#/Analysis of Larkin: Stacking up to 1C's very well

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

Larkin looks good…

HM to Filppula in a few categories.




Posted by
u/Marino19
TOR - NHL
13 hours ago

[OC] The top 20 Centers of 2018/19 in various Statistical Categories

EDIT: For some reason, there does seem to be some inaccuracies with the numbers I pulled last night. Not sure why certain numbers are wrong and others are right since I pulled from the same table but I’ll do my best to correct the tables tonight when I’m home from work. Apologies for the confusion.
With the NHL Network releasing their top 20 players at each position, I decided to take a look at some key statistics and see how players stacked up against other players at their position to check how the guys on their rankings fared this year. Below is the list of the top 20 centers in the league across 16 key statistics from the 2018/19 season. If people enjoy this then I’ll get around to doing wingers and dmen.
All the stats listed below are at Even Strength and there is a 700 TOI minimum. All stats are from Corsica.
Scoring (Raw Totals)

Rank	Player	Goals	Rank	Player	Assists	Rank	Player	Points	Rank	Player	Primary P
1	Tavares	34	1	McDavid	43	1	McDavid	70	1	McDavid	58
2	McDavid	27	2	Crosby	42	2	Crosby	63	2	Crosby	53
3	Matthews	25	3	Krejci	40	3	Tavares	61	3	Tavares	51
4	Scheifele	23	4	Kuznetsov	36	4	Domi	56	4	Point	45
5	Toews	22	5	Barkov	34	5	Barkov	54	5	Domi	44
6	Duchene	22	6	Domi	34	6	Point	53	6	Stamkos	44
7	Domi	22	7	Point	33	7	Krejci	53	7	Barkov	42
8	Stamkos	22	8	Monahan	32	8	Monahan	51	8	Monahan	42
9	MacKinnon	21	9	Malkin	31	9	Stamkos	51	9	Matthews	41
10	Crosby	21	10	Eichel	30	10	Matthews	50	10	Toews	41
11	Seguin	21	11	Johansen	30	11	Toews	50	11	Seguin	41
12	Barkov	20	12	Backstrom	29	12	O’Reilly	48	12	Krejci	38
13	Point	20	13	P. Danault	29	13	Eichel	47	13	Larkin	38
14	Larkin	20	14	Stamkos	29	14	Scheifele	47	14	Duchene	38
15	Couturier	20	15	Toews	28	15	MacKinnon	47	15	MacKinnon	38
16	B. Nelson	19	16	Tavares	27	16	Seguin	47	16	Eichel	37
17	Dubois	19	17	Couture	27	17	Larkin	46	17	O’Reilly	37
18	O’Reilly	19	18	Zibanejad	27	18	Kuznetsov	46	18	Pettersson	36
19	Monahan	19	19	Aho	27	19	Duchene	46	19	Couture	36
20	Couture	18	20	5 tied*	26	20	Couturier	46	20	Scheifele/Couturier	36

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

*Larkin, Barzal, MacKinnon, Courturier, Seguin

Per 60 Scoring and iCF

Rank	Player	G/60	Rank	Player	P/60	Rank	Player	P1/60	Rank	Player	iCF/60
1	Tavares	1.6	1	McDavid	2.96	1	Crosby	2.46	1	Matthews	19.23
2	Matthews	1.43	2	Domi	2.93	2	McDavid	2.45 [TBODY] [/TBODY]	2	Larkin	17.64
3	Duchene	1.18	3	Crosby	2.92	3	Tavares	2.4	3	Kadri	17.17
4	Stamkos	1.18	4	Tavares	2.87	4	Stamkos	2.37	4	Seguin	17.06
5	Cizikas	1.15	5	Matthews	2.86	5	Matthews	2.35	5	Bergeron	16.87
6	Domi	1.15	6	Stamkos	2.74	6	Domi	2.3	6	Tavares	16.85
7	McDavid	1.14	7	Bergeron	2.72	7	Point	2.27	7	Eichel	16.25
8	Filppula	1.09	8	Point	2.68	8	Pettersson	2.17	8	MacKinnon	16.2
9	Toews	1.07	9	Krejci	2.67	9	Monahan	2.16	9	Aho	15.89
10	Eakin	1.03	10	Stastny	2.66	10	Stastny	2.08	10	M. Backlund	15.19
11	Scheifele	1.03	11	Monahan	2.62	11	Bergeron	2.07	11	E. Rodrigues	15.08
12	Point	1.01	12	Kuznetsov	2.57	12	Duchene	2.04	12	Soderberg	14.96
13	Bergeron	1	13	Malkin	2.53	13	Toews	2	13	Trocheck	14.66
14	B. Nelson	.98	14	Barkov	2.47	14	Couture	1.97	14	Kotkaniemi	14.62
15	Couture	.98	15	Pettersson	2.47	15	Barkov	1.92	15	Domi	14.31
16	Monahan	.98	16	Duchene	2.47	16	Malkin	1.92	16	Eller	14.26
17	Crosby	.97	17	Couture	2.46	17	Krejci	1.91	17	Bjugstad	14.22
18	Pettersson	.96	18	Toews	2.44	18	Seguin	1.87	18	Chytil	14.2
19	Couturier	.96	19	Eichel	2.33	19	Eichel	1.83	19	Stepan	14.06
20	Soderberg	.94	20	O’Reilly	2.33	20	O’Reilly	1.79	20	Jenner	13.87

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Possession %s (Raw)

Rank	Player	CF%	Rank	Player	SF%	Rank	Player	GF%	Rank	Player	xGF%
1	Kotkaniemi	57.38	1	Kotkaniemi	56.47	1	O’Reilly	65.38	1	L. Wallmark	60.75
2	J. Thornton	56.82	2	Danault	56.38	2	Crosby	65.12	2	Stastny	60.07
3	Danault	56.77	3	Aho	56.36	3	Bonino	63.38	3	P.E. Bellemare	57.84
4	Aho	56.31	4	B. Schenn	56.18	4	D. Ryan	62.96	4	Koktaniemi	57.31
5	Bergeron	56.24	5	J. Thornton	56.05	5	Point	61.98	5	E. Staal	57.24
6	Stastny	55.92	6	M. Backlund	55.87	6	Cizikas	91.82	6	Aho	56.53
7	Krejci	55.7	7	Crosby	55.85	7	Seguin	61.17	7	B. Schenn	56.26
8	M. Backlund	55.34	8	Stastny	55.77	8	M. Backlund	61.05	8	Cirelli	56.16
9	B. Goodrow	55.29	9	Bergeron	55.43	9	Domi	61.02	9	R. Thomas	56.15
10	D. Ryan	54.85	10	L. Wallmark	54.89	10	Filppula	61.02	10	Danault	55.96
11	Johansen	54.67	11	E. Staal	54.72	11	Bergeron	60.92	11	Crosby	55.94
12	Crosby	54.54	12	O’Reilly	54.66	12	B. Nelson	60.76	12	O’Reilly	55.75
13	L. Wallmark	54.53	13	P.E. Bellemare	54.65	13	Cirelli	60.24	13	Bergeron	55.47
14	Larkin	54.8	14	D. Ryan	54.34	14	Stastny	59.7	14	D. Ryan	55.16
15	Cirelli	54	15	Krejci	54.19	15	Krejci	59.26	15	W. Karlsson	55.15
16	Monahan	53.95	16	W. Karlsson	53.97	16	Eakin	59.13	16	Couture	54.19
17	W. Karlsson	53.78	17	Acciari	53.96	17	Aho	59.13	17	M. Backlund	54.16
18	O’Reilly	53.76	18	B. Goodrow	53.55	18	Tavares	58.9	18	Krejci	54.11
19	Couture	53.73	19	Couturier	53.49	19	Kuznetsov	58.88	19	J. Thornton	53.93
20	Tavares	53.31	20	S. Kuraly	53.44	20	MacKinnon	57.89	20	Domi	53.93

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Rel Possession numbers

Rank	Player	RelCF%	Rank	Player	RelSF%	Rank	Player	RelGF%	Rank	Player	RelxGF%
1	Larkin	8.36	1	Larkin	8.35	1	Crosby	21.91	1	Larkin	8.59
2	Crosby	7.32	2	Crosby	8.26	2	Cizikas	21.42	2	Eichel	7.22
3	Couturier	6.71	3	Couturier	8.15	3	O’Reilly	15.72	3	Hischier	7.19
4	Tavares	6.5	4	Perreault	6.3	4	Seguin	15.11	4	K. Hayes	6.93
5	Barzal	5.59	5	Tavares	5.18	5	Bonino	13.11	5	Crosby	6.74
6	MacKinnon	5.55	6	Kotkaniemi	5.05	6	Hischier	12.97	6	Eller	6.3
7	Kotkaniemi	5.25	7	Hischier	4.82	7	Domi	12.94	7	Bergeron	6.29
8	Johansen	5.04	8	B. Schenn	4.78	8	D. Ryan	11.82	8	C. White	6.08
9	Bergeron	5.02	9	Getzlaf	4.54	9	M. Backlund	11.64	9	L. Wallmark	5.9
10	Eller	4.26	10	Backstrom	4.53	10	McDavid	11.45	10	Stastny	4.98
11	Perreault	4.13	11	MacKinnon	4.38	11	E. Staal	11.15	11	Perreault	4.93
12	J. Thornton	3.91	12	K. Hayes	4.29	12	Eakin	10.86	12	Couturier	4.75
13	Seguin	3.69	13	Riley Nash	4.23	13	Pettersson	10.35	13	Horvat	4.67
14	Cirelli	3.66	14	Barzal	4.05	14	Filppula	10.05	14	Cirelli	4.58
15	McDavid	3.64	15	Stepan	3.94	15	Aho	9.45	15	E. Staal	4.53
16	Krejci	3.37	16	Cirelli	3.91	16	Barkov	9.32	16	Kampf	4.36
17	Getzlaf	3.31	17	J. Thornton	3.85	17	Point	9.26	17	Henrique	4.27
18	D. Ryan	3.1	18	E. Staal	3.8	18	Tavares	8.9	18	Kotkaniemi	3.92
19	Stastny	3.02	19	Eller	3.8	19	Sissons	8.81	19	R. Thomas	3.81
20	Hischier	2.81	20	Danault	3.6	20	MacKinnon	8.65	20	Seguin	2.79

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Analysis
I was going to do a bit of analysis and potentially list my top 20 here but this took way longer than expected and I don’t feel like looking at PP and context numbers (QoC, QoT and ZS%) at the moment so I’m just gonna do a few quick takeaways.
The Habs centers killed it this year. Domi, Danault, and Kotkaniemi popped up a lot more than I expected and I’m not too excited about that as a Leaf fan. Habs legends were even able to sweep the podium in the SF% category.
It’s a crime that Sean Couturier didn’t make the top 20 list. He should be taking over for Barkov in the ‘most underrated’ category at this point.
For a ‘down year’, Tyler Seguin put up some pretty impressive numbers.
Obviously there will be outliers in these stats (see: Wallmark, Eller, Perreault) but I just wanted to throw this together to paint a picture of guys who drive play as well as dominate on the scoresheet.
With all due respect to guys like MacKinnon, Barkov, Stamkos, etc., I think it’s safe to say that Crosby, McDavid, Bergeron and Tavares were the best centers in the league at even strength last year. Those four pretty much dominated these lists. Especially Sid. It’s funny that I still think I underrate Crosby sometimes but putting this together really showed me that he still has an argument for the best in the game.
As I said at the beginning of the post, if people enjoy this then I’ll try to get around to doing a similar post for wingers and d-men.

Click to read more...

 

[NickH8]

Keep in mind being on a garbage team helps his relative stats. Still a good sign

 

[MBH]

I don't think Larkin has proven he's a legit #1 center.
He is on the Red Wings, where center options are limited.
Larkin is 56th among NHL centers in points/60 (500 minute minimum.)
He's got a good CF% for being on a bad team. But it still translated to a minus in the GF% department.

On his own team Larkin was sixth in goals/60, fourth in points/60, second in CF%, sixth in GF%, seventh in GA/60..

A lot of Larkin's numbers are a product of his TOI.
That said, he turned in a very good year with important improvements in key areas, especially faceoffs and the penalty kill.

 

[Gniwder]

I don't think Larkin has proven he's a legit #1 center.
He is on the Red Wings, where center options are limited.
Larkin is 56th among NHL centers in points/60 (500 minute minimum.)
He's got a good CF% for being on a bad team. But it still translated to a minus in the GF% department.

On his own team Larkin was sixth in goals/60, fourth in points/60, second in CF%, sixth in GF%, seventh in GA/60..

A lot of Larkin's numbers are a product of his TOI.
That said, he turned in a very good year with important improvements in key areas, especially faceoffs and the penalty kill.

A lot of the top centers don't PK, double shift with the 4th line, or get stuck with a winger of Abby's caliber. Take away all that wasted TOI and his stats would be comparable.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Last season I started to feel comfortable anytime Larkin was on the ice, regardless of who else was on the other side of the ice. That's a bit like how it was with Zetterberg. Not the highest scorer in the league but head-to-head, he just refuses to get beat.
Larkin can still improve in many areas but I have no problem rolling him as our #1C, I don't feel worried he's going to get dominated by any center in the league even if some of them will outscore him in season totals.

 

[MBH]

A lot of the top centers don't PK, double shift with the 4th line, or get stuck with a winger of Abby's caliber. Take away all that wasted TOI and his stats would be comparable.

Don't buy it.
AA played lots of minutes with Glendening this year and finished with higher p/60.

And I think players who double shift benefit, because they're into the game more. Players love playing.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

P/60 doesn't necessarily translate no matter how many minutes you play. I would think that playing more minutes means you are more fatigued which means your effectiveness is lessened the more you are out there (to a degree).

Would be curious on the numbers if there are any regarding that. I mean Andrew Shaw has a higher P/60 than Larkin. While I am not going to put him among the best in the game, I also am not going to necessarily use him being 56th among centers in P/60 as a major reason to denounce him as a legit #1 center. I think he is on the low end of #1s, but he can still improve and things are looking very promising.

 

[Frk It]

Dude f***s.

We just need Veleno to become his counterpart or find a guy equal/better in the draft.

But Larkin is a big piece to build with. He’s also become very good defensively, in addition to the scoring/possessions stats. He just keeps on working and getting better.

 

[MBH]

P/60 doesn't necessarily translate no matter how many minutes you play. I would think that playing more minutes means you are more fatigued which means your effectiveness is lessened the more you are out there (to a degree).

Would be curious on the numbers if there are any regarding that. I mean Andrew Shaw has a higher P/60 than Larkin. While I am not going to put him among the best in the game, I also am not going to necessarily use him being 56th among centers in P/60 as a major reason to denounce him as a legit #1 center. I think he is on the low end of #1s, but he can still improve and things are looking very promising.

I don't think his production is that impressive is my point.
I think he's got a lot of work to do in the defensive zone, where he still often gets caught covering nobody, or getting lost.
But the great thing about Larkin is he improves in areas every year.

Larkin played a ton.
9th in 5 on 5.
14th in all situations.

I think if we had a legit 2C, he wouldn't play as much. His stats would dip a bit.

Wouldn't change who he is/what he does.

And I think there's a chance Veleno one day overtakes him as 1C.

Larkin is a very good player. A guy who should be part of the core for a long, long time. But he's overhyped in Detroit because he's the best we've got.

 

[raymond23]

Larkin is sooooo much more than points. His line consistently won their matchups from game 1 to game 82 against some crazy good lines.

Not categorizing Larkin as a #1 center after the season he just had is kind of ridiculous. I get it if you want to see it again before you make the claim, but he was a legitimate #1 center last year without a doubt.

There’s so much more to playing center than scoring 90 points or p/60. O’Reilly being the perfect example.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

P/60 doesn't necessarily translate no matter how many minutes you play. I would think that playing more minutes means you are more fatigued which means your effectiveness is lessened the more you are out there (to a degree).

Would be curious on the numbers if there are any regarding that. I mean Andrew Shaw has a higher P/60 than Larkin. While I am not going to put him among the best in the game, I also am not going to necessarily use him being 56th among centers in P/60 as a major reason to denounce him as a legit #1 center. I think he is on the low end of #1s, but he can still improve and things are looking very promising.

Looking at the larger picture and not one of the few remaining stats that supports a non-#1 status is probably important.

Was Dylan Larkin not the best player on ice and I don't mean just the Wings but the entire surface for half the games last year? He was fantastic, hoping he can hit the 80 point barrier while cutting down on his penalties. Guy is a horse.

I have hated p/60 arguments to a degree since Lidstrom because of some of the ways you can manipulate the stat.

 

[Gniwder]

Don't buy it.
AA played lots of minutes with Glendening this year and finished with higher p/60.

And I think players who double shift benefit, because they're into the game more. Players love playing.

He was double shifting with AHL players like Kuffner and Puempel. I'm sure he loves playing. but it doesn't help the stats.

It really doesn't matter who AA plays with because he doesn't utilize his teammates anyways. He just needs a guy that can feed him the puck like Nielsen or Hirose. Playing AA with Mantha or Bert is a waste. Plus AA always has a high G/60, that doesn't mean he's a better overall player than Larkin. AA doesn't PK, and LGD is a better hockey player than Abby.

 

[raymond23]

Last season I started to feel comfortable anytime Larkin was on the ice, regardless of who else was on the other side of the ice. That's a bit like how it was with Zetterberg. Not the highest scorer in the league but head-to-head, he just refuses to get beat.
Larkin can still improve in many areas but I have no problem rolling him as our #1C, I don't feel worried he's going to get dominated by any center in the league even if some of them will outscore him in season totals.

Looking at the larger picture and not one of the few remaining stats that supports a non-#1 status is probably important.

Was Dylan Larkin not the best player on ice and I don't mean just the Wings but the entire surface for half the games last year? He was fantastic, hoping he can hit the 80 point barrier while cutting down on his penalties. Guy is a horse.

I have hated p/60 arguments to a degree since Lidstrom because of some of the ways you can manipulate the stat.

Retweet...

I want to tell the entire world how good Larkin is but I don’t think they’ll understand until he’s matched up against their best player in the playoffs... enjoy that matchup.

 

[MBH]

He was double shifting with AHL players like Kuffner and Puempel. I'm sure he loves playing. but it doesn't help the stats.

It really doesn't matter who AA plays with because he doesn't utilize his teammates anyways. He just needs a guy that can feed him the puck like Nielsen or Hirose. Playing AA with Mantha or Bert is a waste. Plus AA always has a high G/60, that doesn't mean he's a better overall player than Larkin. AA doesn't PK, and LGD is a better hockey player than Abby.

Nobody is arguing anything about Athanasiou.

But the idea that playing AA with Mantha or Bert is a waste? That's crazy.



Athanasiou and Mantha have played well together their entire pro careers.

 

[MBH]

Looking at the larger picture and not one of the few remaining stats that supports a non-#1 status is probably important.

Was Dylan Larkin not the best player on ice and I don't mean just the Wings but the entire surface for half the games last year? He was fantastic, hoping he can hit the 80 point barrier while cutting down on his penalties. Guy is a horse.

I have hated p/60 arguments to a degree since Lidstrom because of some of the ways you can manipulate the stat.

You can't manipulate points/60.
It's a black and white metric.
There's virtually no way in hell Larkin was the best player on the ice surface for 40 games if the Wings lost so often, or if he ends up a "minus player" (even after all those PK goals).

But Larkin is a horse. And he's a gamer who keeps rounding his game to form.

 

[deca guard]

I don't think his production is that impressive is my point.
I think he's got a lot of work to do in the defensive zone, where he still often gets caught covering nobody, or getting lost.
But the great thing about Larkin is he improves in areas every year.

Larkin played a ton.
9th in 5 on 5.
14th in all situations.

I think if we had a legit 2C, he wouldn't play as much. His stats would dip a bit.

Wouldn't change who he is/what he does.

And I think there's a chance Veleno one day overtakes him as 1C.

Larkin is a very good player. A guy who should be part of the core for a long, long time. But he's overhyped in Detroit because he's the best we've got.

on a good team playing with a legit dman and top line winger two things would happen : 1 - he wouldnt play as many minutes where hes just expending energy with mostly low percentage chances at scoring because hes fighting for puck control with weak unit mates and thusly would have more energy to expend with a talented unit that creates more and higher scoring chances . 2- he'd score more because instead of dekeyer and matha working with him it'd be hedman and kucherov , you realize how many more assist hed have on a good team with talented dmenn ? . and alot of work to do in the d zone ? the guys a marathon runner covering as much ice per 60 as anybody while hounding the puck as good as anybody / selke level . wing fans arent hyping him because hes our best . were hyping the guy because he just put on a monster display last season . its you thats getting kicks out of playing devils advocit here . and veleno overtaking him is a pure trolling cast .

 

[Flowah]

I like Larkin a lot but if he's our 1C we aren't elite. Unless he takes a big next step.

He takes a ton of penalties. He isn't as productive as most other 1Cs on elite teams. His defense could use some polish though I think it's probably his strongest point right now.

Just comparing him to 1Cs on elite teams... He's not there. Maybe ever. Maybe just yet. Hard to tell.

 

[Konnan511]

I like Larkin a lot but if he's our 1C we aren't elite. Unless he takes a big next step.

He takes a ton of penalties. He isn't as productive as most other 1Cs on elite teams. His defense could use some polish though I think it's probably his strongest point right now.

Just comparing him to 1Cs on elite teams... He's not there. Maybe ever. Maybe just yet. Hard to tell.

Of course we aren't elite, we are garbo. Wait until him (he's only 23 ffs) and everyone else gets close to their potential/keeps improving.

 

[NotLeddy]

P/60 doesn't necessarily translate no matter how many minutes you play. I would think that playing more minutes means you are more fatigued which means your effectiveness is lessened the more you are out there (to a degree).

Would be curious on the numbers if there are any regarding that. I mean Andrew Shaw has a higher P/60 than Larkin. While I am not going to put him among the best in the game, I also am not going to necessarily use him being 56th among centers in P/60 as a major reason to denounce him as a legit #1 center. I think he is on the low end of #1s, but he can still improve and things are looking very promising.

Shaw also had a PDO of 103.77 (aka unsustainable) and a better p/60 than almost the entire league, was tied with Crosby, and had better p/60 than Tavares, Kane, Matthews, MacKinnon, McDavid, Panarin, Gaudreau. The only players with a better p/60 were Kucherov and Comtois (who only played 10 games). That won't happen again next season.

His p/60 last season was 1.18 and somehow rose up to a 2.89, and his primary linemate, Domi had almost as good of a p/60 with a 104 PDO despite giving up among the most Corsi against per 60 in the league among forwards who played 1000 minutes. At a point you can't chalk it up to anything more than a fluke season. (And not to take anything away from him, but he did have a hat trick vs Detroit with all his goals coming at 5v5 in a game Detroit played atrociously...)

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

You can't manipulate points/60.
It's a black and white metric.
There's virtually no way in hell Larkin was the best player on the ice surface for 40 games if the Wings lost so often, or if he ends up a "minus player" (even after all those PK goals).

But Larkin is a horse. And he's a gamer who keeps rounding his game to form.

P/60 is a rate stat. It's an avearge based off of points and time you're on the ice. Maybe you can't manipulate the number, but you can sure as hell dick around with the context you want to put it in.

Johan Franzen NHL Advanced Statistics (All) | Hockey-Reference.com

Johan Franzen had some pretty damn good P/60 stats.

Points Per/60, what does it really mean?

Basically, P/60 is a stat that needs a damn good bit of context behind it or it is 100% worthless. Thomas Vanek had a pretty good p/60 in his first go around with Detroit. He got traded for nothing, because he was playing the most babied minutes in the NHL. You can manipulate how P/60 makes you view a player if you use a different context.

 

[MBH]

P/60 is a rate stat. It's an avearge based off of points and time you're on the ice. Maybe you can't manipulate the number, but you can sure as hell dick around with the context you want to put it in.

Johan Franzen NHL Advanced Statistics (All) | Hockey-Reference.com

Johan Franzen had some pretty damn good P/60 stats.

Points Per/60, what does it really mean?

Basically, P/60 is a stat that needs a damn good bit of context behind it or it is 100% worthless. Thomas Vanek had a pretty good p/60 in his first go around with Detroit. He got traded for nothing, because he was playing the most babied minutes in the NHL. You can manipulate how P/60 makes you view a player if you use a different context.

So, you mean, p/60 is like any other stat in the world.
End of the day, Larkin's p/60 isn't so hot at 5 on 5.
It's good.
And I think it's an accurate reflection of his play.

He doesn't have the same elite skill as a lot of the top level and second level centers in this game.
He makes up for it to some degree with speed and a good motor.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

So, you mean, p/60 is like any other stat in the world.
End of the day, Larkin's p/60 isn't so hot at 5 on 5.
It's good.
And I think it's an accurate reflection of his play.

He doesn't have the same elite skill as a lot of the top level and second level centers in this game.
He makes up for it to some degree with speed and a good motor.

See, that I agree with you on. No matter what Larkin does, he's not going to get to the level of a guy like McDavid or Matthews. McDavid is just far more talented.

Larkin is like a really really talented Draper or Helm. A guy who plays much better than his physical talents say that he should, but that he does have actual high end skill to back it up too.
But basically P/60 can be "manipulated" or read in a way that tells you something that isn't true. Larkin having a "bad" p/60 isn't indicative of him not being a 1C. It's maybe indicative of him not being a top 5 C in the league.

 

[Frk It]

I like Larkin a lot but if he's our 1C we aren't elite. Unless he takes a big next step.

He takes a ton of penalties. He isn't as productive as most other 1Cs on elite teams. His defense could use some polish though I think it's probably his strongest point right now.

Just comparing him to 1Cs on elite teams... He's not there. Maybe ever. Maybe just yet. Hard to tell.

St. Louis winning with O’Reilly doesn’t change your mind on this at all?

 

[NotLeddy]

So, you mean, p/60 is like any other stat in the world.
End of the day, Larkin's p/60 isn't so hot at 5 on 5.
It's good.
And I think it's an accurate reflection of his play.

He doesn't have the same elite skill as a lot of the top level and second level centers in this game.
He makes up for it to some degree with speed and a good motor.

He had a better p1/60 this season than Scheifele, Aho and Barzal. Are they not 1Cs? Especially considering Larkin plays with a defense that's so much worse at breakouts and zone exits than Carolina and NYI especially, that's pretty impressive.

 

[Gniwder]

So, you mean, p/60 is like any other stat in the world.
End of the day, Larkin's p/60 isn't so hot at 5 on 5.
It's good.
And I think it's an accurate reflection of his play.

He doesn't have the same elite skill as a lot of the top level and second level centers in this game.
He makes up for it to some degree with speed and a good motor.

Last time I checked, skating is a skill, and he's elite in that regard. Doesn't matter if he doesn't have elite stick handling, you just need to get by the defenders one way or another.

The stats pretty much puts him in the middle of the pack, I don't think we're arguing that he's an elite 1C. It's not like he's got a lot of support either, Bert and Mantha are bottom level first line wingers.

I'll be happier than crap if Veleno winds up better than Larkin and takes the 1C spot. Having 2 centers that can play 1C or wing is not a bad problem to have, like having Z & D. We'll know more when he plays in GR this season.