Staple Lafreniere 'Hasn't Shown the Level of Dedication to His Offseason Work,'

[Phil]

3 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

In theory moving Lafraniere to RW would solve a lot, but he can't even get acclimated to the NHL at his usual position of LW.  They've tried him (not enough in my opinion) at RW and claim it didn't work.

 

That's a reason to move him to RW. He hasn't shown any of the flash and potential you want out of a first overall pick, so why are we married to him at LW where we know he'll play behind better, more successful players he stands no chance of leaping over?

[RJWantsTheCup]

4 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

That's a reason to move him to RW. He hasn't shown any of the flash and potential you want out of a first overall pick, so why are we married to him at LW where we know he'll play behind better, more successful players he stands no chance of leaping over?

It's hard to imagine a player who isn't showing anything at his careeer normal position being able to handle switching sides, but stranger things have happened. 

[Phil]

13 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

It's hard to imagine a player who isn't showing anything at his careeer normal position being able to handle switching sides, but stranger things have happened. 

 

It's harder to imagine the team asking two veteran, highly-productive LWs who have being asked to move to their off wing deep into their respective careers just so the kid who "hasn't shown anything" can have the runway cleared for him.

[Br4d]

9 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

That's a reason to move him to RW. He hasn't shown any of the flash and potential you want out of a first overall pick, so why are we married to him at LW where we know he'll play behind better, more successful players he stands no chance of leaping over?

 

I think it is a real mistake to look at Lafreniere through the lens of a #1OA.  All that does is to remove appreciation of the things he actually has shown so far.  Specifically the 44 even strength goals he has scored through age 21 in 216 games.  Anybody else that had that kind of early career progress we'd be looking at as a solid prospect and potential star, because players tend to dramatically improve on their 19-21 seasons by the time they hit early prime at 24 or so.

 

However if we look at him only as a #1OA we lose that ability to appreciate what he's done and what he might be for us.

[RJWantsTheCup]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

It's harder to imagine the team asking two veteran, highly-productive LWs who have being asked to move to their off wing deep into their respective careers just so the kid who "hasn't shown anything" can have the runway cleared for him.

I wouldn't move anyone from their natural position.  I would explore moving the highly unproductive LW to acquire a RW that can play with Panarin & Chytil.

[The Dude]

4 hours ago, Br4d said:

 

When Zibanejad and Kreider and Panarin go away the team is going to be in the market for a lot of offensive help anyway.  On the bright side that search is going to be accompanied by a lot of cap space that is being taken up now.

 

If the Kids can produce at #2 line levels we're better off next season than we've been in the last two.  After that they either are stepping it up or we'll be looking for permanent additions, not TDL rentals, to stabilize the top of the roster.

 

It's just crazy-making to think about Lafreniere and Kakko as #1OA and #2OA.  They haven't demonstrated that type of talent to date and holding that up as the standard they have to achieve is almost guaranteeing that they will fail in your eyes.  if we look at what they are as opposed to juxtaposing that with the #1's and #2's of the last decade then there's a reasonable chance we'll be satisfied with what they turn into.

 

I'm pretty sure at this point that there are some organizations out there that would have gotten a better semblance of #1OA and #2OA out of them than the Rangers have.  However those organizations would have been forced to give them a full shot and also forced to let them play through the rookie mistakes if that's what happened.  Jack Hughes first two seasons were nothing much to look at either.  The Devils figured it out because frankly they were a bad team and they had nothing better to do and they were completely invested in Hughes.

 

Compare that to the Cadillac Rangers who were developing these guys almost as an afterthought because they were not central to the teams immediate success.

The point is, if they don't hit their expected potential, and are marginal 60 point players... Why keep them? Why not move them now and hope someone else thinks they can fix them.  Get value if and when you can. The 1OA luster is probably still of interest to a desperate team, looking to add a name to a rebuilding phase. All the Canadian teams probably have interest and would maybe trade a pretty penny just for the story.. 

 

God damn it, now I'm back on the Brock Boeser train. 

[The Dude]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

Sure, it could but as of today, it's not. 

 

Kakko will play with Zib or Bread. Chytil with Laf and ... Vesey? 

Why can't it be Chytil with Panarin and Kreider with Trocheck? The Kreider Trocheck combo looked good to pretty much close the season. Until it was broken up. Then 2 shifts later put back together. Then broken up to start the next period. God Gallant had zero patience.  

[Pete]

39 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Why can't it be Chytil with Panarin and Kreider with Trocheck? The Kreider Trocheck combo looked good to pretty much close the season. Until it was broken up. Then 2 shifts later put back together. Then broken up to start the next period. God Gallant had zero patience.  

It can be? I'm going based on what we know today, and what we know today is the line combinations that ended the season.

 

While we all have thoughts and feelings about it, I'm not really confident that Lavs messes with line combinations out of the gate. I think he's much more likely to keep the accommodations together while he rolls out the system, at least the players will have some familiarity with each other.

 

Changes may come after that. 

[BrooksBurner]

Don’t break up Lafreniere-Chytil-Kakko. It’s just not necessary. I’m breaking up Kreider and Zibanejad before I do that.

 

Panarin - Zib - Vesey

Lafreniere - Chytil - Kakko

Kreider - Trocheck - Goodrow

Cuylle - Brodzinski - Motte

Before ragging on Vesey up there, I’ve seen multiple indicators that suggested Vesey worked well with both Panarin and Zibanejad.

 

Who are we kidding though? Every coach has their scrub preferences. Laviolette will be bringing in a couple of “his guys” on cheap deals and they’ll be sprinkled in the lineup over what we see now.

[Br4d]

2 hours ago, The Dude said:

The point is, if they don't hit their expected potential, and are marginal 60 point players... Why keep them? Why not move them now and hope someone else thinks they can fix them.  Get value if and when you can. The 1OA luster is probably still of interest to a desperate team, looking to add a name to a rebuilding phase. All the Canadian teams probably have interest and would maybe trade a pretty penny just for the story.. 

 

God damn it, now I'm back on the Brock Boeser train. 

 

The reason you don't move them now is that if they're going to be 60 point players at 24 they're going to be better 60 point players than anybody we could get for them in trade.  That is, they'll have the real chance to be much better than that as they get into prime time at 27 or so.

 

You don't trade Laffy or Chytil right now for the same reason Ottawa shouldn't have traded Zibanejad at 23.  In fact our young guys are more likely to be real prime time studs than Zibanejad was when Ottawa decided to cash out.

 

The #1OA and #2OA stuff is just a trap.  Nobody is going to give us value in a trade as if those guys were anywhere near that status.  They're going to give us value similar to what we gave for Zibanejad and while that might look ok for a year or even two it is likely to be a huge loss of value over the years.

Edited June 16, 2023 by Br4d

[The Dude]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

It can be? I'm going based on what we know today, and what we know today is the line combinations that ended the season.

 

While we all have thoughts and feelings about it, I'm not really confident that Lavs messes with line combinations out of the gate. I think he's much more likely to keep the accommodations together while he rolls out the system, at least the players will have some familiarity with each other.

 

Changes may come after that. 

Maybe I'm missing what you've been saying,  but it reads like you're saying everyone's spot stays as is. We can't move players around to other lines, because that's what it is as of the end of the season. Yet... you're moving Kakko up to the top line. 

 

So, how's that work? As of now Kakko is on the kid line. Not with Zibanejad.  

 

I mean I can see it as a possibility (I didn't like Kakko with Kreider and Zibanejad,  it was painful to watch).  But it's just as likely as the possibility that Chytil bypasses Trocheck and gets a real look with Panarin. Pushing Trocheck down to 3C for now. 

 

IDK. You're saying one thing,  then changing the parameters. 

[Pete]

9 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Maybe I'm missing what you've been saying,  but it reads like you're saying everyone's spot stays as is. We can't move players around to other lines, because that's what it is as of the end of the season. Yet... you're moving Kakko up to the top line. 

 

So, how's that work? As of now Kakko is on the kid line. Not with Zibanejad.  

 

I mean I can see it as a possibility (I didn't like Kakko with Kreider and Zibanejad,  it was painful to watch).  But it's just as likely as the possibility that Chytil bypasses Trocheck and gets a real look with Panarin. Pushing Trocheck down to 3C for now. 

 

IDK. You're saying one thing,  then changing the parameters. 

Kakko is in the top 6 because there are no other RWs.

 

My point is if I had to decide right now, using only what I know right now, and not what my be later, Kakko is the only one I see with a long term future here. 

 

Of course there are scenarios and what ifs that change that, but as of today, that's where it sits. 

[Pete]

2 hours ago, Br4d said:

In fact our young guys are more likely to be real prime time studs than Zibanejad was when Ottawa decided to cash out.

To be clear, this is yet more opinion being positioned as fact. 

[The Dude]

1 hour ago, Br4d said:

 

The reason you don't move them now is that if they're going to be 60 point players at 24 they're going to be better 60 point players than anybody we could get for them in trade.  That is, they'll have the real chance to be much better than that as they get into prime time at 27 or so.

 

You don't trade Laffy or Chytil right now for the same reason Ottawa shouldn't have traded Zibanejad at 23.  In fact our young guys are more likely to be real prime time studs than Zibanejad was when Ottawa decided to cash out.

 

The #1OA and #2OA stuff is just a trap.  Nobody is going to give us value in a trade as if those guys were anywhere near that status.  They're going to give us value similar to what we gave for Zibanejad and while that might look ok for a year or even two it is likely to be a huge loss of value over the years.

But Zibanejad had always shown glimpses of great skill.. Ottawa traded him when he was a 50 point player. There's no comparison with Lafrenière to Zibanejad that you can make. Not the same situation at all. Ottawa was just dumb or looking for veteran scoring and (at the time) a more well rounded and experienced player. The Rangers would be dumb to hold onto Lafrenière in hopes that he one day (now were supposed to wait till 27?!?!?) gets it together 

 

You're making a baseless statement. Lafrenière isn't anywhere near as an attractive player as Zibanejad was when they traded him. 

 

A 60 point player is a 60 point player. They're not that hard to come by.  Heck, none of the kids are even 50 point players. It'd be a career year if Lafrenière approached 50, much less 60. 

 

Being a 60 point player ranks you at 95th in points. In the company of Rakell, Arvidsson, Mittlestadt.. Are these building blocks? Or are they OK players that you don't make the focal point of your future.

 

You don't build around Lafrenière at this point. You'll just exhaust every attempt to get him to be productive and then move on. If anyone is offering anything of substance,  the Rangers need to move on. 

 

 

[BrooksBurner]

14 minutes ago, The Dude said:

But Zibanejad had always shown glimpses of great skill.. Ottawa traded him when he was a 50 point player. There's no comparison with Lafrenière to Zibanejad that you can make. Not the same situation at all. Ottawa was just dumb or looking for veteran scoring and (at the time) a more well rounded and experienced player. The Rangers would be dumb to hold onto Lafrenière in hopes that he one day (now were supposed to wait till 27?!?!?) gets it together 

 

You're making a baseless statement. Lafrenière isn't anywhere near as an attractive player as Zibanejad was when they traded him. 

 

A 60 point player is a 60 point player. They're not that hard to come by.  Heck, none of the kids are even 50 point players. It'd be a career year if Lafrenière approached 50, much less 60. 

 

Being a 60 point player ranks you at 95th in points. In the company of Rakell, Arvidsson, Mittlestadt.. Are these building blocks? Or are they OK players that you don't make the focal point of your future.

 

You don't build around Lafrenière at this point. You'll just exhaust every attempt to get him to be productive and then move on. If anyone is offering anything of substance,  the Rangers need to move on. 

 

 

 

Who's who?

 

ES numbers first 3 years.

 

216gp 44g 85p

200gp 33g 73p

Edited June 17, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[The Dude]

17 minutes ago, Pete said:

Kakko is in the top 6 because there are no other RWs.

 

My point is if I had to decide right now, using only what I know right now, and not what my be later, Kakko is the only one I see with a long term future here. 

 

Of course there are scenarios and what ifs that change that, but as of today, that's where it sits. 

Meh. It's all subjective to whom you/we like more. I know you really aren't into Chytil at all. But it can just as easily be said, that since the Rangers extended Chytil, they want to expand his role. The next step is top 6 linemates for him. 

 

This can and will go many different ways. This lineup has many possible variations that the previous coach didn't use, because he was an unimaginative jerk off. 

[Scott]

14 minutes ago, The Dude said:

But Zibanejad had always shown glimpses of great skill.. Ottawa traded him when he was a 50 point player. There's no comparison with Lafrenière to Zibanejad that you can make. Not the same situation at all. Ottawa was just dumb or looking for veteran scoring and (at the time) a more well rounded and experienced player. The Rangers would be dumb to hold onto Lafrenière in hopes that he one day (now were supposed to wait till 27?!?!?) gets it together 

 

You're making a baseless statement. Lafrenière isn't anywhere near as an attractive player as Zibanejad was when they traded him. 

 

A 60 point player is a 60 point player. They're not that hard to come by.  Heck, none of the kids are even 50 point players. It'd be a career year if Lafrenière approached 50, much less 60. 

 

Being a 60 point player ranks you at 95th in points. In the company of Rakell, Arvidsson, Mittlestadt.. Are these building blocks? Or are they OK players that you don't make the focal point of your future.

 

You don't build around Lafrenière at this point. You'll just exhaust every attempt to get him to be productive and then move on. If anyone is offering anything of substance,  the Rangers need to move on. 

 

 

 

[The Dude]

2 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Who's who?

 

216gp 44g 85p

200gp 33g 73p

I think you fudged your math.

 

Age 19, (20 points) 20 (33 points) and 21 (46 points) stats would give Zibanejad 99 points in 191 games. Wanna add the 9 games he played at age 18? 100 points in 200 games

 

 

Again. Zibanejad had shown flashes of real skill. Had some of that "it" factor. He started younger and achieved higher point totals during his age 20 and 21 years.

 

If you think Lafrenière can hit 51 points this year, good for you,  because that's what Zib put up at age 22. I have zero faith in fatso. 1OA, breaking 50 points would be a huge success in year 4.  That's sad.  Incredibly sad. 

 

 

 

 

[The Dude]

51 minutes ago, jsrangers said:

 

You flush it.

[BrooksBurner]

9 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I think you fudged your math.

 

Age 19, (20 points) 20 (33 points) and 21 (46 points) stats would give Zibanejad 99 points in 191 games. Wanna add the 9 games he played at age 18? 100 points in 200 games

 

 

Again. Zibanejad had shown flashes of real skill. Had some of that "it" factor. He started younger and achieved higher point totals during his age 20 and 21 years.

 

If you think Lafrenière can hit 51 points this year, good for you,  because that's what Zib put up at age 22. I have zero faith in fatso. 1OA, breaking 50 points would be a huge success in year 4.  That's sad.  Incredibly sad. 

 

 

 

 

 

ES points I said.

[Scott]

21 minutes ago, The Dude said:

You flush it.

Or we can keep moving the goalposts from 1OA to maybe one of these years he'll actually put in all the work required to actually show up in the best shape possible and we can give him a gold star for achieving that. Maybe give him another few years for that though can't ask for too much. 

 

He lost me completely by continuing to smile his way through being nothing other than the definition of an out of shape JAG while throwing in the chinstrap moustache for added salt in the wound. He's just happy to be here. 

 

 

[Albatrosss]

Ottawa traded Zib because they considered him damaged goods,  with the concussion issues.  

[Br4d]

2 hours ago, The Dude said:

But Zibanejad had always shown glimpses of great skill.. Ottawa traded him when he was a 50 point player. There's no comparison with Lafrenière to Zibanejad that you can make. Not the same situation at all. Ottawa was just dumb or looking for veteran scoring and (at the time) a more well rounded and experienced player. The Rangers would be dumb to hold onto Lafrenière in hopes that he one day (now were supposed to wait till 27?!?!?) gets it together 

 

You're making a baseless statement. Lafrenière isn't anywhere near as an attractive player as Zibanejad was when they traded him. 

 

A 60 point player is a 60 point player. They're not that hard to come by.  Heck, none of the kids are even 50 point players. It'd be a career year if Lafrenière approached 50, much less 60. 

 

Being a 60 point player ranks you at 95th in points. In the company of Rakell, Arvidsson, Mittlestadt.. Are these building blocks? Or are they OK players that you don't make the focal point of your future.

 

You don't build around Lafrenière at this point. You'll just exhaust every attempt to get him to be productive and then move on. If anyone is offering anything of substance,  the Rangers need to move on. 

 

 

 

After his 4th season at the age of 21 Zibanejad had 43 goals in 200 games but 10 of them were on the power play.

 

Same thing as Lafreniere.  I know you can't see it but it's there.

[Bugg]

10 hours ago, Br4d said:

 

After his 4th season at the age of 21 Zibanejad had 43 goals in 200 games but 10 of them were on the power play.

 

Same thing as Lafreniere.  I know you can't see it but it's there.

Would like to see something like he's living in the gym and has the keys to the local rink. Don't understand anything else. He can make a shitload of $ if he's a star NHL. But if he wants to bum around at the edge like Brian Lawton or Bobby Carpenter of Alexander Daigle, yes, he could do that too and make a living. His draft pedigree means teams will give him a shot almost until he's no better than an AHL zamboni driver. 

[Pete]

There's too many here who watch spreadsheets more than they watch games.

 

This guy is a completely vanilla player, he's not good at anything at all. You can't even say that he's average at everything. He stinks at everything aside from shooting the puck. He's got a pretty wicked shot that he never uses. 

 

He's living on the backs of his line mates, and it couldn't be more clear. Complete complementary player and not a line driver.

 

If you're going to get anything of value out of him, he needs to be playing with star players who can spoon feed him.

 

I see a lot of whining around here about the primadonna stars, meanwhile we have a beat reporter acknowledging that this guy has no work ethic, and the same people whining about the primadonna stars are saying that we should keep this kid.

 

Makes absolutely no sense. 

Edited June 17, 2023 by Pete