I personally like Laura but don't think this is her Tony-making role. The show is ok at best and while Laura is good in the role, she doesn't do anything that elevates the show or make it brilliant and worthwhile.
Patina on the other hand is giving a breakout, star making performance. Brantley's comments notwithstanding, she takes the unconventional concept of the female leading player and makes it work perfectly. Perhaps some people still have Vereen on their minds, but Patina is perhaps as close as we're ever going to get. Brilliant past performances in Gypsy didn't mean Patti Lupone was overlooked for her performance as Madame Rose. It seems silly to suggest someone giving a phenomenal performance shouldn't win solely because someone 40 years ago may have been better (and for the relative few who have seen both live, I do think it would be quite hard to remember and be able to sufficiently a compare an experience you had 40 years ago with one you had today, rose-colored glasses and all.)
While Cinderella plods and has a few moments of promise, Pippin is brilliant all the way through. Sure there are other factors like the rest of the cast, director, etc. but invariably to sustain a brilliant production, you need a phenomenal performance from the female lead, and Patina does just that.
Scratch and claw for every day you're worth!
Make them drag you screaming from life, keep dreaming
You'll live forever here on earth.