Player Discussion: Patrik Laine Part VII: Eliitti! - Mod Warning Post #79

[TannedBum]

I do not find the different level in past accomplishments. No matter how much people keep claiming it's there

It's because you refuse to see it. How about this moment ? Are they at different level ? Laine wont overrun McDavid because of what he did against weak opponents in some Skoda Cup in the past.

 

[ps241]

I may be way off here but I hope this is not starting to be about a Finn stepping on the toes of a Canadian, where even Jets fans are not happy about it. I would have zero clue but I hope we are measuring individuals without looking at their nationalities.

There are literally zero winnipeg Jets fans that are Canadian that wouldn't be thrilled if Laine not only stepped on McDavid's toes but figuratively curb stomped his Canadian ass in NHL play. Laine is a Jet McDavid is an Oiler and that trumps what nationality either of them are.

What you will also find are some Canadian Jets fans who have some typical blind homer type overvaluing of Laine due to him being a Jet.

What you won't find is a Canadian who has Finnish national pride in Laine (unless that is their ancenstory I guess).

I love Laine and if he bangs out 50 goals and 90-100 points this season I will start to consider him being in a tier with McDavid.....I would love for that to happen......I am not expecting it though. Until then I will just enjoy the ride.

 

[19GoalsInPlayoffs]

Let's not forget that Laine played the entire season at the age of 18 and scored a **** ton of goals - and also not forget that McDavid even better and was only hurt by the fact he was injured and missed games.

That is a fact you can argue for. But we do not know if McDavid would have been able to maintain his high level at his rookie season. He might. And probably would. As we do know he is exeptionally good hockey player and at his sophmore season he was able to continue where he left. But Laine might have same kind of sophmore season. At least nothing indicates at this moment anything else. If there is no major injuries, we will be much wiser next summer.

But you have to remember the first full NHL season for a 18 year old is _really hard_. It affected heavily on Laine, it probably would have had similar kind of effects for Connor in some state.

Laine was very near McDavids points per game at one point. If he'd been forced to end his first season there - fortunately he didn't - we would now argue if he could have lifted his game a little and got pass Connor. We now know he did "run out of juice", but the same could have happened to Connor also. We will never know.

 

[grieves]

1) I just meant that McDavid has been so good, it's unlikely anyone touches him with how he's been going. I had shown McDavids D+1 and D+2 years to Matthews and Laine.

2) Yes, you should at least take into consideration. It's just that Laine and Matthews posted elite numbers for young rookies, and McDavid was a whole another level. That's not defining of the 3, but it still tells you something.

Age curves help us project, although we still have a lot to improve upon those.

We do have some trends to go on:
Elite players peaks are much longer
Physical player's peaks are much shorter and decline out faster
Different skill sets last longer
Etc.
But there is definitely more we could learn.

Anything is possible, but not all is most probable.

3) No. We do not account for this, yet. This is one thing you could add to the list that we do not account for yet.

My experience has been though that people way over state experience. It matters, no question... but age and physical abilities seem to be the biggest factor.



See, this is FAR better criticism than Johnson gave. And some I don't have answers for.

I completely understand the sentiment that McDavid just put up a season for the ages but for me the question is not how improbable it is rather than is it actually happening. The biggest issue with these kind of advanced stats is the difference in speed of development. Unless I understood incorrectly, you are basically comparing Laine with McDavid as if they were on equal footing, but I doubt McD was such a weakling in his d+1. He also played only half a season which means he didnt have to deal with the biggest rookie killer, fatigue, although Im sure he would have had better physical conditioning to deal with it. Again, not on equal footing, and on top of that not enough data.

2) We can take it into consideration but Im having a hard time giving it much relevance at this point. This is a point I made with the whole OiSH% debate. We need to let these guys develop first and then see what is up. I think otherwise we are just setting ourselves up for "anomalies". But im not really familiar with the stat yet and I am on holiday trip atm so sorry if im just missing somethng. Ill get informed next week .

3) are goals value more than assists?

I do get what you are saying. Not only is reaching McD a tall order, it is the tallest order imaginable. If Laine doesnt reach him then that is fine. But I mean just look at this monstrosity that is Laine .

 

[kelsier]

It's refreshing to read some intellectual discussion about players for a change, rather than "<insert a name> > AINEC". Oftentimes after spending some time in HFBoards I wonder whether people really are just d*** or whether their homerism is blinding their judgement. Think it may just be a combination. The Laine fans often get ridiculed over statements such as "7 months being a factor" when judging player's performance. In which world is that a non-factor? You don't need to apply rocket science in order to contemplate whether ~210 days makes a difference in young player's performance or not. Luckily at least in here you can pretty freely state your mind without having to explain basic arguments to get people to comprehend them.

I'm not a fan of advanced stats and rarely use them in debates, but I'm not completely ignoring them either. The problem with these are that people often seem to interpret the data as they please and manipulate them to form conclusions which often stand on a rather shaky grounds. Especially with the young players who are in the midst or at the very early stages of the development, how can you cherry pick a stat that make them look good/bad and expect that stat to remain that way? Nearly all of these kids have weaknesses when they make the transition and some of them can turn those weaknesses into strengths over time, which in turn/time will reflect onto these very stats. This is why I take the statistics with a grain of salt (when debating over rookies or prospects) and rather rely on the eye-sight and make my own conclusions. This has nothing really to do with the GAR. I actually enjoyed reading about it.

I think in Laine's case, he's a late bloomer, no matter if he's dominated pretty much every stage he has ever played at. I just feel there's so much room for improvement after seeing how he excelled in the NHL last season. The injuries he's had have been a major setback and even despite of these, he managed to have one of the best ever 18 year old season in the NHL. Now when ever I see McDavid on the ice, it's like watching less selfish Pavel Bure with a way better hockey IQ. The guy is literally the very pinnacle of a great hockey player. Yet where there is one, doesn't mean there cannot be another. I do feel like Laine has the right mindset, the right skill set and something unique (his shot added with size) that every truly great player has (for McDavid it's the hands combined with speed). I truly hope this kid makes it and I remain pretty optimistic. I do also agree that the entire C vs W debate has blown out of proportions. There are plenty of examples where teams have succeeded without a "franchise" C in the roster or on the ice (perhaps more in the Europe than in the NHL as some stated but nevertheless).

If you're a Laine fan and ever feel like your not quite sure about him, I'd suggest you should watch the highlight vid of his FEL playoffs and how he dominated against the grown ups at the age of 17. I wasn't ever really a Tappara fan but jeez, what this kid could do even back then (leading his team to the cup), it's literally unheard of.

 

[MMANumminen]

I have no idea what GAR or WAR means

 

[ps241]

It's refreshing to read some intellectual discussion about players for a change, rather than "<insert a name> > AINEC". Oftentimes after spending some time in HFBoards I wonder whether people really are just d*** or whether their homerism is blinding their judgement. Think it may just be a combination. The Laine fans often get ridiculed over statements such as "7 months being a factor" when judging player's performance. In which world is that a non-factor? You don't need to apply rocket science in order to contemplate whether ~210 days makes a difference in young player's performance or not. Luckily at least in here you can pretty freely state your mind without having to explain basic arguments to get people to comprehend them.

I'm not a fan of advanced stats and rarely use them in debates, but I'm not completely ignoring them either. The problem with these are that people often seem to interpret the data as they please and manipulate them to form conclusions which often stand on a rather shaky grounds. Especially with the young players who are in the midst or at the very early stages of the development, how can you cherry pick a stat that make them look good/bad and expect that stat to remain that way? Nearly all of these kids have weaknesses when they make the transition and some of them can turn those weaknesses into strengths over time, which in turn/time will reflect onto these very stats. This is why I take the statistics with a grain of salt (when debating over rookies or prospects) and rather rely on the eye-sight and make my own conclusions. This has nothing really to do with the GAR. I actually enjoyed reading about it.

I think in Laine's case, he's a late bloomer, no matter if he's dominated pretty much every stage he has ever played at. I just feel there's so much room for improvement after seeing how he excelled in the NHL last season. The injuries he's had have been a major setback and even despite of these, he managed to have one of the best ever 18 year old season in the NHL. Now when ever I see McDavid on the ice, it's like watching less selfish Pavel Bure with a way better hockey IQ. The guy is literally the very pinnacle of a great hockey player. Yet where there is one, doesn't mean there cannot be another. I do feel like Laine has the right mindset, the right skill set and something unique (his shot added with size) that every truly great player has (for McDavid it's the hands combined with speed). I truly hope this kid makes it and I remain pretty optimistic. I do also agree that the entire C vs W debate has blown out of proportions. There are plenty of examples where teams have succeeded without a "franchise" C in the roster or on the ice (perhaps more in the Europe than in the NHL as some stated but nevertheless).

If you're a Laine fan and ever feel like your not quite sure about him, I'd suggest you should watch the highlight vid of his FEL playoffs and how he dominated against the grown ups at the age of 17. I wasn't ever really a Tappara fan but jeez, what this kid could do even back then (leading his team to the cup), it's literally unheard of.

Good post. What Laine did as a 17 year old in his draft season from about December on was close to if not historic. I have been watching the world juniors for 20 plus years and you just don't see 17 year olds in their draft year do what Laine and Puljujarvi did. Re was the run in the playoffs Laine had, followed by the world championships. That was all pretty insane.

Your point about improvement due to physical change is valid. I watched allot of Draisaitl as a junior because he played on the same team as Morrissey and I fell in love with the kid in his draft year and prayed the Jets got him but he was a slow awkward skater. The Oil rushed him into the NHL and a bit like Kyle Connor you could tell he wasn't ready so it was back to junior where he almost lead his team to the memorial cup. However, the larger point is how much he improved his skating over his D1 and D2 seasons. By the time he started his D3 season he was a good and fast skater and it allowed him to exploit his true gifts which are strength, vision, passing, IQ. His skating was light years better.

I don't think I have ever seen a pure goal scorer that is 6'5"? I am not sure what that will look like when he transforms into a mature adult. We saw Scheifele mature into a top 10 scorer in the NHL as his body weight, strength, balance, and skating improved. What will that look like for Laine? I think Patrik has a similar raw runnway like Draisaitl and Scheifele had as far as room to grow and mature physical attributes. What will it look like when Patrik adds muscle, strength, speed, and quickness?

Fun to let the mind wander.

 

[Weezeric]

I don't think it's impossible that Laine outscore mcdavid next year. Its interesting if you compare their rookie seasons. Laine had 11 goals in his first 14 games iirc. Then he went through the most difficult stretch, schedule wise, in NHL history as a raw 18 yr old. Then he got hurt. He definitely slowed down production wise toward the end of the year. I, for one, will be disappointed if Laine doesn't lead the jets in scoring this year. Can't wait for the season to start.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Well, I'm not going to join the Johnson bashing, but as you said GAR is an estimate. You should always use it with grain of salt. Like every other adv stat out there.

Hockey is a very complicated sport and it is played with so little margins that you just can't extract all the decisive factors in to numbers. There have been plenty of very good players, elite or generational even, who are or were of utmost importance to their teams and wouldn't have gotten near the McDavids GAR numbers.

Does that mean that McDavid is on another level compared to them? And might I ask what that "level" is and how important that "level" is for a game called ice hockey?

I don't mean GAR doesn't work. I'm just saying GAR is just one stat that might help you to see something in players you might not notice without it.

For example if you'd pick the 20 best GAR players of their position to an one team, you'd probably get one helluva team, but it might not even get you in to the playoffs. It certainly would not guarantee any of your players or your team the Rocket, Hart or any of the "important stuff". And strangely most of the "top GAR" team players would see their GAR drop singnifically after one season together. Would that mean that they have gotten so much worse with all the other "top GARs"? Or just imply the shortcomings of that individual stat...

To keep this on topic; even as Laine would never get near McDavids GAR numbers he might still one day be discussed as one of the greatest players. Or might not. Only the future will tell (not the GAR ).

The GAR only says the same thing that we already know without it. McDavid is on a level above both Matthews and Laine. He is on the Crosby level. The best player in the game level. Not merely elite, but generational level.

That does not mean that either or both Matthews and Laine can't join him on his level. He may level off or they may continue to develop. I would rate Laine's chances of overhauling McD a little higher than Matthews'. He is younger and still growing into that big frame. He seems very dedicated to becoming the best. He is like Scheifele in that but with even more natural talent.

That said, Laine is not on McD's level now and not likely to catch up. McD is not at his peak yet either.

Lets see Laine establish himself above Matthews first before we start making McD comparisons.

 

[DashingDane]

I may be way off here but I hope this is not starting to be about a Finn stepping on the toes of a Canadian, where even Jets fans are not happy about it. I would have zero clue but I hope we are measuring individuals without looking at their nationalities.

I think it's close to impossible not to be slightly biased when you are from a small country and you have a very gifted young player. I say that because I can relate I think the key is to make a conscious attempt to look objectively at the player in terms of what's best for the team he plays on vs his needs. It's hard to step on anyones toes that way. The truth is that the more I watched Ehlers the more I became a fan of the Winnipeg Jets. That being said, Finland produced Laine and you should be super excited and proud about that! In my mind there is no question he is the most raw superstar in the league and there is really no telling how far he can take it. Only time will tell.

 

[psycho_dad*]

It's because you refuse to see it. How about this moment ? Are they at different level ? Laine wont overrun McDavid because of what he did against weak opponents in some Skoda Cup in the past.

This moment? Yeah but McDavid had his second season already and Laine didn't.

The different level can not be found in statistical evidence but of course the sample size is rather small yet.

I'm simply taking both of their comparable age "skoda cups" and looking at what they did with it. I don't apply some magical " different level " to it when it doesn't show on the scoreboard

 

[garret9]

I have no idea what GAR or WAR means

Way over simplification version, with the simplification being slightly inaccurate, it combines many statistics:
player goals
player primary assists
player secondary assists
player shots
team shots with player on
team shots against with player on
giveaways
takeaways
hits
penalties take
penalties drawn
faceoffs

and adjusts these things for the environment:
the four teammates on the ice
the five opponents on the ice
schedule (whether either team is rested or tired from b2b)
head coach history (of both teams)
zone start (defensive, neutral, offensive faceoffs or on the fly)
score (trailing, tied, or leading, and by how much)

and adjusts shots for shot quality by introducing these factors:
shot distance
shot angle
shot type
handedness of shooter with the side the shooter is on
potential rebounds given time of last shot
potential rush shot given time of last neutral or defensive zone event
and also a regressed historical performance factor (ex: Stamkos scores more given those previous factors)

Ultimately it combines all this to give you an estimate of how many goals (or wins for WAR) a player garnered for their team relative to a replacement level player (bottom x% in total TOI).

The more complex break down is a five part series:
Primer
XPM - estimating player value on expected goal differentials (think Corsi on super steroids)
BPM - estimating player value on boxscore stats
Extras, seasonal adjustments, and blending of XPM and BPM
Testing and final remarks

 

[psycho_dad*]

WAR? Huh? What is it good for?

 

[garret9]

WAR? Huh? What is it good for?

I've made that joke too...

But it is incredibly useful. I'd love to see someone else come up with a better, faster, and more accurate way to estimate the best to worst 891 players last year.

In the end, any list, whether made by person, stat, or person adjusting a list of a stat, is going to be inaccurate. However, someone is going to be the least inaccurate.

All people are wrong. All models are wrong. Some are useful though.

 

[ijuka]

It's because you refuse to see it. How about this moment ? Are they at different level ? Laine wont overrun McDavid because of what he did against weak opponents in some Skoda Cup in the past.

Until his slump to end his rookie season, Laine's statline was more impressive than McDavid's during his rookie season.

Also, you might underestimate that Skoda Cup achievement's difficulty.

 

[garret9]

Until his slump to end his rookie season, Laine's statline was more impressive than McDavid's during his rookie season.

Also, you might underestimate that Skoda Cup achievement's difficulty.

Define statline. His scoring was better, but his two way numbers were significantly worse.

 

[Ippenator]

Define statline. His scoring was better, but his two way numbers were significantly worse.

In the end only scoring and keeping the opponents scoring lower than own team's scoring matters.

 

[Deif]

Just passing by here.. Are there people that actually think Laine is on the same level as McDavid?

 

[psycho_dad*]

Just passing by here.. Are there people that actually think Laine is on the same level as McDavid?

You would need to read posts to find out.

 

[Deif]

You would need to read posts to find out.

It appears that is the case.

 

[psycho_dad*]

It appears that is the case.

Yes and you also get to see why some people think so.

 

[psycho_dad*]

It's because you refuse to see it. How about this moment ? Are they at different level ? Laine wont overrun McDavid because of what he did against weak opponents in some Skoda Cup in the past.

For over a 2 month period in his rookie season, Laine was clearly outproducing McDavid in his sophomore season. Not just in GPG but PPG as well.

One can either ignore that or see it as something. I do see it as something rather remarkable, his level of play at 18 was the highest offensive production in the entire NHL for over 2 months, it speaks of his incredibly high ceiling. He wasn't physically as NHL ready as he should have but his skills carried him to almost PPG for full season and he had extremely high peaks.

Adult conditioning will provide more stamina and longer periods of sustained higher level. It looks great for him.

 

[JetsFan815]

Why can't people be satisfied that Laine is a great player without expecting him to be better than McDavid? I don't see him as being near McDavid. In the long run I see him as being a Tarasenko, Stamkos, Kovalchuk tier of player, Ovechkin in the best case and that's okay

 

[WPGChief]

Why can't people be satisfied that Laine is a great player without expecting him to be better than McDavid? I don't see him as being near McDavid. In the long run I see him as being a Tarasenko, Stamkos, Kovalchuk tier of player, Ovechkin in the best case and that's okay

As a Jets fan, I hope Laine could eventually reach and perform at McDavid type levels. However, I understand and am setting a realistic ceiling for Laine considering that McDavid has arguably already reached Crosby (or even higher) ceilings. I, too, don't understand the problem of saying "Laine isn't as good as McDavid", because it's probably a number less than 5 in a league of ~372 forwards that are nearly as good or better than McDavid.

 

[garret9]

In the end only scoring and keeping the opponents scoring lower than own team's scoring matters.

Optimal outcome occurring is not always the best measure of a team's/player's efficiency or impact in reaching that optimal outcome.
This is why we look at particular numbers, to remove as many of the layers of fat of outside variables and impacts.