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

[Albatrosss]

10 minutes ago, fletch said:

 

 

Fortunately or unfortunately sometimes it takes a new organization for a player to reach full potential.  We benefited with Zib.  I look at JT Miller with the Canucks.  He had some time with the Lightning after the Rangers but didn’t really blossom until Vancouver.  Would he ever have reached his level of production if he stayed with the Rangers?

 

I think we missed a chance with Laf to send him to the minors.  Now we only have the threats/options of healthy scratches, reduced ice time, etc to try and drive home the message of work ethic.  If there isn’t a way to change the status quo with his preparation he may need the shock of a new organization where he’s got to earn ice time without thinking he’s entitled to top six minutes and power play time.

Point is we gotta be patient with kids. Some take a little longer to figure it out.  Laf is fine and productive. And he’s getting paid accordingly.  Would you stop loving your son because he’s not as good an athlete you hoped he would be?  Would you stop loving your daughter because she’s a fat slob who likes donuts? 

[Br4d]

35 minutes ago, fletch said:

 

 

Fortunately or unfortunately sometimes it takes a new organization for a player to reach full potential.  We benefited with Zib.  I look at JT Miller with the Canucks.  He had some time with the Lightning after the Rangers but didn’t really blossom until Vancouver.  Would he ever have reached his level of production if he stayed with the Rangers?

 

I think we missed a chance with Laf to send him to the minors.  Now we only have the threats/options of healthy scratches, reduced ice time, etc to try and drive home the message of work ethic.  If there isn’t a way to change the status quo with his preparation he may need the shock of a new organization where he’s got to earn ice time without thinking he’s entitled to top six minutes and power play time.

 

I get all of this however we're going to suffer as much as Laffy does while it all plays out.  I'm not remotely convinced that the Rangers have done an appropriate job of developing any of the kids at this point.

 

Part of that is just timing.  We sent out the letter, which promised a fast track back into contention and *then* we got the #2OA and #1OA back to back.  Those two things, a fast track back into contention and developing two potential superstars just don't go easily hand in hand.

 

Part of that is the coaching.  We got the two kids and then we fired the coach and we brought in a vet's coach to replace him.  The Rangers coaches have been about as bad as they could be in terms of developing young talent over the last 4 seasons and a *huge* part of that is the promises in the letter.

 

How often in NHL history did a #1OA pick play for two different head coaches in his first two seasons?  How often was he working on his 3rd head coach going into his 4th season?

 

What I'm trying to say is that the hitches in Laffy's development to date have been as much on the Rangers as they have been on him.  I think probably they have been much more on the Rangers part than they've been on his part and that's with the questionable work ethic included in the picture.

[RangersIn7]

Just now, Br4d said:

 

I get all of this however we're going to suffer as much as Laffy does while it all plays out.  I'm not remotely convinced that the Rangers have done an appropriate job of developing any of the kids at this point.

 

Part of that is just timing.  We sent out the letter, which promised a fast track back into contention and *then* we got the #2OA and #1OA back to back.  Those two things, a fast track back into contention and developing two potential superstars just don't go easily hand in hand.

 

Part of that is the coaching.  We got the two kids and then we fired the coach and we brought in a vet's coach to replace him.  The Rangers coaches have been about as bad as they could be in terms of developing young talent over the last 4 seasons and a *huge* part of that is the promises in the letter.

 

How often in NHL history did a #1OA pick play for two different head coaches in his first two seasons?  How often was he working on his 3rd head coach going into his 4th season?

 

What I'm trying to say is that the hitches in Laffy's development to date have been as much on the Rangers as they have been on him.  I think probably they have been much more on the Rangers part than they've been on his part and that's with the questionable work ethic included in the picture.

It’s a mixture of both.

They haven’t done right nor enough.

Same is true of him.

 

Hopefully, he’s a bit more mature, hears what’s being said about him, and does what’s needed.

 

Also, I think he was probably pretty clueless regarding what he needed to do and how to do it, cause in reality, I doubt he’s ever had to work too hard to succeed previously. He’s just been better than everyone he’s played against.

And even through those first 2 seasons, he’s trying to fit in, get acclimated, be one of the boys, etc.

 

Now though, he needs to make it right. And the organization does too.

[Br4d]

10 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

It’s a mixture of both.

They haven’t done right nor enough.

Same is true of him.

 

Hopefully, he’s a bit more mature, hears what’s being said about him, and does what’s needed.

 

Also, I think he was probably pretty clueless regarding what he needed to do and how to do it, cause in reality, I doubt he’s ever had to work too hard to succeed previously. He’s just been better than everyone he’s played against.

And even through those first 2 seasons, he’s trying to fit in, get acclimated, be one of the boys, etc.

 

Now though, he needs to make it right. And the organization does too.

 

It's going to be really hard to get it right now though.

 

One of the other huge considerations is that vets don't want kids taking their jobs.  If the vet has some talent he is going to hold onto that job as long as he can and he's going to resent opportunities being given to the kid who is likely to take his job.

 

This is the other thing the Rangers did wrong.  Because of the letter they emphasized current production over future production at every step along the way.  It's not that they didn't give the kids opportunities.  It's that if the kids weren't immediately on fire they lost the opportunities back to the productive vets because of the Rangers need to stay competitive at all costs.

 

We look at Jack Hughes and we're jealous but Jack Hughes performed at about the same level as Laffy and Kakko his first two seasons.  He just never lost the primary opportunity in the process except when he was hurt - because the Devils were a bad team and there was no amount of immediate vet production that was going to get between Hughes and his opportunities.  Then in his 3rd season he broke out (and got hurt again) but he was still the #1 player on that Devils team and last year he arrived.

 

I don't know that the Rangers can get back the opportunities they should have given Laffy and Kakko all along and truth be told I don't know that either of them will get those opportunities this season either.  Having a deep veteran team that needs to contend right now makes it *very* hard to do the right thing for the young players you need to succeed.

 

I just don't know if they're going to find the right pattern to make this work.  Laviolette has a very tough job in front of him and two coaches have gone by the wayside trying to get it done over the last 4 seasons.

Edited June 25, 2023 by Br4d

[RangersIn7]

37 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

It's going to be really hard to get it right now though.

 

One of the other huge considerations is that vets don't want kids taking their jobs.  If the vet has some talent he is going to hold onto that job as long as he can and he's going to resent opportunities being given to the kid who is likely to take his job.

 

This is the other thing the Rangers did wrong.  Because of the letter they emphasized current production over future production at every step along the way.  It's not that they didn't give the kids opportunities.  It's that if the kids weren't immediately on fire they lost the opportunities back to the productive vets because of the Rangers need to stay competitive at all costs.

 

We look at Jack Hughes and we're jealous but Jack Hughes performed at about the same level as Laffy and Kakko his first two seasons.  He just never lost the primary opportunity in the process except when he was hurt - because the Devils were a bad team and there was no amount of immediate vet production that was going to get between Hughes and his opportunities.  Then in his 3rd season he broke out (and got hurt again) but he was still the #1 player on that Devils team and last year he arrived.

 

I don't know that the Rangers can get back the opportunities they should have given Laffy and Kakko all along and truth be told I don't know that either of them will get those opportunities this season either.  Having a deep veteran team that needs to contend right now makes it *very* hard to do the right thing for the young players you need to succeed.

 

I just don't know if they're going to find the right pattern to make this work.  Laviolette has a very tough job in front of him and two coaches have gone by the wayside trying to get it done over the last 4 seasons.

We will see.

 

If his in shape, I’ll be optimistic and he’ll get opportunities 

[fletch]

1 hour ago, CCCP said:

Point is we gotta be patient with kids. Some take a little longer to figure it out.  Laf is fine and productive. And he’s getting paid accordingly.  Would you stop loving your son because he’s not as good an athlete you hoped he would be?  Would you stop loving your daughter because she’s a fat slob who likes donuts? 

 

1 hour ago, Br4d said:

 

I get all of this however we're going to suffer as much as Laffy does while it all plays out.  I'm not remotely convinced that the Rangers have done an appropriate job of developing any of the kids at this point.

 

Part of that is just timing.  We sent out the letter, which promised a fast track back into contention and *then* we got the #2OA and #1OA back to back.  Those two things, a fast track back into contention and developing two potential superstars just don't go easily hand in hand.

 

Part of that is the coaching.  We got the two kids and then we fired the coach and we brought in a vet's coach to replace him.  The Rangers coaches have been about as bad as they could be in terms of developing young talent over the last 4 seasons and a *huge* part of that is the promises in the letter.

 

How often in NHL history did a #1OA pick play for two different head coaches in his first two seasons?  How often was he working on his 3rd head coach going into his 4th season?

 

What I'm trying to say is that the hitches in Laffy's development to date have been as much on the Rangers as they have been on him.  I think probably they have been much more on the Rangers part than they've been on his part and that's with the questionable work ethic included in the picture.

There’s two parties at blame:

1. The player.  For not being in shape.  Nor producing consistent play at both ends of the ice that demands top six and power play time, insisting on the opportunities rather than earning the opportunities.

2. The organization.  By not demanding accountability in developing skills and professionalism, and letting this level of conditioning and preparation slide.  No time in the minors.  No healthy scratches.  

 

I don’t see a lot of accountability demanded by the organization for any players for unacceptable effort or play (benchings for parts of games, healthy scratches).

 

 It would be great if a vet were to take Laf and/or Kakko and mentor and teach proper professionalism, which may or may not be happening behind the scenes. I see progress and work ethic from Kakko that I don’t see with Laf.

 

I think the Rangers are failing the player’s development by not demanding more, and are missing an opportunity to have a better contributor.  I think we are seeing the ceiling on Laf without a different approach or a new team.

[Sod16]

2 hours ago, CCCP said:

Point is we gotta be patient with kids. Some take a little longer to figure it out.  Laf is fine and productive. And he’s getting paid accordingly.  Would you stop loving your son because he’s not as good an athlete you hoped he would be?  Would you stop loving your daughter because she’s a fat slob who likes donuts? 

GMs who treat players like their children finish last.  Yes, for every story of a player who blossumed five years in there's another of a team that held on to a bust too long and ended up getting little or no return.

[Albatrosss]

1 hour ago, Sod16 said:

GMs who treat players like their children finish last.  Yes, for every story of a player who blossumed five years in there's another of a team that held on to a bust too long and ended up getting little or no return.

You have an example of a GM treating players like children whose team finished last?  Laf is not a bust. With his TOI he contributes accordingly. You consider him a bust because he doesn’t live up to your 1 OA expectations. 

[RangersIn7]

He’s not a bust at this point.

He’s actually become a better hockey player in each season.

And he’s still improving.

Blahblahblah.

 

It’s all relative. And circumstantial. 
And part of it’s not.

Everyone needs to do better on that. 
 

This season and the 1-2 that follow are it with this core.

 

All of them.

[Keirik]

2 hours ago, fletch said:

 

There’s two parties at blame:

1. The player.  For not being in shape.  Nor producing consistent play at both ends of the ice that demands top six and power play time, insisting on the opportunities rather than earning the opportunities.

2. The organization.  By not demanding accountability in developing skills and professionalism, and letting this level of conditioning and preparation slide.  No time in the minors.  No healthy scratches.  

 

I don’t see a lot of accountability demanded by the organization for any players for unacceptable effort or play (benchings for parts of games, healthy scratches).

 

 It would be great if a vet were to take Laf and/or Kakko and mentor and teach proper professionalism, which may or may not be happening behind the scenes. I see progress and work ethic from Kakko that I don’t see with Laf.

 

I think the Rangers are failing the player’s development by not demanding more, and are missing an opportunity to have a better contributor.  I think we are seeing the ceiling on Laf without a different approach or a new team.

I’d even throw a third factor in the mix….the leaders of this team. You hear all the time about players living with veterans (Crosby with lemieux as an example) to make sure the kid gets off on the right foot. Maybe I just missed it but I haven’t heard of anyone taking laf under their wing. No?

[Pete]

It's also partly he isn't highly skilled at any particular facet of the game, nor does he have any intangibles. 

[Scott]

 

Host family:

 

19 minutes ago, Pete said:

It's also partly he isn't highly skilled at any particular facet of the game, nor does he have any intangibles. 

 

Correct imo.

[BrooksBurner]

Lafreniere has plenty of skill, but it’s not on display enough because he has trouble consistently creating enough space. As a result, he lacks confidence when the puck finds him under pressure. He needs to get faster, stronger, and a better first couple of steps. If Laf applies himself and does that, he’ll take off from there.

[siddious]

43 minutes ago, Pete said:

It's also partly he isn't highly skilled at any particular facet of the game, nor does he have any intangibles. 

 

17 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Lafreniere has plenty of skill, but it’s not on display enough because he has trouble consistently creating enough space. As a result, he lacks confidence when the puck finds him under pressure. He needs to get faster, stronger, and a better first couple of steps. If Laf applies himself and does that, he’ll take off from there.

He is not a high end skill guy like Panarin but his strengths were supposed to be vision and a chip on his shoulder and I absolutely agree that vision can be hindered by being a step too slow. 

[Sod16]

2 hours ago, CCCP said:

You have an example of a GM treating players like children whose team finished last?  Laf is not a bust. With his TOI he contributes accordingly. You consider him a bust because he doesn’t live up to your 1 OA expectations. 

You are correct that Laf is not a certified bust, yet, but being considered a bust is, in fact, legitimately a function of expectations.  A 1OA who becomes a passable NHL player but not better is a bust.  A third round pick who reaches that level is not.  Did LaF "contribute accordingly" to his TOI in seven playoff games.  Given that he was 0-0-0, I assume that means he never saw the ice.

[Albatrosss]

2 hours ago, Sod16 said:

You are correct that Laf is not a certified bust, yet, but being considered a bust is, in fact, legitimately a function of expectations.  A 1OA who becomes a passable NHL player but not better is a bust.  A third round pick who reaches that level is not.  Did LaF "contribute accordingly" to his TOI in seven playoff games.  Given that he was 0-0-0, I assume that means he never saw the ice.

Did Panarin? Did anyone not named kreider and igor? 

[Pete]

8 hours ago, CCCP said:

Did Panarin? Did anyone not named kreider and igor? 

Why can't we just have a conversation about Lafreniere?

He's absolutely a bust as a number one overall. He's a monster of a disappointment as a draft pick.

 

That said, he may or may not find other ways to contribute. He might become some type of useful checking forward in the future. But he's still a bust. He's should desperately trying to salvage his career right now. But he's probably not.

 

 

[Sharpshooter]

We're at the point now where we're hoping he becomes Ryan Johansen lite, or something.

[BrooksBurner]

All 2010+ 1OA F 5v5 through first 3 seasons, leaving McDavid and Matthews out for obvious generational reasons:

 

Hall: 171 games, 1 pt every 27.9 min, 1 goal every 71 min, -7

RNH: 182 games, 1 pt every 38.3 min, 1 goal every 98 min, -11

Yakupov: 192 games, 1 point every 40.1 min, 1 goal every 91 min, -72

MacKinnon: 218 games, 1 pt every 31.2 min, 1 goal every 87.4 min, +9

Hischier: 209 games,  1 pt every 29.7 min, 1 goal every 69.1 min, -6

Hughes: 166 games, 1 pt every 37.1 min, 1 goal every 82.1 min, -45

Laf: 216 games, 1 pt every 36.1 min, 1 goal every 66.9 min, +5

 

4th in points/min, 1st in goals/min, 2nd +/-. He's right there production wise with the tier after McDavid/Matthews.

 

He leaves your eyes wanting more flash and visibility throughout the year, but the fact of the matter is he has produced adequately for a 1OA across the 3 years while moving between positions and linemates on a competitive team that requires him to be responsible without just cherry picking for offense. He's done so while arguably being behind on a physical spectrum, and requires significant training to get to where he should be. If his numbers look good in comparison to other 1OAs now, what will they look like if he puts in the conditioning work?

 

He lacks the explosive speed of MacKinnon and Hughes, so I don't anticipate a breakout like those guys experienced - Hughes in his 4th season and MacKinnon in his 5th - but I could see a career track similar in 5v5 production to Hall and Hischier. In a couple of more seasons, probably potting 40+ 5v5 points. Before anyone scoffs at that, "a 40 point player, great", Zibanejad has 1 year of 40+ 5v5 points (2 other years at 39 to be fair). Lack of PP time and role matters significantly, and can't be ignored.

[Pete]

And the search for stats to craft a narrative that he's not that bad continues. Points per minute... Completely pointless stat in this scenario because as we know, the rest of those players came into the league in the top 6. Laugh hasn't faced the level of competition the others have. 

 

But sure... We'll keep singing the song and doing the dance. 

Edited June 26, 2023 by Pete

[Sharpshooter]

Some of you guys seriously do too much stat gymnastics and over analysis to make the most miniscule of points. lol Or to try to anyway. Look, I'm not saying he won't improve but from watching him these last few years, the eye test says he pretty much sucks. Yeah, he's not in a position that most first overall picks are usually in, but as I've said from watching, absolutely nothing has stood out to me. He doesn't really do anything well, like, at all. Maybe once in awhile he can dish it, but that's really it. He doesn't score, he hardly ever hits and his skating, while better this year, still leaves a lot to be desired.

 

Can he get better and be a solid contributor at the NHL level sure? Is he a complete bust? Absolutely. That cannot be denied.

[BrooksBurner]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

And the search for stats to craft a narrative that he's not that bad continues. Points per minute... Completely pointless stat in this scenario because as we know, the rest of those players came into the league in the top 6. Laugh hasn't faced the level of competition the others have. 

 

But sure... We'll keep singing the song and doing the dance. 

Lafreniere’s most common line combo year 1 was Zibanejad and Buchnevich. Year 2 Zibanejad and Kreider. This past year was the only year he was “third line” with the other 2 kids, and I think across the season playing against different clubs every night, the whole idea of enforcing such drastic matchup hockey across the top 9 is overstated anyway.

[BrooksBurner]

11 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

Some of you guys seriously do too much stat gymnastics and over analysis to make the most miniscule of points. lol Or to try to anyway. Look, I'm not saying he won't improve but from watching him these last few years, the eye test says he pretty much sucks. Yeah, he's not in a position that most first overall picks are usually in, but as I've said from watching, absolutely nothing has stood out to me. He doesn't really do anything well, like, at all. Maybe once in awhile he can dish it, but that's really it. He doesn't score, he hardly ever hits and his skating, while better this year, still leaves a lot to be desired.

 

Can he get better and be a solid contributor at the NHL level sure? Is he a complete bust? Absolutely. That cannot be denied.

It’s not stat gymnastics to compare 5v5 numbers when PP is not a legitimate comparison. It’s all we have. Comparing boxcar stats is entirely disingenuous and, to be frank, amateur fantasy hockey fan type stuff.

Edited June 26, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[Sharpshooter]

3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

It’s not cap gymnastics to compare 5v5 numbers when PP is not a legitimate comparison. It’s all we have. Comparing boxcar stats is entirely disingenuous and, to be frank, amateur fantasy hockey fan type stuff.

I just haven't liked what I've seen from him at all, at really any point. Now if this staff gives him some more time, more PP time and he goes off, then great. I'm willing to go into this season with an open mind. However, as it stands right now, he's been a colossal bust as a first overall.

[BrooksBurner]

4 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

I just haven't liked what I've seen from him at all, at really any point. Now if this staff gives him some more time, more PP time and he goes off, then great. I'm willing to go into this season with an open mind. However, as it stands right now, he's been a colossal bust as a first overall.

I’ll be concerned and lean towards bust if he’s given a primary role on the PP and the totals look the same. I think we both know a significant PP role isn’t happening though, barring a surprising trade this summer.