So in the context of replying to a poster who is trying to mock people calling Laf a bust, am I really wrong in comparing the production of other 1OAs to Laf's production? Including the on-paper statistics of an actual bust? What's silly about that?
Still, it's absolutely fair to say that every player's circumstances are different, but what seems to be a constant in the NHL is that if you have the talent and still to play at the top, you're going to play at the top. I don't understand why this fanbase lives and dies on top minutes and PP1 time when it comes to our top picks. I can't look at the 1OA list over the last few decades and say to myself, without laughing out loud, that the superstars on that list are only superstars because they played minutes and got shoved onto PP1. In fact, we saw Laf on PP1 and it didn't result in some drastic change of his talent and skill. We've seen Laf on a lot of line combos and we've even seen him get some top line minutes, but he's always looked the same. Chemistry goes a long way and he's absolutely improving, but relies on Chy a lot to finish his plays and KK's cycle. Guy can shoot, but he doesn't do it enough. A lot of you want to count your chickens before they hatch in terms of you want to call him a success. His 4th season AFTER his off-season work will be a great example of actual improvement in his overall game.