The Kids Are Alright?

[Phil]

51 minutes ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

There's no reason to compare either player to Jack Hughes. Hughes is a special, elite level talent, who went to a team that truly needed him and allowed him to have every opportunity to thrive with top minutes.

 

Kakko Chytil and Laf all probably were not NHL ready right away. Chytil absolutely was rushed into the league earlier than he needed to be. 

 

For laf and kakko, its tough to send guys like that back to a development league. Laf probably needed AHL time but the rules are dumb and going to Juniors would have been a complete waste of time for him. Kakko as well. It's tough to sell a fanbase on that though. On top of that, most high picks like that are going to teams that immediately are looking to build around them, not trying to find places to put them. Us getting some lottery luck probably wasn't the best thing for those guys.

 

Draft position aside, any other player at their age, doing what they're doing would be viewed as positives, and would be seen as guys with lots of potential that we would be excited about. 

 

Sorry, but of course there is. Hughes and Kakko were part of the same draft class, first and second overall respectively. This happens all the time.

 

"Taylor versus Tyler" (Hall/Seguin)

McDavid/Eichel

Matthews/Laine

Hischier/Patrick (this largely helped drive Patrick out of PHI)

 

Even Lafreniere/Byfield would be more of a thing if either player were doing anything of note.

 

But largely, any time you are making a selection at the top of the draft, whoever you pick is inevitably going to be compared to other players taken in similar positions in recent years. Especially if they're given "like" comparisons by the experts. McDavid was "the next one" and made right by it. Lafreniere was supposed to be a can't miss high-end performer. Jeff Marek, who is a big prospects guy, was raving about him for two years before the draft.

 

When the Lifetime movie gets made about these two (Lafreniere and Kakko) it should be called "Caveats & Cope: The Lafreniere & Kakko Stories"

[Pete]

14 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Actually you *can* put draft position aside from a practical perspective.

 

What third line in the NHL would you rather have right now than the one we have?

You want to have one niche debate because it makes you feel better about the other debate.

 

Is the third line good? Sure.

 

Is the third line constituted of top pick busts who couldn't hack it in the top 6? Also true.

 

Was that the plan when they were drafted? No. Did they have to flip assets to get better players because they stunk for a long time? Yes.

 

The fact that they are a good third line doesn't change the fact that they were drafted to be a great 1st line LOL.

[LindG1000]

23 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Sorry, but of course there is. Hughes and Kakko were part of the same draft class, first and second overall respectively. This happens all the time.

 

"Taylor versus Tyler" (Hall/Seguin)

McDavid/Eichel

Matthews/Laine

Hischier/Patrick (this largely helped drive Patrick out of PHI)

 

Even Lafreniere/Byfield would be more of a thing if either player were doing anything of note.

 

But largely, any time you are making a selection at the top of the draft, whoever you pick is inevitably going to be compared to other players taken in similar positions in recent years. Especially if they're given "like" comparisons by the experts. McDavid was "the next one" and made right by it. Lafreniere was supposed to be a can't miss high-end performer. Jeff Marek, who is a big prospects guy, was raving about him for two years before the draft.

 

When the Lifetime movie gets made about these two (Lafreniere and Kakko) it should be called "Caveats & Cope: The Lafreniere & Kakko Stories"

 

Man, if only the Devils drank the kool-aid at draft time. 

 

In June of 2019 there was a strong contingent that thought Kakko was the right pick at #1.

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Man, if only the Devils drank the kool-aid at draft time. 

 

In June of 2019 there was a strong contingent that thought Kakko was the right pick at #1.

It wasn't a strong contingent, it was a contingent of vocal Euro contrarians. 

[BrooksBurner]

9 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Man, if only the Devils drank the kool-aid at draft time. 

 

In June of 2019 there was a strong contingent that thought Kakko was the right pick at #1.

 

Yeah. I remember reading there were actual NHL GMs (under anonymity) who preferred Kakko. No clue what they were thinking. I remember watching tape of both pre-draft and thinking Hughes was clearly the better prospect because of his skating and vision.

[LindG1000]

6 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Yeah. I remember reading there were actual NHL GMs (under anonymity) who preferred Kakko. No clue what they were thinking. I remember watching tape of both pre-draft and thinking Hughes was clearly the better prospect because of his skating and vision.

 

I get what they were thinking. Big, young wing. Just shattered Liiga U18 scoring records. Has room to grow. Was like a men among boys internationally. 

 

Hindsight's a bitch.

[lefty9]

As of now there is a big gap between Hughes and Kappo ,but I think Kappo will close the gap a little in the coming years

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

 

Unfortunately you can't just put draft position aside.

IDK seems pretty easy to me lol

 

 

 

 

[Drew a Penalty]

9 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I get what they were thinking. Big, young wing. Just shattered Liiga U18 scoring records. Has room to grow. Was like a men among boys internationally. 

 

Hindsight's a bitch.

 

No, what fueled any hype for Kakko was the fact that he was doing it against men, not boys. He looked like a monster in the Liiga. The hype got even worse when he had a 2 goal game against Canada and a hat trick against Slovakia in the World Championships against some NHL competition.

 

Hughes had chosen an unprecedented path at the time by staying with the USNTDP for his draft year. Hughes put up record numbers for the US team, but there was a question of him doing it all against boys while Kakko was a near P/GP amongst men.

 

The thought at the time was that Kakko was more physically ready for NHL action and physicality than Hughes because of the competition both faced. We all know how that's turned out.

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

54 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Sorry, but of course there is. Hughes and Kakko were part of the same draft class, first and second overall respectively. This happens all the time.

 

"Taylor versus Tyler" (Hall/Seguin)

McDavid/Eichel

Matthews/Laine

Hischier/Patrick (this largely helped drive Patrick out of PHI)

 

Even Lafreniere/Byfield would be more of a thing if either player were doing anything of note.

 

But largely, any time you are making a selection at the top of the draft, whoever you pick is inevitably going to be compared to other players taken in similar positions in recent years. Especially if they're given "like" comparisons by the experts. McDavid was "the next one" and made right by it. Lafreniere was supposed to be a can't miss high-end performer. Jeff Marek, who is a big prospects guy, was raving about him for two years before the draft.

 

When the Lifetime movie gets made about these two (Lafreniere and Kakko) it should be called "Caveats & Cope: The Lafreniere & Kakko Stories"

for a couple of years maybe this was discussed but I don't think anyone still talks about these players in comparison to eachother

 

But if Kakko turns into the Patrick Laine to Jack Hughes' Auston Matthews, I'll be quite happy

Edited March 27, 2023 by BlairBettsBlocksEverything

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

IDK seems pretty easy to me lol

 

 

 

 

To each their own, not everybody wants to wear the blue tinted sunglasses. Everything's okay because the top two picks in the draft turned into useful third liners! I'm sure that's what every team envisions when the lottery ball drops.

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

for a couple of years maybe this was discussed but I don't think anyone still talks about these players in comparison to eachother

Yes, because the players drafted around them are wildly more successful so there's no more comparison to be had haha. 

[Pete]

4 minutes ago, Drew a Penalty said:

 

No, what fueled any hype for Kakko was the fact that he was doing it against men, not boys. He looked like a monster in the Liiga. The hype got even worse when he had a 2 goal game against Canada and a hat trick against Slovakia in the World Championships against some NHL competition.

 

Hughes had chosen an unprecedented path at the time by staying with the USNTDP for his draft year. Hughes put up record numbers for the US team, but there was a question of him doing it all against boys while Kakko was a near P/GP amongst men.

 

The thought at the time was that Kakko was more physically ready for NHL action and physicality than Hughes because of the competition both faced. We all know how that's turned out.

It's like everybody somehow forgot that skating was an important part of the game... Probably the most important part. 

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

Just now, Pete said:

To each their own, not everybody wants to wear the blue tinted sunglasses. Everything's okay because the top two picks in the draft turned into useful third liners! I'm sure that's what every team envisions when the lottery ball drops.

not exactly what I'm saying. Yeah we had huge expectations for both players, and they for sure haven't quite lived up to it yet. It's easier to take when you are a cup contender vs. a team that took these players to build a whole franchise around that don't quite pan out.

 

They are contributing to a team that has a realistic cup chance, and they are improving. If you view them from the lens of talented young players who still have high ceilings, playing behind elite talent, it's more encouraging.  for me at least  

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

3 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yes, because the players drafted around them are wildly more successful so there's no more comparison to be had haha. 

I mean, im not disagreeing with that? I don't think anyone in this thread is saying Kakko is going to become close to Hughes, talent wise. 

 

I'm 1000% more confident that Kakko can be closer to the Laine to Matthews example than the Hischier/Patrick example though

[Drew a Penalty]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

It's like everybody somehow forgot that skating was an important part of the game... Probably the most important part. 

 

Kakko's balance really had people fooled that he was a more capable skater than he was/is.

[LindG1000]

1 minute ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

not exactly what I'm saying. Yeah we had huge expectations for both players, and they for sure haven't quite lived up to it yet. It's easier to take when you are a cup contender vs. a team that took these players to build a whole franchise around that don't quite pan out.

 

They are contributing to a team that has a realistic cup chance, and they are improving. If you view them from the lens of talented young players who still have high ceilings, playing behind elite talent, it's more encouraging.  for me at least  

 

I'd probably make the argument that they're doing exactly what we're asking of them. No more, no less. We've asked them to be a formidable third line, and so they are.

[Pete]

14 minutes ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

not exactly what I'm saying. Yeah we had huge expectations for both players, and they for sure haven't quite lived up to it yet. It's easier to take when you are a cup contender vs. a team that took these players to build a whole franchise around that don't quite pan out.

 

They are contributing to a team that has a realistic cup chance, and they are improving. If you view them from the lens of talented young players who still have high ceilings, playing behind elite talent, it's more encouraging.  for me at least  

I get that and agree to a point. Right now, it's A conversation, but if the team sucked it would be THE conversation,

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I'd probably make the argument that they're doing exactly what we're asking of them. No more, no less. We've asked them to be a formidable third line, and so they are.

Yes, and again, the team is asking them to do that because the team already asked them to be first and second liners...And they couldn't.

[BrooksBurner]

43 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yes, and again, the team is asking them to do that because the team already asked them to be first and second liners...And they couldn't.

Yes for Kakko. Not legitimately for Lafreniere.

[Pete]

33 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Yes for Kakko. Not legitimately for Lafreniere.

Yea, it is, but not worth the debate.

[BrooksBurner]

38 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yea, it is, but not worth the debate.

Agree. It’s not worth it because you know the argument you’d make is weak and involves the team telling him to switch positions. The other avenue is telling him to outplay a 50 goal guy and Panarin. These aren’t legitimate opportunities.

Edited March 27, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[RangersIn7]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

You want to have one niche debate because it makes you feel better about the other debate.

 

Is the third line good? Sure.

 

Is the third line constituted of top pick busts who couldn't hack it in the top 6? Also true.

 

Was that the plan when they were drafted? No. Did they have to flip assets to get better players because they stunk for a long time? Yes.

 

The fact that they are a good third line doesn't change the fact that they were drafted to be a great 1st line LOL.

I still think “bust” in both inaccurate and unfair… but yeah… they’ve underachieved at this point.

 

That said… still we’ve seen growth, progress, improvement and an increase in their production.

 

Next step is needed.

 

I think most of us feel like they can give more.

Gotta find their way to consistently producing. 

[Pete]

21 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Agree. It’s not worth it because you know the argument you’d make is weak and involves the team telling him to switch positions. The other avenue is telling him to outplay a 50 goal guy and Panarin. These aren’t legitimate opportunities.

Whatever makes you feel good about yourself. I know you need all the help you can get.

Edited March 27, 2023 by Pete

[Pete]

9 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I still think “bust” in both inaccurate and unfair… but yeah… they’ve underachieved at this point.

 

That said… still we’ve seen growth, progress, improvement and an increase in their production.

 

Next step is needed.

 

I think most of us feel like they can give more.

Gotta find their way to consistently producing. 

Feels like we were having this same debate this same time a year ago. Then they had a nice playoff. And now we're still having this conversation.