Pre-Game Talk: Jets vs Panthers - Helsinki (Nov 1 & 2) Hartwall Arena

[Adam da bomb]

Regarding trading Laine for Barkov, I personally think it's an absolute non starter. Besides Laine being the far better player at the same age, Laine brings a lot of off-ice value that Barkov doesn't. I read somewhere that Laine jerseys are pretty much the only ones selling outside of Winnipeg, he gets a lot of coverage in hockey news broadcasts and so on. People outside Winnipeg like to talk about him and that sells merchandise, and also puts the team on the map. Barkov doesn't have the same draw at all.

Yes but merchandise sales aren't they shared by the league instead of just going to the team.

 

[Adam da bomb]

So one player does not win us the cup Laine or Barkov one gives us the better chance tho.

 

[Tommigun]

Yes but merchandise sales aren't they shared by the league instead of just going to the team.

I was not aware of that. But still, there's value in more exposure for the Jets. Barkov is not close to being as popular as Laine, who is known outside of Winnipeg as well. Barkov is well known with die-hard fans of the game, but not to the more casual fan.

 

[Adam da bomb]

In my opinion we lucked out when we got Laine in the draft with our 2nd pick.

To not see him develop and just ship him off to another team would be absolute stupidity on the Jets part.

We had patience with Scheifele and he is now the best player on this team.

In my opinion we lucked out when we got Laine in the draft with our 2nd pick.

To not see him develop and just ship him off to another team would be absolute stupidity on the Jets part.

We had patience with Scheifele and he is now the best player on this team.

We were not a contender when Schief was young. We are a contender now but who knows for how long.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

How come? +/- isn't including power play or shorthanded goals (only if you are on the ice when being scored on when YOU are on the power play, but then you deserve a minus), it is pretty much even strength only. One defender getting a lot of PP time and the other PK shouldn't affect +/-.

Go Figure | NHL.com - NHL Headquarters
"A player is awarded a "plus" each time he is on the ice when his Club scores an even-strength or shorthanded goal. He receives a "minus" if he is on the ice for an even-strength or shorthanded goal scored by the opposing Club. The difference in these numbers is considered the player's "plus-minus" statistic."

Empty net goals count. PK goals against count but PP goals for do not count. Even strength goal differential is still not a great stat - but it is much better than +/-. If it was then biased for the strength of the team, we'd be getting somewhere.

You started this with a classic example of the failure of +/-. You get it. So why are you so determined to defend it? It is neither accurately descriptive nor predictive, so it doesn't have any value whatsoever.

 

[Adam da bomb]

I was not aware of that. But still, there's value in more exposure for the Jets. Barkov is not close to being as popular as Laine, who is known outside of Winnipeg as well. Barkov is well known with die-hard fans of the game, but not to the more casual fan.

How does more exposure help? It doesn't help the fans. We pay the same for tickets and would like to get a cup for my money.

 

[Tommigun]

Empty net goals count. PK goals against count but PP goals for do not count. Even strength goal differential is still not a great stat - but it is much better than +/-. If it was then biased for the strength of the team, we'd be getting somewhere.

You started this with a classic example of the failure of +/-. You get it. So why are you so determined to defend it? It is neither accurately descriptive nor predictive, so it doesn't have any value whatsoever.

I see the fallacy in it and there's definitely better models, but my point was that even as it is it holds some value in my opinion. I'd love if they tweaked it a bit, don't get me wrong. But it is already pretty close to an even strength stat:
* If you are on the PK and get scored on, you won't get a minus
* If you are on the PP and score, you won't get a plus
* If you are on the PP and get scored on, I think an argument can be made for the minus to count. I don't see a problem with giving a minus to the PP which got scored on, it shouldn't happen. Even if no good argument could be made, the amount of minus gotten this way is pretty minor.
* Empty netters sure, they shouldn't count... but how many of those do you get per year? Can't be more than a handful, and they should even out for everyone.

It's not perfect but I do defend that there's value when used within a limited context like intra-team comparisons for defenders.

 

[VictoriaJetsFan]

You have to ask are the Jets in a win now window? Would you sacrifice possibly the better player in 3 years when Buff Wheeler little etc won't be as good. Also a team friendly Sasha allows us to resign Trouba which makes us the better team.

This.....is what I was thinking exactly when this trade proposal occurred to me...I am concerned our window is not as large as some think...

 

[cbcwpg]

Gotta let it play out a bit more.... If Laine finishes the season with 10 goals, then fine, discuss trading him. But not until then..

GMs that have players like Laine fall in their laps do not stay employed very long if they then trade that player away. Having anyone that can score 40 goals is a rarity in today's NHL... you can't even think about trading a player like that until it is proven they are now a bust, or management demands it for PR reasons ( like drug use or they beat their wives or something along those lines ) and maybe not even then.

IMO Laine is feeling the pressure of being in the last year of his ELC and the pressure of trying to repeat his last 2 seasons. Time will tell if he overcomes this.

 

[JetsUK]

No, of course one player does not make a team win a cup. But one player can be the difference between winning it and almost winning it.

McDavid doesn't have the supporting cast that the Jets have. If the Jets had McD, they would win a cup in the very near future. No one can say for certain in any one year. What if we got McD and he was injured in the first game? But if we had him we would be as near as possible to a sure thing sometime in the next 2-3 years.

Barkov is not McD but he would have almost the same effect - unless the price to get him was crippling in some way. Jets would still have a lot of scoring power with Barkov instead of Laine and better defense.

This Laine for Barkov theme strikes me as a classic beware what you ask for scenario (not finger pointing here). Premature accounements of his demise notwithstanding, I see him, even now, and with a very different skill set, as every bit the difference-maker that Barkov is, and see no reason why he can’t be a dominant player in the league, as he’s seemed to signpost since h was drafted.

Laine is a rare talent. We are lucky to have him. He will bounce back. I wouldn’t trade him for anyone not named C McDavid. Time to win two in a row.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Gotta let it play out a bit more.... If Laine finishes the season with 10 goals, then fine, discuss trading him. But not until then..

GMs that have players like Laine fall in their laps do not stay employed very long if they then trade that player away. Having anyone that can score 40 goals is a rarity in today's NHL... you can't even think about trading a player like that until it is proven they are now a bust, or management demands it for PR reasons ( like drug use or they beat their wives or something along those lines ) and maybe not even then.

IMO Laine is feeling the pressure of being in the last year of his ELC and the pressure of trying to repeat his last 2 seasons. Time will tell if he overcomes this.

It has nothing to do with being a bust. It's opportunity and window costs. Now is our window Barkov is the better player this second even if Laine scores 40. Barkov is in his prime. Laine will be in 3 yrs but our window is narrow.

 

[Tommigun]

It has nothing to do with being a bust. It's opportunity and window costs. Now is our window Barkov is the better player this second even if Laine scores 40. Barkov is in his prime. Laine will be in 3 yrs but our window is narrow.

Has such a trade ever been made? A superstar in the making with an extremely solid track record, traded for another player who’s in his prime and the better player at the moment (where those factors are the only reasons for the trade)? I can’t think of any on top of my head. I also think that the casual fans in Winnipeg would absolutely riot if such a trade was made.

 

[204hockey]

Came to read about things happening in Finland see stupid talk about trading laine... take that to the trade thread ,,who the he'll wants to trade laine anyways ????

 

[Adam da bomb]

Has such a trade ever been made? A superstar in the making with an extremely solid track record, traded for another player who’s in his prime and the better player at the moment (where those factors are the only reasons for the trade)? I can’t think of any on top of my head. I also think that the casual fans in Winnipeg would absolutely riot if such a trade was made.

And I think there is zero chance this trade gets made. Just my thoughts.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I see the fallacy in it and there's definitely better models, but my point was that even as it is it holds some value in my opinion. I'd love if they tweaked it a bit, don't get me wrong. But it is already pretty close to an even strength stat:
* If you are on the PK and get scored on, you won't get a minus
* If you are on the PP and score, you won't get a plus
* If you are on the PP and get scored on, I think an argument can be made for the minus to count. I don't see a problem with giving a minus to the PP which got scored on, it shouldn't happen. Even if no good argument could be made, the amount of minus gotten this way is pretty minor.
* Empty netters sure, they shouldn't count... but how many of those do you get per year? Can't be more than a handful, and they should even out for everyone.

It's not perfect but I do defend that there's value when used within a limited context like intra-team comparisons for defenders.

It is not "already pretty close to an even strength stat".

Go Figure | NHL.com - NHL Headquarters
"A player is awarded a "plus" each time he is on the ice when his Club scores an even-strength or shorthanded goal. He receives a "minus" if he is on the ice for an even-strength or shorthanded goal scored by the opposing Club. The difference in these numbers is considered the player's "plus-minus" statistic."

That is a goal scored while your team is shorthanded, a goal against while you are PK'ing. If they would just leave all ST goals out of it, it would be less bad.


You say that "even as it is it holds some value in my opinion". What precisely is the value? The number jumps all over the map. A good player on a bad team will have a bad plus minus. Worse than a bad player on a bad team because the good player gets more TOI. A bad player on a good team will have a good plus minus. Special Teams create substantial inequalities. So it is not descriptive. A player can be the worst in the league, or on his team, one year and the best the next year. So it is not predictive.

I get tempted to look at the +/- numbers occasionally, just because they are there. But I try to resist because I know they will only give me a false impression. It would be best if the league would stop tracking it altogether.

Edit: I see you did specify "intra-team comparisons for defenders". That doesn't work either unless they are getting the same usage. They have to be on the same pair and have the same special teams usage. I'm pretty certain that you are mistaken about the effect of special teams.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I see the fallacy in it and there's definitely better models, but my point was that even as it is it holds some value in my opinion. I'd love if they tweaked it a bit, don't get me wrong. But it is already pretty close to an even strength stat:
* If you are on the PK and get scored on, you won't get a minus
* If you are on the PP and score, you won't get a plus
* If you are on the PP and get scored on, I think an argument can be made for the minus to count. I don't see a problem with giving a minus to the PP which got scored on, it shouldn't happen. Even if no good argument could be made, the amount of minus gotten this way is pretty minor.
* Empty netters sure, they shouldn't count... but how many of those do you get per year? Can't be more than a handful, and they should even out for everyone.

It's not perfect but I do defend that there's value when used within a limited context like intra-team comparisons for defenders.

Instead of just arguing with me, I suggest you read this from a more expert source than I am:
Analysis: Plus/Minus Sucks

 

[SUX2BU]

1 pm start times means I will have to listen to the sweet voice of Paul Edmonds on the radio at work

Yeah, the man with a face for radio .....

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

This Laine for Barkov theme strikes me as a classic beware what you ask for scenario (not finger pointing here). Premature accounements of his demise notwithstanding, I see him, even now, and with a very different skill set, as every bit the difference-maker that Barkov is, and see no reason why he can’t be a dominant player in the league, as he’s seemed to signpost since h was drafted.

Laine is a rare talent. We are lucky to have him. He will bounce back. I wouldn’t trade him for anyone not named C McDavid. Time to win two in a row.

Basically, I agree. Laine is special, Barkov is merely really ****ing good.

I am biased in favour of the strength down the middle though. Barkov would have a greater positive impact on his linemates and the rest of his teammates because of being a C. Think of the difficulty opposing teams will have matching against Scheif, Barkov, Little, Lowry and some permutation of our wingers.

We take Laine out but we move Rosie back to RW. We also have Lemmy (he will start to assert himself eventually), Petan, Appleton and Vesalainen. None of them is close to Laine but we are still very deep at wing, and have Barkov.

Does Barkov play Fortnite? If so, deal's off.

This is all fantasy talk because it isn't happening. Neither Laine nor Barkov is being traded, much less both. But if you really want to have fun, start fantasizing a package of Laine + Trouba. How much would other teams give to get that? Come to think of it, how much would we give up to keep that? I mean, I just remembered that we already have that.

 

[Tommigun]

It is not "already pretty close to an even strength stat".


That is a goal scored while your team is shorthanded, a goal against while you are PK'ing. If they would just leave all ST goals out of it, it would be less bad.


You say that "even as it is it holds some value in my opinion". What precisely is the value? The number jumps all over the map. A good player on a bad team will have a bad plus minus. Worse than a bad player on a bad team because the good player gets more TOI. A bad player on a good team will have a good plus minus. Special Teams create substantial inequalities. So it is not descriptive. A player can be the worst in the league, or on his team, one year and the best the next year. So it is not predictive.

I get tempted to look at the +/- numbers occasionally, just because they are there. But I try to resist because I know they will only give me a false impression. It would be best if the league would stop tracking it altogether.

Edit: I see you did specify "intra-team comparisons for defenders". That doesn't work either unless they are getting the same usage. They have to be on the same pair and have the same special teams usage. I'm pretty certain that you are mistaken about the effect of special teams.

I’m pretty sure you are mistaken about getting a minus on the PK. I have always been in the belief, and the portion you bolded says as much, that you only get a minus if the OPPOSING team scores short handed (which I think is fair).

If you got a minus for getting scored on while shorthanded the metric would be beyond useless for sure.

 

[jetsforever]

Do people here honestly want to trade Laine?!

 

[Howard Chuck]

Do people here honestly want to trade Laine?!

I'm pretty sure it's just down time boredom..... we need hockey!

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I’m pretty sure you are mistaken about getting a minus on the PK. I have always been in the belief, and the portion you bolded says as much, that you only get a minus if the OPPOSING team scores short handed (which I think is fair).

If you got a minus for getting scored on while shorthanded the metric would be beyond useless for sure.

That bolded part can be read either way. If it was as you believe the results would not be so wildly scattered. Read that article I linked. It actually analyzes the value of the stat far better than I ever could. It is not the only one, nor necessarily the best one. There are lots of others. Hers is another one, from Garret:
Behind the Numbers: Why Plus/Minus is the worst statistic in hockey and should be abolished

Here is an explanation of how it is calculated. It agrees with your reading of that bolded part.
From here:
What Is the Plus/Minus Statistic in Hockey and How Is It Calculated?

How Is it Calculated?
When an even-strength or shorthanded goal is scored, every player on the ice for the team scoring the goal is credited with a "plus." Every player on the ice for the team scored against gets a "minus." The difference in these numbers by the end of the game makes up each individual player's plus/minus ranking. A high plus total is taken to mean that a guy is a good defensive player.
To clarify, an even-strength goal means a goal that is scored when there are the same number of players on each team. A shorthanded goal is a goal scored by the team that has fewer players on the ice than the opposing team due to penalties.

Here is another analysis:
Don't use plus/minus

The bottom line is that it is a worse than useless stat. It only misleads.

 

[Spock]

That bolded part can be read either way. If it was as you believe the results would not be so wildly scattered. Read that article I linked. It actually analyzes the value of the stat far better than I ever could. It is not the only one, nor necessarily the best one. There are lots of others. Hers is another one, from Garret:
Behind the Numbers: Why Plus/Minus is the worst statistic in hockey and should be abolished

Here is an explanation of how it is calculated. It agrees with your reading of that bolded part.
From here:
What Is the Plus/Minus Statistic in Hockey and How Is It Calculated?


Here is another analysis:
Don't use plus/minus

The bottom line is that it is a worse than useless stat. It only misleads.

It's absurd that some people dismiss all things corsi and endorse +/-. When the latter is a heavily reduced sample size of the former.

 

[Zhamnov5GoalGame]

Came here to read about the Jets big overseas game vs the Panthers only to find a bIzarre Laine for Barkov trade debate and an even more misplaced + / - debate???


... Go Jets Go?

 

[sipowicz]