Alexis Lafreniere - is he the 2nd best prospect since Crosby?

[Lebowski]

My argument is that there are players that have excelled to a much greater degree against tougher competition, and people like yourself are just clouded with so much recency bias it's gotten to a ridiculously insane level.

1) Matthews dominated men in the Swiss league, then went to the WHC against NHLers and was amongst the best players in the tournament.
2) Tavares was granted exceptional status, went on to have historic OHL seasons, much more dominant than Lafreniere.
3) Prospects like Eichel, Dahlin also dominated against men.

I just don't see a single reason why he should even be mentioned in the same breath as the elite #1s and quite honestly, he's closer to Jack Hughes than he is Matthews/Tavares/Dahlin/Eichel.

1) You can't know what Lafreniere could do in a men's league because he was never given the opportunity of playing in a men's league. He has done as well as pretty much anyone in junior on the other hand leading up to his draft, minus the truly exceptional players like Crosby and McDavid.

2) Exceptional status is irrelevant and the OHL is a lot more willing to hand out these exceptions than the Q to begin with. You keep going back to Tavares being a much more dominant than Lafreniere while it simply isn't true, at least not in his 17 and 18 years old seasons. Not only that, but Lafreniere's D season is actually better up to this point than Tavares'.

No one denies Tavares had an amazing D-2 season, and that's why he was considered a possible generational talent at that point in his career. But he failed to build on that season, plain and simple. There wasn't any talk of a possible generational talent by the time he got drafted, he was considered a strong 1st overall pick and nothing more.

3) Dominating is a strong word and the sample size was especially small in Eichel's case. Either way, it's a meaningless argument considering Lafreniere never had the chance to even play against men. If the men's league argument was as prevalent as you seem to think it is, Euro players would be getting drafted ahead of CHL kids routinely. In reality, that doesn't happen often, and dominant CHL kids end up being dominant NHL players anyway.

You may not see a single reason why he's mentioned in the same breath as the elite #1s, but the reasons are pretty obvious, starting with his stats that are up there with any "elite #1s" minus the obvious two outliers.

Funny how you stopped mentioning Hall and MacKinnon, though. Did you realize you didn't have much of a leg to stand on? If he's better than these guys, but clearly inferior to that other tier of guys, should we have a tier specifically made for Lafreniere? At this point you're just splitting hairs in half because you've camped yourself in a position that you can't really defend.

In a worse league. Playing an easier position. And you're disregarding how many years prior to their draft year?

The burden of proof is on you on that argument. Worse league? What's your estimated impact on their respective production given the league they played in? What's your methodology? How do you account for their immediate surroundings in their level of production? Laf just dwarfed the competition at the WJC, shouldn't that alleviate some of your concerns that he's feeding off of weaker competition in the Q?

Easier position? There's definitely a value premium on centers compared to wingers. Even considering that, Laf is as close to the consensus #1 ranked prospect even when a guy like Byfield is available. That should be pretty telling.

How many years prior to their draft? You realize the fact Tavares had an additional year in the CHL leading up to his draft is to his advantage, right?

 

[Leafs87]

In terms of hype and not looking at what the prospects actually became I put fourth fourth behind crosby. McDavid 2nd, Tavares 3rd and Laf 4th

 

[Tutu to]

Still not close to Tavares. Tavares put up historic numbers in spite of his skating because of his IQ.

Not in his draft year which is why the hyped die down.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

My argument is that there are players that have excelled to a much greater degree against tougher competition, and people like yourself are just clouded with so much recency bias it's gotten to a ridiculously insane level.

1) Matthews dominated men in the Swiss league, then went to the WHC against NHLers and was amongst the best players in the tournament.
2) Tavares was granted exceptional status, went on to have historic OHL seasons, much more dominant than Lafreniere.
3) Prospects like Eichel, Dahlin also dominated against men.

I just don't see a single reason why he should even be mentioned in the same breath as the elite #1s and quite honestly, he's closer to Jack Hughes than he is Matthews/Tavares/Dahlin/Eichel.

You keep saying "historic seasons", plural. Which seasons are those? Tavares had that one season as a 16 year old that would be considered historic. He then REGRESSED statistically in his 17 and 18 year old seasons. To use another hockey term, his career year was as a 16 year old. Yet you keep acting like each year he kept on breaking records. Lafreniere, by contrast, has improved each year. His draft year (this year) he's having a better year than Tavares had in his draft year.

I do agree, however, that the HYPE around Tavares was higher than it is around Lafreniere. But that was largely due to his 16 year old season and some folks still believing that indicated he had Crosby/McDavid-like potential. As we've seen now after a decade, he clearly didn't and his 17 and 18 year old seasons were more indicative of his future potential.

 

[Mickey Marner]

In fairness to Tavares' declining numbers, OHL scoring dropped about half a goal per game between his 16 & 18 year old seasons. In 2006-07, nine players scored 100+ points. In 2008-09, only Tavares did. He finished 2nd, 3rd, 1st in OHL scoring from 16-18.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

In fairness to Tavares' declining numbers, OHL scoring dropped about half a goal per game between his 16 & 18 year old seasons. In 2006-07, nine players scored 100+ points. In 2008-09, only Tavares did. He finished 2nd, 3rd, 1st in OHL scoring from 16-18.

2007 also seemed to have all the top guys play well over 60 games (the guys who reached 100 points). 2009 had a bunch of guys in the 90 point range, but many seemed to miss 10+ games and would have hit 100 without those missed games.

So I don't think it's a case of some drastic drop in offense as it is a weird anomaly where a lot of the guys on pace for 100+ missed significant time compared to 2007. Because 2008 (Tavares' season after his 72 goal year), there were still eight 100 point players, and I don't recall any rule changes at the time following the 2008 season that would lead to widespread drop in scoring.

 

[newfy]

2) Exceptional status is irrelevant and the OHL is a lot more willing to hand out these exceptions than the Q to begin with. You keep going back to Tavares being a much more dominant than Lafreniere while it simply isn't true, at least not in his 17 and 18 years old seasons. Not only that, but Lafreniere's D season is actually better up to this point than Tavares'.

I've seen this point out there a couple times but its irrelevant for different reasons than you posted. If I remember correctly, Lafreniere knew he was a late birthday and would be 14 to start in the Q and play 3 full seasons anyways. I'm pretty sure this decision was made so he didnt get hurt, 14 is young for that league.

People trying to compare based on Tavares' draft numbers either werent around to remember Tavares draft year or are being intentionally obtuse. I'm not saying Lafreniere is better than him for sure but there were serious concerns about his skating and that his numbers wouldnt carry over. His numbers also dipped over the course of his OHL career as well. If he put up 72 goals and was even considered an average skater this wouldnt be a discussion but his skating was knocked hard.

 

[93LEAFS]

1) You can't know what Lafreniere could do in a men's league because he was never given the opportunity of playing in a men's league. He has done as well as pretty much anyone in junior on the other hand leading up to his draft, minus the truly exceptional players like Crosby and McDavid.

2) Exceptional status is irrelevant and the OHL is a lot more willing to hand out these exceptions than the Q to begin with. You keep going back to Tavares being a much more dominant than Lafreniere while it simply isn't true, at least not in his 17 and 18 years old seasons. Not only that, but Lafreniere's D season is actually better up to this point than Tavares'.

No one denies Tavares had an amazing D-2 season, and that's why he was considered a possible generational talent at that point in his career. But he failed to build on that season, plain and simple. There wasn't any talk of a possible generational talent by the time he got drafted, he was considered a strong 1st overall pick and nothing more.

Tavares had a better junior career, and his age and league adjusted numbers have always been better than Lafreniere, including his 17 and 18-year-old seasons. Stamkos's 16 and 17-year-old seasons are more impressive than Lafreniere too. Patrick Kane's 2006-07 season also blows him out of the water. Marner's 17 and 18-year-old season are pretty much on par. It's not like he blows past what we've seen recently. Drouin's 17 and 18 year old seasons were on a similar level.

As for exceptional. The QMJHL is just as willing considering they set the standard at Veleno. Every OHLer who has gotten exceptional status has been better than Veleno outside of Sean Day.

 

[SympathyForTheDevils]

Tavares had a better junior career, and his age and league adjusted numbers have always been better than Lafreniere, including his 17 and 18-year-old seasons. Stamkos's 16 and 17-year-old seasons are more impressive than Lafreniere too. Patrick Kane's 2006-07 season also blows him out of the water. Marner's 17 and 18-year-old season are pretty much on par. It's not like he blows past what we've seen recently. Drouin's 17 and 18 year old seasons were on a similar level.

As for exceptional. The QMJHL is just as willing considering they set the standard at Veleno. Every OHLer who has gotten exceptional status has been better than Veleno outside of Sean Day.

Lafrenière's numbers are actually pretty comparable to all those guys once you adjust for the PP disparity. Kane had more than half his production coming from London's 510 PP opportunities. Most CHL teams this year will be lucky to get close to 300 (Lafrenière's team is pacing for 275). That was strongest from 05-07, but even by 09, teams were getting roughly an additional 100 PPs a year compared to today; for their star forwards, that's an additional 10-15 points per year. Kane, Tavares and Stamkos's draft years aren't quite as dominant when you take that into account (Tavares's 16 yo season is still amazing, by any standard).

Plus, aside from Stamkos, these guys generally played with more talented linemates than Lafrenière is.

 

[newfy]

Tavares had a better junior career, and his age and league adjusted numbers have always been better than Lafreniere, including his 17 and 18-year-old seasons. Stamkos's 16 and 17-year-old seasons are more impressive than Lafreniere too. Patrick Kane's 2006-07 season also blows him out of the water. Marner's 17 and 18-year-old season are pretty much on par. It's not like he blows past what we've seen recently. Drouin's 17 and 18 year old seasons were on a similar level.

As for exceptional. The QMJHL is just as willing considering they set the standard at Veleno. Every OHLer who has gotten exceptional status has been better than Veleno outside of Sean Day.

Using just raw numbers doesnt really explain Tavares as a number one overall pick though. No one knew what he was going to be like in the NHL because of his skating. Just throwing out his numbers and his goal totals in the OHL is not what peoplewere doing back then. There was genuine concern about his skating. He ended up going first and is insanely hard working and turned his skating into a strength imo but thats all hindsight and not what the talk was about on draft day. Obviously he was hyped, he was still a number one overall pick but his hype really didnt match the numbers he was putting up eitherdue to his skating. 72 goals in the OHL as a 16 year old and there were still people saying he might go second overall kinda explains him. He was a polarising prospect for sure to a lot of people. I'm also not saying that Lafreniere is a for sure better prospect or anything like that either, just that posted Tavares' numbers isnt telling the whole story at all

As for the exceptional status thing, I've mentioned it already but there was talk at the time that Lafreniere didnt actually apply for exceptional status or he would've got it. With his birthday he knew he would be 14 in the Q and would already for sure have to play 3 seasons without it so why take the risk for his health/toll on his body. I'm not 100% if this is true but this is what was discussed at the time and does kinda make sense.

 

[93LEAFS]

Lafrenière's numbers are actually pretty comparable to all those guys once you adjust for the PP disparity. Kane had more than half his production coming from London's 510 PP opportunities. Most CHL teams this year will be lucky to get close to 300 (Lafrenière's team is pacing for 275). That was strongest from 05-07, but even by 09, teams were getting roughly an additional 100 PPs a year compared to today; for their star forwards, that's an additional 10-15 points per year. Kane, Tavares and Stamkos's draft years aren't quite as dominant when you take that into account (Tavares's 16 yo season is still amazing, by any standard).

Plus, aside from Stamkos, these guys generally played with more talented linemates than Lafrenière is.

Most also played tougher competition outside of Drouin though. Yes, the OHL players generally have better teammates, but they also generally play better players. Just look at the amount of drafted players in the OHL during McDavid and Marner's time there, compared to the amount in the Q.