Scott Laughton has had a rough go of it in his first few games as a Leaf. It all came to a head against Florida when Laughton’s inability to clear the puck led to a Florida goal.
I’m by no means a Laughton defender. In my article a few weeks back, I noted my concerns; he’s not a high-end offensive player, and I had real concerns that he wasn’t a perfect fit to play centre.
I didn’t love the trade on deadline day, but between him and Carlo being retained and having term left, I was coming around on the player.
Laughton at his best
Say what you want about Scott Laughton, but he has more experience playing third-line centre than any other player on the Leafs. It may be a low bar, but his experience playing in a tough, defensive third-line role has value to a team like Toronto.
He’s also been a consistent 15–20 goal scorer in his career, where almost none of it comes on special teams. In a lot of ways, he checks off boxes for the Leafs; 5v5 scoring, reliable bottom-six play, and penalty killing.
Deployment Issues
There’s been some buzz lately about how Laughton hasn’t been deployed in that third-line defensive role. Questions have arisen: “Why did the Leafs trade for him if he isn’t going to play that role? He’s certainly not here to play offence.”
I’m not sure that’s completely true. In their first three games, the Domi–Laughton–McMann line had 10 defensive zone face-offs, which is about 3.3 defensive zone starts a game. In comparison, Robertson–Domi–McMann, through 24 games, had only 29 defensive zone starts. That’s roughly 1.2 per game.
Having Laughton in the lineup certainly makes Berube more willing to start their third line in their end. I think the concern has less to do with Berube’s usage of Laughton in the defensive end (Hockey Reference has Laughton’s defensive zone percentage at 64% which is the highest since his 2018–19 season), and more to do with the linemates he has.
Laughton is objectively a terrible fit alongside Max Domi. Domi is a guy who loves creating offence off the rush. He’s arguably one of Toronto’s best players in that respect. He’s also, however, not even close to being as good at sustaining offence in-zone.
Domi (and even McMann lately) have poor forechecking numbers for the Leafs, and so does Laughton, despite his reputation. Domi in particular is not someone who plays well within structure in the offensive zone. It explains why he tends to thrive with other highly creative players or elite finishers; they form a dangerous partnership with Domi off the rush and can do the in-zone play-driving that Domi lacks.
It’s what makes the current iteration of the Leafs third line between Laughton, Domi and McMann so troublesome. Domi’s play-driving is muted on the wing, where he’s less engaged in the build-up through transition, and while Laughton is strong along the boards and provides more offence through in-zone offence, Domi tends to struggle in that aspect.
So, in short:
- The line struggles to create opportunities off the rush, as Domi’s strengths in that aspect are negated by his placement on the wing.
- They can’t establish a ton of in-zone time offensively since none of the three are great forecheckers.
- When they do get time in the zone, which is Laughton’s strength, it’s also Domi and McMann’s weakness.
The results
The results, of course, tell us that the line is getting caved in. They have an xGF% of 31.16 courtesy of Natural Stat Trick, and they’ve surrendered three times the number of scoring chances they’ve created over three games.
The core issue for that line is possession; with only a CF% of 32.14%, Domi’s defensive deficiencies get highlighted even more. That line struggles to break the puck out, whether it’s miscommunication or just a lack of personnel I’m not certain, but it’s leading to a ton of time defending in their zone and chasing the puck.
It is worth mentioning that the Jarnkrok–Tavares–Nylander line has fared equally bad in that time frame. Their CF% is just 31.25%, their xGF% is 44.7% and they’re bleeding almost two times as many scoring chances against as they generate.
The Lorentz–Kampf–Holmberg line hasn’t played well either. They’ve had a few more games of sample size (six), but given their CF% of 32.35%, an xGF% of 31.4% and the fact they give up almost three times the amount of scoring chances they generate, it’s safe to say that’s not a line that’s worked either.
In essence, I want to make the point that, yes, Laughton is struggling in his first three games as a Leaf. Yes, the fanbase isn’t wrong to want more from a guy they traded a first-round pick and a fan favourite in Nikita Grebenkin for.
However, I find it unfair to the player to take the brunt of the criticism from the fanbase when no line has put up good numbers since the trade deadline. He’s the only player of the nine I pointed out earlier who has the excuse of joining a new team for the first time in his career. Between his linemates being a bad fit for his skillset, and learning a new system for the first time, I think he deserves some grace to settle in.
Comparisons
I saw someone mention Henri Jokiharju posting positive numbers on Boston with Zadorov, and asserting it isn’t unreasonable to expect a deadline acquisition to make a good impression immediately.
I agree with the premise of the idea. However, it’s also not unreasonable to see someone struggle.
Colorado
Colorado gave up even more for Brock Nelson as a rental, and in four games with Drouin and Nichuskin, the line has posted:
CF%: 48.21%
xGF%: 36.2%
Scoring Chances For vs Scoring Chances Against: 14—14
Tampa Bay
Tampa gave up a ton of assets to get the Gourde–Bjorkstrand duo from Seattle. In four games together alongside Gage Goncalves, the line has posted:
CF%: 53.33%
xGF%: 29.87%
Scoring Chances For vs Scoring Chances Against: 2–8
The main point I want to get across is that even with Laughton’s struggles, it’s not dissimilar to the struggles of the other two main forward acquisitions at this year’s deadline. Laughton’s PDO is also currently 70.6 per Hockey Reference, the lowest mark of his career. I don’t expect that to continue.
New Lines
From a line composition perspective, I think a Knies–Laughton–Jarnkrok line would work well.
Robertson—Matthews—Nylander
Tavares—Domi—Marner
Knies—Laughton—Jarnkrok
Lorentz—Kampf—McMann
Nylander and Tavares as a duo have struggled of late, so I think flipping Nylander onto a line with Matthews will be a nice change of pace. Robertson is likely a surprising name but I like his energy and commitment on the forecheck this year.
I still like Domi at centre more than on the wing, and I think the chemistry between him and Marner and between Marner and Tavares can lead to something great.
Knies—Laughton—Jarnkrok is the perfect match up defensive line. Knies is a great forechecker, and he’s been trusted more and more defensively this year. Having two defensively capable wingers will allow Laughton to play in a role he’s more familiar with, and I think Knies and Laughton will be an effective in-zone duo on offence. Jarnkrok’s speed should also help this team chase down deep passes.
What now?
In conclusion, I think Laughton is a fine player. I don’t think he was a big enough addition for the Leafs at the deadline, but I do think that given some time and the right composition of linemates, he’ll become a solid and stable depth piece for the Leafs. I also expect his overall defensive numbers to improve without bottom of the barrel goaltending behind him.
One Comment