Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

AHL/Juniors Option


The Dude

Recommended Posts

Your examples are of much older players. Players who were already pretty well rounded. DeAngelo was never well rounded...

 

We aren't talking about a 22th overall pick, whom you expect to learn the ropes. These are supposed to be game changers. What number 1 picks have looked this lost or average over the last 5 years? They at least put up some points. You don't take such talents and try to change them. This team could draft McDavid and people would be fine with Quinn "pounding this shit into their head".

 

This isn't going to end with these two players being top six scoring phenoms. Like they were drafted as. Nope. 20 goals and solid PK guys... Awesome. The Rangers want to replace Jesper Fast do bad, that they are willing to sacrifice top scoring talent to create Fast 2.0.

 

You don't think this is a bit melodramatic for 19 games of Lafreniere and just over a season of Kakko on a clearly snakebitten team with completely reasonable explanations and obvious growth?

 

Neither of them started in the traditional top pick spots - top6/PP1. The last player of their caliber to not step into top roles on their team immediately after the draft was probably Stamkos. And honestly - Svechnikov looked like this for the first half of his first season. So did Mikko Rantanen - actually, Rantanen looked like this for the better part of two seasons. A couple of the picks after Laine in the '16 draft did as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think this is a bit melodramatic for 19 games of Lafreniere and just over a season of Kakko on a clearly snakebitten team with completely reasonable explanations and obvious growth?

 

Neither of them started in the traditional top pick spots - top6/PP1. The last player of their caliber to not step into top roles on their team immediately after the draft was probably Stamkos. And honestly - Svechnikov looked like this for the first half of his first season. So did Mikko Rantanen - actually, Rantanen looked like this for the better part of two seasons. A couple of the picks after Laine in the '16 draft did as well.

Tyler Seguin stepped into Boston's team as a 19 year old on the third line and scored 22 points getting 13 minutes a night.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think this is a bit melodramatic for 19 games of Lafreniere and just over a season of Kakko on a clearly snakebitten team with completely reasonable explanations and obvious growth?

 

Neither of them started in the traditional top pick spots - top6/PP1. The last player of their caliber to not step into top roles on their team immediately after the draft was probably Stamkos. And honestly - Svechnikov looked like this for the first half of his first season. So did Mikko Rantanen - actually, Rantanen looked like this for the better part of two seasons. A couple of the picks after Laine in the '16 draft did as well.

 

I agree it's not unique from a pure production perspective.

But the idea that was proposed (if I understood correctly) was that it's OK our top picks look decidedly ordinary because they're learning "Quinn hockey", and if that's the case it worries me. It seems to me that is putting an awful lot of trust in a coach who has proved nothing and for whom the jury is out on whether he's even an NHL coach, let alone a good one.

 

Of course, young talented skill guys have to learn to play responsible and functional NHL hockey. No arguments there. But I would certainly question whether sacrificing offensive development and to curb their offensive instincts for a couple of years in order to work on being "hard on pucks", "north/south", "in guys faces" and whatnot is actually the "modern day NHL" developmental route for top of the draft, high end offensive skill players.

 

Obviously with the important caveat that we don't know whether this is actually happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree it's not unique from a pure production perspective.

But the idea that was proposed (if I understood correctly) was that it's OK our top picks look decidedly ordinary because they're learning "Quinn hockey", and if that's the case it worries me. It seems to me that is putting an awful lot of trust in a coach who has proved nothing and for whom the jury is out on whether he's even an NHL coach, let alone a good one.

 

Of course, young talented skill guys have to learn to play responsible and functional NHL hockey. No arguments there. But I would certainly question whether sacrificing offensive development and to curb their offensive instincts for a couple of years in order to work on being "hard on pucks", "north/south", "in guys faces" and whatnot is actually the "modern day NHL" developmental route for top of the draft, high end offensive skill players.

 

Obviously with the important caveat that we don't know whether this is actually happening.

 

We know that they've got a vision for Kakko beyond what we're seeing. At one point they said they wanted to make him the "ultimate hockey player".

 

Look, this is a weird year in a weird division with a lot of circumstances outside of hockey and an almost insane amount of poor luck on the ice coming in. That Lafreniere or Kakko doesn't have 10 points on the season just yet sucks, but they're doing damn near everything else right. I'm not really sure what the point of overthinking flat out bad luck is.

 

If you say that you've been reasonably displeased with Lafreniere's effort until recently - that's fair. He looked like he was coasting or lost for a while. If you want to be frustrated with the goals and assists from those two so far - no argument, but it's a good deal of "high danger, no conversion", which really points to, again, bad luck.

 

But apparently, if after 19 games as a 1st overall after not playing hockey for 10 months as a 19 year old you're not melting the ice you skate on, it's time to give up and fire everyone because they're FUBAR. That's just not a rational reaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laffy sure did thread the needle to Strome on Friday night with that pass. It was almost "Gretzky-to-Kurri"-esque!

 

I'm seeing glimpses of it, and I keep watching for it every game.

 

Fucking Kakko is missing some solid time with this Covid shit, and yeah, G man...that's bad luck too! I was really digging him doing impressions of Guy Carbonneau out there!! :rofl:

 

Ok, that's a bit of a stretch, but the kid is "getting it"....and I wanna see more of it, dammit!! LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know that they've got a vision for Kakko beyond what we're seeing. At one point they said they wanted to make him the "ultimate hockey player".

 

Look, this is a weird year in a weird division with a lot of circumstances outside of hockey and an almost insane amount of poor luck on the ice coming in. That Lafreniere or Kakko doesn't have 10 points on the season just yet sucks, but they're doing damn near everything else right. I'm not really sure what the point of overthinking flat out bad luck is.

 

If you say that you've been reasonably displeased with Lafreniere's effort until recently - that's fair. He looked like he was coasting or lost for a while. If you want to be frustrated with the goals and assists from those two so far - no argument, but it's a good deal of "high danger, no conversion", which really points to, again, bad luck.

 

But apparently, if after 19 games as a 1st overall after not playing hockey for 10 months as a 19 year old you're not melting the ice you skate on, it's time to give up and fire everyone because they're FUBAR. That's just not a rational reaction.

 

From after practice yesterday...

 

 

https://twitter.com/vzmercogliano/status/1366456312532520960

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree it's not unique from a pure production perspective.

But the idea that was proposed (if I understood correctly) was that it's OK our top picks look decidedly ordinary because they're learning "Quinn hockey", and if that's the case it worries me. It seems to me that is putting an awful lot of trust in a coach who has proved nothing and for whom the jury is out on whether he's even an NHL coach, let alone a good one.

 

Of course, young talented skill guys have to learn to play responsible and functional NHL hockey. No arguments there. But I would certainly question whether sacrificing offensive development and to curb their offensive instincts for a couple of years in order to work on being "hard on pucks", "north/south", "in guys faces" and whatnot is actually the "modern day NHL" developmental route for top of the draft, high end offensive skill players.

 

Obviously with the important caveat that we don't know whether this is actually happening.

 

I don't get the "Quinn hockey" thing being a huge negative. They hired him almost specifically for how "Quinn hockey" played a part in the development of Jack Eichel, Brady Tkachuk, Jordan Greenway, Clayton Keller, Dante Fabbro, Charlie McAvoy, Matt Grzelcyk. Pretty sure there's been different threads here about trying to trade for all those guys. Maybe Kieffer Bellows should have stayed at BU instead of going to the WHL (yea Dunny I said it).

 

The teenagers just need some time. You can clearly see the difference in Kakko. Its a shame he went on the COVID list right after seeing the puck go in on his shootout goal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know that they've got a vision for Kakko beyond what we're seeing. At one point they said they wanted to make him the "ultimate hockey player".

 

Look, this is a weird year in a weird division with a lot of circumstances outside of hockey and an almost insane amount of poor luck on the ice coming in. That Lafreniere or Kakko doesn't have 10 points on the season just yet sucks, but they're doing damn near everything else right. I'm not really sure what the point of overthinking flat out bad luck is.

 

If you say that you've been reasonably displeased with Lafreniere's effort until recently - that's fair. He looked like he was coasting or lost for a while. If you want to be frustrated with the goals and assists from those two so far - no argument, but it's a good deal of "high danger, no conversion", which really points to, again, bad luck.

 

But apparently, if after 19 games as a 1st overall after not playing hockey for 10 months as a 19 year old you're not melting the ice you skate on, it's time to give up and fire everyone because they're FUBAR. That's just not a rational reaction.

 

Right. I’m not saying any of those things and I broadly agree with you. I’ve made the point that Lafreniere has been unlucky and could easily have had 9/10 points on a less snakebitten team. At which point you’d be reasonably happy.

 

I was referring to Josh’s post that was the base of the discussion. If it’s true these guys aren’t productive because they’re being taught to play “Quinn hockey” (this may or may not be true), then I’d question whether that is a sensible way to develop high end offensive talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 months!! Holy shit! I didn't realize it was THAT long!

 

Me either. I think a lot of us have been rough on him, myself included, but I think he gets a pass here on a really slow start. We can't even look at past #1 picks on this one as a gauge because none of them in the past had been taken out of the game for that long from a pandemic prior to the NHL. All comparisons are moot right now.

 

Looking forward to seeing him progress the rest of the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me either. I think a lot of us have been rough on him, myself included, but I think he gets a pass here on a really slow start. We can't even look at past #1 picks on this one as a gauge because none of them in the past had been taken out of the game for that long from a pandemic prior to the NHL. All comparisons are moot right now.

 

Looking forward to seeing him progress the rest of the way.

 

Yeah man...I'm even giving the kid more of a pass...I've been pretty supportive of him, but that's just a ridiculous amount of time away from the game.....it's even longer than Tommy John surgery for pitchers!!!

 

Take your time, Laffy...we got yer back, Brutha!!! :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah man...I'm even giving the kid more of a pass...I've been pretty supportive of him, but that's just a ridiculous amount of time away from the game.....it's even longer than Tommy John surgery for pitchers!!!

 

Take your time, Laffy...we got yer back, Brutha!!! :rofl:

 

i'd be scared of this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...