Gravesy

5 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

https://thehockeywriters.com/gabe-perreault-2023-nhl-draft-profile/

 

 

 

Not trying to trash the pick. I don't know shit about these kids. Why is this franchise allergic to taking naturally good skating prospects though?

Yeah. I don't know much about them either, but when I read stuff like this

Quote

Analysis: Perreault is an extremely skilled and intelligent winger who can make a ton of positive things happen inside the offensive zone. Perreault makes highly-creative and unique dekes and passes with the puck at a high rate, both off the perimeter and in small areas. His puck game is clear NHL power-play quality, and he will score as a pro. The issues on Perreault’s game is his 5-foot-11 frame and his lack of footspeed. He shows good second effort and can win puck battles at the junior level, although whether he can do that versus men is a concern. His hockey sense is so elite though that I think he can overcome those issues and become a very good top six winger.

Thoughts on the pick: Perreault is one of the most skilled and intelligent players in the draft. I thought he’d go higher, but his frame, a barely 5-foot-11 winger who is skinny, combined with his subpar skating, gave a lot of NHL scouts pause despite his tremendous offensive abilities, so I’m not stunned he got to No. 23. He has a long way to go to look like an NHL player, but he has the talent to be a top six wing for the Rangers down the line. In an ideal world, the Rangers would have added size, and they wouldn’t have picked another wing, but Perreault was too much talent to pass up at this point in the draft for them.

https://theathletic.com/4649257/2023/06/28/new-york-rangers-nhl-draft-2023-grades-picks-analysis/

it makes me highly skeptical, given we have a #1 and a #2 pick whose struggles are very closely linked to a lack of skating ability and speed. Obviously I'm not shitting on the pick or anything like that, just worried that yet again we've taken a first rounder with skating issues. 

1 hour ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Ah okey.

 

If that’s true he’s lying to himself. Laf was more hyped than Power, Hughes, Dahlin and Ekblad pre-draft.

 

Everyone said Laf was supposed to be in that tier below Matthews/MacKinnon.

He was definitely not as hyped as Dahlin. Dahlin was seen as a generational d prospect. I’m pretty sure Pronman had Laf behind Hughes in the same article from Lafs draft year.

12 hours ago, siddious said:

12 hours ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Laf ahead of Hischer?? Lol what. I’d trade him straight up for Nico even if he’s younger and a lot cheaper.

It’s a bit of a wonky list. He has bedard in 2nd or third and he’s not even in the nhl yet lol

It’s a ranking of them as prospects, not how good they are now. 

On 6/6/2023 at 3:13 AM, Bugg said:

I dunno right this second. Know the Ottawa GM would be demanding him, hence, no trade. 

Maybe my irony detector is off, but surely you're joking.

10 hours ago, RangersIn7 said:

I’d rather him than Kravtsov. He’s already established as an NHL player. 

No matter where he ends up, unless there’s some catastrophic consequences, he’s better than Kravtsov.

 

Of course. Getting a functional if underwhelming 3rd liner is obviously far better than getting what in essence is nothing for the pick. I would have thought it’s obvious that wasn’t my point though. 
My point was simply that, if you look at the forwards on the board at the time it’s a distinctly meh group. Like I said, a horrific scouting job and I’m not defending the pick, just stating that it’s not as if the Rangers reached on Kravtsov in a position where they had their pick of a bunch of talented forwards. 
 

On Wahlstrom, he hasn’t been able to stay on the ice and his best season is 24 points. Again, would rather him than Kravtsov, but in reality he’s done nothing and I’m fairly certain Rangers fans would be quite far from “damn happy” with what he’s been able to do so far.

2 hours ago, RangersIn7 said:

Point is… you had a pick at a spot where if you hadn’t gone off-board, you’d now have a player in hand that you would be pretty damn happy with. 

Maybe we’ve been watching different games, but I’m pretty sure no one would be “damn happy“ with Wahlstrom and what he’s been able to do so far.

51 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Bouchard, Wahlstrom, Dobson, Dellandrea — all better picks. Wahlstrom was the pick. He's not great either, but at least he's an NHLer.

Well yeah, like I said, the Rangers set fire to their pick. Most of that list would have been better selections. However, it’s not a great list of prospects. Iirc D was basically not in the conversation. I wanted Wahlstrom too and was fucking seething when they passed on him, but he’s completely underwhelming too. Obviously he’s here and playing which in and of itself is a huge upgrade on Kravtsov.

Not defending the pick at all, just saying that part of the draft wasn’t particularly strong in terms of forwards. 

Now, in fairness, in hindsight where the Rangers took Kravtsov wasn’t a great place to pick.

Obviously the Rangers set fire to their pick, but that’s not a who’s who of guys tearing up the league. 

10 hours ago, CCCP said:

Thinking about it and i dont know how much its the kids and how much it was the Rangers euro ex-scouting promising Kravtsov and Anderson the world and all kinds of ice time and not giving them shit.  Anderson, Kravtsov—same storyline. 

It very much looks like a bit from column A and a bit from column B.

In fact, very little appears to have been done well with these two. 

They were reaches in the draft. 

They evidently weren't handled well once they got here.

Both showed themselves as bad character picks. Andersson probably not cut out for life in the NHL, Kravtsov being a massive diva.

And ultimately, even as reaches, they turned out to be completely underwhelming as players. They would both have been egregious uses of late 1sts, never mind top 10 picks.

Just a brutal scouting job all round.  

17 minutes ago, Slobberknocker said:

can we get keenan out of retirement?

You probably don’t want that.

BUT, I think someone with a bit of Keenan in them wouldn’t necessarily be the worst thing for this group. Someone who will fucking sit you if you’re horsing around, committing bad turnovers, is sailing around out there or not doing what the system tells you to do. And will do it regardless of what name is on your back.

I honestly think that’s more important than track record. Someone who will hold privileged veterans accountable and isn’t afraid of it. You want to play? Do your fucking job.

I realise this is simplistic and a bit dumb, but after the last 4 or 5 years I think it’s needed.

Edit different takes there @Sod16

You might be right

57 minutes ago, Pete said:

Once again, look at across the river at Jack Hughes. The difference is not power play time lol.

Why on earth should I look at Jack Hughes? It's as relevant as looking at Connor McDavid.

Those guys are elite players. Lafreniere isn't in Hughes stratosphere, so the comparisons of the two are a complete waste of oxygen at this point.

Also, I never said anything to the effect of "the difference is pp time". They are an ocean apart.

You need to let it go and look at him for what he is. Not a 1st OA. Not someone who was supposed to be franchise altering. Just a 21 year old middle of the lineup player who produces OK for where he is. 

The entire point is, until someone comes up with a trade scenario that represents real, tangible value, I think the best way forward is to keep him at a low cost. That's it.

8 hours ago, The Dude said:

But what he is, isn't what the team needs.

 

He isn't anything right now.

 

They need him to have a niche. Energy guy. Set up man. Grinder. Speedster. Shooter. Being capable of PKing. He's none of that. 

 

And not for nothing,  but hasn't he spent the last 2-3 months on the PP? When he was first put there, he got some results,  being a Kreider-lite, net front presence and deflecting shots. Where'd that go? 

 

It's like he accomplishes a feat, and then that's good enough for him. One and done, then he's back to being a passenger that really doesn't do anything.  

 

The only reason to keep him, is in hopes that he matures or a real coach can tap into that noggin and get some sort of identity out of him that kicks him up a few notches above this nothing player he is right now. 

 

I just don't see it. Hopefully another GM does and the Rangers can move on, while addressing a need. 

 

I mean, maybe my timeline is off here. But as I recall, he got some time on PP1 and did ok as a net front presence. It was a short period though, and was done as a project when Kane arrived? 

Like I've said, I'm not trying to white knight for Lafreniere. I agree with most if not all of the criticism. 

I'm just not entirely sure there's great value to be had in trading him at this point. 

And, for now and to the contrary, the value play for me seems to be keeping him around at a low cost. You can scoff at the 40 point thing all you want, but it's still 40 points, from a 21 year old, playing predominantly on the 3rd line with similarly disappointing young players and minimal PP time. If he can do that, with all his flaws, I'm not yet willing to accept there isn't a 50+ point upside there - however small you want to say the chance of that upside becoming reality is.

That is until someone shows me a trade scenario that I like. If there's real value to be had from trading him I wouldn't be against it. But I have a hard time seeing it.

1 hour ago, Pete said:

I think the problem with that line of thinking is you can't take out the fact that he's a one overall.

Of course you can, provided 

a) he's willing to accept a deal in line with his play and

b) the return in a potential trade isn't in line with his draft pedigree

1 hour ago, Pete said:

And since the production is pretty easily replaceable, with either a cheap UFA or a younger guy

Is it though?

I'm not sure the league is full of pending UFA's who can put up 40-50 on the 3rd line for +- 2.5 aav.

Look, I don't really disagree with your assessment of him, it's just that I'm really not sure there's value in trading him just to get rid vs keeping him at a low cost with the 10% chance he's a 50 point guy when fully developed. If he can get me a legit mid 6 RW who fits under the cap I'm all ears, don't get me wrong.

1 hour ago, Pete said:

Why is everyone just ignoring the fact that it doesn't matter what would have happened to Lafreniere if he was drafted 3 years ago by a really bad team.

 

He wasn't, he was drafted to a really competitive team. Maybe that hurt his development but it is what it is. You can't put that toothpaste back in the tube and nor does it matter to the team moving forward. He has no role here.

 

But that's just point number one.

 

Point number two that nobody really ever wants to address or answer is that he has shown no glimpses of anything at all (aside from the one deke he pulled off twice) that would make you think he had the requisite skill set to be a top line player in the NHL.

 

Let's go through it again, he's not fast enough, he's not strong enough, he doesn't have enough hockey sense, he doesn't have enough creativity, he doesn't have a good enough shot, to be a top line player.

 

What has anyone seen in his game to make them think he should be given more responsibility?

 

The people who watch this team closely and have spent years following this sport and reporting on it are saying he doesn't have what it takes. 

 

The same people who are saying we're wasting the competitive window are the ones saying let's just see what we have in him! Meanwhile this guy has done nothing to force a coach to keep him in the lineup. There are players who every time they are out on the ice are creating something, and it has nothing to do with being on the power play. They're doing the little things and those little things are being built on to create big opportunities. Lafreniere doesn't do that nearly enough.

 

It's really just time to move on, if he flourishes somewhere else that's great, but much like ADA it was never going to happen here. 

I don't really disagree with this, but for now I try to look at this way:

If you completely remove yourself from the fact he was #1OA, billed as a franchise altering player and the crushing disappointment that ensued, a 21 year old player coming off a 40 point season feels like someone we might want to keep around. He did that with no PP time to speak of and with line mates who, let's be fair, are varying degrees of disappointments themselves. 

If - and this is the caveat - he's willing to be paid in line with what he is and not his draft stock - I'm not really sure what's in it for the Rangers to cut ties, unless someone is willing to give you a real and significant upgrade at RW. 

I just don't think he gives you anything in return that changes much if anything at all. 

I'm leaning towards paying him for what he is and just hope against all available evidence that he's some sort of late bloomer. 

What can you realistically hope to get in a trade? You're certainly not getting an established player that makes a real difference to this roster.

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

Anybody who's watched Dach and Lafreniere can see there's a difference between those two players. 

Yeah, it really isn't apples to apples.

I don't disagree that you might get someone to give up a high pick for Laffy, but I'd be absolutely shocked if someone gave up a functional, goal scoring top 6 winger who isn't old and with a bit of bite to his game. 

The shine is well and truly off. 

10 minutes ago, Blue Heaven said:

LaF is as good as gone.  Just can't make a Sammy Blais type of trade, however they do need to flip Laf for a top 2 scoring winger that can grind and can't be older than dirt, A 1st also has to be included.

You're not getting that for Lafreniere in a month of Sundays. 

We're dangerously close to "my failing prospect for your failing prospect" territory here. 

26 minutes ago, Pete said:

You need to point me at those posts here, because I haven't seen them and they need to be dealt with accordingly.

There's a couple of posts in the match thread around the time the game was over/winding down. 

Narrative might be a bit strong, but I saw it there, it was mentioned on the broadcast and some fool on the Athletic wrote words to that effect as well.

Just now, Pete said:

I don't think this will be the case at all. 

Already seen it both here and in the open world.

Lafreniere was dog poo. 

But so was the rest of the young players. If Kakko, Chytil or Miller were any better it was fucking marginal. A huge come down from everyone compared to last playoffs. 

Schneider I guess gets a pass for mostly doing his job adequately.

Edit before someone comes after me, this is not a defense of #13. It's more a cry of despair because I really can't see it from any of them.

2 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

We both oddly scored 17 goals this series. They could've scored 10 more. I don't feel like we could've scored many more than we did. SHESTY was spectacular.

They got out of some holes last playoff run, so this might not be entirely fair.

But this years iteration of the team felt like a bunch of fair-weather fannies. Things going your way? Swell. Pump them for 5. A bit of adversity? Fucking turtle up and get dry humped. 

I agree with you, Shesterkin was excellent. The narrative will be that he too lost his matchup with Schmid,but that seems really unfair. One goalie had to stand on his head. The other played really well, but wasn't made to work anywhere near as hard for his saves.

9 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

They're younger, faster, hungrier and better than us and they'll probably be that for the next decade

That's the most worrying thing for me.

The Rangers looked old, slow and lethargic, and in the 4 games they lost genuinely looked like they simply couldn't keep up with the Devils speed. 

I don't want to be too knee jerk, after all this core got close to the SC final last season. But it feels like change has to come, and it'll require more surgery than canning the coach. Panarin feels like they key cog, but it's hard to see how they move on from him without paying through the nose to do it. It feels very much like Gorton and Drury have locked us into this iteration of the team for now. 

Sure, you could move Goodrow and Laf/Kakko, but that doesn't feel like nearly enough to move the needle.

2 hours ago, RichieNextel305 said:

The difference in talent from Lafreniere to some of these guys in New Jersey is really scary. And I have defended Lafreniere virtually every step of the way. This isn’t to say that I support moving on from him; I do think it could come back and bite us in the ass so it’s something Drury would have to be very, very careful with. But man, watching guys like Hughes and Hischier and then looking at him really accomplishing nothing, and knowing he and Hughes were both 1s back to back years, is scary. I get players go at their own pace but it’s really not good.

Don't think Chytil or Kakko have been much better, if better at all tbh.

Not that it helps.

Quote

Laf- Trocheck-Kane

Not going to lie, that looks like aids on ice.

1 hour ago, Pete said:

Dilly dally with the puck? That pass was a grenade, even Vally said so. It bounced one foot before it got to him and then hit him in the shin pads. I've seen better passes across the blue line from my kids Mite team. 

I said that in the heat of the moment (watched it in the morning here local time).

Watched it back and agree with you. It’s 100% on Fox. 
The general point stands though, that goal is a microcosm of the Rangers last 3 games. A cavalcade of ineptitude.