What tier is lafrienere on?

[93LEAFS]

Lafreniere’s vision, skill and hockey sense are immediately transferable.

It’s the same reason why many think he’s in a tier with Eichel/Matthews despite not being the quickest guy on the ice.

The same tier as Matthews/Eichel seems to be an argument I see more around here than actually displayed with evidence from the scouting community. But, I heard the same things said about Hughes last year.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I can't find the full article anymore, but this is from September 2017. In the original, one scout also had Tavares 3rd and Doughty 2nd.

A lot to look forward to this OHL season - SooToday.com

That's a 10 scout poll, though. Hardly a big enough sample size to suggest it was widely believed Stamkos would go ahead of Tavares.

In any case, the overall point about Tavares was his physical shortcomings didn't prevent him from being taken 1st overall because his mental game was thought to be elite. I think the same holds true for Lafreniere versus some guys with better "physical tools" than him.

I also think with regards to MacKinnon it's a revisionist history to make it sound like he was seen as becoming as good as he's become. The talk leading up to the draft was he'd be more in line with a Hall-level player than the one he's become. A good top line center, but not necessarily a franchise center.

In terms of hype/expectations, I'd say Lafreniere is slightly below Eichel/Matthews level, but above Hall for sure, and even MacKinnon at the time of the draft.

 

[JoemAvs]

That's a 10 scout poll, though. Hardly a big enough sample size to suggest it was widely believed Stamkos would go ahead of Tavares.

In any case, the overall point about Tavares was his physical shortcomings didn't prevent him from being taken 1st overall because his mental game was thought to be elite. I think the same holds true for Lafreniere versus some guys with better "physical tools" than him.

I also think with regards to MacKinnon it's a revisionist history to make it sound like he was seen as becoming as good as he's become. The talk leading up to the draft was he'd be more in line with a Hall-level player than the one he's become. A good top line center, but not necessarily a franchise center.

In terms of hype/expectations, I'd say Lafreniere is slightly below Eichel/Matthews level, but above Hall for sure, and even MacKinnon at the time of the draft.

Not really true.
Mac similar to Tavares had a ton of hype going for him in his pre-draft seasons.
Then he had a slow start and weak WJC (mostly due to injuries and strange coaching decisions) and people soured on him.
Also people are forgetting that both Jones and Barkov as well as to a lesser extent Drouin had ridiculous hype going for them. Jones (rightfully) was seen as the best D prospect since Doughty and the total package and Barkov was doing things nobody had done before in Finland.

I just think that top prospect group was unusually strong and that is hurting Macs perception right now. He was thought of as a bonafide franchise player and #1 C going forward. I thought we had just drafted the next Stamkos when Stamkos had just scored 60 goals a year earlier and was considered the closest thing to Crosby and Malkin out there.

Lafreniere as a prospect is nowhere near that level. He is getting a ton of hype but a lot of that is stemming from the fact that he missed the draft by 3 weeks or so and basically had an extra year in junior compared to the likes of MacKinnon or Barkov.

I think Taylor Hall is exactly the correct range for him. Both dominated juniors. Both are wingers. Both are probably not the player you want to build your franchise around.

 

[93LEAFS]

That's a 10 scout poll, though. Hardly a big enough sample size to suggest it was widely believed Stamkos would go ahead of Tavares.

In any case, the overall point about Tavares was his physical shortcomings didn't prevent him from being taken 1st overall because his mental game was thought to be elite. I think the same holds true for Lafreniere versus some guys with better "physical tools" than him.

I also think with regards to MacKinnon it's a revisionist history to make it sound like he was seen as becoming as good as he's become. The talk leading up to the draft was he'd be more in line with a Hall-level player than the one he's become. A good top line center, but not necessarily a franchise center.

In terms of hype/expectations, I'd say Lafreniere is slightly below Eichel/Matthews level, but above Hall for sure, and even MacKinnon at the time of the draft.

MacKinnon was projected similar to Stamkos, and was viewed as the best center prospect since at least Seguin and probably since Tavares/Stamkos. But, whatever. You have your opinion on where Laf ranks, and I have mine. I don't think either is too extreme, and people are free to think what they want. I just view him more in the Hughes/Hall territory but ahead of RNH/Yakupov/Ekblad. I would say Tavares was a better prospect than Laf, that is partially position driven, but despite his skating, he really rounded out his game his final 2 years in the OHL. I'd also add though, I'm not saying Laf shouldn't go #1, if I was going on physical tools I'd take Stuzle or Byfield ahead, but its when you get into comparing him to the other elite #1's of recent years, that where some of the disparity in physical tools emerge. Matthews/Eichel just had tool kits which you dream up for franchise centers. Size and strength, combined with unreal other gifts (Matthews his puck control and shot, Eichel his speed and passing).

Also, the scouts Bob tends to poll are running their draft boards, so this is from guys who have input from tons of scouts.

 

[MrOT]

If he is, it’s not by much.

As of 2017, when Crosby had played fairly close to Forsberg’s career game totals, Crosby was 3rd all time in adjusted points per game with 1,46, Forsberg was 4th all time with 1,38 despite being older when retiring than Crosby was in 2017 and playing more games injured and not being 100%.

Forsberg is also 9th all time in playoff ppg with 1,133 through 151 games, Crosby is 11th all time with 1,125 through 168 games (don’t know the adjusted numbers for playoffs but they’d surely work in Forsberg’s favour). Forsberg was also the only player to win the Stanley cup scoring race without reaching the finals in history, and he did it twice.

I wouldn’t call that a different tier for Crosby. They are clearly in the same tier ability wise. Anyone claiming otherwise looking at these numbers is absolutely beyond me.

But people here tend to not care about actual production, rather looking at number of high finishes and best seasons.

 

[biturbo19]

I don't really understand how to vote based on the poll choices.

As prospects, really, the closest comparable is recent. He's just a notch above that Svechnikov tier. Before that...i'd say he's that same tier above the Hall/Seguin level.

He's a really hard prospect to peg down, in that he's a Winger, and most #1 overall caliber prospects for a while now...have been viewed as either Centers or Defencemen. But he has that special and well-rounded skillset to be viewed as a potentially "franchise-changing" winger.


I almost feel like the best comparable would be way back, to say he's kinda comparable to Rick Nash as a prospect.

 

[ViD]

He’s worse than anyone mentioned in the list and unlikely to surpass.

 

[aufheben]

Weirdly enough, that's who I keep thinking of when trying to think of a comparable.

A better shooting, better physical game version of Huberdeau, mind you. But similar vision/playmaking ability from the wing.

I’ll take it.

 

[aufheben]

It’s interesting comparing the responses in this thread to this poll from January 2020 asking where Lafreniere ranks among the best prospects since Crosby. 71.7% voted him 5th-best-or-higher, and about 23% voted him the 3rd-best. What changed, HF?

 

[93LEAFS]

It’s interesting comparing the responses in this thread to this poll from January 2020 asking where Lafreniere ranks among the best prospects since Crosby. 71.7% voted him 5th-best-or-higher, and about 23% voted him the 3rd-best. What changed, HF?

View attachment 360874

That was after crazy WJC hype, and I said the same at the time. Now people have listened to more nuanced opinions and calmed down a bit.

 

[bobholly39]

It’s interesting comparing the responses in this thread to this poll from January 2020 asking where Lafreniere ranks among the best prospects since Crosby. 71.7% voted him 5th-best-or-higher, and about 23% voted him the 3rd-best. What changed, HF?

View attachment 360874

What changed:

For one thing that poll talked about "as prospect". This one doesnt.

So in the poll you're referencing id have Laf > Mack pretty easily. But to say so here would imply you expect Laf to become better than Mack has, which is an insanely high bar.

Also - Matthews > Laf for prospect (though its close). And Matthews himself has been rock solid so far. Not quite the peak season of Mack yet, but i think his consistency from day 1 bodes even better for long term success. So again in this poll - Matthews > Laf

The tiers listed here dont make sense and i dont agree with them per se. But Drai just won the ross and will win the hart - and if he hadnt Panarin might have.

I voted below that. Laf would do better in a poll that was more clearly stated

 

[Mitch nylander]

I really like the Taylor Hall comparison here. I see Lafreniere being an 80 point winger, with a chance at winning the hart. Both players are very skilled and have some size.

Their point production is weirdly similar in the o/q as well.

 

[KevSkillz4]

Tier of Alexandre Daigle and Jonathan Drouin!

 

[93gilmour93]

Below the Matthews/Panarin tier.....

 

[lottster14]

Somewhere between Patrik Stefan and Gretzky. Guess we'll see

 

[TGWL]

I'll take 1st line winger, whatever tier that ends up being. If we can get a consistent, hard working 1st line player, I'm cool with that pick. Very rare you hit the lotto and get the leagues next best player, or future top 3 player.

 

[CupInSIX]

A more consistent Hall wouldn't be too shabby.