Value of: Landeskog vs JVR

[Pierce Hawthorne]

lawl. wouldnt give up 5'9 3rd liner Gallagher for JVR?
leafs would laugh and block the habs number if that was even offered.

nice to see you would give him up for a guy who is 10x better in landy though

If Gallagher is a 3rd liner what, in your mind, is JVR?

A 4th liner? Depth forward? AHL quality?


Just trying to gauge how you look at players.

 

[Kelly]

JVR is Taylor Pyatt with more offense, I take Gallagher over him every day of the week. Third liner? I don't think so.

Good baby Jesus what a horrible post. If you were trying to make his post look better in light of a worse one, then good job you definitely succeeded.

Can Habs fans explain to me how Gallagher is better than JVR? I love Gallagher, but JVR scores more goals and points and is absolute money around the net. Gallagher is better defensively and is more of an agitator but that's about it.. It's definitely close.

As for topic: Landeskog > JVR.

 

[Legend123]

Good baby Jesus what a horrible post. If you were trying to make his post look better in light of a worse one, then good job you definitely succeeded.

Can Habs fans explain to me how Gallagher is better than JVR? I love Gallagher, but JVR scores more goals and points and is absolute money around the net. Gallagher is better defensively and is more of an agitator but that's about it.. It's definitely close.

As for topic: Landeskog > JVR.

lol Gallagher's first 4 years were more productive and he scored more goals. Gallagher is also more effective in front of the net and plays similarly to Marchand in terms of being a pest. Gallagher also has better advanced numbers. He in fact he has by far better advanced numbers.

That being said, now, they are pretty much equal. But Jvr has been better the past 3 years.

 

[The Podium]

Actually, I'd rather trade Couture, but okay?

Doesn't really help your analogy that we don't really have a "position of need" to theoretically trade Couture for.

Now you're just being intentionally difficult. Ill use the Leafs for example. The Leafs are lacking a top pairing D, say they target Ekblad and Provorov. Ekblad costs Matthews but Provorov costs Nylander, I would rather trade for Provorov as keeping Matthews is better for the team long term.

Does that mean Ekblad is overrated? God no, but acquiring him would be like fixing a hole in your foundation by removing another part of your foundation.

 

[Kelly]

lol Gallagher's first 4 years were more productive and he scored more goals. Gallagher is also more effective in front of the net and plays similarly to Marchand in terms of being a pest. Gallagher also has better advanced numbers. He in fact he has by far better advanced numbers.

That being said, now, they are pretty much equal. But Jvr has been better the past 3 years.

Um.... lol, Why in the world would you compare their first four seasons in the league when determining who the better player is NOW. That's ridiculous, JVR has out produced him every year for the past three.

What advanced stats? Post some of these relative advanced stats where "Gallagher blows him out of the water". Yes, I said Gallagher is a pest, and is better defensively... that's all that I can think of, JVR is better offensively. Both players are great around the net. I have watched Gallagher lots, and I don't see how some Habs fans are scoffing at the idea of JVR being a better player than Gallagher.

 

[sansabri]

Gally had a higher PPG.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Now you're just being intentionally difficult. Ill use the Leafs for example. The Leafs are lacking a top pairing D, say they target Ekblad and Provorov. Ekblad costs Matthews but Provorov costs Nylander, I would rather trade for Provorov as keeping Matthews is better for the team long term.

Does that mean Ekblad is overrated? God no, but acquiring him would be like fixing a hole in your foundation by removing another part of your foundation.

No, the difference is that Matthews + Provorov is a better combination than Ekblad + Nylander. You're using a skewed example. If you're trading for Provorov, it means you're gambling on his upside being #1D. If you think he's likely to hit that (I do), then it's a no brainer to trade an inferior player (Nylander) for a player that is potentially as good as Ekblad (Provorov) instead if trading a superior player (Matthews) for an established Ekblad.

 

[Legend123]

Um.... lol, Why in the world would you compare their first four seasons in the league when determining who the better player is NOW. That's ridiculous, JVR has out produced him every year for the past three.

What advanced stats? Post some of these relative advanced stats where "Gallagher blows him out of the water". Yes, I said Gallagher is a pest, and is better defensively... that's all that I can think of, JVR is better offensively. Both players are great around the net. I have watched Gallagher lots, and I don't see how some Habs fans are scoffing at the idea of JVR being a better player than Gallagher.

http://public.tableau.com/shared/N48YNX8MX?:display_count=yes
Gallagher was better last year in terms of ppg too. And a slim advantage in G/Gm

 

[Kelly]

Gally had a higher PPG.

Last year?

JvR - 0.72
Gallagher - 0.75

I mean, just barely.

Past 3 seasons:

JVR - 0.72 PPG -- 0.35GPG -- 202GP
Galllagher - 0.59 PPG -- 0.28 GPG -- 216GP

I'm pretty comforable with stating JVR > Gallagher offensively.. Also he was on pace for another ~55-60 pt season, where Gallager was on pace for a career high, so who knows if he would've kept up with that pace.

http://public.tableau.com/shared/N48YNX8MX?:display_count=yes

Have you actually looked at this chart or?

 

[Legend123]

Last year?

JvR - 0.72
Gallagher - 0.75

I mean, just barely.

Past 3 seasons:

JVR - 0.72 PPG -- 0.35GPG -- 202GP
Galllagher - 0.59 PPG -- 0.28 GPG -- 216GP

I'm pretty comforable with stating JVR > Gallagher offensively.. Also he was on pace for another ~55-60 pt season, where Gallager was on pace for a career high, so who knows if he would've kept up with that pace.



Have you actually looked at this chart or?

Clearly Gallagher has by far better numbers no?
Gally vs JvR
-Shot generation
0.9965 vs 0.8897. Gally has an edge of 1068 points
-Shot suppression
0.6494vs 0.05496. Gally edge of 5944 points.
-Possession
0.9885 vs 0.5777. Gally edge of 4108 points

That to me Gally has much better advance numbers

 

[The Podium]

No, the difference is that Matthews + Provorov is a better combination than Ekblad + Nylander. You're using a skewed example. If you're trading for Provorov, it means you're gambling on his upside being #1D. If you think he's likely to hit that (I do), then it's a no brainer to trade an inferior player (Nylander) for a player that is potentially as good as Ekblad (Provorov) instead if trading a superior player (Matthews) for an established Ekblad.

Still being difficult, I'm just using quick examples so stop reading to far into it. What I'm trying to say is that sometimes its better to keep your high calibre player and trade lesser pieces for a lesser player than it is to do the opposite. I don't understand why that is so difficult for you to understand.

 

[Kelly]

Clearly Gallagher has by far better numbers no?

Not by far... Better relative shot suppression numbers, but that's it.

 

[Legend123]

Not by far... Better relative shot suppression numbers, but that's it.

check my post again. Gally has huge edge.

 

[strictlyrandy]

Wait...people think Gallagher is better than JVR? I mean, I know HF has these silly views that all Leafs players are bad, but while JVR certainly isn't elite in any measure, he's a better player than Gallagher and a more consistent goal scorer. I'd gladly take JVR on my team. He's a good secondary scoring wing that would thrive on a team like Colorado on their 2nd line.

 

[sansabri]

Last year?

JvR - 0.72
Gallagher - 0.75

I mean, just barely.

Past 3 seasons:

JVR - 0.72 PPG -- 0.35GPG -- 202GP
Galllagher - 0.59 PPG -- 0.28 GPG -- 216GP

I'm pretty comforable with stating JVR > Gallagher offensively.. Also he was on pace for another ~55-60 pt season, where Gallager was on pace for a career high, so who knows if he would've kept up with that pace.

Yeah, barely. Still happened.

I'm pretty comfortable stating that Gallagher is already the better overall player. To boot, he's younger and on a much better deal.

 

[Kelly]

check my post again. Gally has huge edge.

Ok first, I've stated Gallagher is a better defensive player, so why even bring up possession stats.

Also.

JVR-
CF60 Rel - 8.54
CA60 Rel - -3.02
CF% Rel - 4.86

Gallagher-
CF60 Rel - 9.88
CA60 Rel - -0.11
CF% - 4.02

JVR actually had better possesion numbers relative to his teammates.

Yeah, barely. Still happened.

I'm pretty comfortable stating that Gallagher is already the better overall player. To boot, he's younger and on a much better deal.

Past three years it hasn't....

Also what does his contract and age have to do with who the better player is now?

I'm pretty comfortable saying JVR is a better player now, Gallagher has age and contract on his side, so pure value, I'd take Gallagher... If I was wanting to win tomorrow, JVR pretty easily for me.

 

[Legend123]

Ok first, I've stated Gallagher is a better defensive player, so why even bring up possession stats.

Also.

JVR-
CF60 Rel - 8.54
CA60 Rel - -3.02
CF% Rel - 4.86

Gallagher-
CF60 Rel - 9.88
CA60 Rel - -0.11
CF% - 4.02

JVR actually had better possesion numbers relative to his teammates.

doesnt matter. Gallagher has much better advanced numbers.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Still being difficult, I'm just using quick examples so stop reading to far into it. What I'm trying to say is that sometimes its better to keep your high calibre player and trade lesser pieces for a lesser player than it is to do the opposite. I don't understand why that is so difficult for you to understand.

Because it's concepts like these that cause hockey people to make bad decisions. If a trade Is good value (Nylander for Provorov, for example), you pull the trigger. If it's not (Matthews for Ekblad), you don't. Really that simple. Especially if it's your franchise player, which makes the example you used so much worse.

My whole point is that the poster I replied to implied that it wouldn't be worth it to trade for Landeskog. This implies that it wouldn't be good value, which in turn implies that Landeskog is not as good as people think he is (ie the player he's 'worth' in real life is an overpayment, because Landeskog isn't as good as trade value dictates). That was the whole point.

 

[The Podium]

Because it's concepts like these that cause hockey people to make bad decisions. If a trade Is good value (Nylander for Provorov, for example), you pull the trigger. If it's not (Matthews for Ekblad), you don't. Really that simple. Especially if it's your franchise player, which makes the example you used so much worse.

My whole point is that the poster I replied to implied that it wouldn't be worth it to trade for Landeskog. This implies that it wouldn't be good value, which in turn implies that Landeskog is not as good as people think he is (ie the player he's 'worth' in real life is an overpayment, because Landeskog isn't as good as trade value dictates). That was the whole point.

Nylander and Provorov are both equal in value as are Matthews and Ekblad.

I was the poster you originally quoted and it had nothing to do with Landeskog not being worth his value. It has more to do with what you are giving up. If you need to fill a hole its always better to trade expendable pieces than to trade your core. A player of Landeskog's calibre would require a core piece while JVR would not. If a team has an expendable piece of Landeskog's calibre than you always make that deal first, but name 1 player in the league that is of Landeskog's calibre and expendable? Likely not any, so a lesser quality player can fill the same role, albeit not as well, while not taking away from a teams current core may be the better option.

 

[Kelly]

doesnt matter. Gallagher has much better advanced numbers.

No, he doesn't. Try to keep up.

 

[Legend123]

No, he doesn't. Try to keep up.

so having more than 11, 000 points in advanced numbers of an advantage would not make u think he does??

 

[Kelly]

so having more than 11, 000 points in advanced numbers of an advantage would not make u think he does??

When you say points, you mean decimal points right

I just proved in those same stats, that JVR is better relatively to his teammates. Even though I've stated JVR is inferior defensively to Gallagher, so I'm not even sure what you're arguing.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Good baby Jesus what a horrible post. If you were trying to make his post look better in light of a worse one, then good job you definitely succeeded.

Can Habs fans explain to me how Gallagher is better than JVR? I love Gallagher, but JVR scores more goals and points and is absolute money around the net. Gallagher is better defensively and is more of an agitator but that's about it.. It's definitely close.

As for topic: Landeskog > JVR.

So your basis for me being wrong is points? Lol

Gallagher career PPG-.6

JVR Career PPG-.621


Points are not that different are they?

Gallagher is better in his own end by a long shot as well.

So yah I stick to my original point.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

I don't think Gallagher is a third line either but your JVR comparison is laughable.

Laughable eh?

I assume your speaking of my Taylor Pyatt comparison?

Both players drafted in the top 10, both players put up points (yes JVR puts up more which is what I said) both are suspect in their own end. Both big players who refuse to hit.

Oh yah totally laughable comparison.........

 

[Kelly]

So your basis for me being wrong is points? Lol

Gallagher career PPG-.6

JVR Career PPG-.621


Points are not that different are they?

Gallagher is better in his own end by a long shot as well.

So yah I stick to my original point.

Embarrassing for you.

Watch JVR play, and recently (last 3yrs) points wise it hasn't been close, as I have proved above.

That Pyatt comparison though, hahaha. That's like me saying Sedins are similar to Wellwood, both skilled players who don't use the body, though Sedins have put up more points. It's just so far off. It honestly doesn't even deserve a reply