CantHaveTkachev
Legends
and lose the much needed defensive aspects of his game?Larsson is an excellent shut-down Dman, but he provides very little offence. I wonder if the Oilers could trade him for a guy who provides offence?
why?
and lose the much needed defensive aspects of his game?Larsson is an excellent shut-down Dman, but he provides very little offence. I wonder if the Oilers could trade him for a guy who provides offence?
I thought that scoring goals (especially on the PP) was the biggest problem for the Oilers this past season. Maybe Larsson for a guy like Barrie could change those fortunes?and lose the much needed defensive aspects of his game?
why?
was a problem sure, but not the problemI thought that scoring goals (especially on the PP) was the biggest problem for the Oilers this past season. Maybe Larsson for a guy like Barrie could change those fortunes?
I thought that scoring goals (especially on the PP) was the biggest problem for the Oilers this past season. Maybe Larsson for a guy like Barrie could change those fortunes?
I thought that scoring goals (especially on the PP) was the biggest problem for the Oilers this past season. Maybe Larsson for a guy like Barrie could change those fortunes?
Inetersting thoughts on why Klefbom and Larsson struggled. I would throw in my 2 cents and just say Larsson really didn't struggle much but Klefbom was a complete and utter tire fire for the first few months of the season. Don't think coaching/matchups or even injury really had as much to do with how bad Klefbom was. He was rumoured to be completely healthy to start the year. He had a complete mental breakdown. Had to go back to basics and slowly returned to at least NHL level defender by the end of the year. Really hope that is a one off and we don't see tire fire Klefbom ever again.
I don't know why but I still believe Larsson will be a Vlassic level player in terms of offense. Just needs to get over the hump and trust himself/work on it a bit more.
Also I don't think many outside of Edmonton would consider trading a Larsson type player for a Eberle type player 4 years ago or today. Larsson is a very good player even if his offense does leave a lot to desire. Eberle can put up points and isn't too bad defensively but mainly because of position I don't think Eberle can/does come even remotely close to helping a team as much as Larsson does. Point in case this years Worlds...
Preventing goals is just as important as scoring them. Larsson is going no where, he is legit the only D man we can play against other teams top lines. The rest get their faces caved in. As much as we need a PPQB it will in no way be at the cost of Larsson.
Do you not understand how to watch defencemen?Some individual struggles last season?
Perplexing comments...I have no idea what you were watching.
He was junk. Probably the worst he has ever played. He was a bottom pairing dman far too much last season.
But yeah...McLellan discourages the elements that would help a player succeed...lol
Thats pretty ridiculous.
Do you not understand how to watch defencemen?
You must not. Larsson has fabulous positioning, gap control, and boardwork with his stickwork and reaction times a notch below in quality to the first three skills.
Anybody with eyeballs who knows what they're looking at with Larsson would have seen three things last season:
1) he had games where he showed difficulty skating, winning battles and throwing hits...which all coincided with his back injury;
2) he didn't play up to par for the first 15 games, which was a prelude to the first point and follows into the third point; and
3) he spent a lot of time trying to cover for Klefbom, who was a disaster for much of the season.
Last season was the worst that I had ever seen Klefbom play.
Its silly season here where any stuff gets stated and I'm trying to stay away from it but reading fiction like this is too much.
1) This is the classic Larsson was fabulous except for when injured and without even a qualifier of when he was injured, how, what extent. No, the post would have you believe that Larsson injury explains away any section of games in which he didn't play well. Suffice though, and important to note that the point is not substantiated in anycase.
2) At least citing 15 games at start is a better point but still not citing when the injury occurred, what it was, etc. But I do like how all of 1-3 could be one point and reference each other.
3) The Klefbom factor. Look carefully at what Panda Bear is saying here. He is attributing Larssons struggle to Klefbom. Saying that a lot of the struggle is "trying to cover for Klefbom"
The last bit annoys me. Because not only is it lazy (the poster didn't even run numbers or check on ice stats) Its simply a lie.
Heres the truth. Larsson and Klefbom played 214EV minutes together last season. A small proportion of the minutes played. The bigger story is Klefbom played 536EV minutes with Benning (a brutal assignment) and even played more EV minutes with Russell, than with Larsson.
So that Larsson played over 1200EV minutes last season, only 214 of them with Klefbom, but the fictual attribution posted by Panda is that Larssons struggle was due to "trying to cover for Klefbom"
Was that on Xbox or PlayStation?
I would expect, or hope, that a poster who on the same page replied "your post is absolute bilge" would share more accurate assessments than the quoted.
Another cherry picked non sense example of how Klefbom is the most overrated analytics player in ages. He’s not a good defensive player. He wasn’t this year he wasn’t last year. It was as noticeable last year because he was producing. Tracking shot attempts and using it as a primary evaluation tool has been dead for a while. Get with the times.Lmao, this is why I love actual stats and facts so much. They dont lie and can expose people in a second. The myth that Klefbom and Larsson played alot together this season needs to stop as that is obviously, and factually incorrect. The myth that Klefbom "dragged" Larsson down also needs to stop, as it appears it was the reverse that is true
Whats even more interesting is that Larssons numbers declined steeply away from Klefbom (Klefboms decreased as well, but not by as much). The other interesting thing is that more often than not, players did better with Klefbom, than away. Most notably, McDavid, Draisaitl and Maroon did alot better with him.
View attachment 123017
In regards to Larsson: Players oftne did do better with him, but not to the degree they did with Klefbom
View attachment 123019
Another cherry picked non sense example of how Klefbom is the most overrated analytics player in ages. He’s not a good defensive player. He wasn’t this year he wasn’t last year. It was as noticeable last year because he was producing. Tracking shot attempts and using it as a primary evaluation tool has been dead for a while. Get with the times.
Larsson doesnt play PP or situations when the team is likely to give up an ENG.
Larsson plays PK and in situations when his team is likely to score an ENG.
The above is exhibit ZZZZ of why +/- sucks
Another cherry picked non sense example of how Klefbom is the most overrated analytics player in ages. He’s not a good defensive player. He wasn’t this year he wasn’t last year. It was as noticeable last year because he was producing. Tracking shot attempts and using it as a primary evaluation tool has been dead for a while. Get with the times.
Bit of a stretch. Id say he gets his face caved in less than the other D. But I would not say he can neutralize another teams top line, at least not what he showed this year. The only time he did show this ability was when Klefbom was healthy and both were at the top of their games. So independently he cant, but with a good partner he could
how does this show Klefbom is good at actually defending?Lmao, this is why I love actual stats and facts so much. They dont lie and can expose people in a second. The myth that Klefbom and Larsson played alot together this season needs to stop as that is obviously, and factually incorrect. The myth that Klefbom "dragged" Larsson down also needs to stop, as it appears it was the reverse that is true
Whats even more interesting is that Larssons numbers declined steeply away from Klefbom (Klefboms decreased as well, but not by as much). The other interesting thing is that more often than not, players did better with Klefbom, than away. Most notably, McDavid, Draisaitl and Maroon did alot better with him.
View attachment 123017
In regards to Larsson: Players oftne did do better with him, but not to the degree they did with Klefbom
View attachment 123019
Do you not understand how to watch defencemen?
You must not. Larsson has fabulous positioning, gap control, and boardwork with his stickwork and reaction times a notch below in quality to the first three skills.
Anybody with eyeballs who knows what they're looking at with Larsson would have seen three things last season:
1) he had games where he showed difficulty skating, winning battles and throwing hits...which all coincided with his back injury;
2) he didn't play up to par for the first 15 games, which was a prelude to the first point and follows into the third point; and
3) he spent a lot of time trying to cover for Klefbom, who was a disaster for much of the season.
Last season was the worst that I had ever seen Klefbom play.
Todd seems to discourage it
Klefbom isn't horrible defensive. Can actually be pretty good. Last year though he just had 2 or 3MASSIVE blunders a game. The kind you see on highlight reels for the guy who scored.
That's not something that shows up in stats however.
Lmao, this is why I love actual stats and facts so much. They dont lie and can expose people in a second. The myth that Klefbom and Larsson played alot together this season needs to stop as that is obviously, and factually incorrect. The myth that Klefbom "dragged" Larsson down also needs to stop, as it appears it was the reverse that is true
In regards to Larsson: Players oftne did do better with him, but not to the degree they did with Klefbom
Stats without relevance and context are uselessFirst, these charts do not show anything statistically, since they are in essence a single data point (average for one season). The author needs to either show many seasons for this to be valuable (along with measures of variance), or needs to show the per game stats, again along with measures of variance. And that is assuming the metric being measured actually means what it is claimed it does (i.e. measures effectiveness). I get that it is very complicated to do so (and that or a lack of understanding for the need for it is why no one does it), but it is unfortunately actually an important thing when it comes to statistical analysis.
Second, playing with Larsson generally meant starting in the D-zone, while playing with Klefbom generally meant starting in the O-zone, making their WoWOY stats difficult to compare in any case, and would in fact suggest that if Larsson was making others better, while taking the tough matchups, and starting in the D-zone, that is actually pretty damn good. Now the problem with that, is there isn't a great way to throw all those factors (which all have their own variances, and whose weight would need to be decided) into a blender and get out a 'general effectiveness' metric (although I'm sure someone has tried to hack one together). All we really have to go by is usage, and usage suggests that Larsson was the most trusted D-man for the Oiler's this year.
How on earth is there anything disingenuous about what I am writing?Herte was your original premise regarding TMac and helping players succeed......
So you start with a flawed nonsensical premise and then double down (and throw in some misdirection) instead of taking a step away from it.
Why would I continue to engage with this disingenuous perspective?
Believe what you want man.
How on earth is there anything disingenuous about what I am writing?
Larsson had some difficulties last year associated with injury, a lack of form to start the year, and a partner for the first whack of the season that kept brainfarting.
The only games where he possibly looked like a bottom-pairing defencemen were ones where his back was clearly and significantly affecting him.
If you think he looked like a bottom-pairing player, then you don't understand what you're watching.
As for Todd discouraging Larsson to play a role beyond being a stay-at-home defenceman? Really?
Both Larsson and his Swedish NT coach literally talked to the media about how he got a more offensive role on Sweden than he did on Edmonton.