Laine's numbers, what do u think?

[RageQuit77]

Not trying to critizise or talk you down, but i don't think Laine needs a change in the way a certain stat is being calculated to show he is a good player. He already proves he is a beast with every thing else he does.

Signed
Unkown Habs fan

I don't think that either. Actually arguing against attempt to downplay worth of EN goals as proper goals (and that they wouldn't be results of SOGs).

Anyhow, when this thread is now here I would honestly know how that famous "un-sustainability of a player's S%" is exactly determined and calculated, and how it is taken as a norm to give more value to shooting volume then shooting accuracy/quality? Is that because with higher shooting volume also sample for Shot-based metrics grow faster? Where are exactly limits of statistical sample sizes where un-sustainability arguments about Laine's shooting doesn't hold anymore (e.g. high S% can be perceived as a sustainable statistical fact over longer timeframes within small upper and lower boundaries of variation)?

In Laine's case we've heard about un-sustainability all season long, but while his sample set grows continuously, his SO% doesn't decline as would be expected from those argumentations (recently his SO% has been merely rising then declining). Bigger sized sample, less the random luck and noise have place within it, right?

Could some stats guru explain thoroughly the innings and the logic behind these un-sustainability arguments in the case study of Patrik Laine? Thanks.

 

[morehockeystats]

Could some stats guru explain thoroughly the innings and the logic behind these un-sustainability arguments in the case study of Patrik Laine? Thanks.

The only argument that I can see is not a statistical one, but the one that the league will learn him and counter him better next season.

However given that Laine has no previous history to which we could see a path to regression, there is no valid statistical reason to object that Laine is the next Mike Bossy.

 

[RageQuit77]

The only argument that I can see is not a statistical one, but the one that the league will learn him and counter him better next season.

However given that Laine has no previous history to which we could see a path to regression, there is no valid statistical reason to object that Laine is the next Mike Bossy.

(I meant S%, not SO%, sorry)

Thanks. That's good argument for unsustainability of his S%.

But there are also possible balancing counter arguments to that. If and when we can take it as granted that opposing teams will counter and guard him better in the future, knowing very well they cannot leave too much room for Laine to release his shot it is also clear that Laine himself is not passive object of surroundings. Considering his past track record what comes to adaptation to higher and higher level circumstances, his age and the fact he is still little bit raw physically, still limited NHL experience and knowledge about other teams game systems and players, defenses and goalies, and his professionalist, self-cultivating attitude: we can also expect he isn't going to be contained that easily.

There is also limits of efforts where the price put to his special keying becomes too high for the team who put too much resources to shutting him down. His goals/assists highlight reel is good source to look what I mean.

There are very often vast vacuum on the ice around him when he does his magic.

 

[RageQuit77]

After reading this

http://www.corsica.hockey/blog/2016/03/03/shot-quality-and-expected-goals-part-i/
http://www.corsica.hockey/blog/2016/08/13/shot-quality-and-expected-goals-part-1-5/

I didn't much better understanding about "quality of shot" (which S% is part of/reflection of), or what could be reasonably expected to be Laine's "expected goals" in the future, but mathematic models of proxy for that seems to be still in the development stage.

Eyetest and instinctive non-ennumerable perception and 'feeling' instead repeats continuously to me that I can expect a lot goals from him, regardless is his S% 15 or 17 or 21... or Corsis.

How to make formula for "quality of shooting changes" that were skipped for a pass by selective shooter with high shooting skill set and accuracy? Why SOGs or Shots -based metrics (like Corsis) should have anything to do in predictions of sustainability of S% of highly selective snipes? Hypothetic Ultimate Universally Optimal Pure Sniper would score with rate 1SOG/1G (while his all shots would be SOGs) which would be also ultimate measure for "Quality" of shooting.

 

[morehockeystats]

(I meant S%, not SO%, sorry)

Thanks. That's good argument for unsustainability of his S%.

But there are also possible balancing counter arguments to that. If and when we can take it as granted that opposing teams will counter and guard him better in the future, knowing very well they cannot leave too much room for Laine to release his shot it is also clear that Laine himself is not passive object of surroundings. Considering his past track record what comes to adaptation to higher and higher level circumstances, his age and the fact he is still little bit raw physically, still limited NHL experience and knowledge about other teams game systems and players, defenses and goalies, and his professionalist, self-cultivating attitude: we can also expect he isn't going to be contained that easily.

There is also limits of efforts where the price put to his special keying becomes too high for the team who put too much resources to shutting him down. His goals/assists highlight reel is good source to look what I mean.

There are very often vast vacuum on the ice around him when he does his magic.

Winnipeg is rapidly transiting from its previous core of Ladd-Little-Wheeler-Kane into a new one, with Ehlers, Laine and Scheifele. Part of Laine's score is Scheifele's surge who was known to be good, but he's already right there with Tavares, Giroux and Seguin. I do expect the league to be prepared somewhat better next season for the duo and to the Jets in general. Their story this season is very similar to the story of Dallas, but their future looks much brighter.

 

[Kaako Kappo]

Winnipeg is rapidly transiting from its previous core of Ladd-Little-Wheeler-Kane into a new one, with Ehlers, Laine and Scheifele. Part of Laine's score is Scheifele's surge who was known to be good, but he's already right there with Tavares, Giroux and Seguin. I do expect the league to be prepared somewhat better next season for the duo and to the Jets in general. Their story this season is very similar to the story of Dallas, but their future looks much brighter.

As someone already said in another thread (I think it's the Gaurdeau one on mainboards), it doesn't take NHL teams a full season to adjust or catch on to certain lines or players. It probably doesn't even take a month. Shouldn't even take an entire game. They do their research and preparation.

 

[morehockeystats]

As someone already said in another thread (I think it's the Gaurdeau one on mainboards), it doesn't take NHL teams a full season to adjust or catch on to certain lines or players. It probably doesn't even take a month. Shouldn't even take an entire game. They do their research and preparation.

Then why do we see the "sophomore slumps" so often?

 

[Kaako Kappo]

Then why do we see the "sophomore slumps" so often?

I dont believe in those anymore than i believe in Santa Claus.

 

[Ippenator]

The only argument that I can see is not a statistical one, but the one that the league will learn him and counter him better next season.

However given that Laine has no previous history to which we could see a path to regression, there is no valid statistical reason to object that Laine is the next Mike Bossy.

So he's a ready made player at his prime when he is only 18 years old and the youngest player in the whole league? So you don't believe that he can develop with huge steps already next season, both physically and with getting more experience? Your comment makes me think that you probably don't have a clue of what calibre of young player we are talking about here. He has still so much of his frame to fill, that the amount of explosiveness and pure strength he can still gain during the following few years is so amazing, that when it happens, he will have much more of options of how he can score in the future. Just wait and see...

 

[Laineux]

Paul Maurice said that he's never seen anyone score like Laine in practice.

Mikko Koskinen said that no one in his team has a shot like Laine (plays with Kovalchuk)

Think he's going to have a pretty high sh%

 

[gwh]

Let's see some shot by type statistics:
151 shots (43th among forwards) s% = 19,9%
1 deflected shot (190th) 0 goals 0%
3 backhand shots (376th) 0 goals 0%
0 wraparound shots (-th) 0 goals 0%
5 tipped shots (218th) 2 goals 40,0%
27 snap shots (52nd) 8 goals 29,6%
80 wrist shots (50th) 15 goals 18,8%
35 slap shots (10th) 5 goals 14,3%
Laine has one of the best shots in NHL, and he is a definitely a selective shooter, you won't see him shooting wishful snapshots far away. If he continues this type of play, he is probably always going to end up with a high s%, Can he even sustain a s% we're seeing today? Maybe, time will tell.

As for comparison, a different type of player, that also has amassed amazing 28 goals this season:
Auston Matthews
206 shots (5th among forwards) s% = 13,6%
1 deflected shot (190th) 0 goals 0%
29 backhand shots (3rd) 5 goals 17,2%
9 wraparound shots (1st) 0 goals 0%
10 tipped shots (82nd) 2 goals 20,0%
75 snap shots (1st) 9 goals 12,0%
79 wrist shots (54th) 12 goals 15,2%
3 slap shots (313th) 0 goals 0%
Matthews plays the type of game where he shoots the puck more, thus probably ends with lower s%.

Interesting. Thanks for posting.

Laine's Slap+ Snap = Mathews Snap. Mathews has no slapper, but fires snapshots instead.

Laine has no backhand, warparound. This makes the main difference between the shot totals.

 

[BM14]

Someone post some updated numbers please.

 

[sr edler]

Someone post some updated numbers please.

Currently 17.3 S%

34 goals on 196 shots.

 

[Incognito]

Currently 17.3 S%

34 goals on 196 shots.

Without empty netters, he has 31 goals on 193 shots, or a 16.1 shooting %. Obviously the empty net goals skew his shooting percentage higher, since you score with basically every shot on net that you take. 16.1% seems a little more reasonable in terms of what to expect from him in the future.