Player Discussion Alexis Lafrenière: Part II

[True Blue]

This isn't 20th century NHL. Teams get kids to excel early. We are 0-for-5 with highly drafted forwards panning out quickly.

It's fair to ask why.

But why stop there? Why not go back to the 70s and point to the Maloney brothers, Middleton, Vickers & Murdoch,?

 

[Synergy27]

And I am still waiting for you to evidence that the Rangers have a problem developing forwards. Citing 1993 seems a bit disingenuous. Unless you think that the issue is an existential one for the franchise and go back to the Cook brothers.

The evidence is the lack of evidence. The Rangers haven't drafted and developed an elite scorer in the entire time I've been following the team. On top of that, they have also brought in a whole bunch of high end talents as FAs and the majority of them found a way to die on the vine here (yes, most were old and dying before they got here). That's why people are so elated that Panarin worked out - he's an exception to the rule that a lot of us resigned ourselves to.

Logical or not, supported by next gen metrics or not, the FACT remains that I have never seen a PPG forward come up thru this system and establish himself as a NYR. Not one.

Yes, draft capital has been an historical hinderance to that, but you'd think that over the course of 30+ years the team would stumble into a Pastrnak or a Point. You'd think that they'd find their own Panarin or Kucherov.

Players like Stepan, Callahan, and Dubinsky are great. I loved them. I got into many heated debates as to why I believed Stepan was actually a 1C when most of the league viewed him as a good 2C. Alexei Kovalev, probably the closest this team has come to drafting and developing an elite talent (and the #27 in my username) was always referred to as an "enigma" while here and didn't have his best years until he moved on.

Kakko and Lafreniere are different. They were consensus top picks that we were actually lucky enough to get. Both were labeled as NHL ready during their draft years, and in Laf's case, the punditry was pretty certain that he'd step in and score 60 points in his first year (i.e., more than any of the guys above scored at their peaks). The draft capital excuse is no longer in the Ranger fans argument arsenal.

Lafreniere is on a 10 point pace. Ten. With a little more puck luck he'd be on what, a 30-40 point pace (if being generous and giving him say another 2 goals and 3 assists)? If the kid had 5 more points right now and was showing the occasional flash of elite skill, I'd be much more open to accepting the COVID/not playing for 10 months explanation.

Kakko, for all of his improved play still only has 3 points.

These players cannot, like absolutely cannot, follow Stepan/Miller/Callahan development curves. They need to be much better. We blew up a contending team and tanked for once because the brass understands that elite talent is required to win it all. It is unacceptable for 1OA and 2OA draft picks to be on similar development curves as, and to be compared to, the not good enough core players that we all loved but knew deep inside were never good enough.

We also absolutely must have these guys really clicking before Panarin starts to decline and the big paychecks start rolling in. That's how this works in the cap era.

I will believe that these kids will be elite point producers on Broadway when I see it, and I will be disappointed in both if they turn into anything less than that. I don't feel as though that is an unreasonable stance to take.

 

[True Blue]

Both can be true at once. Rangers don't give up a lot of excellent scoring chances, that's a credit to how they've done a good job committing to defense. If it weren't for that one bad goal by Shesterkin, Capitals would have been shutout, they weren't generating much of anything. The Jacques Martin influence is strong with this team, I'll leave it at that.

So if they are suppressing high danger scoring chances and out chancing their opponents then perhaps the system is stifling for their opponents and to them?

 

[mas0764]

But why stop there? Why not go back to the 70s and point to the Maloney brothers, Middleton, Vickers & Murdoch,?

I don't understand the point you are making.

 

[Machinehead]

Because I don't think he's been invisible at all, which has been said in this thread, I think he's played well, in fact I think he's been one of the better forwards on the team this year (probably not saying much with how bad or inconsistent a lot of the forwards have been, but that probably also contributes to his lack of points) would I like to see more points from him? Sure, but I think with the counting stats he's largely been incredibly unlucky (and the advanced stats seem to point in this direction too), I get it's an incredibly unsatisfying reason, but sometimes that's life. I think the people who think he's been invisible might not have understood the style of game that Lafreniere plays and just saw 1OA must mean the flashy Patrick Kane style of player where Lafreniere is more in the elite grinder Crosby type of player.

I thought he and Chytil played really well to start the season, then he gets moved to play his off wing with Panarin and Strome while they were struggling at ES, then he gets moved to played with Zibanejad who was struggling even worse, then Chytil who was probably the best forward on the team gets hurt and Laf gets moved back down to the third line to play with Howden and DiGuiseppe and sets up guys like Bitetto for chances between the circles with literately no close to them that they don't end up scoring on.

I think as a board this year there's justifiable anger and frustration with the way this season has gone so far, but I think posters are just going with their guts and posting where their feelings are with placing their anger and frustrations lay and since it's the internet they can't change their opinions after it and it makes HF as a whole miserable to read because it's either that or people just hopping in and being irreverent memers who just want to hop in and throw a grenade into a thread and leave (which I've definitely been guilty of this year) and every issue is two brick walls talking at each other which makes it feel pointless to even come in here and spend the time to be sincere and take the time to hash things out with people.

And by the way I copied this sentence from this very thread:
Based on his 1OA pick, and points to date, despite the goal today, he’s been a bust so far.

I mean...that's it?

"So far" means absolutely nothing in hockey and it says nothing about his career.

If poster A thinks he's been invisible and poster B disagrees, is that necessarily posting with anger and frustration?

People with 84 posts have a hot take and then leave? That always happened. Don't pay any mind to it.

I'm sorry, I just don't see people shitting on the kid in a toxic way. I think your assessment is reasonable and that's mostly what I've seen.

The only thing that's been toxic are the handful of posters that let us know every time Tim Stuzle farts and I've called that out every time.

 

[True Blue]

The evidence is the lack of evidence. The Rangers haven't drafted and developed an elite scorer in the entire time I've been following the team. On top of that, they have also brought in a whole bunch of high end talents as FAs and the majority of them found a way to die on the vine here (yes, most were old and dying before they got here). That's why people are so elated that Panarin worked out - he's an exception to the rule that a lot of us resigned ourselves to.

Ok, so now the issue has morphed from developing forwards to developing "elite" forwards. More often than not, for that to happen one needs to be picking top-10. While not impossible to to find talent else where in the draft, it certainly helps. Not to mention having more first round pick than less would also assist the situation. But here is the crux of it. It is not that the Rangers have a problem developing forwards, the issue at hand is that they have an issue developing elite forwards. And our sample size is........confidence bringing question......2 players. Both 19. One whose fancy stats are better than counting stats (clearly fancy stats count the most, until one needs the argument to go into a different direction) and one who is dominating on ice but has nothing to show for it.

Ok. Color me convinced. They have an issue developing elite level forwards.

 

[True Blue]

I don't understand the point you are making.

How far back does the sample go back that you want to use for the issue of "Rangers have problems developing elite forwards"?

 

[Machinehead]

Are you going to deny the assets in the franchise pre-Gorton being GM and post?

No, we have more young assets than we ever had before. That's a good thing. Who said it wasn't?

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Because I don't think he's been invisible at all, which has been said in this thread, I think he's played well, in fact I think he's been one of the better forwards on the team this year (probably not saying much with how bad or inconsistent a lot of the forwards have been, but that probably also contributes to his lack of points) would I like to see more points from him? Sure, but I think with the counting stats he's largely been incredibly unlucky (and the advanced stats seem to point in this direction too), I get it's an incredibly unsatisfying reason, but sometimes that's life. I think the people who think he's been invisible might not have understood the style of game that Lafreniere plays and just saw 1OA must mean the flashy Patrick Kane style of player where Lafreniere is more in the elite grinder Crosby type of player.

I thought he and Chytil played really well to start the season, then he gets moved to play his off wing with Panarin and Strome while they were struggling at ES, then he gets moved to played with Zibanejad who was struggling even worse, then Chytil who was probably the best forward on the team gets hurt and Laf gets moved back down to the third line to play with Howden and DiGuiseppe and sets up guys like Bitetto for chances between the circles with literately no close to them that they don't end up scoring on.

I think as a board this year there's justifiable anger and frustration with the way this season has gone so far, but I think posters are just going with their guts and posting where their feelings are with placing their anger and frustrations lay and since it's the internet they can't change their opinions after it and it makes HF as a whole miserable to read because it's either that or people just hopping in and being irreverent memers who just want to hop in and throw a grenade into a thread and leave (which I've definitely been guilty of this year) and every issue is two brick walls talking at each other which makes it feel pointless to even come in here and spend the time to be sincere and take the time to hash things out with people.

And by the way I copied this sentence from this very thread:
Based on his 1OA pick, and points to date, despite the goal today, he’s been a bust so far.

didnt read lol

 

[mas0764]

How far back does the sample go back that you want to use for the issue of "Rangers have problems developing elite forwards"?

The lockout of 2004-05 always seems like a good line of demarcation to me for the "new school," NHL to a certain degree. The Rangers did business way differently pre and post lockout in terms of their approach to team building.

 

[Machinehead]

How far back does the sample go back that you want to use for the issue of "Rangers have problems developing elite forwards"?

I think we've certainly had either Sather or the guy Sather hired for the last 21 years, so use that.

Boy, I can't wait to see that list of Hart finalists.

Like, I'm not trying to be obtuse or negative or anything like that. But again, the idea that this is something the Rangers want to improve is consensus. It's why we did a rebuild. Management themselves are aware of it, and that is also a good thing.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

So if they are suppressing high danger scoring chances and out chancing their opponents then perhaps the system is stifling for their opponents and to them?

Sort of, I shouldn't be talking like I'm some authoritative source but it goes without saying: hockey teams who play preventive defense usually need to sacrifice something along the way. My general impression of the Rangers is they don't generate as many scoring chances per game as most teams, wouldn't be surprised if they're bottom quarter of the league on that front (maybe bottom third). I'd definitely guess they're top quarter (in a good way) in preventing high danger events against.

I'm going by eye test on this one, but I decided to follow the Rangers this year due to interest in your two young big time prospects and my general takeaway is Rangers games are hard to watch...put in another way, the amount of events happening in most games seems low, particularly on transition plays. Perhaps as the season goes along, things could change.

 

[mas0764]

Sort of, I shouldn't be talking like I'm some authoritative source but it goes without saying: hockey teams who play preventive defense usually need to sacrifice something along the way. My general impression of the Rangers is they don't generate as many scoring chances per game as most teams, wouldn't be surprised if they're bottom quarter of the league on that front (maybe bottom third). I'd definitely guess they're top quarter (in a good way) in preventing high danger events against.

I'm going by eye test on this one, but I decided to follow the Rangers this year due to interest in your two young big time prospects and my general takeaway is Rangers games are hard to watch...put in another way, the amount of events happening in most games seems low, particularly on transition plays.

Another way to put it: They play a safe, boring brand of hockey.

And I suspect that is one of the things "holding back," the kids. They are being drilled into being defensively responsible.

I'm not sure I agree with this approach. Let them go out and be offensive dynamos.

I also can't help but feel this is dicta from management: "We want to make the playoffs now." Quinn or someone else views it as important to keep their jobs.

No the F it isn't! Get Kakko and Lafreniere going, that's literally the main goal.

 

[Machinehead]

Another way to put it: They play a safe, boring brand of hockey.

And I suspect that is one of the things "holding back," the kids. They are being drilled into being defensively responsible.

I'm not sure I agree with this approach. Let them go out and be offensive dynamos.

You have your cohort of two-way stars like Bergeron, Couturier, Crosby when he feels like it, but most stars in the NHL suck at defense.

Ovechkin and Kane couldn't find the defensive zone if you tattooed on their wife's forehead.

 

[Synergy27]

Ok, so now the issue has morphed from developing forwards to developing "elite" forwards. More often than not, for that to happen one needs to be picking top-10. While not impossible to to find talent else where in the draft, it certainly helps. Not to mention having more first round pick than less would also assist the situation. But here is the crux of it. It is not that the Rangers have a problem developing forwards, the issue at hand is that they have an issue developing elite forwards. And our sample size is........confidence bringing question......2 players. Both 19. One whose fancy stats are better than counting stats (clearly fancy stats count the most, until one needs the argument to go into a different direction) and one who is dominating on ice but has nothing to show for it.

Ok. Color me convinced. They have an issue developing elite level forwards.

The issue hasn't morphed at all for me. That's always what this thread has been about - we're talking about Alexis Lafreniere for god's sake. Up until very recently this thread has been mostly devoted to comparing him to other recent 1 and 2OAs, not to the last batch of Ranger youth.

But again, you talk about a sample size of 2. I am talking about a sample size of 30+ years worth of draft picks. Yes, these are the only top 2 picks they have had, and I am very, very happy they were finally lucky enough to have them. But, it seems like many (most?) other teams over that timespan have managed to produce at least one top tier player with picks worse than ours, or without picking at all.

The question is why, and because this is the case, I will remain cautiously optimistic at best until our can't miss prospects actually don't miss.

 

[Synergy27]

You have your cohort of two-way stars like Bergeron, Couturier, Crosby when he feels like it, but most stars in the NHL suck at defense.

Ovechkin and Kane couldn't find the defensive zone if you tattooed on their wife's forehead.

 

[Off Sides]

I feel like we need to be reminded, this is the Rangers. Nothing ever just happens the same way it does on other teams. Looking at what other #1 and #2 picks have done means nothing in the context that this is the Rangers. If I've learned anything from watching this team since Kisio was their captain, expecting them to follow any sort of linear normal track towards wherever they are going is foolhardy.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

Another way to put it: They play a safe, boring brand of hockey.

And I suspect that is one of the things "holding back," the kids. They are being drilled into being defensively responsible.

I'm not sure I agree with this approach. Let them go out and be offensive dynamos.

I also can't help but feel this is dicta from management: "We want to make the playoffs now." Quinn or someone else views it as important to keep their jobs.

No the F it isn't! Get Kakko and Lafreniere going, that's literally the main goal.

A blunt way of putting it, but it's true.

Last thing worth noting though, and I'm sure this isn't news to anyone here: Lafreniere and Kakko and the Rangers are competing in the East Divison, against rival veteran teams who are also generally good at preventing scoring chances. Contrast this with the Canaian ivision for reference.

 

[Synergy27]

The only thing that's been toxic are the handful of posters that let us know every time Tim Stuzle farts and I've called that out every time.

To be fair, I hear that his farts smell like a sweet bouquet of bratwurst and altbier, so I can't say I blame them.

 

[aufheben]

When the defense to his underwhelming production is he’s a 19 year kid entering the league during a pandemic, it is fair to note Stutzle.

I guess, although there are examples besides Stutzle.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

And I am still waiting for you to evidence that the Rangers have a problem developing forwards. Citing 1993 seems a bit disingenuous. Unless you think that the issue is an existential one for the franchise and go back to the Cook brothers.

 

[SA16]

A blunt way of putting it, but it's true.

Last thing worth noting though, and I'm sure this isn't news to anyone here: Lafreniere and Kakko and the Rangers are competing in the East Divison, against rival veteran teams who are also generally good at preventing scoring chances. Contrast this with the Canaian ivision for reference.

I've shown this before and it's not true. The thought before the season the East had a lot of good teams and good defenses and goalies. And yet...

North:6.24 goals/game
Central: 5.95 goals/game
East: 5.85 goals/game
West: 5.61 goals/game

 

[Synergy27]

I've shown this before and it's not true. The thought before the season the East had a lot of good teams and good defenses and goalies. And yet...

North:6.24 goals/game
Central: 5.95 goals/game
East: 5.85 goals/game
West: 5.61 goals/game

You are a solid analytics guy. I appreciate what you bring here.

Did you happen to see the quick goal differential analysis I did in another thread? Just showing the pure difference in goal differential between the best and worst team in each division? I thought the results of that quick analysis were compelling, but they seemed subject to big swings still this early in the season.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

I've shown this before and it's not true. The thought before the season the East had a lot of good teams and good defenses and goalies. And yet...

North:6.24 goals/game
Central: 5.95 goals/game
East: 5.85 goals/game
West: 5.61 goals/game

Interesting, doesn't support my narrative. I do think it undersells how bad the defenses have looked thus far, despite the North's comfortable lead.

 

[SA16]

You are a solid analytics guy. I appreciate what you bring here.

Did you happen to see the quick goal differential analysis I did in another thread? Just showing the pure difference in goal differential between the best and worst team in each division? I thought the results of that quick analysis were compelling, but they seemed subject to big swings still this early in the season.

I didn't notice it (but am looking at the stats now myself). All I know is we were constantly told the East is the toughest and the North would be the most offensive and while it's true for the North the other 3 divisions have been pretty similar with regards to the goal scoring.

At the same time though I think you consider that teams with bad goal differentials like Anaheim/Det/NSH aren't bad because they are a disaster defensively. They just don't score. I don't think having them in divisions exactly makes other teams output greater.