Player Discussion Adam Larsson (Hall talk will result in a thread ban)

[Little Fury]

As for Todd discouraging Larsson to play a role beyond being a stay-at-home defenceman? Really?

Both Larsson and his Swedish NT coach literally talked to the media about how he got a more offensive role on Sweden than he did on Edmonton.

It's nice verbal and all, but did it actually translate into offence? I'm sincerely asking since I didn't watch a minute of the tournament.

Overall, I'm skeptical of the idea that an NHL coach wouldn't use every weapon they can to win hockey games. If Larsson has the ability to play a more offensive game and the coaches are holding him back, that's a pretty big blunder for a pro staff to make.

 

[Drivesaitl]

How on earth is there anything disingenuous about what I am writing?

Larsson had some difficulties last year associated with injury, a lack of form to start the year, and a partner for the first whack of the season that kept brainfarting.

The only games where he possibly looked like a bottom-pairing defencemen were ones where his back was clearly and significantly affecting him.

If you think he looked like a bottom-pairing player, then you don't understand what you're watching.

As for Todd discouraging Larsson to play a role beyond being a stay-at-home defenceman? Really?

Both Larsson and his Swedish NT coach literally talked to the media about how he got a more offensive role on Sweden than he did on Edmonton.

How about the fictitious attribution of Larsson difficulties being due to " lots of time covering for Klefbom" as you alleged. I challenged that already, not surprising that you sidestepped that one.

Again, so readers can be aware of your fiction Larsson played with Klefbom for only 214 out of Larsson's +1200EV minutes all season. You're going to have to come up with a better excuse than Its Klefs fault.

But again interesting that you misrepresented the toi and attribution or that you even thought Larssons difficulty this season was due to Klefbom.

The Reality here is you didn't even check Wowy stats when you made your proclamation. You didn't even know how often the two played together. If we're being honest..

 

[guymez]

How on earth is there anything disingenuous about what I am writing?

Larsson had some difficulties last year associated with injury, a lack of form to start the year, and a partner for the first whack of the season that kept brainfarting.

The only games where he possibly looked like a bottom-pairing defencemen were ones where his back was clearly and significantly affecting him.

If you think he looked like a bottom-pairing player, then you don't understand what you're watching.

As for Todd discouraging Larsson to play a role beyond being a stay-at-home defenceman? Really?

Both Larsson and his Swedish NT coach literally talked to the media about how he got a more offensive role on Sweden than he did on Edmonton.

As I stated...you started off with a premise that is impossible to support and then went in multiple directions trying to double down.
Just because you choose to believe that doesnt make it real.

So if you really believe that TMac purposely discourages player success then have at it.
Nothing personal but its not worthy of discussion IMO.

If you want to suggest that TMac could have done something different with the player....thats different all together.

As for Larsson...IMO he was garbage last season. I watched every game and I saw a player that was not only making poor decisions but a player that was a step late in defending. It was far below his usual high standards IMO. You could also say that about a lot of players.
My point with Larsson was that I fully understand why he wasnt a PP option last season. It fits with the fact that he struggled to deal with what was put in front of him so adding another responsibility would have been counter productive.

In any event I am expecting a bounce back season in 2018/19 from Larsson. IMO he is a #2/3 dman...he didnt play anything near that level last season but I expect him to be at at that level again.

If he can add some offence and get close to a .3 ppg player then I think that makes him a solid #2 dman. I would be thrilled with that outcome.

Will he get the PP time to help make that happen? He didnt deserve it last season but I am confident he will be a more realistic option for the coaches to go to this season.

We shall see.

 

[guymez]

It's nice verbal and all, but did it actually translate into offence? I'm sincerely asking since I didn't watch a minute of the tournament.

Overall, I'm skeptical of the idea that an NHL coach wouldn't use every weapon they can to win hockey games. If Larsson has the ability to play a more offensive game and the coaches are holding him back, that's a pretty big blunder for a pro staff to make.

Its counter productive on so many levels for a professional coaching staff to purposely discourage a players success.

It really is ridiculous.

 

[MessierII]

What do you use?

I prefer goals for and against with context to shot attempts. Shot attempts with context are obviously better than without but are rarely used. The eye test mixed with goal stats, shot stats, zone starts etc i use everything. If you rely on one divine stat to give you all your information than your an idiot.

 

[Little Fury]

I prefer goals for and against with context to shot attempts. Shot attempts with context are obviously better than without but are rarely used.

What kind of context?

If you rely on one divine stat to give you all your information than your an idiot.

Good thing nobody does this.

 

[MessierII]

What kind of context?



Good thing nobody does this.

Except aceboogie literally just threw score adjusted corsi out there as some kind of good player/bad player graph. No quality of competition, no quality of teammates, no o zone/d zone starts, no shot quality. So yeah analytics guys do throw one one stat to prove a point all the time.

 

[Little Fury]

Except aceboogie literally just threw score adjusted corsi out there as some kind of good player/bad player graph.

LOL that's not what that was. It was a WOWY chart to give a snapshot of how different players did in terms of shot metrics with or without 77 and 6.

 

[MessierII]

LOL that's not what that was. It was a WOWY chart to give a snapshot of how different players did in terms of shot metrics with or without 77 and 6.

And the conclusion and argument that aceboogie made was? That Klefbom is unbelievably good and Larsson is just ok even though Larssons teams have outscored the opposition by 46 goals over the past 3 years when he’s on the ice compared to being outscored by 9 over the same stretch when Klefbom is on the ice. Only a 55 goal swing when Larsson is on the ice. If the stats don’t correlate with the goals for and against over a 3 season sample size then I dismiss them.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

LOL that's not what that was. It was a WOWY chart to give a snapshot of how different players did in terms of shot metrics with or without 77 and 6.

What's that chart trying to prove?

 

[Little Fury]

And the conclusion and argument that aceboogie made was? That Klefbom is unbelievably good and Larsson is just ok

That wasn't his argument. He was showing how players performed by shot rates with or without the respective player. That's it.

Larssons teams have outscored the opposition by 46 goals over the past 3 years when he’s on the ice compared to being outscored by 9 over the same stretch when Klefbom is on the ice. Only a 55 goal swing when Larsson is on the ice.

What game state are you using because the difference in GA between Larsson and Klef at even strength (5v5, 4v4, 3v3) over the past three years is actually just 18 goals. See? Context matters!

If the stats don’t correlate with the goals for and against over a 3 season sample size then I dismiss them.

Why are you talking about the last three years when Aceboogie was only talking about this season?

 

[Little Fury]

What's that chart trying to prove?

Why don't you read his post where he says what it's trying to prove.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Why don't you read his post where he says what it's trying to prove.

not sure a shot attempt chart is solid evidence that we can debunk the myth of Klefbom "dragging" down Larsson

 

[Little Fury]

not sure a shot attempt chart is solid evidence that we can debunk the myth of Klefbom "dragging" down Larsson

Fine, then argue that. @PerformanceOil did a good job without resorting to cheap shots at fancy stats or misrepresenting the argument being made.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Fine, then argue that. @PerformanceOil did a good job without resorting to cheap shots at fancy stats or misrepresenting the argument being made.

Cheap shots? Where?

 

[LaGu]

If you cannot see that Larsson was struggling with injury this season, I don't know what you were watching. Sorry, it is late, but that seems to be what some are implying.

He took maintenance days because .... ?
He looked way better every time he got a rest period (especially the last time when he had a longer one) because ...?


Larsson spent most of his first 10-15 games with Klefbom and, apart from game 1, they were destroyed. Isn't that what people are talking about when saying that Klefbom pulled down Larsson? Looking at those games I have a hard time saying that this wasn't the case.

After that period Larsson was better, especially everytime after there was a break and/or ge had a break. If I filter the stats from beginning/mid of Nov (when Klefbom and Larsson were split), Larsson's look pretty good despite struggling with his injury ("assumed injury").

Anyway, I don't really follow the actual point of this thread at the moment.
Larsson vs Klefbom in 17/18? Please... Klefbom was a disaster until they gave him the cortisone shots in December.
Larsson vs Vlasic? .... I think no one ever said he was Vlasic level, but more that he was that type of D.
Cannot break out or move the puck? Ok, with respect to someone like Vlasic, I have no problem with that. He does defer the breakouts so much more often in EDM than he did in NJD, which was confusing to me. Seeing him again controlling the breakouts often in the whc makes me think it is coaching. But I obviously don't know that for sure.
Larsson being crap?
It was his worst season since 13/14 (AHL). But I don't think he was nearly as much of a wreck that some seem to think he was. Still our best defensive D by a bit, doing the hardest lifting in terms of opposition on the team.

 

[Little Fury]

Cheap shots? Where?

Post #212, #232...

 

[Tobias Kahun]

Post #212, #232...

You consider post 232 a cheap shot?

 

[Spawn]

Lmao, this is why I love actual stats and facts so much. They dont lie and can expose people in a second. The myth that Klefbom and Larsson played alot together this season needs to stop as that is obviously, and factually incorrect. The myth that Klefbom "dragged" Larsson down also needs to stop, as it appears it was the reverse that is true

Whats even more interesting is that Larssons numbers declined steeply away from Klefbom (Klefboms decreased as well, but not by as much). The other interesting thing is that more often than not, players did better with Klefbom, than away. Most notably, McDavid, Draisaitl and Maroon did alot better with him.

View attachment 123017

In regards to Larsson: Players oftne did do better with him, but not to the degree they did with Klefbom

View attachment 123019

Players didn't "do better." They had better shot metrics.

 

[guymez]

Post #212, #232...

I am not taking sides here at all but you cant seriously think that posts #232 and #212 are examples of cheap shots.

Maybe I am alone on this but those are rather innocuous posts.
I get that this is unfortunately where society is going but IMO if thats the criteria for doing harm then we had better preface and close every post with a unicorn and a rainbow so nobody's feelings get bruised. j/k

Off season is boring...spicing up a post with a little passion is fine in my books.

 

[Little Fury]

You consider post 232 a cheap shot?

Completely misrepresenting an argument to score points isn't a cheap shot?

 

[Jamin]

Completely misrepresenting an argument to score points isn't a cheap shot?

Never read youtube comments or your head might explode

 

[Little Fury]

Never read youtube comments or your head might explode

I didn't say it was an insult or that it was offensive. I guess I could have used the term "bad faith argument" but it is what it is.

 

[MessierII]

Klefbom with the most major mistakes on scoring chances both of the last two years but god damn is his corsi sexy.

 

[guymez]

View attachment 123275
Klefbom with the most major mistakes on scoring chances both of the last two years but god damn is his corsi sexy.

You really have to stop with these cheap shots....they're hurtful.