Player Discussion: Laine

[KingBogo]

The claim by someone was that Wheeler did better in results with Scheifele than Laine did. For that claim you need to check (using for example Natural Stat Trick line tool) how Wheeler did with Scheifele (and without Laine) and how Laine did with Scheifele (and without Wheeler).

That was exactly what I did. I did not cherry pick anything. I just took the claim that was made and pointed out that it was not true.

As I found out, the difference in results was pretty marginal, but anyway it was not favourable for Wheeler.

Ehlers does not relate to the argument at all as the argument was about "1st line with Laine vs. 1st line with Wheeler", or in practice sadly "CSL vs CSW" for 19-20.

I wanted to broaden the argument out to what is the best use of our top 6 forwards to maximize team success.

 

[Hunter368]

I wanted to broaden the argument out to what is the best use of our top 6 forwards to maximize team success.

Correct.

Some want to make the debate Laine vs Wheeler when it isn't, it's about what's best for the team overall. Using individual stats can easily show whatever one wants (in reality it's very debatable at best), as you stated. The team isn't going to do what's best for any single player (nor should it), they will do what's best for the team overall......aka KC/Mark/BW and Laine/Ehlers/X. People thinking or claiming the team or certain players is intentionally achieving less or hate Laine........are not being logical. All teams, not trying to tank, want to achieve the best they can, which equals out to money, profit and championships. The day Laine playing on the top line and Wheeler on the 2nd line achieves greater results for the team overall is the day I'll champion that cause.....but to-date it hasn't happened.....at least over any extended period with teams results overall. I've said it a million times in the Laine debate, team > any single player. The team is using the players in the positions they are to achieve the best results for the team overall.

 

[Hunter368]

I'll respond to both of these arguments because basically they are the same. Having a slightly higher goals differential % isolating just 2 players is a pretty soft argument IMO unless you care for only 1 player and not the team as a whole. I could post a whole bunch of possession metrics that don't put Laine in a favorable light but rather I will stick to your 5-5 GF% argument. Last season Laine with all linemates had a 51.96 GF%. Isolated with Scheifele it was 52.50%. A grand difference of 1 goal. Laine already plays with the player that has the biggest impact on his GF% and that is Ehlers. Isolating Ehlers with Laine his GF% goes up to 78.57%. My guess it is because Ehlers is able to transition the puck from defense better than anyone else on the team. If you go back a couple years Ehlers-Statsny-Laine had a 69.57 GF%. Probably the best GF% would be Ehlers-Scheifele-Laine but most of this comes from Ehlers not Scheifele who he already plays with. If you look at lines Connor-Scheifele-Wheeler has a very solid 57.14 GF%, while Connor-Scheifele-Laine has a poor one with a 48.39%.

If you look at it from a team perspective. Laine and Connor are our 2 best natural goal scoreres. Wheeler and Scheifele make Connor a more effective goal scorer and Ehlers makes Laine a better goal scorer. IMO Scheifele adds too little to Ehlers and Laine to take away the positives for Connor. This is especially true that we have a center that has worked best with Laine in the past in Statsny.

Often happens on good drafting teams, especially ones who go for BPA each draft......often they gain extordinary depth in certain positions. Jets have five top line players, four top line wingers which create a ton of competition & at times some players get impatient waiting for their time to take the top spot (which I understand). Any of our top four wingers could be the top line winger on most/many teams. Figuring out and playing these players in spots that deliver the best results for the team overall success is tough & can create a divide between team & a player.......at times that leads to a split......teams trading good players (good, not franchise) isn't uncommon due to a variety of reasons.

As been stated, hopefully things can be worked out regarding usage, linemates, contract, etc and Laine stays long term......but if it can't Chevy isn't being forced to do anything within the next three years......if Laine staying isn't in the cards long term Chevy will wait until he gets the trade he wants & improves the team overall. I assume everyone posting on the Jets board are Jets fans, not just player fans and they would want to see the team improve however it's achieved. Right?????

 

[Farmboy Patty]

If the discussion is not about Wheeler vs Laine, then the obvious solution should be to move the aging and overplayed Wheeler to the second line, and move Connor there while we are at it.
Ehlers-Chef-Laine and Connor-Stastny-Wheeler could squeeze out the max offense of this group.

 

[LowLefty]

I wanted to broaden the argument out to what is the best use of our top 6 forwards to maximize team success.

Should "sticky" this -
Refer back to it when discussions break out as a reminder of Laine's impact on team success vs any player's personal success.

We're not covering new ground here - but it always comes back to driving this point home in order to avoid the distractions

 

[Krauser]

The claim was actually about Wheeler vs Laine on the 1st line with Scheifele and Connor.

2019-20, 5v5:
Connor-Scheifele-Laine: GF% 48.4, CF% 47.0, XG% 43.5
Connor-Scheifele-Wheeler: GF% 57.1, CF% 53.8, XG% 48.0
(from Natural Stat Trick)

The argument for Laine on the 1st line would be stronger if it could be made in terms of their shot share and quality of chances, which are better predictors of future results than goal differential.

But even those who want to argue that GF% is itself reason enough for Laine to replace Wheeler on the 1st line should admit that CSL had a negative goal differential last year, at 5-on-5. It made sense for Maurice to try moving Wheeler up to the 1st line later in the year, because the 1st line to that point was getting buried in shots and chances, and was a negative in goal differential. And when Wheeler did move up, the first line did better in shots, better in chances, and better in goals.

Now maybe the struggles of the CSL combination last year weren’t mainly Laine’s fault, and maybe those struggles won’t be likely continue this year, if Laine improves and other factors around him are better, or better suited to his game. But it is just a fact that CSL were an ineffective first line last year, not just in terms of advanced metrics but on the scoresheet.

 

[ps241]

If the discussion is not about Wheeler vs Laine, then the obvious solution should be to move the aging and overplayed Wheeler to the second line, and move Connor there while we are at it.
Ehlers-Chef-Laine and Connor-Stastny-Wheeler could squeeze out the max offense of this group.

I think Laine fans are going to want him playing with Stastny and Ehlers to optimize him. Laine has looked much better with Stastny than Scheifele imo.

 

[Lowered Expectations]

I really would like to see EStL with 27&29 with some shifts with 55 in every game so that all wingers get about equal time in every game. Connor and Laine should not play in same line IMO. Ehlers and Laine were playing very good together, even with Eakin!

 

[KingBogo]

I think Laine fans are going to want him playing with Stastny and Ehlers to optimize him. Laine has looked much better with Stastny than Scheifele imo.

Assuming Stastny is still close to the same player he was a couple years back he was a very nice fit with Ehlers and Laine and I look forward to seeing if they can re-spark that chemistry.

 

[Atoyot]

I think Laine fans are going to want him playing with Stastny and Ehlers to optimize him. Laine has looked much better with Stastny than Scheifele imo.

Ehlers-Scheifele-Laine was a top line in the league before Laine's concussion. There hasn't been a combination that has been better for him.

 

[Farmboy Patty]

Ehlers-Scheifele-Laine was a top line in the league before Laine's concussion. There hasn't been a combination that has been better for him.

That line was magical at times.

 

[Farmboy Patty]

I think Laine fans are going to want him playing with Stastny and Ehlers to optimize him. Laine has looked much better with Stastny than Scheifele imo.

I don’t want to get too excited about the return of the Stastny before the reviews are out

if he plays close to the same level as he did on his first stint here, then we’re good and Laine will also enjoy scoring on that line

 

[Psych0dad]

Should "sticky" this -
Refer back to it when discussions break out as a reminder of Laine's impact on team success vs any player's personal success.

We're not covering new ground here - but it always comes back to driving this point home in order to avoid the distractions

I still fail to see the magical spreading of talent as something that hasn't worked for Jets so far.

When Laine is playing 1st line, he produces more results than the other RW options do. When he has played with other centers, excluding Stastny, Laine's production 5 on 5 dies down especially with Little so the impact he could have made in 1st line is negated by wasting him in a line that can't produce offense.

At the same time, Wheeler will create less positive results for Jets in that 1st than Laine would be able to.

I can't find a rational way how Jets win in this usage. It takes away time and chances from the most effective lineup option.

It's pretty simple. If Jets are to take a shot in the offensive zone, would you rather have Wheeler or Laine take it? Because first line creates more offense due to better players and favored usage. Jets have mainly had only one capable offensive center through the whole time Laine has been there. So him and Wheeler have been in competition for that spot and coach has preferred Wheeler although Laine produces more in that spot.

I only have seen negative effect for the team. They have been worse than they needed to due to this irrational choice.

It has taken the most productive, positively impacting RW out of top line ice time and pushed him to a line and role that effectively halts his offensive production 5 on 5.

Jets have probably left about 30-50 goals to the positive on the bench by preferring Wheeler over the past seasons.

I can't find the reasoning, the math that in any way suggest this has benefited the team. One thing it has done is, it pissed off Laine and keeping him now might prove much more difficult than it should have been.

If I am missing something obvious that would make it a "benefit to the whole" please explain. I for the life of me can't find it, and think it's been a major mistake by Paul since early 2017 when he started doing it.

And I am talking about the teams angle. How does the team benefit from having Wheeler take the shots Laine could have taken? Unless someone is under the delusion that Wheeler can use his shots just as effectively

With Stastny in lineup they can now spread the talent. It's best to play Laine with Stastny, they will outproduce the Chef line with less minutes. But when Jets have mot had Stastny, keeping Laine away from the only offensive center has been a terrible waste. But it worked great for one thing. It propped up artificially the extension contract of an aging RW, who signed it ftom the position of two 90pt seasons.

The more I think of it, where some see a smart plan of spreading the talent, I see a catastrophic failure. Held down team production, alienated franchise future and handcuffed the team to a ridiculous extension of a veteran based on his two best seasons that were created by coaching choice and preference. I don't know how one could have F'ed it up more if they had tried. It's a string of unfortunate choices without logic.

 

[tbcwpg]

I still fail to see the magical spreading of talent as something that hasn't worked for Jets so far.

When Laine is playing 1st line, he produces more results than the other RW options do. When he has played with other centers, excluding Stastny, Laine's production 5 on 5 dies down especially with Little so the impact he could have made in 1st line is negated by wasting him in a line that can't produce offense.

At the same time, Wheeler will create less positive results for Jets in that 1st than Laine would be able to.

I can't find a rational way how Jets win in this usage. It takes away time and chances from the most effective lineup option.

It's pretty simple. If Jets are to take a shot in the offensive zone, would you rather have Wheeler or Laine take it? Because first line creates more offense due to better players and favored usage. Jets have mainly had only one capable offensive center through the whole time Laine has been there. So him and Wheeler have been in competition for that spot and coach has preferred Wheeler although Laine produces more in that spot.

I only have seen negative effect for the team. They have been worse than they needed to due to this irrational choice.

It has taken the most productive, positively impacting RW out of top line ice time and pushed him to a line and role that effectively halts his offensive production 5 on 5.

Jets have probably left about 30-50 goals to the positive on the bench by preferring Wheeler over the past seasons.

I can't find the reasoning, the math that in any way suggest this has benefited the team. One thing it has done is, it pissed off Laine and keeping him now might prove much more difficult than it should have been.

If I am missing something obvious that would make it a "benefit to the whole" please explain. I for the life of me can't find it, and think it's been a major mistake by Paul since early 2017 when he started doing it.

And I am talking about the teams angle. How does the team benefit from having Wheeler take the shots Laine could have taken? Unless someone is under the delusion that Wheeler can use his shots just as effectively

Wheeler is primarily a playmaker for Scheifele and Connor whereas Laine is a finisher. Scheifele is good at both - not as good as Wheeler at creating goals for others, but better than Laine, and not as good as a pure goal scorer than Laine but better than Wheeler.

I actually think Laine and Wheeler would work well. The issue is the combo that makes the team work best. Also the stats show that Laine's most effective linemate is Ehlers- so the question is, is Ehlers-Scheifele-Laine and Connor-Stastny-Wheeler a better use of the top 6 than Connor-Scheifele-Wheeler and Ehlers-Stastny-Laine? Is it 81-55-29 and 27-25-26? Or a different combo?

When you talk about effectiveness of a player on a particular line, Laine might score a few more goals than Wheeler does, but is it the best combo for the team in general to just switch those two around? I'm not sure.

 

[untouchable21]

The last time Stastny was here, he was in Connor’s spot on PP1 Is he going to go back to that or has Connor cemented himself in that spot?

 

[10Ducky10]

If the discussion is not about Wheeler vs Laine, then the obvious solution should be to move the aging and overplayed Wheeler to the second line, and move Connor there while we are at it.
Ehlers-Chef-Laine and Connor-Stastny-Wheeler could squeeze out the max offense of this group.

Spread the weath in no order...

Apples Stastny Wheeler
Harkins Scheif Laine
KC Roslo Ehlers
MP Lowry Copper
Thompson

JMo DeMelo
Slamberg Poink
Heinola Poolman
Boolow-Forbort
Waive Niku if rosters are'nt expanded.

Helle LB

 

[Farmboy Patty]

Spread the weath in no order...

Apples Stastny Wheeler
Harkins Scheif Laine
KC Roslo Ehlers
MP Lowry Copper
Thompson

JMo DeMelo
Slamberg Poink
Heinola Poolman
Boolow-Forbort
Waive Niku if rosters are'nt expanded.

Helle LB

While it is not likely that Paul Maurice Would try that, it is a very interesting lineup. A ”third” line with KC Roslo and Ehlers would eat their opposition alive with their speed and firepower.

 

[10Ducky10]

While it is not likely that Paul Maurice Would try that, it is a very interesting lineup. A ”third” line with KC Roslo and Ehlers would eat their opposition alive with their speed and firepower.

I see MP as a problem there because of seeing the other team's best lines for a lot of their ice time. Let him sit in the pressbox and come in for injuries.

I am being serious and a lot of posters will laugh but what about trying Niku as a RWer with Copper and Lowry?

 

[boydkc]

Tough part about the trade is that it's very likely gonna look like a loss for The Jets. We're gonna get back either a decent 2C/1st pairing D + extra and the success of the trade is gonna Be mesasured by team success which is affected by lots of other factors. The other team will put Laine in the first line and 1st pp, play him to his offensive strenghts and he's most likely gonna score a lot. Otherwise they won't do The trade. So even If the return is good on paper, it's very likely that Chevy will appear as the loser of the trade unless we go far in the playoffs immediately

I think Chevy will hold on to Laine untill the bitter like he did with Trouba. The difference is though that Trouba apparently wanted out for reasons unrelated to hockey or the team, while Laine wants to be in a role where he's being used for what he does best which is scoring goals, so I think it's still possible for things to turn better, but a lot of it has to do with coaching decisions and we all know that change isn't likely to happen

Steve Duchesne Peter Forsberg Ron Hextall Kerry Huffman Mike Ricci $15M cash 1993 1st round pick (#10-Jocelyn Thibault) future considerations (Chris Simon 1994 1st round pick (#10-Nolan Baumgartner)) [TBODY] [/TBODY]

June 30, 1992

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

This was the return for Lindros who had not yet played a game in the NHL. If Chevy can pull off a similar trade With Laine to this the Jets will be an NHL power for the next decade...

 

[KingBogo]

Steve Duchesne Peter Forsberg Ron Hextall Kerry Huffman Mike Ricci $15M cash 1993 1st round pick (#10-Jocelyn Thibault) future considerations (Chris Simon 1994 1st round pick (#10-Nolan Baumgartner)) [TBODY] [/TBODY]

June 30, 1992

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

This was the return for Lindros who had not yet played a game in the NHL. If Chevy can pull off a similar trade With Laine to this the Jets will be an NHL power for the next decade...

The problem being a Lindros return at that point in time would be far more similar to what a McDavid return would be rather than what Laine would ever hope to return.

 

[Atoyot]

Steve Duchesne Peter Forsberg Ron Hextall Kerry Huffman Mike Ricci $15M cash 1993 1st round pick (#10-Jocelyn Thibault) future considerations (Chris Simon 1994 1st round pick (#10-Nolan Baumgartner)) [TBODY] [/TBODY]

June 30, 1992

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

This was the return for Lindros who had not yet played a game in the NHL. If Chevy can pull off a similar trade With Laine to this the Jets will be an NHL power for the next decade...

Imma just go ahead and pop the bubble: that ain't happening. Nothing close to that is happening. A third of that ain't happening.

 

[ps241]

Ehlers-Scheifele-Laine was a top line in the league before Laine's concussion. There hasn't been a combination that has been better for him.

Was that the stretch when that line was shooting close to 20%?

 

[Psych0dad]

The argument for Laine on the 1st line would be stronger if it could be made in terms of their shot share and quality of chances, which are better predictors of future results than goal differential.

Actual real world results are far more important than obscure prediction and averages based statistic. You're literally putting the cart before the horse.

I care about the scoreboard because it directly reflects to the teams points and standings.

Your argument cares MORE about which one is on the ice for a better percentage of total shots taken, or what the distance of those shots averages.

You're simply picking the wrong thing to focus on. As long as hockey wins are based on goal differential, it doesn't matter in what fashion those wins have been accumulated.

If it was decided like figure skating on visual review of style, emphazizing the amount of shots for and against and proximity to net, then your argument would make sense. But it isn't, it's based on goals and has always been, so you're wrong to put any weight on those irrelevant stats. They don't matter, scoreboard dictates.

 

[Atoyot]

Was that the stretch when that line was shooting close to 20%?

Oh you bet it was. Also the best 42 game stretch of both Ehlers' and Laine's career to this point.

 

[KingBogo]

Actual real world results are far more important than obscure prediction and averages based statistic. You're literally putting the cart before the horse.

I care about the scoreboard because it directly reflects to the teams points and standings.

Your argument cares MORE about which one is on the ice for a better percentage of total shots taken, or what the distance of those shots averages.

You're simply picking the wrong thing to focus on. As long as hockey wins are based on goal differential, it doesn't matter in what fashion those wins have been accumulated.

If it was decided like figure skating on visual review of style, emphazizing the amount of shots for and against and proximity to net, then your argument would make sense. But it isn't, it's based on goals and has always been, so you're wrong to put any weight on those irrelevant stats. They don't matter, scoreboard dictates.

So just to be clear you are arguing plus/minus is the most important underlying metric as that is basically what goals differential is.