared he turns into Marc Savard after a trade.

The reality is, like any kid, he needs to be used in all situations to see if he has true potential in him, and to be given opportunities to hone his offense instead of being pigeon holed as another ho-hum "two way forward." There's literally no point to that.

If Kreider's out for any length of time, and you give him increased responsibility and communicate that to him, and he shows potential, stick with him.

If he sucks, see if it lights a fire under his ass and he works hard/gets better. Probably will take up to a year to evaluate.
If he sucks and it doesn't light a fire under his ass, that will be readily apparent in a year and the team can move on from him.
Sheltering him and encouraging him to play like a third line grinder does nothing for anyone. If he's a bust, wouldn't you rather know now when he has value, vs. 3 years from now when he's still putting up 35-40 points a season???

Would Miller be the player he's becoming if he was stapled to the third pairing in Ben Harpur/Libor Hajek usage?

I commented on another thread how we pit our young players against each other in these discussions. I do not get it and I dislike it. Hahaha. What does how Laf is being treated (which frankly isn't all that kindly) have to do with how K'Andre was treated? It just strikes me so weird that we feel we need to run down one prospect of ours to elevate another...
Personally I feel anyone who was declaring Miller a bust in his first couple of years is a knob. It's just a shitty look to be so negative about players that are really still just kids. The people who were calling Kakko and Chytil busts are starting to look like knobs now too, and I fully expect the same thing as far as some of these Laf (and Kravtsov) takes go: "career 4th liner/bottom sixer" "BUST!" "Trade him for ANYTHING while we can!" about a consensus 1OA player who is just 3 months past his 21st birthday...
When Othmann doesn't set the NHL on fire next year we are going to hear the same shit... and so it goes.

 

[mas0764]

Rangers have won 1 Cup in 83 years. I'll take a "one-off" Cup at this point. Sure, I wish my favourite team could be a dynasty and win multiple cups but for me that's not a realistic expectation.

The Penguins won back-to-back Cups and were the first team to do so since the Red Wings in the 1990s. It's a league where a bunch of teams can win.

I would "take" a one-off as well, but doesn't it seem like most of the winners are repeat winners? I think the point is to get good enough to even win 1, you have to get good enough to win more than 1.

The exception to that rule is the Blues. The other "one time" winners the past 15 years are the Bruins, who appeared in a total of 3 and could have easily won another, and the Caps, who have been hanging around for forever because they have the second best goal scorer ever.

And to get good enough to win more than 1, well, look at the Blackhawks, Kings, Lightning, etc.

 

[egelband]

Can anyone explain what happened to Lafreniere’s “sandpaper”? Or was it never real?

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Can anyone explain what happened to Lafreniere’s “sandpaper”? Or was it never real?

Gallant stole it and replaced it with 2-ply Charmin

 

[PANARIN BREAD FAN]

I would "take" a one-off as well, but doesn't it seem like most of the winners are repeat winners? I think the point is to get good enough to even win 1, you have to get good enough to win more than 1.

The exception to that rule is the Blues. The other "one time" winners the past 15 years are the Bruins, who appeared in a total of 3 and could have easily won another, and the Caps, who have been hanging around for forever because they have the second best goal scorer ever.

And to get good enough to win more than 1, well, look at the Blackhawks, Kings, Lightning, etc.

didn't seem like you were willing to accept the one-off not too long ago.

still have to get to the dance before you can dance. then from there try and win that one before worrying about a 2nd.

also lots of teams that win the first championship also lose the next go round when attempting 2 in a row - happens in all sports.

 

[mas0764]

didn't seem like you were willing to accept the one-off not too long ago.

still have to get to the dance before you can dance. then from there try and win that one before worrying about a 2nd.

also lots of teams that win the first championship also lose the next go round when attempting 2 in a row - happens in all sports.

I never said I wouldn't "accept," it. I said I'm not going to build towards "just trying to win one."

I'm emulating the multi-winners because they are basically the only teams that win. I'm not interested in being a Blues-like team that wins 1 out of every 15 Cups.

I'm interested in being the Penguins, Blackhawks, or Kings.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

I really can’t wait for Laffy to start finding his game and come back to this thread

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I would "take" a one-off as well, but doesn't it seem like most of the winners are repeat winners? I think the point is to get good enough to even win 1, you have to get good enough to win more than 1.

The exception to that rule is the Blues. The other "one time" winners the past 15 years are the Bruins, who appeared in a total of 3 and could have easily won another, and the Caps, who have been hanging around for forever because they have the second best goal scorer ever.

And to get good enough to win more than 1, well, look at the Blackhawks, Kings, Lightning, etc.

Capitals
Avalanche
Red Wings

Also one-time winners in the last 15 years.

 

[RangersFan1994]

Can anyone explain what happened to Lafreniere’s “sandpaper”? Or was it never real?

Scouts just said on draft day, because they did not want the NHL to know him as a Soft Smelly Frenchman

 

[Synergy27]

I really can’t wait for Laffy to start finding his game and come back to this thread

You “can’t wait”? Sounds like you need to exercise some patience.

 

[LORDE]

I really can’t wait for Laffy to start finding his game and come back to this thread

I can't wait either...

Nothing would make me happier (aside from winning the Mega-Millions I guess)

This is his big chance...
#1 LW and PP1 opportunity (reportedly)

 

[mas0764]

Capitals
Avalanche
Red Wings

Also one-time winners in the last 15 years.

But the Red Wings were multi-Cup winners, their last one just happened to be the first year of that 15 year period. I count them in the repeaters club.

The Avalanche just won last year and look like they can easily win again.

The one-time winners should be considered the Blues, the Capitals and the Bruins. But the Bruins appeared in two more and the Capitals have the second best player of the era/second greatest goal scorer ever. The Blues are the team that is the true "one-off" and "anything can happen if you play well and the chips fall in your favor," team. The others are all semi-dynasties with dynastic-level talent that just haven't gotten all the breaks, mostly because they've run into other dynastic teams.

If one wants to argue that we can't become the Penguins because we don't have Malkin and Crosby and can't get said players at least we should target becoming like the Bruins.

Lucic (in his prime), Krejci, Bergeron, Marchand. Blake Wheeler and Tyler Seguin were on the early teams (1 cup win, 1 finals loss). David Pastrnak on the later team. Nathan Horton before he was injured. Mark Recchi as the MSL of the team.

They were loaded. We aren't like them yet, not even close. We need Laf and Kakko to become Marchand, Seguin, Wheeler, etc. And we need more talent, way more young forward talent.

Their D also featured Chara, Krug, Hamilton, and McAvoy along the way. We have Fox.... and... well, Trouba sucks in comparison to those guys.

 

[JHS]

Rangers have won 1 Cup in 83 years. I'll take a "one-off" Cup at this point. Sure, I wish my favourite team could be a dynasty and win multiple cups but for me that's not a realistic expectation.

The Penguins won back-to-back Cups and were the first team to do so since the Red Wings in the 1990s. It's a league where a bunch of teams can win.

Yes- Thank you for this perspective. I love how people want "multiple cups" when we have not had a single cup since 94.

 

[mas0764]

Yes- Thank you for this perspective. I love how people want "multiple cups" when we have not had a single cup since 94.

But again, you aren't likely to get even 1 unless you build a multi-winner.

I would love one. We aren't likely gonna get even 1 unless we build a team that rivals the Pens, Blackhawks, Kings, Bruins, etc. Those level teams win all the Cups.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

You “can’t wait”? Sounds like you need to exercise some patience.

Not gonna lie- that was good

 

[McRanger92]

I would "take" a one-off as well, but doesn't it seem like most of the winners are repeat winners? I think the point is to get good enough to even win 1, you have to get good enough to win more than 1.

The exception to that rule is the Blues. The other "one time" winners the past 15 years are the Bruins, who appeared in a total of 3 and could have easily won another, and the Caps, who have been hanging around for forever because they have the second best goal scorer ever.

And to get good enough to win more than 1, well, look at the Blackhawks, Kings, Lightning, etc.

The Rangers were already pretty close last year and have a better all around team this year. You can win multiple Cups until you win your first, and there's no reason why it cant be us this year. With this core, and the jumps made by Kakko, Chytil and Miller, they can do it but it almost always comes down to puck luck and health once you get in.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

At this point Laffy needs to will himself into a positive game and build his own confidence.

It's a funny thing with sports. It can go south really quickly and you can fall into a tailspin. Especially at a young age.

He's got an opportunity to prove something to himself first, and then the team, fans, etc. I could imagine he feels like the world is sitting on his shoulders right now. He needs some good things to happen, take a breath and just go play. Make a mistake, but do it full speed trying to make your mark on the game.

We can scrutinize the kid all we want. We can say he doesn't have the pace to play in the NHL and his skating is an issue, but he's got the tools to be a very good player in this league.

He's not allowing his talents to take over and become the NHL version of himself (the playoff version we saw last year, which was very good) and it may because he's sensing what everyone else is. He's not like the other #1OAs. And thats fine. Be the player you are and what will be will be. Thats the only thing you can control right now.

And who knows. I'm sure if he has a good game or two and Kreider comes back, Gallant may leave him there to try and jump start him and build his confidence. Big opportunity for him.

The other question is who will be supplanting Kreider on PP1? Kakko?