DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 29,807
- 20,962
Player Discussion Artturi Lehkonen
- Thread starter PKWeber
- Start date
- Status
Maybe. Maybe not.
First year you are an unknown quantity. Teams/ goalies are a bit busy to really focus on new young guys, unless they are very good.
After a season there is a page in the book on you.
Lehks is a pure sniper so I am guessing orher teams were quick to realize he isn't a passing threat. Anyway, then after year 2 young guy has to adjust.
So an actual jinx ? Well , No, of course not.
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 29,807
- 20,962
I asked Corey Pronman years ago, and he said that the notion of the sophomore jinx didn't hold up statistically. The norm is for players to improve in their second year.
@Mathletic @Talks to Goalposts , thoughts?
Le Barron de HF
Justin make me proud
Brownies
Registered User
My expectations are a bit low on Lekhonen. I think he's a guy that looks good, but somehow won't produce much at this level. I had the same impression with a guy like Pajaarvi (spelling ?) when he was drafted. I hope he surprises me and I'm still rooting for the guy, he's a useful player anyway.
If the statistics show that then I stand corrected.
So for Lehks I will go with Team Titanic and injury. And he ended off the year very well. Chemistry at the end ?
montreal
Go Habs Go
I would want to see a legit study done, not just looking at top players since you would expect the best players to more be able to avoid a slump. But even if it doesn't exist, I still think Lekonen would have been better last year if he never played any time with Pleks. It's one of the main reasons I didn't want Pleks back, there's no one I want to see on his line other then say DLR Pleks McCarron since they aren't going to make the NHL based off their offense.
It's an interesting question. First of all, you have to ask yourself what you mean exactly by sophomore jinx. Throughout sports, it's true that players, in general, increase their production from year one to year two. In many sports, a player's production through the years will ressemble a weibull distribution. That being said, no single player has a perfect weibull distribution. They all have injuries, down years, years that everything goes perfectly for them, and so on. They all deviate at one point or another. Some deviate in their first year, some in their second and so on.
Does the sophomore jinx exist? Yes, I think it does by certain definitions. If you mean by sophomore jinx that money and fame got to a player's head then I think it exists. In some cases, players overachieved in their first year (especially the older they are in their rookie season), which can lead people to believe the player is stronger than he actually is.
That being said, do players, on average, end up scoring less in their second year, than expected? No.
Andrei79
Registered User
- Jan 25, 2013
- 15,295
- 27,337
This is how I see it.
It's a legitimate phenomenon, but not the norm. It happened to Carey Price, as an example.
VirginiaMtlExpat
Second most interesting man in the world.
Just wondering why you would pick the Weibull. It has two parameters, and depending the values of the two, you can end up with a curve that is extremely variable in shape.
Weibull distribution - Wikipedia
Unlike a normal or triangular or uniform distribution, which is fairly consistent in shape. In other words, there is no such thing as a perfect weibull distribution. There is a family of Weibull distributions, whose members don't look much like each other. But as a mathlete, you would know that.
Adam Michaels
Registered User
Redux91
I do Three bullets.
Why would anyone believe... in any kind of "jinx" ..at all?
The notion at all that professional sports rookies who have decent debut's automatically suffer regression the following year "just because the jinx exists" is as ridiculous a notion as believing in "jinx's" at all in the first place... Still a silly concept to me..
having said that do i feel lehkonen regressed his sophomore season? absolutely not, as ive watched pretty much all 139 of his NHL games spanning 2 seasons, and if anything, lehkonen was given even more opportunities and chances under Julien because of the hardwork and scoring chances he creates
yeah the goal totals didnt match the 18 goals the previous year but..thats not lehkonen regressing..thats just being part of one of the worst teams in the NHL and no centers to play with.
Mrb1p
PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Lekhonen still trains as weird as ever... Jesus, I hope Kotkaniemi doesnt work with these guys...
I think he can get 20+ goals, he was jinxed last season. He had so many great chances with goalies making spectacular saves against him. He ended up scoring at something like 7% of his shots on goals.
dackelljuneaubulis02
Registered User
- Oct 13, 2012
- 11,562
- 6,892
i'm a believer in Lehkonen. I think this season will be his coming out party. Hoping/thinking the same for Hudon too.
Cobra Commander
Registered User
Yes i would like both of them to step up and score some goals, both need to surpass the 15 mark.
Adam Michaels
Registered User
He had 6 goals in his first 52 games. He then had 6 goals in his last 14 games. The 6 in 14 is prorated at 35 goals in 82 games. But since he played 66 games, if you prorate 6 goals in 14 games, it's 28 goals in 66 games.
But to be a bit more moderate, I think, like you, he can be a 20+ goal scorer.
I've said it in a few different threads, but I feel like Domi would be the perfect line mate for Lehkonen.
dackelljuneaubulis02
Registered User
- Oct 13, 2012
- 11,562
- 6,892
They're both guys who would benefit from great Centers so I'd settle for at least a visible progression from both. Stat wise we're just so miserable up the middle that I can't really set goal totals for markers of success. Still 15's doable from them even in our situation.
groovejuice
Without deviation progress is not possible
I doubt think any reasonable person believes there's a jinx involved. I'd think the expression is just an all encompassing euphemism for an occurance with multiple possible causes.
Lehkonen scored 12 in 66 games this year, that's already a 15/82 pace...
And he had a bad year IMO, he should hit 20+ next season if he stays healthy. Play him with someone who can pass the puck and he will score goals.
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 29,807
- 20,962
GHJimmy
We made it here.
- Mar 30, 2018
- 1,109
- 935
In the future I could see
Domi - Kotkaniemi - Lehkonen
Once play making is very valuable in centre and winger but one sniper.. created plays could also make good chemistry which leads to goals and points, if it doesn't pan out maybe Poehling could have a shot at it too if needed.
But future plans I would take, first few weeks once Kotka starts I'd say 3rd pairing and move up or send him down to AHL, then move up second Line if he improves. Domi is very good at play making, good vision and I think he could make a spark.. One for one trade was awful but both players needed a new start elsewhere
Hostile Offer
Artist formerly known as Eagle Peninsula
I really hope Lehkonen can find his groove again, loved his game in his rookie year. However, I'm not sold on at all for him being a 20+ goal scorer. More likely a 3rd line grinder and a PK specialist. For scoring potential, I take Hudon rather easily.
The Normal is also a two parameter distribution, but to address the meat of the argument: there are distributions which are not well fit by a Weibull distribution, despite the distribution's agility. This is probably what @Mathletic meant. Really, since players collect integer numbers of points, and x-point games it's a poisson (for which the Weibull is a natural continuous extension), but to give an example of an empirical distribution not well fit by either of those distributions, consider a player who only had 0 and 3 point games in equal proportion. The peak of the probability mass/density will be at an x-point game that the player never had. All players will have varying amounts of this misfit.
- Status
