Game 4 Devils vs. Rangers
- Thread starter kreidertime
- Start date
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
kreidertime
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2014
- Messages
- 10,470
- Likes
- 582
- Points
- 113
O’Reilly would’ve been nice
PorterPanzer
Active Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2022
- Messages
- 851
- Likes
- 135
- Points
- 43
Very few bright spots but back to the friendly grounds of NJ. Let's Go Rangers!
PorterPanzer
Active Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2022
- Messages
- 851
- Likes
- 135
- Points
- 43
I'm curious what Ottawa did differently with Tim Stutzle, the 3rd pick in the draft after Laf. In 216 games Laf has 91 points while Stutzle has 171 points in 210 games. Development is on the player and Laf still looks like the same player he was when we drafted him, just older. Hughes was asked about his improved scoring in an interview before game 4 and Jack said he worked on his shooting through the off season while Laf was likely sucking the fillings from eclairs. Bet GG bought them for him too, nothing can stop his Project Stiflekid from reaching fruition!
Had we drafted Stutzle instead of Lafreniere we would be asking the same question of him that we are of Alex, because we would have treated him the same.
In his 3rd year with us Lafreniere is finally breaking 15 mins a game, and that is still less than what Stutzle got in his ROOKIE year. OTT committed to him from day 1 and we didn't to Alex with no real path for him to become a 20min player for us as he's not going to play ahead of Panarin or Kreider on the left.
kreidertime
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2014
- Messages
- 10,470
- Likes
- 582
- Points
- 113
I don’t know why Rangers fans can’t understand this. It’s quite simple. When you develop Lafreniere and Kakko like role players, why are you surprised that at this stage of their career they are role players? Apparently the Rangers and their fans are the only ones who can’t grasp this.
kreidertime
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2014
- Messages
- 10,470
- Likes
- 582
- Points
- 113
Panarin should be getting third line minutes at the most in the playoffs as he has shown his game sucks come playoff time.
This whole debate is crazy IMO. The Rangers went to the ECF last year. They are in the playoffs this year. They have high priced stars and vets in their lineup. Those are all things the Devs, Sabres, Sens, etc. cannot say over the past bunch of years.
This is very clear - the Rangers never bottomed out, they got lottery luck with both Laf and Kakko, and since they came to a decent team with star vets, they were played as role players, learning a full ice game, on a team that prioritized winning. If you want the Rangers to shift course and be the Devs, Sabres, Sens and bottom out, and have tons of time for kids because their team is a bare wasteland, okay that is your choice, but that is the difference.
And I wouldn't say it is the Rangers "inability" to develop kids. I would say it is an organizational choice to prioritize winning and star vets over throwing kids, and their growing pains, into the top 6 or on PP1. It is an organizational philosophy. Some will agree with it, and some will say F that, play the kids and grow the future, even if it means sucking for many years, and not bringing in big name stars/vets.
This is not complicated. And I am not saying which way is better, I am just saying that's the reality of it.
This is very clear - the Rangers never bottomed out, they got lottery luck with both Laf and Kakko, and since they came to a decent team with star vets, they were played as role players, learning a full ice game, on a team that prioritized winning. If you want the Rangers to shift course and be the Devs, Sabres, Sens and bottom out, and have tons of time for kids because their team is a bare wasteland, okay that is your choice, but that is the difference.
And I wouldn't say it is the Rangers "inability" to develop kids. I would say it is an organizational choice to prioritize winning and star vets over throwing kids, and their growing pains, into the top 6 or on PP1. It is an organizational philosophy. Some will agree with it, and some will say F that, play the kids and grow the future, even if it means sucking for many years, and not bringing in big name stars/vets.
This is not complicated. And I am not saying which way is better, I am just saying that's the reality of it.
Last edited:
BigDaddyAl1973
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2013
- Messages
- 7,062
- Likes
- 1,472
- Points
- 113
How many playoff wins ..check that. ..playoff games does Stutzle have under his belt?
Development is for the minors and shitty teams.
The problem is Alexis is not a once in a generation type player. He doesn't have a cannon of a shot. He isn't speedy or quick...he has size...but gets knock off the puck too much...at this stage of his career he is third best left wing on this team.
Hughes gets the puck at his own blue line, people sit at the edge of their seats...defenses totally have to be on alert..has nothing to do with power play time and everything to do with skill level.
Are we now going to say that Lindy Ruff developed Jack Hughes..what a fucking joke.
Which Edmonton coach, and there have been quite a few, developed Connor McDavid?
Development is for the minors and shitty teams.
The problem is Alexis is not a once in a generation type player. He doesn't have a cannon of a shot. He isn't speedy or quick...he has size...but gets knock off the puck too much...at this stage of his career he is third best left wing on this team.
Hughes gets the puck at his own blue line, people sit at the edge of their seats...defenses totally have to be on alert..has nothing to do with power play time and everything to do with skill level.
Are we now going to say that Lindy Ruff developed Jack Hughes..what a fucking joke.
Which Edmonton coach, and there have been quite a few, developed Connor McDavid?
