I just think he has some untapped offense that will be stifled if they JUST use him as a depth guy. No more, no less. He doesn't have to be a regular top six forward to be useful offensively. "all situations" is a good way to put it but that doesn't mean no offense either.
I disagree. And that's not a knock on Laferriere. I just don't think he's a top-six forward. At best, a tweener.
I guess I don't understand why you're fighting this hard for Laf simply staying in the lineup and not even close to the same amount of breath on any other kid, employing the pathos of an AHL paycut is kind of petty, especially if we're actually talking big picture and not just taking this personally somehow.
It's the offseason, where there's not much to talk about aside from our stubborn opinions.
But my biggest reason for fighting it is the Kings FINALLY get it right with a prospect, and now people are saying they should have handled him differently. They should have given other prospects a shot in lieu of underachieving vets who weren't pulling their weight.
As far as bringing up salary, you said that playing someone else in his place isn't a punishment. If I had to take a 90% paycut for a while because management would rather demote me to the AHL for someone I outplayed is pretty significant. It's not like Fagemo outplayed or outworked him. Turcotte's a fair argument, but again, I think Laferriere's effort earned it.
If Thomas or Turcotte got the spot on opening night roster and played at the level Laferriere did, I'd be advocating for them too. It's not a defense of Laferriere. It's a defense of prospects not being jerked around due to:
- cap issues
- playing undeserving/underachieving vets over them
He's a likeable kid! I'm rooting for him, he stuck up for people, he made a good name for himself, I love his energy and drive and how he carries himself...but you're making me feel like an asshole about that and making it sound like he should have been irreplaceable in the lineup; he's not flawless and while I like to reward 'hard work' you're applying that only to Laf and ignoring plenty of others here. I'm not trying to 'punish' him. I'm trying to think of ways to further develop him. But sure, I guess maybe he's just a 10-10 guy over 82 games and I'm the weirdo for thinking otherwise and suggesting other ways to get there instead of making him smoke the whole pack.
Sorry, that's obviously not my intention. I just think Laferriere's issues are experience related, and from what I saw, I don't see a benefit to him going to the AHL. So, I'm vehemently against any prospect going down there for reasons other than his best interest.
I can tell you have his best interest in mind, and maybe the disagreement is justvwhat that is.
But I'll also vehemently protest any assertion he was 'part if the PLD problem' (I know that wasn't what you said, but it was mentioned).
I would actually argue that 'just work thru it' for 82 games on Laf's situation with no flexibility is just about as dumb as keeping other guys glass ceilinged in the AHL for a few years. Throw what you can at these guys, see how they handle it, adjust. Right now it's just 'here's a fire hose, Laf, and here's a toy donkey, Akil.'
I wasn't arguing Laf should work through it. I was arguing the disparity of how vets versus prospects getting handled is bad. Frankly, the org should give less ice time and sit anyone who isn't playing up to snuff.
You seem to think my defense is specifically for Laferriere. It's not. He was just a step in the right direction for prospect management, and to the contrary, I want all prospects to get equal treatment, all other factors being equal.
