Alexis Lafreniere and the Rangers Reach a Critical Point

[Phil]

1 hour ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I think this is the problem. How do you appropriately value a player who was picked first overall less than three years ago, who has a history of being a wildly successful player, but can't seem to get it going in the NHL - or at least not in this situation?

 

You have a couple situations to look at, I guess.

 

There's Chris Pronger, who was traded in 1995 straight up for Brendan Shanahan at the end of his second pro season. Pronger was 2nd overall in 1993 and high potential but not really the Pronger we know yet; Shanahan a 26-year-old wing with multiple recent 50-goal seasons.

You have Bryan Berard who was traded for Wade Redden, Marty Straka, Don Beaupre, and Damian Rhodes. Berard was the first overall in 1995; Redden the second overall, Straka a 23 year old who had a booming second year and a very poor follow-up post lockout, Beaupre a goalie on his last legs, and Rhodes, a very middling goalie.

 

Those two deals are ancient at this point, and probably are more food for thought on the valuation of unknowns than anything to see. 

 

The deal I'd be looking at is something like the Erik Johnson trade. Johnson was traded in his third season (asterisk since he missed a whole season due to injury and double-asterisk since he didn't actually play in the NHL in his first year, so fifth year of team control), along with Jay McClement and a 1st rounder (ended up being 11th overall) for Kevin Shattenkirk, Chris Stewart, and a conditional 2nd. Keep in mind that Shattenkirk was a rookie first-rounder running the Avs PP (7-19-26 in 47GP and Stewart was at the time viewed as a top-end young power forward.  That's probably more what we're looking at.

 

I'd say this pretty concretely - any competent Lafreniere trade secures multiple young assets with years of team control. I don't think a Boeser or a Horvat makes sense here - I actually don't think the Canucks have the horses for it.

 

Bingo.

 

If Vancouver wants Lafreniere, too bad. The price would have been Elias Pettersson.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, rmc51 said:

Yes. It won’t happen right now. Yes it should, just not right now.

 

I would have done it at the very start of this season, but that was assuming Lafreniere was in good enough shape. It should happen next year, assuming Lafreniere follows through on conditioning.

How quickly you forget that they tried Kreider on the right already. It lasted about 5 minutes. He doesn't like it, apparently. Because no one has asked him about it, which makes me think that topic os off limits for media.

[LindG1000]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

Bingo.

 

If Vancouver wants Lafreniere, too bad. The price would have been Elias Pettersson.

 

Pettersson is the right level of player. My concern is that he's locked in until the end of next season where he's due a 10.25M QO and will likely make big bank against a rising cap, so unless Van wants to take our cap problems too (or facilitate fixing them), it's maybe not in the cards to get someone already on a second contract of that size.

 

I really mean that the Canucks don't have the horses for this to mean that the Canucks almost can't make this deal make sense for both them and the Rangers. I'm looking more at teams like Seattle, Detroit, Montreal, or Anaheim.

 

 

[Phil]

26 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Pettersson is the right level of player. My concern is that he's locked in until the end of next season where he's due a 10.25M QO and will likely make big bank against a rising cap, so unless Van wants to take our cap problems too (or facilitate fixing them), it's maybe not in the cards to get someone already on a second contract of that size.

 

I really mean that the Canucks don't have the horses for this to mean that the Canucks almost can't make this deal make sense for both them and the Rangers. I'm looking more at teams like Seattle, Detroit, Montreal, or Anaheim.

 

 

 

That's why I said he would have been the target. Basically Lafreniere for EP, then don't keep Zib, or don't sign Trocheck.

[LindG1000]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

That's why I said he would have been the target. Basically Lafreniere for EP, then don't keep Zib, or don't sign Trocheck.

 

I'd take that Bedard pick if they get it. You know, just sayin.

[Ozzy]

49 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I'd take that Bedard pick if they get it. You know, just sayin.

 

We draft that kid, and I know something bad's gonna happen:

 

-Trip over the cord on introduction night

-Throw his medal into the stands

-Play like shit and eats donuts his first 3 seasons

-I'm not even going the Cherapanov route
 

...you get the idea!!!   LOL

 

Anywhere else he goes and he's McJesus Jr.

[The Dude]

9 hours ago, Phil said:

 

Yes, and my point stands. If you're dealing the FIRST OVERALL PICK, before he's even signed a second contract, for Brock Boeser, or a UFA center (after you just signed Trocheck), I'd fire you.

In a hockey trade, Boeser is the fit as a guy who is almost at his prime and he hasn't exactly had the best linemates/team around him.

 

IMO Boeser is a  player that really needs to be put in a better situation. Vancouver has been a disaster for years.  Obviously I'd want more coming back. They could do a lot worse than nabbing a young RW who is on a decent contract and who I believe is better than he has shown. The Rangers have nothing they can depend on, past Kakko at RW. That's pretty bad. 

 

What exactly are people expecting in trade? A broken 1OA prospect, that doesn't seem to have a role that is anything more than filler right now...  I'll take a top 6 RW and picks/prospects. 

 

 

[Keirik]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

In a hockey trade, Boeser is the fit as a guy who is almost at his prime and he hasn't exactly had the best linemates/team around him.

 

IMO Boeser is a  player that really needs to be put in a better situation. Vancouver has been a disaster for years.  Obviously I'd want more coming back. They could do a lot worse than nabbing a young RW who is on a decent contract and who I believe is better than he has shown. The Rangers have nothing they can depend on, past Kakko at RW. That's pretty bad. 

 

What exactly are people expecting in trade? A broken 1OA prospect, that doesn't seem to have a role that is anything more than filler right now...  I'll take a top 6 RW and picks/prospects. 

 

 

If he’s such a broken player with no role, why is any team giving up a top 6 and prospects/picks in the first place? 

[Phil]

2 hours ago, The Dude said:

In a hockey trade, Boeser is the fit as a guy who is almost at his prime and he hasn't exactly had the best linemates/team around him.

 

IMO Boeser is a  player that really needs to be put in a better situation. Vancouver has been a disaster for years.  Obviously I'd want more coming back. They could do a lot worse than nabbing a young RW who is on a decent contract and who I believe is better than he has shown. The Rangers have nothing they can depend on, past Kakko at RW. That's pretty bad. 

 

What exactly are people expecting in trade? A broken 1OA prospect, that doesn't seem to have a role that is anything more than filler right now...  I'll take a top 6 RW and picks/prospects. 

 

 

 

42 minutes ago, Keirik said:

If he’s such a broken player with no role, why is any team giving up a top 6 and prospects/picks in the first place? 

 

What @Keirik said. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

 

And to answer the question, the cost would have been Elias Pettersson, but can't be anymore because the Rangers have no room for another top-six center (now that Trocheck is signed for eternity).

 

In other words, it doesn't much matter how badly Vancouver wants him. They don't have the assets to deal for him anymore.

[The Dude]

1 hour ago, Keirik said:

If he’s such a broken player with no role, why is any team giving up a top 6 and prospects/picks in the first place? 

Do I have to explain the 1OA luster to you again?  Plus Boeser isn't exactly perfect either. But he is a commodity the Rangers need. 

[The Dude]

27 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

 

What @Keirik said. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

 

And to answer the question, the cost would have been Elias Pettersson, but can't be anymore because the Rangers have no room for another top-six center (now that Trocheck is signed for eternity).

 

In other words, it doesn't much matter how badly Vancouver wants him. They don't have the assets to deal for him anymore.

Yes . I can.

 

Boeser is kinda broken too. Just not as much and plays a position the Rangers need.  He'd also possibly come with more assets.  They aren’t getting any kind of 1 for 1 swap that makes sense for them. 

 

I don't care what the cost would have been.  I'm asking about now. Now, I take Boeser + if it's on the table. Pettersson isn't on the table. Pettersson is a much more complete and finished product. Even last year Vancouver would be stupid to entertain the notion. 

 

Broken player for broken player. Boeser fits a need. Unless you can come up with a decently priced legit top 6 RW to evenly swap,  right now Boeser is the best option brought up.... Besides Kane +  

 

Again.  Other teams may value that 1OA tag more than the Rangers do. It definitely carries value, especially for rebuilding or retooling teams looking for a possible building block packaged in a change of scenery player. 

 

He's essentially Johnathan Drouin without the AHL no show. Tampa got Sergachev and a 2nd for a guy with an attitude problem after his 3rd NHL season. And he was drafted 3OA. We're talking 1OA with good attitude and obvious need for a change. 

 

I mean I'm suggesting Boeser. You are saying Pettersson was equal value. You can't use your cake analogy towards me, if that's what you're expecting in return. 

[Keirik]

17 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Do I have to explain the 1OA luster to you again?  Plus Boeser isn't exactly perfect either. But he is a commodity the Rangers need. 

No you don’t. What you do need to do is post without the needless snarkiness though. 

 

Your post still doesn’t explain why Vancouver is giving up a 25 year old established top six forward with a .career .78 ppg and four 20+ goal seasons AND even more prospects and picks for a guy in his third year that in your eyes is broken.  Maybe there would be merit if you left the “and” part out but otherwise it’s just very unrealistic in my opinion. 
 

 

[The Dude]

10 minutes ago, Keirik said:

No you don’t. What you do need to do is post without the needless snarkiness though. 

 

Your post still doesn’t explain why Vancouver is giving up a 25 year old established top six forward with a .career .78 ppg and four 20+ goal seasons AND even more prospects and picks for a guy in his third year that in your eyes is broken.  Maybe there would be merit if you left the “and” part out but otherwise it’s just very unrealistic in my opinion. 
 

 

See, the issue here is, I'm already responding to your snarkiness, by you questioning my take that he's a broken player with no role.

 

You seem to think he's good still and shouldn't be traded, yet you bury that to take shots at my opinion. "If he's such a broken player with no role". Talk about snarky. You can't go there man. So stop. 

 

Vancouver is giving up the player because he's been underachieving and has been rumored to be on the move since last season-  for a player Vancouver has been rumored to be interested in since last season. Maybe the prospects are wishful thinking in this scenario, but I'd expect the Rangers to get max value for a recent 1OA.  

[Keirik]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

See, the issue here is, I'm already responding to your snarkiness, by you questioning my take that he's a broken player with no role.

 

You seem to think he's good still and shouldn't be traded, yet you bury that to take shots at my opinion. "If he's such a broken player with no role". Talk about snarky. You can't go there man. So stop. 

 

Vancouver is giving up the player because he's been underachieving and has been rumored to be on the move since last season-  for a player Vancouver has been rumored to be interested in since last season. Maybe the prospects are wishful thinking in this scenario, but I'd expect the Rangers to get max value for a recent 1OA.  

There’s nothing snarky in what I’m saying. Nothing at all. I’m not understanding how a guy this broken is going to command so much just because he’s a 1st overall and you’re posting a lot of contradictions. I, along with others, are pointing that out. The term carries some clout, but not after three seasons in the book. Every team has a scouting report, film, data. They see the same you see. Yet you seem to think he’s going for a pretty big haul just because he’s 1OA on paper. He’s a low commodity right now ONLY valued because of where’s he’s drafted. 
 

You compared Alf to Drouin and said he’s “essentially” the same. Drouin had 52 points and was traded in the offseason. If Alf sniffs 40 points this year he’s going nowhere let alone 50. If he doesn’t come anywhere near that he’s not bringing back some serious return, which makes trading him even worse of a decision.

[BrooksBurner]

The issue I have with Boeser is that a third of his goals and points have come on the PP in his career. So if he's a 25-30 goal, 50-60 point guy in Vancouver, he's a 15-20 goal, 35-40 point guy here. Lafreniere is already pretty close to that output at ES. The gripe is just that Lafreniere as a 1OA _should_ be better than Brock Boeser by now.

 

Anyway, I just don't see Boeser moving the needle enough even at half-retained. The risk of trading Lafreniere far outweighs the potential reward of Boeser. He's the right position the Rangers would be looking for if they ever did pull the trigger, but it's just not the right value or fit.

[RangersIn7]

22 hours ago, Pete said:

How quickly you forget that they tried Kreider on the right already. It lasted about 5 minutes. He doesn't like it, apparently. Because no one has asked him about it, which makes me think that topic os off limits for media.

They’ve tried Kreider on the right side multiple times under multiple coaches.

It never worked. 

[Pete]

11 hours ago, rmc51 said:

The issue I have with Boeser is that a third of his goals and points have come on the PP in his career. So if he's a 25-30 goal, 50-60 point guy in Vancouver, he's a 15-20 goal, 35-40 point guy here. Lafreniere is already pretty close to that output at ES. The gripe is just that Lafreniere as a 1OA _should_ be better than Brock Boeser by now.

 

Anyway, I just don't see Boeser moving the needle enough even at half-retained. The risk of trading Lafreniere far outweighs the potential reward of Boeser. He's the right position the Rangers would be looking for if they ever did pull the trigger, but it's just not the right value or fit.

The fault I find with this logic is that you can't parse out production that way. "Well, he won't get his PP points here so we'll just toss them out". That's not at all the way to look at that. The way to look at it is who makes the team better at even strength?

 

Lafreniere is an absolute passenger on every line he's on. He doesn't drive play. I don't watch VAN at all, so I'm not really sure if Boeser does, and this is where actually watching games and scouting would have to come into play.

 

I'm not sure if Boeser is an upgrade or worth Laf or whatever, I'm just saying you can't skim PPP off the top and say "well these players are equal" because that's just not true.

[BrooksBurner]

11 minutes ago, Pete said:

The fault I find with this logic is that you can't parse out production that way. "Well, he won't get his PP points here so we'll just toss them out". That's not at all the way to look at that. The way to look at it is who makes the team better at even strength?

 

Lafreniere is an absolute passenger on every line he's on. He doesn't drive play. I don't watch VAN at all, so I'm not really sure if Boeser does, and this is where actually watching games and scouting would have to come into play.

 

I'm not sure if Boeser is an upgrade or worth Laf or whatever, I'm just saying you can't skim PPP off the top and say "well these players are equal" because that's just not true.

True, and we had been seeing that with Kakko being effective versus Lafreniere not being effective despite production being the same, but it provides a little bit of a guesstimation of “is that who you really risk trading the former 1OA for”. I mean, look, there is some major “pie in the face” risk at making such a trade. It’s easier to accept the risk if the paper production is there on top of the on ice play / eye test difference.

 

It’s a quick litmus test that should be passed before considering anything.

Edited January 4, 2023 by rmc51

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, rmc51 said:

True, and we had been seeing that with Kakko being effective versus Lafreniere not being effective despite production being the same, but it provides a little bit of a guesstimation of “is that who you really risk trading the former 1OA for”. I mean, look, there is some major “pie in the face” risk at making such a trade. It’s easier to accept the risk if the paper production is there on top of the on ice play / eye test difference.

 

It’s a quick litmus test that should be passed before considering anything.

I hear you. And Laffy is gonna be cheap, so not sure it's even worth trading him because you have to fill out a roster and I don't think they can afford Boeser who's older and less durable.

[Ozzy]

I have a funny feeling Yukon is going to "get it", and he'll be the value contract of the league eventually.  Just have faith, fellas!  It's hard to be patient, I know!!  I've gone through several remotes already watching Donut boy.

 

He's going to make his mark!   (Hopefully not in his shorts!)  LOL

[Pete]

12 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

I have a funny feeling Yukon is going to "get it", and he'll be the value contract of the league eventually.  Just have faith, fellas!  It's hard to be patient, I know!!  I've gone through several remotes already watching Donut boy.

 

He's going to make his mark!   (Hopefully not in his shorts!)  LOL

I find the blind Faith admirable LOL.

 

Because right now there is nothing in his game that suggests he's going to get it. 

 

For as bad as Kakko stats were, from his second year on you could tell there was a hockey player there. You could tell he worked on his skating. Last year I blame a lot on injury and lack of confidence.

 

Lafreniere just ain't that. He doesn't look any different than the player who broke into the league. 

Edited January 4, 2023 by Pete

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

That really is the concerning thing with him. Even in games where he does manage to get on the scoresheet, we're not seeing real consistent impactful play. He occasionally finds a way to get involved and scores. He's not consistently involved/impacting the game, and even when the kid line was flourishing, he was never really the catalyst of it, and more of a passenger to the ship being driven by Chytil and Kakko. 

 

The potential is still there. He didn't just forget how to play hockey, which is why I am not keen on really trading him for anything at this point. But he's left a lot to be desired and I have significantly higher hopes for Kakko than I do for Laf right now

 

and the fact that he got the Broadway hat after coming back from a scratch, even when he didn't do anything in the game, does show me that the team respects him, knows he can be better and wants to see him succeed. 

Edited January 4, 2023 by BlairBettsBlocksEverything

[Ozzy]

20 minutes ago, Pete said:

I find the blind Faith admirable LOL.

 

Because right now there is nothing in his game that suggests he's going to get it. 

 

For as bad as Kakko stats were, from his second year on you could tell there was a hockey player there. You could tell he worked on his skating. Last year I blame a lot on injury and lack of confidence.

 

Lafreniere just ain't that. He doesn't look any different than the player who broke into the league. 

 

 

You're absolutely right, Pete....he's not progressing anything like Kakko.  I just can't accept the fact that this kid is an absolute bust.  It's just not sitting well.  You read that scouting report of him...what bullshit!  I actually wondered if they were referencing the same guy!!!

 

Did we draft the wrong Lafreniere??

 

I'm rolling on blind faith, you're right!  I just cannot seem to accept that all those scouts and scouting reports can be THAT wrong!  LOL

 

I mean!!!  REALLY WRONG!!!

[Pete]

55 minutes ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

That really is the concerning thing with him. Even in games where he does manage to get on the scoresheet, we're not seeing real consistent impactful play. He occasionally finds a way to get involved and scores. He's not consistently involved/impacting the game, and even when the kid line was flourishing, he was never really the catalyst of it, and more of a passenger to the ship being driven by Chytil and Kakko. 

 

The potential is still there. He didn't just forget how to play hockey, which is why I am not keen on really trading him for anything at this point. But he's left a lot to be desired and I have significantly higher hopes for Kakko than I do for Laf right now

 

and the fact that he got the Broadway hat after coming back from a scratch, even when he didn't do anything in the game, does show me that the team respects him, knows he can be better and wants to see him succeed. 

Did he forget how to play hockey? No.

 

Did he ever know how to play when he wasn't bigger, stronger and faster than his competition? Probably also no.

 

Here he's a JAG. He's average sized, average speed, average hands, average skating, below average conditioning, etc.

[Ozzy]

I'm hoping he can turn into a "Marchand" type player.  Laff does have some spunk to his game.

 

Marchand had all the same traits: Average speed, average skating, and it's smaller than Cornelius.  He has great hands though, especially around the net....also great vision.  The question is, can we develop that in Yukon?

Edited January 4, 2023 by Ozzy