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

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,150
12,989
WORLDS: Larsson encouraged to activate offensively

The Swedish coach encouraged him to go forward.

Todd seems to discourage it.

I think this is absolute nonsense and doesn't allow for context.

Larsson had a bad year and couldn't handle his defensive responsibilities so it made little to no sense to increase his responsibilities.

At the worlds it looked to me like Larsson had elevated his game...probably due to the fact that he has processed what happened to his Dad. So adding in an offensive element was more appropriate.

I think it makes a lot more sense to wait an see how he is deployed next season before jumping to an ill founded conclusion like you did.

All that being said there is precious little evidence that Larsson is going to have any meaningful offensive numbers regardless of his opportunity so I wouldnt get your hopes up.

I would be estatic with 0.35 ppg from Larsson.
 
Last edited:

joestevens29

Registered User
Apr 30, 2009
52,887
15,667
Larsson in all this offensive glory ended up with 3 points in 10 games

I feel if he was as good as coaches and fans are talking that he would've had more than that. Yes I know he played a shutdown role, but they also played against teams that were allowing 4-5 goals a game

I could see him breaking out one or two seasons and putting up 10g and 20a, but I don't think it's going to be the norm.
 

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
25,668
20,045
Waterloo Ontario
I think this is absolute nonsense and doesn't allow for context.

Larsson had a bad year and couldn't handle his defensive responsibilities so it made little to no sense to increase his responsibilities.

At the worlds it looked to me like Larsson had elevated his game...probably due to the fact that he has processed what happened to his Dad. So adding in an offensive element was more appropriate.

I think it makes a lot more sense to wait an see how he is deployed next season before jumping to an ill founded conclusion like you did.

It's going to sound like an excuse and maybe it is but Larsson was dealing with a back issue this year. For a defenseman, and especially a guy who plays the way he does this is a huge handicap.

I went to six games this year and was lucky enough to have had seats down in the lower bowl behind the net. I'm no expert on defensemen but I really like watching Larsson because when he engages he does so in a big way. Down low you miss some parts of the game but get a very good look at the defensemen and how they handle things in their own end. For what it is worth it looked to me like both he an Klefbom were struggling with injuries even before this was confirmed. Larsson seemed much more tentative than normal and Klefbom seemed like he was completely tentative in all aspects of the game. Very different in both cases than the guys I saw last year. The last game I saw him play was late in the season. He was back to normal and was an absolute beast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kurtcobang

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,150
12,989
Larsson in all this offensive glory ended up with 3 points in 10 games

I feel if he was as good as coaches and fans are talking that he would've had more than that. Yes I know he played a shutdown role, but they also played against teams that were allowing 4-5 goals a game

I could see him breaking out one or two seasons and putting up 10g and 20a, but I don't think it's going to be the norm.

10 goals seems like a lot for Larsson but I think that numbers around 5-7 goals and 23-25 assists are obtainable.
 

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,150
12,989
It's going to sound like an excuse and maybe it is but Larsson was dealing with a back issue this year. For a defenseman, and especially a guy who plays the way he does this is a huge handicap.

I went to six games this year and was lucky enough to have had seats down in the lower bowl behind the net. I'm no expert on defensemen but I really like watching Larsson because when he engages he does so in a big way. Down low you miss some parts of the game but get a very good look at the defensemen and how they handle things in their own end. For what it is worth it looked to me like both he an Klefbom were struggling with injuries even before this was confirmed. Larsson seemed much more tentative than normal and Klefbom seemed like he was completely tentative in all aspects of the game. Very different in both cases than the guys I saw last year. The last game I saw him play was late in the season. He was back to normal and was an absolute beast.

This makes a ton of sense to me because as you stated both players looked like a shell of who they were the previous season. When you factor in that Sekera was unavailable for most of the season (and not very effective when he got back) that made Larssons and Klefboms roles that much more demanding.

I think in many ways what we saw last season was an outlier in terms of player performance. I stand by my comments from a month ago that I expect this team to make the playoffs next season because by my eye there was a cascade of issues (learning how to win being one of them) that created much of what we saw last season.
I dont think its going to repeat itself...quite the opposite. I expect a healthy and motivated team to hit the ice next season. There are still some holes but i dont think that the performance last season is an entirely accurate indicator of how big the holes are.

I hope that both Klefbom and Larsson are back next season because I think both players will be back to their 2016/17 form
 
  • Like
Reactions: kurtcobang

CupofOil

Knob Flavored Coffey
Aug 20, 2009
46,867
40,841
NYC
Larsson in all this offensive glory ended up with 3 points in 10 games

I feel if he was as good as coaches and fans are talking that he would've had more than that. Yes I know he played a shutdown role, but they also played against teams that were allowing 4-5 goals a game

I could see him breaking out one or two seasons and putting up 10g and 20a, but I don't think it's going to be the norm.

Larsson will never be a 10 goal player, it's not in his skillset to accomplish that and that's very tough to do without any PP time.
I'd be content with 5G, 25A in a good year. 25-30 even strength points a year and a rock on defense and you have a very solid #2 Dman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: guymez

Panda Bear

Registered User
Apr 2, 2010
6,581
5,722
I think this is absolute nonsense and doesn't allow for context.

Larsson had a bad year and couldn't handle his defensive responsibilities so it made little to no sense to increase his responsibilities.

At the worlds it looked to me like Larsson had elevated his game...probably due to the fact that he has processed what happened to his Dad. So adding in an offensive element was more appropriate.

I think it makes a lot more sense to wait an see how he is deployed next season before jumping to an ill founded conclusion like you did.

All that being said there is precious little evidence that Larsson is going to have any meaningful offensive numbers regardless of his opportunity so I wouldnt get your hopes up.

I would be estatic with 0.35 ppg from Larsson.
I think your post is absolute bilge.


Larsson played the exact same role in 17-18 that he did in 16-17: the stay-at-home defenceman who anchors a defensive pairing.

He handled his defensive responsibilities more than fine in his first season year, and yet he still didn't have his responsibilities elevated.

He had some individual struggles relating to a lingering back injury in 17-18. Given that Klefbom and Sekera were shitting the bed (also thanks to injuries) the entirety of 17-18 and were clearly worse than Larsson, you would imagine that Larsson would have had elevated offensive duties if Todd were willing to use him as more than an anchorman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zguy370

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
25,668
20,045
Waterloo Ontario
Code:
Name    2015-2016    Games    2015-2016    Games    2015-2016    Games    Total minus    Tot Gms    %-minus
Karlsson     29    82    25    77    37    71    91    230    0.395652174
Burns    29    82    25    82    28    82    82    246    0.333333333
Larsson     21    82    20    79    22    63    63    224    0.28125
Doughty     20    82    24    82    23    82    67    246    0.272357724
Hedman    22    78    27    79    18    77    67    234    0.286324786
Keith    18    67    21    80    36    82    75    229    0.327510917
Subban    23    68    26    66    25    81    74    215    0.344186047
Josi    28    81    24    72    20    75    72    228    0.315789474
Letang    20    71    13    41    30    79    63    191    0.329842932
Weber    33    78    20    78    11    26    64    182    0.351648352
Suter    27    82    22    81    26    78    75    241    0.31120332
OEL     25    75    34    79    34    82    93    236    0.394067797
Byfulien    30    81    25    80    18    69    73    230    0.317391304
Pietrangelo    23    73    25    80    22    78    70    231    0.303030303
S. Jones    31    81    23    75    24    78    78    234    0.333333333
Vlasic    18    67    24    75    25    81    67    223    0.30044843
A. Greene     26    81    23    66    30    81    79    228    0.346491228
Klefbom     8    30    25    82    23    66    56    178    0.314606742

Forgive the formatting of the chart above.(I'll clean it up when I get a chance). One thing I notced about Larsson is that when he is very seldom a minus player. This means that when he is on the ice the Oilers typically come out tied or ahead. Given that he is not a big point generator and that he plays against the oppositions best this is significant.

The chart above looks at some of the best defensemen in the league. I calculated how many times over the last three years the player registered a negative. (I also included Greene and Klefbom since they were his partners much of the time.

Larsson had the fewest minuses of anyone in this group over that period and he had the second best %-age of games played with a minus, only slightly behind Doughty. What is also interesting is that if you omit last year where he was hurt and only count the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 seasons he has the best %-age at 25.6%.

If you look at guys like Faulk and Barrie for example who have also played on teams with poor defensive teams the numers tend to be in the mid 40's.
 

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,150
12,989
I think your post is absolute bilge.


Larsson played the exact same role in 17-18 that he did in 16-17: the stay-at-home defenceman who anchors a defensive pairing.

He handled his defensive responsibilities more than fine in his first season year, and yet he still didn't have his responsibilities elevated.

He had some individual struggles relating to a lingering back injury in 17-18. Given that Klefbom and Sekera were ****ting the bed (also thanks to injuries) the entirety of 17-18 and were clearly worse than Larsson, you would imagine that Larsson would have had elevated offensive duties if Todd were willing to use him as more than an anchorman.

Some individual struggles last season?

Perplexing comments...I have no idea what you were watching.
He was junk. Probably the worst he has ever played. He was a bottom pairing dman far too much last season.

But yeah...McLellan discourages the elements that would help a player succeed...lol
Thats pretty ridiculous.
 

MettleMcOiler

5-14-6-1
Mar 9, 2011
4,235
5,227
Edmonton
Some individual struggles last season?

Perplexing comments...I have no idea what you were watching.
He was junk. Probably the worst he has ever played. He was a bottom pairing dman far too much last season.

But yeah...McLellan discourages the elements that would help a player succeed...lol
Thats pretty ridiculous.

I watched pretty much all the games last year and your assessment of Larsson is deadwrong. He is still one of our best defenders even on his bad days and apparently you weren't watching Russel and Benning because they caused more problems then Larsson ever did in the entire season not to mention the down seasons of Klefbom and Sekera. And yeah, anybody with eyes would of seen that Larsson was pigeonholed to be defence first defencemen, it was only at the end of the season that he was allowed to activate offensively and didn't look out of place doing it.
Get a grip. Larsson is a good dman, and your comments are ridiculous saying otherwise.
 

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,150
12,989
I watched pretty much all the games last year and your assessment of Larsson is deadwrong. He is still one of our best defenders even on his bad days and apparently you weren't watching Russel and Benning because they caused more problems then Larsson ever did in the entire season not to mention the down seasons of Klefbom and Sekera. And yeah, anybody with eyes would of seen that Larsson was pigeonholed to be defence first defencemen, it was only at the end of the season that he was allowed to activate offensively and didn't look out of place doing it.
Get a grip. Larsson is a good dman, and your comments are ridiculous saying otherwise.

My assessment that Larsson was terrible this past season is dead wrong?
You are going to argue against that? You then tell me to get a grip..lol

Are you telling me that Larsson didnt have a bad season? I dont have to compare him to Benning and Russell to know that...why...because I am comparing him to his usual high standard of play.
Doesnt that make more sense? Thats how I arrived at my conclusion.

If you have been reading my posts you would know that I defend Larsson from posters suggesting nonsense like he is a #4 dman. I like Larsson a lot but I am not so infatuated with the player that I refuse to admit he had a terrible season.

So you do realize that there is a difference between saying a dman is terrible and saying that he had a terrible year...right?
 
Last edited:

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
27,803
16,469
Some individual struggles last season?

Perplexing comments...I have no idea what you were watching.
He was junk. Probably the worst he has ever played. He was a bottom pairing dman far too much last season.

But yeah...McLellan discourages the elements that would help a player succeed...lol
Thats pretty ridiculous.
Can’t really he was junk when he was +10 even when missing a lot of games. If he was junk we sure outscore the other team a lot when he was on the ice for a junk player. Biggest place he failed was on the PK as did just about everybody this year.
 

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,150
12,989
Can’t really he was junk when he was +10 even when missing a lot of games. If he was junk we sure outscore the other team a lot when he was on the ice for a junk player. Biggest place he failed was on the PK as did just about everybody this year.

I agree...there was plenty of blame to go around.
I just think that he was junk by his own standards. He was making decisions (with and without the puck) you never see him make. It was very tough to watch for anyone that wasnt still emotionally attached to the player he got traded for.

IMO it was an outlier...for Larsson and the team. I am very sure it wont happen again next season.
 

Mcnotloilersfan

I'm here, I'm bored
Jul 11, 2010
11,081
5,136
Niagara
My assessment that Larsson was terrible this past season is dead wrong?
You are going to argue against that? You then tell me to get a grip..lol

Are you telling me that Larsson didnt have a bad season? I dont have to compare him to Benning and Russell to know that...why...because I am comparing him to his usual high standard of play.
Doesnt that make more sense? Thats how I arrived at my conclusion.

If you have been reading my posts you would know that I defend Larsson from posters suggesting nonsense like he is a #4 dman. I like Larsson a lot but I am not so infatuated with the player that I refuse to admit he had a terrible season.

So you do realize that there is a difference between saying a dman is terrible and saying that he had a terrible year...right?

I wouldn't say he had a terrible season at all. I think you're using the wrong word. He had a sub-par season for him, but terrible? No. sorry
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaddy

Aceboogie

Registered User
Aug 25, 2012
32,649
3,896
I also think that a reason why Larsson (and Klefbom) struggled this season after looking like a legit top pairing the season before is that teams really started to game plan them and pick apart the weaknesses this year. It would take a while to adapt your own game when teams are doing that. So I wouldnt be suprised to see a big bounce back from both next year. Due to a) being healthy and b) being able to adjust to life under the spotlight of other teams

As for Larssons offense: I still think there is a lingering thought out there that Larsson can find his offense that he was showing in the SHL pre draft. Even 4 years ago I was super interested in a Larsson for Eberle trade because I thought Larsson could find his offense and break out. But even year it doesnt happen further decreases the chance he ever will. I would put the likelihood at like 5%. I just dont see it given whats hes showed here and in NJ. Not the end of the world though
 

Aerchon

Registered User
Jul 20, 2011
10,527
3,727
I also think that a reason why Larsson (and Klefbom) struggled this season after looking like a legit top pairing the season before is that teams really started to game plan them and pick apart the weaknesses this year. It would take a while to adapt your own game when teams are doing that. So I wouldnt be suprised to see a big bounce back from both next year. Due to a) being healthy and b) being able to adjust to life under the spotlight of other teams

As for Larssons offense: I still think there is a lingering thought out there that Larsson can find his offense that he was showing in the SHL pre draft. Even 4 years ago I was super interested in a Larsson for Eberle trade because I thought Larsson could find his offense and break out. But even year it doesnt happen further decreases the chance he ever will. I would put the likelihood at like 5%. I just dont see it given whats hes showed here and in NJ. Not the end of the world though

Inetersting thoughts on why Klefbom and Larsson struggled. I would throw in my 2 cents and just say Larsson really didn't struggle much but Klefbom was a complete and utter tire fire for the first few months of the season. Don't think coaching/matchups or even injury really had as much to do with how bad Klefbom was. He was rumoured to be completely healthy to start the year. He had a complete mental breakdown. Had to go back to basics and slowly returned to at least NHL level defender by the end of the year. Really hope that is a one off and we don't see tire fire Klefbom ever again.

I don't know why but I still believe Larsson will be a Vlassic level player in terms of offense. Just needs to get over the hump and trust himself/work on it a bit more.

Also I don't think many outside of Edmonton would consider trading a Larsson type player for a Eberle type player 4 years ago or today. Larsson is a very good player even if his offense does leave a lot to desire. Eberle can put up points and isn't too bad defensively but mainly because of position I don't think Eberle can/does come even remotely close to helping a team as much as Larsson does. Point in case this years Worlds...
 

NJ DevLolz

The Many Saints of Newark
Sep 30, 2017
4,573
5,401
Code:
Name    2015-2016    Games    2015-2016    Games    2015-2016    Games    Total minus    Tot Gms    %-minus
Karlsson     29    82    25    77    37    71    91    230    0.395652174
Burns    29    82    25    82    28    82    82    246    0.333333333
Larsson     21    82    20    79    22    63    63    224    0.28125
Doughty     20    82    24    82    23    82    67    246    0.272357724
Hedman    22    78    27    79    18    77    67    234    0.286324786
Keith    18    67    21    80    36    82    75    229    0.327510917
Subban    23    68    26    66    25    81    74    215    0.344186047
Josi    28    81    24    72    20    75    72    228    0.315789474
Letang    20    71    13    41    30    79    63    191    0.329842932
Weber    33    78    20    78    11    26    64    182    0.351648352
Suter    27    82    22    81    26    78    75    241    0.31120332
OEL     25    75    34    79    34    82    93    236    0.394067797
Byfulien    30    81    25    80    18    69    73    230    0.317391304
Pietrangelo    23    73    25    80    22    78    70    231    0.303030303
S. Jones    31    81    23    75    24    78    78    234    0.333333333
Vlasic    18    67    24    75    25    81    67    223    0.30044843
A. Greene     26    81    23    66    30    81    79    228    0.346491228
Klefbom     8    30    25    82    23    66    56    178    0.314606742

Forgive the formatting of the chart above.(I'll clean it up when I get a chance). One thing I notced about Larsson is that when he is very seldom a minus player. This means that when he is on the ice the Oilers typically come out tied or ahead. Given that he is not a big point generator and that he plays against the oppositions best this is significant.

The chart above looks at some of the best defensemen in the league. I calculated how many times over the last three years the player registered a negative. (I also included Greene and Klefbom since they were his partners much of the time.

Larsson had the fewest minuses of anyone in this group over that period and he had the second best %-age of games played with a minus, only slightly behind Doughty. What is also interesting is that if you omit last year where he was hurt and only count the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 seasons he has the best %-age at 25.6%.

If you look at guys like Faulk and Barrie for example who have also played on teams with poor defensive teams the numers tend to be in the mid 40's.
Larsson doesnt play PP or situations when the team is likely to give up an ENG.

Larsson plays PK and in situations when his team is likely to score an ENG.

The above is exhibit ZZZZ of why +/- sucks
 

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
33,150
12,989
I wouldn't say he had a terrible season at all. I think you're using the wrong word. He had a sub-par season for him, but terrible? No. sorry

So its my description of his season thats the problem for you.

Okay...its cool...pick a softer more gentle word if that works better for you.

In any event by my eye...he looked bad far too often.
 

McShogun99

Registered User
Aug 30, 2009
17,928
13,461
Edmonton
Depends on who you talk too, some say he wandered in from the desert with plans on changin' things

Other say they gave away the golden goose to get the man to gander our way.

I remember when there were rumors about NJD willing to trade us Larsson for Yakupov after his rookie season.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad