In response to McLean (2021), Laufer (2021) makes three claims which are either not supported by research or are based on studies with important limitations. First is that a vocabulary size, instead of a level, can be used to match learners with lexically appropriate materials despite test creators and research not supporting this. Second is that the word family (WF6) is an appropriate definition of the lexical unit if learners know at least 5,000 WF6s. The available evidence suggests that for such learners, knowledge of derivational forms is limited enough that it can result in the incorrect matching of learners to pedagogical materials (McLean, 2018). Additionally, foreign language learners who know 5,000 WF6s are rare. Third is that derivational forms are infrequent enough that knowledge of only a few affixes will support comprehension. This inference results from Laufer and Cobb's (2020) analysis, which has major limitations. [For McLean's 2021 article, "The Coverage Comprehension Model, Its Importance to Pedagogy and Research, and Threats to the Validity with Which It Is Operationalized," see EJ1296462. For Laufer's 2021 article, "Lexical Thresholds and Alleged Threats to Validity: A Storm in a Teacup?," see EJ1317203.]