Lafreniere Vs Stutzle/Sanderson

[Pinto Bean]

The poll results are likely the way they are as I think the majority of people think Sanderson should have went closer to #10 rather than #5.

If all these players hit their ceilings, then obviously the Sens duo win but of course, Laf is the best bet to actually hit that ceiling all while having an insanely high floor.

So this all really depends on how likely people think the players involved will hit their ceilings.

I'll add that I think Sanderson is generally seen closer to a 10th ranked prospect in the 2020 draft rather than a 5th ranked prospect simply because he doesn't have the flash or silky smooth moves like a Drysdale, a Raymond, or a Perfetti. But as we've seen with elite two-way dmen (Jones, Mcdonagh, MaCavoy), if Sanderson can some how hit this level of player, he may have as large an impact on winning as any player in the top 10.

 

[Polar Bear]

The fact that more people are picking Laf, that is nothing short of laughable.

Great player, but what the f*** has he done to be worthy of two top 5 picks? These people either expect that both Stützle and Sanderson will bust entirely, or that Laf will be the best player in the league rightaway.

Maybe, most people don't rate Sanderson as a top five pick which impacts things, just saying? I personally had Stutzle at 4, but that's an opinion in the minority.

 

[Ace Card Bedard]

Potential #1C and potential #1D

or

potential top line winger?



Stutzle/Sanderson for me.

 

[Agent Zub]

Honestly I'm willing to bet Stutzle becomes the best of all three. He's not as refined as Lafrenierre but he's got better soft skills.

 

[aufheben]

I wouldn’t trade Laf for those two, and I personally had Stuzle ranked #2OA. Laf just checks too many boxes.

 

[Sun God Nika]

as a sens fan i keep the two players as a rangers fan i keep the one player.

 

[AB13]

If Ottawa took Rossi, Holtz or Drysdale instead of Sanderson I would go for 3 and 5. But I will take Lafreniere considering Sanderson doesn’t strike me as a very high upside player.

 

[jbeck5]

But why would we assume both the Rangers and Ottawa picked correctly? Players become much less likely to reach their potential as you get away from #1, who almost always ends up a star. How many 3rd and 5th picks end up better than the 1st overall is what we need to look at.

2005: Crosby vs. Jack Johnson & Price
2006: Erik Johnson vs. Toews & Kessel
2007: Kane vs. Turris & Alzner
2008: Stamkos vs. Bogosian & Luke Schenn
2009: Tavares vs. Duchene & Brayden Schenn -push
2010: Hall vs. Gudbranson & Niederreiter
2011: RNH vs. Huberdeau & Ryan Strome
2012: Yakupov vs. Galchenyuk & Rielly
2013: MacKinnon vs. Drouin & Lindholm
2014: Ekblad vs. Draisaitl & Dal Colle
2015: McDavid vs. Dylan Strome & Hanifin
2016: Matthews vs. Dubois & Juolevi
2017: Hischier vs. Heiskanen & Pettersson
2018: Dahlin vs. Kotkaniemi & Hayton

With this we have 8 for the 1st overall vs 5 for 3rd and 5th and 1 that's probably a push. We also see that almost all the drafts where there was a clear-cut #1 like Lafreniere end up being better for the 1st overall.

Except tavares, RNH, and Yakupov lol.

 

[Albatros]

Lafrenière vs. Stützle is so close already that Sanderson easily tips that over.

 

[jbeck5]

I think you missed the part where I said more often than not. There's more than just 2017 where the #1 pick wouldn't have been the correct choice in hindsight. 2014, 2006 are other examples. But more often than not it ends up being the correct choice. Not to mention the years where it wasn't are typically years where we knew going into the draft that the #1 pick wasn't as strong as most years (ie. Hischier, Ekblad, RNH, etc.). This is not one of those years. Laf looks like a stud and the best forward available in the draft since Matthews 4 years ago.

You also have to consider that this year was considered more unique on the high end depth.

The top 5 or 10 was much stronger in this draft than most others.

So while you're looking at how strong the 1st overall is, you can't ignore how strong the draft class is for the handful of players drafted after #1. That's a big factor you're completely ignoring.

You never mentioned once that you factored in that #3 and #5 are better than usual #3 and #5 which is what literally every expert was saying going into the draft. The #2,#3,#4,#5 etc are very strong this draft.

You had many saying stutzle and Byfield could both be #1s in another draft.

You've also heard lots saying that stutzle is as offensively talented as Lafreniere, just not as well rounded.

If stutzle can put up close to the offense or Lafreniere while Sanderson becomes a #1-#2 d, I easily take the two players.

 

[slimbob8]

You also have to consider that this year was considered more unique on the high end depth.

The top 5 or 10 was much stronger in this draft than most others.

So while you're looking at how strong the 1st overall is, you can't ignore how strong the draft class is for the handful of players drafted after #1. That's a big factor you're completely ignoring.

You never mentioned once that you factored in that #3 and #5 are better than usual #3 and #5 which is what literally every expert was saying going into the draft. The #2,#3,#4,#5 etc are very strong this draft.

You had many saying stutzle and Byfield could both be #1s in another draft.

You've also heard lots saying that stutzle is as offensively talented as Lafreniere, just not as well rounded.

If stutzle can put up close to the offense or Lafreniere while Sanderson becomes a #1-#2 d, I easily take the two players.

Of course, anyone would. But that's kind of my point; it's all based on huge IF's that more often than not don't turn out. Yes this year has a lot great talent near the top compared to other years, but it's also got a better #1 compared to most years. They said the same thing in 2015 since it was even more loaded with elite talent at the top. Fast forward 5 years and nobody's taking Strome + Hanifin over McDavid or even Eichel for that matter. Both those guys at the time looked like sure things. Yes they're both very good players, but not anywhere close to the ceilings they were projected to.

Obviously we're talking about prospects here so this is all unpredictable and 3+5 could easily end up being the correct choice, but my main point is the odds favor taking #1 in these situations. And that's all before you factor in the marketing goldmine your franchise gets by having somebody like that to sell to the fans. Ownership doesn't take that too lightly because players like this put seats in the stands even during losing years.

 

[jbeck5]

Of course, anyone would. But that's kind of my point; it's all based on huge IF's that more often than not don't turn out. Yes this year has a lot great talent near the top compared to other years, but it's also got a better #1 compared to most years. They said the same thing in 2015 since it was even more loaded with elite talent at the top. Fast forward 5 years and nobody's taking Strome + Hanifin over McDavid or even Eichel for that matter. Both those guys at the time looked like sure things. Yes they're both very good players, but not anywhere close to the ceilings they were projected to.

Obviously we're talking about prospects here so this is all unpredictable and 3+5 could easily end up being the correct choice, but my main point is the odds favor taking #1 in these situations. And that's all before you factor in the marketing goldmine your franchise gets by having somebody like that to sell to the fans. Ownership doesn't take that too lightly because players like this put seats in the stands even during losing years.

Lafreniere is also not on the level of a McDavid or a Crosby. Yes he's the undisputed #1 this year, but he's not a player where if he's not the best player in the entire NHL in his prime, it would be a disappointment, like it would have been the case with Crosby or McDavid. They were both predicted to be the undisputed best player in the world in their 20-30 age decade. Not Lafreniere. He's just predicted to be a top 5 player in the world at any time. Sounds like an insignificant difference but its not.

I see Lafreniere more like a Malkin(not in terms of style, but in terms of world rankings) where some streaks might have you thinking he's the best player in the world but over long stretches you'd probably pick a few others.

 

[slimbob8]

Lafreniere is also not on the level of a McDavid or a Crosby. Yes he's the undisputed #1 this year, but he's not a player where if he's not the best player in the entire NHL in his prime, it would be a disappointment, like it would have been the case with Crosby or McDavid. They were both predicted to be the undisputed best player in the world in their 20-30 age decade. Not Lafreniere. He's just predicted to be a top 5 player in the world at any time. Sounds like an insignificant difference but its not.

I see Lafreniere more like a Malkin(not in terms of style, but in terms of world rankings) where some streaks might have you thinking he's the best player in the world but over long stretches you'd probably pick a few others.

Agreed. Definitely not even close to their level. Those two guys are generational and you find a player like that once a decade. As I mentioned in an earlier post I have Laf in the level below those type of players. Ie. Matthews, etc.

 

[Regal]

Except tavares, RNH, and Yakupov lol.

Tavares I would still take, it's just close. I don't think RNH was considered near Laf or the same level of consensus. Yakupov was a rare outlier bust

 

[Regal]

Lafreniere is also not on the level of a McDavid or a Crosby. Yes he's the undisputed #1 this year, but he's not a player where if he's not the best player in the entire NHL in his prime, it would be a disappointment, like it would have been the case with Crosby or McDavid. They were both predicted to be the undisputed best player in the world in their 20-30 age decade. Not Lafreniere. He's just predicted to be a top 5 player in the world at any time. Sounds like an insignificant difference but its not.

I see Lafreniere more like a Malkin(not in terms of style, but in terms of world rankings) where some streaks might have you thinking he's the best player in the world but over long stretches you'd probably pick a few others.

That level of player would be better than the 3 and 5 of just about every draft

 

[Voight]

The Ottawa duo. Laf is a good prospect but his peak is probably a 80/90 point winger. At least with the Ottawa duo you get a potential elite winger and d-man (tho I thought they should have picked Drysdale)

 

[jbeck5]

The Ottawa duo. Laf is a good prospect but his peak is probably a 80/90 point winger. At least with the Ottawa duo you get a potential elite winger and d-man (tho I thought they should have picked Drysdale)

I'm pretty sure Ottawa has stutzle penciled in as a center. He's been center his whole life and just recently switched to wing to get more ice time. It was his decision, he figured he'd get more ice time as a first line winger than second line center. Ottawa will groom him to be #1 center.

 

[Machinehead]

I'll stick with Lafreniere. I think this dude is gonna be the truth.

 

[Machinehead]

Ok but not every year is the same. What about 2017? 3 and 5 are both way better players than one. This year had alot of high end depth most drafts dont have that and Lafreniere while being a great player isnt a stand out number 1 like a Mcdavid, Crosby etc.

If Lafreniere isn't a stand-out #1 then what is?

It wasn't even a discussion.

 

[bert]

If Lafreniere isn't a stand-out #1 then what is?

It wasn't even a discussion.

The 2nd tier wasnt a discussion either. Pure skill and raw potential the players picked 2 and 3 have just as much upside. They're just less proven and are both a birth year younger from a development stand point. I agree that Lafreniere was easily the stand alone number 1. There is 0 risk in the pick and thats why. However the upside/ceiling of 2 and 3 is very similar. In Byfields case his upside is the highest in the draft.

 

[Polar Bear]

The 2nd tier wasnt a discussion either. Pure skill and raw potential the players picked 2 and 3 have just as much upside. They're just less proven and are both a birth year younger from a development stand point. I agree that Lafreniere was easily the stand alone number 1. There is 0 risk in the pick and thats why. However the upside/ceiling of 2 and 3 is very similar. In Byfields case his upside is the highest in the draft.

I don't think Stutzle's ceiling is as high as Laf's, personally. Byfield (who should be great), I think can match it, but he might have a harder time getting there and certainly has a lower floor.

 

[bert]

I don't think Stutzle's ceiling is as high as Laf's, personally. Byfield (who should be great), I think can match it, but he might have a harder time getting there and certainly has a lower floor.

Thats fine, were all entitled to our opinions. Stutzle is a better skater with more creativity.

 

[Polar Bear]

Thats fine, were all entitled to our opinions. Stutzle is a better skater with more creativity.

He's arguably one of the, if not, the best skater in the draft. His creativity isn't on Laf's level, IMO. We will see though, I like Stutzle a lot, I just had him at 4, which I admit is a minority opinion on the forum.

 

[Karl Eriksson]

Ottawa duo

 

[bert]

He's arguably one of the, if not, the best skater in the draft. His creativity isn't on Laf's level, IMO. We will see though, I like Stutzle a lot, I just had him at 4, which I admit is a minority opinion on the forum.

Lafreniere is far more polished, physical, poweful, better shooter has that it factor. Thats why ye was number one without any hesitation. But Stutzles creativity is the best in the draft.