Value of: Lafreniere Offer Sheet (1 year at $6.4M)

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Lafrenière had 35 ES points in 81 games last year. And that includes his previous shooting percentage dropping by 8 points.

I wonder why his shooting percentage dropped by so much... could it have anything to do with his shooting percentage being unsustainable the prior year? Who could have predicted he wouldn't continue to shoot at 20% at 5v5?

His 5v5 on ice shooting percentage actually went up this year (to 9.24% from 8.88%).

His 5v5 p/60 and primary p/60 have dropped each year he's been in the league, despite his on ice shooting percentage going up each year:

5v5 p/60:
2020-21 1.75
2021-22 1.66
2022-23 1.61

5v5 primary p/60
2020-21 1.49
2021-22 1.35
2022-23 1.11

 

[Tawnos]

I wonder why his shooting percentage dropped by so much... could it have anything to do with his shooting percentage being unsustainable the prior year? Who could have predicted he wouldn't continue to shoot at 20% at 5v5?

His 5v5 on ice shooting percentage actually went up this year (to 9.24% from 8.88%).

His 5v5 p/60 and primary p/60 have dropped each year he's been in the league, despite his on ice shooting percentage going up each year:

5v5 p/60:
2020-21 1.75
2021-22 1.66
2022-23 1.61

5v5 primary p/60
2020-21 1.49
2021-22 1.35
2022-23 1.11

The 8% drop was from the average of the other two years he'd been in the league, not just the year before.

The 5v5 p/60 numbers are too close to draw a meaningful conclusion from. The difference between 1.75 and 1.61 p/60 isn't even 3 points over the course of a season. Plus, if you look at all ES situations, his p/60 in the three years are 1.79, 1.73, 1.88 (I never pay attention to primary points, because there are too many cases that the secondary assist is more important to the goal than the primary assist). The on-ice shooting percentage is a reflection of him helping his line create more scoring chances whether he gets a point out of it or not. Both of those things are a reflection of him having a somewhat expanded role last year, even if that didn't include special teams time.

Am I saying he's not a disappointing 1OA? No. Am I saying he's legitimately worth $6.4m? No, I made that clear in my initial post where I said it's an overpay. All I'm really saying is that I think a lot of people underestimate the quality of the player at this stage of his career. It could still go either way. His performance at ES over his first three seasons are fairly comparable to Joe Thornton, Rick Nash, and RNH, while being slightly ahead of Daigle, Stefan and Yakupov. It's too soon to give up on him and too soon to give him away for a lottery ticket.

Lafrenière is a good player. Maybe not 1OA good, but still good.

 

[blundluntman]

Ok cool? I’m not disagreeing that it’s a stupid move.

I’m saying that he’s a former 1OA who so many fans will delude themselves into thinking can be rebuild with a change of scenery to be what he was.

I was telling you why someone on HFboards would unironically push for Laf at 6.4M. I wouldn’t and you wouldn’t, and it’s crazy… but he ticks the marks for some of these crazy prospect mavens.

I get you but it was more of a joke/rhetorical question in my original post bc of how ridiculous it was

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

The 8% drop was from the average of the other two years he'd been in the league, not just the year before.

I don't care if you used his first 2 years or just last year. His individual shooting percentage was clearly unsustainably high and he was due for significant regression in that regard.

The 5v5 p/60 numbers are too close to draw a meaningful conclusion from. The difference between 1.75 and 1.61 p/60 isn't even 3 points over the course of a season. Plus, if you look at all ES situations, his p/60 in the three years are 1.79, 1.73, 1.88 (I never pay attention to primary points, because there are too many cases that the secondary assist is more important to the goal than the primary assist).

Why would you use his ES numbers instead of his 5v5 numbers? Those are inflated by empty net points, of which he had 3 last year vs 0 in his first two years.

The fact that he's failed to improve on his 5v5 scoring efficiency is not a good sign for him. He was billed as being more or less a finished product, and I think that was probably pretty true (and the numbers reflect that). I don't see him making many huge strides from here on out.

The on-ice shooting percentage is a reflection of him helping his line create more scoring chances whether he gets a point out of it or not.

No, it really isn't.

 

[Tawnos]

I don't care if you used his first 2 years or just last year. His individual shooting percentage was clearly unsustainably high and he was due for significant regression in that regard.


Why would you use his ES numbers instead of his 5v5 numbers? Those are inflated by empty net points, of which he had 3 last year vs 0 in his first two years.

The fact that he's failed to improve on his 5v5 scoring efficiency is not a good sign for him. He was billed as being more or less a finished product, and I think that was probably pretty true (and the numbers reflect that). I don't see him making many huge strides from here on out.

No, it really isn't.

"No it really isn't." Lies, damn lies, and statistics indeed, huh?

I used ES numbers because they reflect the role the guy plays. He got empty net and 6v5 points last year because the coach began trusting him to play in important situations... and that happened because his play improved from the season before, plain and simple.

You may be right, he might not make huge strides. Then again, he might. Like I said, it could go either way still. After three seasons, I don't think anyone expected Thornton to become one of the best playmakers of his generation. It's too early.

 

[ML16]

Yeah, the move doesn't make any sense regardless of who makes the offer, even if short term. It's a waste of picks or a waste of money. It'd have to be a move made of pure spite

In a way, the move could make sense for both teams: Montreal takes yet another gamble on an underwhelming-so-far 1st rounder fitting its emeging core - and New York, on the Habs spiraling down in the standings to fetch a top-10 pick next summer.

From this perspective, the Habs would have no alternative but send a 1 year 6.4M OS; they lack their own 2nd to offer less and the Rangers would easily match any OS that doesn’t include at least an unprotected 1st anyways.

Besides waiving the possibility of another top-10 pick next year, it would also entail the Habs giving a lot of bargaining power to Lafrenière afterwards; to say nothing of the risk of rules circumventing if the latter signs an affordable long term contract next January. Highly unlikely the Habs go that route.

As for the Rangers, as long as Lafrenière is RFA, they can bridge him and wait to see if his production eventually explodes; no incentive to move him while his value is at a all time low.

In summary, the Rangers shouldn’t necessarily be preoccupied by the Habs - and most bottom-dwellers for that matter - targeting Lafrenière, but they could be quite vulnerable if a GM expecting to draft in the #20+ range next summer makes such a bold NBA-ish move!

 

[Axel Sandy Pelikan]

I get you but it was more of a joke/rhetorical question in my original post bc of how ridiculous it was

Yeah. We have had several of those type of guys that I mention on the Wings board. Some of them were so much about it that I find myself rooting against the NHL careers of Jake Sanderson and Gabriel Vilardi solely because of how f***in annoying this guy was about pumping their tires.

 

[blundluntman]

In a way, the move could make sense for both teams: Montreal takes yet another gamble on an underwhelming-so-far 1st rounder fitting its emeging core - and New York, on the Habs spiraling down in the standings to fetch a top-10 pick next summer.

From this perspective, the Habs would have no alternative but send a 1 year 6.4M OS; they lack their own 2nd to offer less and the Rangers would easily match any OS that doesn’t include at least an unprotected 1st anyways.

Besides waiving the possibility of another top-10 pick next year, it would also entail the Habs giving a lot of bargaining power to Lafrenière afterwards; to say nothing of the risk of rules circumventing if the latter signs an affordable long term contract next January. Highly unlikely the Habs go that route.

As for the Rangers, as long as Lafrenière is RFA, they can bridge him and wait to see if his production eventually explodes; no incentive to move him while his value is at a all time low.

In summary, the Rangers shouldn’t necessarily be preoccupied by the Habs - and most bottom-dwellers for that matter - targeting Lafrenière, but they could be quite vulnerable if a GM expecting to draft in the #20+ range next summer makes such a bold NBA-ish move!

It's too high risk to justify if you ask me. I guess with the amount of cap space, it isn't too much of a loss to give Lafreniere 6.4 for 1 year. But giving away a 1st and a 3rd round pick for a guy that will likely be a middle 6 forward at best is very short-sighted. Especially when you consider they could have a shot at a very high 1st round pick next year.

Yeah. We have had several of those type of guys that I mention on the Wings board. Some of them were so much about it that I find myself rooting against the NHL careers of Jake Sanderson and Gabriel Vilardi solely because of how f***in annoying this guy was about pumping their tires.

Yeah I don't get why anybody would try to justify making such an absurd move but I guess there will always be people that do. Gambling addictions are a real thing after all

 

[Axel Sandy Pelikan]

In a way, the move could make sense for both teams: Montreal takes yet another gamble on an underwhelming-so-far 1st rounder fitting its emeging core - and New York, on the Habs spiraling down in the standings to fetch a top-10 pick next summer.

From this perspective, the Habs would have no alternative but send a 1 year 6.4M OS; they lack their own 2nd to offer less and the Rangers would easily match any OS that doesn’t include at least an unprotected 1st anyways.

Besides waiving the possibility of another top-10 pick next year, it would also entail the Habs giving a lot of bargaining power to Lafrenière afterwards; to say nothing of the risk of rules circumventing if the latter signs an affordable long term contract next January. Highly unlikely the Habs go that route.

As for the Rangers, as long as Lafrenière is RFA, they can bridge him and wait to see if his production eventually explodes; no incentive to move him while his value is at a all time low.

In summary, the Rangers shouldn’t necessarily be preoccupied by the Habs - and most bottom-dwellers for that matter - targeting Lafrenière, but they could be quite vulnerable if a GM expecting to draft in the #20+ range next summer makes such a bold NBA-ish move!

At this point, just f***in offer a 1st for Laf straight up if you want him. Tell the Rags GM that you're planning on an OS but that they know and you know that he's not worth 6.4M for that year. Offer the same comp picks but just negotiate the deal on your own terms. Maybe adjust the conditions on the 1st to be a bit less protective for you. Like top 5 instead of top 10 or something.

The comp picks AND the salary are way this is dumb.

 

[I Hate Philadelphia]

"No it really isn't." Lies, damn lies, and statistics indeed, huh?

I used ES numbers because they reflect the role the guy plays. He got empty net and 6v5 points last year because the coach began trusting him to play in important situations... and that happened because his play improved from the season before, plain and simple.

You may be right, he might not make huge strides. Then again, he might. Like I said, it could go either way still. After three seasons, I don't think anyone expected Thornton to become one of the best playmakers of his generation. It's too early.

Another awful comparison

1. Thornton was a year younger
2. Thornton played on a bottom-feeder team
3. Thornton was forced into playing a grinder / 4th line role
4. Thornton played ~150 fewer minutes in these 3 seasons despite playing one more game than Lafreniere
5. Thornton scored almost 20 more points than Laf in this time despite all of the above, PLUS league average goal scoring being significantly less during this time in NHL history

The Lafreniere cope has got to stop, he is simply not good.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

"No it really isn't." Lies, damn lies, and statistics indeed, huh?

Not that at all, it's just that such a trivial change in his on ice sh% has very little to do with one individual player, especially considering that scoring has increased over the last few years.

I used ES numbers because they reflect the role the guy plays. He got empty net and 6v5 points last year because the coach began trusting him to play in important situations... and that happened because his play improved from the season before, plain and simple.

ES points aren't standard. Yeah, his scoring per minute went up because he played more time against an empty net. That's not really giving any good insight into his ability to actually create offense.

If you really wanted to reflect the role he plays, why not just use total points when comparing his contract value to other players?

You may be right, he might not make huge strides. Then again, he might. Like I said, it could go either way still. After three seasons, I don't think anyone expected Thornton to become one of the best playmakers of his generation. It's too early.

You mean the same Joe Thornton who led his team in goals, assists, and points as a 20 year old in his 3rd season? Yeah, I'm sure him becoming an elite offensive player was a real shock to everybody.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that Lafreniere deserves to even be in the same sentence as Thornton.

 

[miscs75]

Remember when Ian Mitchell was going to be a star?

*Ryan Poehling

 

[I Hate Philadelphia]

*Ryan Poehling

*Oliver Wahlstrom

 

[Tawnos]

Another awful comparison

View attachment 730857

1. Thornton was a year younger
2. Thornton played on a bottom-feeder team
3. Thornton was forced into playing a grinder / 4th line role
4. Thornton played ~150 fewer minutes in these 3 seasons despite playing one more game than Lafreniere
5. Thornton scored almost 20 more points than Laf in this time despite all of the above, PLUS league average goal scoring being significantly less during this time in NHL history

The Lafreniere cope has got to stop, he is simply not good.

1. That's true. And?
2. That should have given him more opportunities, not fewer. And it did. See number 4.
3. So was Lafrenière (3rd line grinder role).
4. Thornton played 3413 in his first three seasons. Lafrenière played 3115. Thornton got the benefit of more than twice the amount of PP time as Lafrenière's gotten and on the first unit much of the time.
5. Thornton scored 79 EVP in his first three years. Lafrenière scored 85. The only reason there's a significant point total difference between the two is because Thornton played on the PP... like I said, being on a bottom feeder gave him more opportunities, not fewer.

Aside from the fact that you were flat out wrong in some of the things you said, it's really just not the point I was making. Lafrenière still has a ton of potential. I don't think he's going to be a player on par with Thornton, but he can still have a really good NHL career. Bringing up Thornton was an illustration of how players after their D+3 still have plenty of room for improvement. He's the prime example.

Not that at all, it's just that such a trivial change in his on ice sh% has very little to do with one individual player, especially considering that scoring has increased over the last few years.


ES points aren't standard. Yeah, his scoring per minute went up because he played more time against an empty net. That's not really giving any good insight into his ability to actually create offense.

If you really wanted to reflect the role he plays, why not just use total points when comparing his contract value to other players?


You mean the same Joe Thornton who led his team in goals, assists, and points as a 20 year old in his 3rd season? Yeah, I'm sure him becoming an elite offensive player was a real shock to everybody.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that Lafreniere deserves to even be in the same sentence as Thornton.

Not surprised your ability to understand a simple point is just as bad as the other posters. No point in continuing with you.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Not surprised your ability to understand a simple point is just as bad as the other posters. No point in continuing with you

I'm not surprised you're waiving the white towel. "After three seasons, I don't think anyone expected Thornton to become one of the best playmakers of his generation." Lol. I guess you weren't around back then.

Next time do your homework.

 

[hawksrule]

1. That's true. And?
2. That should have given him more opportunities, not fewer. And it did. See number 4.
3. So was Lafrenière (3rd line grinder role).
4. Thornton played 3413 in his first three seasons. Lafrenière played 3115. Thornton got the benefit of more than twice the amount of PP time as Lafrenière's gotten and on the first unit much of the time.
5. Thornton scored 79 EVP in his first three years. Lafrenière scored 85. The only reason there's a significant point total difference between the two is because Thornton played on the PP... like I said, being on a bottom feeder gave him more opportunities, not fewer.

Aside from the fact that you were flat out wrong in some of the things you said, it's really just not the point I was making. Lafrenière still has a ton of potential. I don't think he's going to be a player on par with Thornton, but he can still have a really good NHL career. Bringing up Thornton was an illustration of how players after their D+3 still have plenty of room for improvement. He's the prime example.



Not surprised your ability to understand a simple point is just as bad as the other posters. No point in continuing with you.

Bringing up a random outlier who improved after his d+3 has no more relevance than a billion examples of players who didn’t. Unless your point is simply that no matter how disappointing he’s been so far,
that he may improve exists in the realm of possibility. If that’s the case, no one would dispute that but it isn’t an interesting point.

 

[miscs75]

*Oliver Wahlstrom

Wahlstrom never impressed me from the start as an Islanders fan. Too many parallels to Mike Hoffman. Ryan Poehling on the other hand was talked about like he’s the next superstar after his hat trick then he fizzled out to nothing real fast. Now he’s a bottom 6 guy.

 

[blankall]

This would actually be a good gamble for a team likely to get a late first. I don't touch it if I'm Montreal though. Montreal was bottom five in the league last year (yes below Arizona), and they could easily find themselves in that same position again next year.

You have to remember that many teams were purposely tanking last year for Bedard. All of the teams that were below Montreal last year, Columbus, Anaheim, SJ, and Chicago, will be trying harder this year. In order to move up, Montreal has to leapfrog teams like Philly, St. Louis, Detroit, Washington, Vancouver, etc...

I do think Laf is somewhat buried in the NYR. On a team with fewer options, where he is given a true top 6 role, he could potentially flourish.

 

[TGWL]

Mighty generous of you.

Toffoli had 30 goals in his 3rd full season, Laf has never come close to sniffing this.

That's not what the poster said.

 

[CTHabsfan]

This would actually be a good gamble for a team likely to get a late first. I don't touch it if I'm Montreal though. Montreal was bottom five in the league last year (yes below Arizona), and they could easily find themselves in that same position again next year.

You have to remember that many teams were purposely tanking last year for Bedard. All of the teams that were below Montreal last year, Columbus, Anaheim, SJ, and Chicago, will be trying harder this year. In order to move up, Montreal has to leapfrog teams like Philly, St. Louis, Detroit, Washington, Vancouver, etc...

I do think Laf is somewhat buried in the NYR. On a team with fewer options, where he is given a true top 6 role, he could potentially flourish.

Montreal also has plenty of forwards and there would be unrealistic expectations for Laf to be the next Québécois superstar.

 

[I Hate Philadelphia]

1. That's true. And?
2. That should have given him more opportunities, not fewer. And it did. See number 4.
3. So was Lafrenière (3rd line grinder role).
4. Thornton played 3413 in his first three seasons. Lafrenière played 3115. Thornton got the benefit of more than twice the amount of PP time as Lafrenière's gotten and on the first unit much of the time.
5. Thornton scored 79 EVP in his first three years. Lafrenière scored 85. The only reason there's a significant point total difference between the two is because Thornton played on the PP... like I said, being on a bottom feeder gave him more opportunities, not fewer.

Aside from the fact that you were flat out wrong in some of the things you said, it's really just not the point I was making. Lafrenière still has a ton of potential. I don't think he's going to be a player on par with Thornton, but he can still have a really good NHL career. Bringing up Thornton was an illustration of how players after their D+3 still have plenty of room for improvement. He's the prime example.



Not surprised your ability to understand a simple point is just as bad as the other posters. No point in continuing with you.

So you're just going to flat out lie about their ice time in their first 3 seasons? You know we can all look this up, right?

Yikes...

 

[Tawnos]

So you're just going to flat out lie about their ice time in their first 3 seasons? You know we can all look this up, right?
View attachment 730883
Yikes...

You realize there's an official source for this information, right? Yikes, indeed.

 

[ML16]

At this point, just f***in offer a 1st for Laf straight up if you want him. Tell the Rags GM that you're planning on an OS but that they know and you know that he's not worth 6.4M for that year. Offer the same comp picks but just negotiate the deal on your own terms. Maybe adjust the conditions on the 1st to be a bit less protective for you. Like top 5 instead of top 10 or something.

The comp picks AND the salary are way this is dumb.

I concur; OS remains a nuclear option to this day in the NHL and unless contenders start using their projected late 1st round pick to change that league-wide dynamic - mainstreaming the Hurricanes’ the successful Kotkaniemi OS blueprint, ie. - this strategy indeed leaves nowhere.

As for building up a package to obtain Lafrenière, I doubt there’s mutual interest between the latter and Montreal, but for discussion’s sake, let’s say there is.

Under that assumption, Montreal’s « best sustainable offer » would likely be something around: 1) a cost-controlled U25 defenseman (Harris?); 2) a cost-controlled U25 winger (Ylonen/Farrell?) and 3) a top-10-protected 1st round pick in 2024 or 2025.

Basically, a future 1st and former 2nd (Ylonen) and 3rd (Harris) round picks; slightly above the OS compensation for 6.4M (1st and 3rd).

But would New York even consider such a package? Only if they lost faith in Lafrenière as much as Chicago and Colorado did with Dach and Newhook respectively in the last couple of years.

 

[HabsAddict]

I concur; OS remains a nuclear option to this day in the NHL and unless contenders start using their projected late 1st round pick to change that league-wide dynamic - mainstreaming the Hurricanes’ the successful Kotkaniemi OS blueprint, ie. - this strategy indeed leaves nowhere.

As for building up a package to obtain Lafrenière, I doubt there’s mutual interest between the latter and Montreal, but for discussion’s sake, let’s say there is.

Under that assumption, Montreal’s « best sustainable offer » would likely be something around: 1) a cost-controlled U25 defenseman (Harris?); 2) a cost-controlled U25 winger (Ylonen/Farrell?) and 3) a top-10-protected 1st round pick in 2024 or 2025.

Basically, a future 1st and former 2nd (Ylonen) and 3rd (Harris) round picks; slightly above the OS compensation for 6.4M (1st and 3rd).

But would New York even consider such a package? Only if they lost faith in Lafrenière as much as Chicago and Colorado did with Dach and Newhook respectively in the last couple of years.

Habs won't overpay for another project .

Laf value is a mid 1st pick at best so why would the Habs offer two prospects AND their 1st.

Nobody cares about his French background and at this point, Laf can go either way in his development. Meaning he could be a top 6 or just what he has shown so far.

It makes more sense for a top team to OS him then a bottom team risking a high pick.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

If he’s so bad, why waste your time trying to trade him for us? I don’t see all the fuss.