Brooks From the Mind of a Genius: Laviolette Needs to Take Risks

[BrooksBurner]

Elmer Ferguson Memorial Award winner Larry Brooks with a tremendous mid-summer column. Just an incredible piece.

 

https://nypost.com/2023/07/15/peter-laviolette-should-take-risk-for-rangers-to-reach-mandate/?utm_campaign=iphone_nyp&utm_source=twitter_app

 

Quote

This means that Laviolette must allow Filip Chytil, Kaapo Kakko and Alexis Lafreniere — the only three forwards younger than 30 projected to make the opening roster, if you can believe that five-plus years after The Letter — to breathe and make mistakes even if that approach could cost a point or three early.

 

Look, I get it. The pressure to make the playoffs is immense. Every game matters. But you have to be willing to risk taking a baby step back in order to be in position take two giant steps forward down the line. This is something Gallant would not do. 

 

Quote

Seriously. From where is the growth coming, if not from the Kids? Of course, Mika Zibanejad, Artemi Panarin, Chris Kreider and Vincent Trocheck can become more effective players under Laviolette, but their respective ceilings are pretty well established. Same for Barclay Goodrow, Jimmy Vesey, Blake Wheeler, et al.

Chytil, Kakko and Lafreniere, well, who knows? That’s the point. The Rangers have to know. They have to give these three forwards the chance to soar. Maybe they will crash. Maybe the ceiling will be as low as in an RV. But maybe the ceiling can be as high as those in apartments in pre-WW II buildings on the Upper West Side. The Rangers have to find out.

 

Laviolette has to give them the chance. Win Now does not mean October. Win Now means June.

 

Quote

3. I’ll tell you this. Power play time is not a birthright. There simply must be competition for spots on the man advantage and there must be competition for ice time between the two units. This first unit entitlement that took root during the 2020-21 season must come to an end. 

Brooksy firing on all cylinders.

Edited July 15, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[siddious]

The conundrum is that this team needs the kids to succeed to win the ultimate prize. They won’t succeed unless they’re developed and given opportunity, which probably includes a lot of failure at times.

i get why gallant didn’t wanna do it. Hopefully drury is smarter than that. 
 

 

[The Dude]

Chytil should get his opportunity with Panarin or Kreider. Kakko is all but guaranteed a top 6 RW spot. Lafrenière has his work cut out for him. He can either play with Zibanejad or Trocheck.  

 

God, with this insistence of talking about how wronged the kids have been.  How much more do people expect them to play? It's not like they were getting 8-10 minutes a night. 13-15 with no PP time is decent. Are people seriously thinking Lafrenière should play more than Panarin? Chytil over Zibanejad? What are we talking about here? What is the expectation from this camp?  

 

The growth will come from better scoring opportunities, that will vary in style. Smarter decisions with the puck upon exits and entries. Better defensive structure and gameplans. Actually trying match ups. 

 

Not sure what the point was in complaining about the PP. It was the teams bread and butter. It carried the team for 2+ seasons. I'll totally agree about the long shifts for unit 1 needing to stop. But the basic parts of the 1st unit should probably stick together. Trocheck can be replaced by a kid, any kid. 

[Br4d]

The real problem is that Lafreniere is essentially going to play a similar role to Panarin's with a touch of Kreider thrown into the mix if he gets the opportunities and makes good on them.   His history suggests that he is a playmaker who then is very opportunistic in front of the goal.  Odds are pretty good he will not perform at the same level Panarin does while he is getting on track and so there is definitely some downside in the process of developing him.

 

This was likely always part of the thought process from the Rangers: that Lafreniere was going to do things that they already had veteran players doing and not necessarily as well as them while he was developing.

 

That however is the price you pay when you want to develop a young player who has similar skillsets to other more established vets on the team.

[Long live the King]

Another article of things we've talked about for months.

 

Laf - Zib - Kakko

Panarin - Chytil - Vesey

Kreider - Trocheck - Wheeler

 

           CK

Zib - Chytil - Kakko

          Fox

 

                 Wheeler

Panarin - Trocheck - Laf

              Jones/Miller

 

Brooks is a plagiarist.

[BrooksBurner]

30 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

Another article of things we've talked about for months.

 

Laf - Zib - Kakko

Panarin - Chytil - Vesey

Kreider - Trocheck - Wheeler

 

           CK

Zib - Chytil - Kakko

          Fox

 

                 Wheeler

Panarin - Trocheck - Laf

              Jones/Miller

 

Brooks is a plagiarist.

Your lines are getting there. Another month and you might build mine from weeks ago.

[Long live the King]

31 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Your lines are getting there. Another month and you might build mine from weeks ago.

 

I'm not try to get anywhere.   Been posting the same lines since the FA signings. 

[Valriera]

That stat really hits home for me. The only three forwards younger than 30. 

 

The only three forwards younger than 30.

 

Vegas did it with an abnormally elderly roster. But one of their young forwards was Jack Eichel, who is better than our three will ever be. 

 

The only three forwards younger than 30.

 

It's quite possible that the path here is not forward, but backward, because even if Lafreniere is McDavid next season, the only three forwards under 30 are winning nothing. Going to be a very interesting season.  

 

 

[BrooksBurner]

3 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

 

I'm not try to get anywhere.   Been posting the same lines since the FA signings. 

Lol was just kidding around

[Br4d]

Lafreniere is not going to be McDavid.

 

You could make a very good argument at this point that McDavid is the 4th in a line of truly generational players: Phil Esposito, Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux and now McDavid.

 

Esposito makes the list because of his silly consecutive season goal-scoring numbers during his prime, leading the NHL in goals scored 6 seasons in a row.  You could put Gordie Howe in his slot and nobody would argue a lot but during his prime Esposito potted goals like nobody before him and only Gretzky and Lemieux since.

Edited July 15, 2023 by Br4d

[BrooksBurner]

12 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Lafreniere is not going to be McDavid.

 

You could make a very good argument at this point that McDavid is the 4th in a line of truly generational players: Phil Esposito, Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux and now McDavid.

 

Esposito makes the list because of his silly consecutive season goal-scoring numbers during his prime, leading the NHL in goals scored 6 seasons in a row.  You could put Gordie Howe in his slot and nobody would argue a lot but during his prime Esposito potted goals like nobody before him and only Gretzky and Lemieux since.

[siddious]

Laf needs to be a top 6 player and ill be fine. If he can do 30-30 and bring some grit which he apparently has and some leadership I’m fine. 
 

he’s not trending for that 

[Br4d]

4 minutes ago, siddious said:

Laf needs to be a top 6 player and ill be fine. If he can do 30-30 and bring some grit which he apparently has and some leadership I’m fine. 
 

he’s not trending for that 

 

If he hits I'm expecting 35-65 as his typical season.

 

*If* he hits.

[Br4d]

32 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

I would put Ovechkin squarely in the Gordie Howe box.  That makes him a reasonable player to put in the generational category but he's never been as dominant as Esposito was during his prime.  Neither was Howe.

 

That's why I put Esposito in that very short list of generational players while leaving a lot of other great players worth 90-100 points a season off of the list.

[Pete]

Can this guy contradict himself any more?

 

Powerplay time is not a birthright, therefore we should stop giving it to the five best offensive players on the team and start giving it to other players based on where they were drafted... Because it's not a birthright... Right...

[Br4d]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

Can this guy contradict himself any more?

 

Powerplay time is not a birthright, therefore we should stop giving it to the five best offensive players on the team and start giving it to other players based on where they were drafted... Because it's not a birthright... Right...

 

Smart teams get the best synergy out of the talent available.  That includes developing future talent at times even if it will cost a small amount of current production.

 

It's not like the Rangers have the best powerplay in the NHL right now nor like they will have the best powerplay in a few years time if they keep playing the same players the lion's share of the minutes.

[Long live the King]

26 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

Smart teams get the best synergy out of the talent available.  That includes developing future talent at times even if it will cost a small amount of current production.

 

It's not like the Rangers have the best powerplay in the NHL right now nor like they will have the best powerplay in a few years time if they keep playing the same players the lion's share of the minutes.

 

Tied for 4th best pp over the last 4 years.

[Pete]

34 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

Smart teams get the best synergy out of the talent available.  That includes developing future talent at times even if it will cost a small amount of current production.

 

It's not like the Rangers have the best powerplay in the NHL right now nor like they will have the best powerplay in a few years time if they keep playing the same players the lion's share of the minutes.

I'm glad we agree Gallant wasn't smart. 

[RangersIn7]

2 hours ago, Long live the King said:

 

Tied for 4th best pp over the last 4 years.

Good as the PP has been, it’s also had its slumps, and can be very predictable. A little stale I’d say.

Changing up some personnel , maybe the minute distribution, perhaps some different tactics, could give them a fresh look. Make it a bit harder to defend. 

 

The big 4 on their PP are still going to plenty of time. But they won’t find anything else that works without some change. 

[Br4d]

One of the reasons that Laviolette needs to have a plan to get a lot more out of the non-core guys is that the Rangers have had tremendous injury luck over the last two seasons.

 

He can't count on that continuing and it's better to be proactive and widen the talent opportunities before you are forced to do so by injury.

Edited July 17, 2023 by Br4d

[siddious]

23 minutes ago, Br4d said:

One of the reasons that Laviolette needs to have a plan to get a lot more out of the non-core guys is that the Rangers have had tremendous injury luck over the last two seasons.

 

He can't count on that continuing and it's better to be proactive and widen the talent opportunities before you are forced to do so by injury.

This is true. I’d say it extends beyond the last 2 seasons as well. Especially with top line guys. Makes the Ramsey firing even more bizarre 

[Ozzy]

2 hours ago, Br4d said:

One of the reasons that Laviolette needs to have a plan to get a lot more out of the non-core guys is that the Rangers have had tremendous injury luck over the last two seasons.

 

He can't count on that continuing and it's better to be proactive and widen the talent opportunities before you are forced to do so by injury.

 

Agree 100% Brad....we've been amazingly lucky.  This is also a reason to establish a solid offensive and defensive system where players don't have free-wheel, or depend on talent alone for us to be successful.  Most likely the reason that the Canes were able to do so much without 3 of their best players in the playoffs.

 

There's really only one guy that if he goes down, we're fucked, and that's Igor the Magnificent.

 

The rest we may be able to weather the storm within a strict and rigid system where players play their role.  But as we saw with the Canes, there's a limit as to how far you may be able to go before reality creeps in, and more talented teams eventually win out.

 

But to your point...yeah man....we have been super fortunate!

[Br4d]

I really think it is mostly talent and motivation once you get into the playoffs.

 

High energy systems like the 'Canes run can grind your opponents down during the regular season but by the post-season you're ground down as well because you've been skating hard all season and now somehow you have to amp it up again because the competition just got consistently harder.

 

There are a bunch of reasons the Rangers beat the 'Canes in '21-22 but I think the big one was when Trouba took their kid winger out.  Suddenly the 'Canes just couldn't maintain the same pressure and the Rangers were able to maintain their edge in games 6 and 7.

 

I think it is pretty likely that Brind'Amour will live through some version of that reality in every post-season because he really drives his guys hard and when he loses one of them the whole system takes a hit.

[RangersIn7]

2 hours ago, siddious said:

This is true. I’d say it extends beyond the last 2 seasons as well. Especially with top line guys. Makes the Ramsey firing even more bizarre 

Still extremely curious about that.

 

I can’t wrap my head around it.

[fletch]

https://nypost.com/2023/07/15/peter-laviolette-should-take-risk-for-rangers-to-reach-mandate/?utm_campaign=iphone_nyp&utm_source=twitter_app

 

'This means that Laviolette must allow Filip Chytil, Kaapo Kakko and Alexis Lafreniere — the only three forwards younger than 30 projected to make the opening roster, if you can believe that five-plus years after The Letter — to breathe and make mistakes even if that approach could cost a point or three early.'

 

https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/03/23/a-new-look-at-aging-curves-for-nhl-skaters-part-1/

'by taking each player’s respective change year-over-year...the average NHL skater plateaus from age 22 to 25.'

 

https://www.arcticicehockey.com/2010/1/21/1261318/nhl-points-per-game-peak-age

' NHL Points-per-Game Peak Age Estimation. There are numerous ways to estimate the age at which NHL players peak.... The peak age is just slightly more than 25 (years old).  

 

https://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2014/3/13/5500522/nhl-scoring-stats-rates-age-analysis

'On average, players retain about 90% of their scoring through age 29, but the drop from there is pretty sharp.'

 

https://www.hockeyviz.com/static/pdf/ritsac19.pdf

'Peak age is 24...24-31 gentle decline...31-34 twice as steep...34-40 about three times as steep.'

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271172145_Estimating_the_effects_of_age_on_NHL_player_performance

'Our best estimate of the scoring peak age is between 27 and 28 for forwards.'

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/rangers

With the exception of Chytil, Kakko, and Lafreniere, I think it's reasonable to think we've seen the ceiling on yearly goals/assists from the rest of our forwards - and while it's possible to get a one-year performance jump like Kreider in 2021-2022 - I would expect either status quo or decline from all forwards other than Chytil, Kakko, and Lafreniere.