Larkin VS Pettersson

Larkin or Pettersson


  • Total voters
    133
Status
Not open for further replies.

bert

Registered User
Nov 11, 2002
35,984
21,919
Visit site
Who the hell has Larkin elevated?

The guy in 2nd on the Wings last year finished 18 points behind him and didn't even play with Larkin.
Maybe a foreign concept to you but being a two way player helps everyone on the ice. Bertuzzi and Mantha appear to be elevated.... Larkin is and has always been on a terrible team, when the wings get better his overall impact will be easier for you to recognize.
 

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,797
NYC
Maybe a foreign concept to you but being a two way player helps everyone on the ice. Bertuzzi and Mantha appear to be elevated.... Larkin is and has always been on a terrible team, when the wings get better his overall impact will be easier for you to recognize.
So Larkin is propped up by being on a terrible team but Hall is punished for being on a terrible team? I'm confused.
 

newfy

Registered User
Jul 28, 2010
14,718
8,241
I love Larkin. Argue in his favour many times here. Feel he’s very underrated and under appreciated. Pettersson is just in a different tier.

Its fair to pick EP, theyre both really good players. Not sure its time to say theyre in different tiers though. Theyre 2 years apart in age and EP hasnt had a season as good as Larkin did last year. 1st line defensive center that can produce first line numbers vs a more flashy, higher offensive center. But Larkins season last year is better offensively than anything EP has done to date.

I could very easily see EP becoming better, but he wasnt last year and there isnt a huge age difference either.
 

ccman68

Registered User
Dec 9, 2017
4,108
4,383
Holy ****, has Larkin become overhyped.

Pettersson is way more overhyped than Larkin. These two players shouldn’t even be compared because Larkin is so much better. It’s like comparing Crosby to Anisimov.
 

koyvoo

Registered User
Nov 8, 2014
17,244
16,982
Pettersson is way more overhyped than Larkin. These two players shouldn’t even be compared because Larkin is so much better. It’s like comparing Crosby to Anisimov.
Hey, as long as you don’t mind representing your knowledge and understanding of this sport like you do, I have no problem with it either.
 

Aqualung

Registered User
Nov 16, 2007
4,415
2,539
this poll wrecked by petterson fan boys that dont understand how important what larkin does is
I don't think I'd call it "wrecked" unless you don't understand the imperative quality of the poll.

For example, 80% of the people could prefer Pettersson by a "hair". It has no bearing on the margin of preference (or an indictment on Larkin's qualities), just the number of people.
 

Aqualung

Registered User
Nov 16, 2007
4,415
2,539
Its fair to pick EP, theyre both really good players. Not sure its time to say theyre in different tiers though. Theyre 2 years apart in age and EP hasnt had a season as good as Larkin did last year. 1st line defensive center that can produce first line numbers vs a more flashy, higher offensive center. But Larkins season last year is better offensively than anything EP has done to date.

I could very easily see EP becoming better, but he wasnt last year and there isnt a huge age difference either.

I think it's fair to pick either as well, but your framing lacks context. They're a little over 2 years a part in age, but 3 drafts apart as well. Larkin was playing in his fourth season last year, Pettersson has only played his rookie season. Pettersson's rookie season was better than any of Larkin's first three seasons as well. A bit disingenuous to say that Larkin was better in his fourth season against a rookie as if this should be comparable.
 

newfy

Registered User
Jul 28, 2010
14,718
8,241
I think it's fair to pick either as well, but your framing lacks context. They're a little over 2 years a part in age, but 3 drafts apart as well. Larkin was playing in his fourth season last year, Pettersson has only played his rookie season. Pettersson's rookie season was better than any of Larkin's first three seasons as well. A bit disingenuous to say that Larkin was better in his fourth season against a rookie as if this should be comparable.

Its not disingenuous to say that, it just is what it is. Their seasons are 2 years apart in age, EP's rookie season he had a year longer to develop basically. Development also isnt linear, so EP has something to prove still before we can say anything about him being the better player, let alone being in a different tier because based on last season and the start of this season, Larkin is the better player.

I dont really doubt EP will likely be better offensively overall, but with Larkin looking like a point per game player on a bad team, possibly higher when the D improves, EP is going to have to score 90+ to be equal to him realistically. I think he can likely get there, he has a tonne of skill. But its also not some guarantee that he does that just because he had a really good 60 something point rookie season either. To be in a different tier, he'll have to be in that 100 point range. Hes good but thats not some number every dynamic offensive player in the league automatically hits either (its also something EP has the skill to do, but he needs to prove it before we start saying hes that guy and tiers ahead of people who are also really good players)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cheesehead9099

Aqualung

Registered User
Nov 16, 2007
4,415
2,539
Its not disingenuous to say that, it just is what it is. Their seasons are 2 years apart in age, EP's rookie season he had a year longer to develop basically. Development also isnt linear, so EP has something to prove still before we can say anything about him being the better player, let alone being in a different tier because based on last season and the start of this season, Larkin is the better player.

I dont really doubt EP will likely be better offensively overall, but with Larkin looking like a point per game player on a bad team, possibly higher when the D improves, EP is going to have to score 90+ to be equal to him realistically. I think he can likely get there, he has a tonne of skill. But its also not some guarantee that he does that just because he had a really good 60 something point rookie season either. To be in a different tier, he'll have to be in that 100 point range. Hes good but thats not some number every dynamic offensive player in the league automatically hits either (its also something EP has the skill to do, but he needs to prove it before we start saying hes that guy and tiers ahead of people who are also really good players)
Not sure you're arguing with the right person. I didn't say they were in different tiers. I provided context to your set up. I also think setting up arbitrary point totals is what it is... arbitrary. You're approaching it too black and white. EP doesn't only have to score more to be considered better; he could be develop the ability to be more clutch, or he could learn to be better defensively, or whatever other criteria used to evaluate players. It's also disingenuous to say "60 point rookie season" when in reality he had 66 points in 71 games. Your leaving out context again.

Even if you compared Pettersson's rookie season to Larkin's second season (which I don't think is the way to do it), Pettersson still had the better season. The additional year before he entered the NHL did not change that narrative. I agree development isn't linear, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet against the odds that a Pettersson peaked in his rookie season.
 

newfy

Registered User
Jul 28, 2010
14,718
8,241
Not sure you're arguing with the right person. I didn't say they were in different tiers. I provided context to your set up. I also think setting up arbitrary point totals is what it is... arbitrary. You're approaching it too black and white. EP doesn't only have to score more to be considered better; he could be develop the ability to be more clutch, or he could learn to be better defensively, or whatever other criteria used to evaluate players. It's also disingenuous to say "60 point rookie season" when in reality he had 66 points in 71 games. Your leaving out context again.

Even if you compared Pettersson's rookie season to Larkin's second season (which I don't think is the way to do it), Pettersson still had the better season. The additional year before he entered the NHL did not change that narrative. I agree development isn't linear, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet against the odds that a Pettersson peaked in his rookie season.

You were providing context to a post in which I was replying to a guy saying they were in different tiers. Youre right, Pettersson could become more clutch or something to be deemed the better player but I dont want to sit here and type for 3 hours about all the possible ways it could happen so I was generalizing a bit. The numbers I posted arent exact numbers obviously but its to get a ball park idea of where their all around games are. Larkin is a really, really good two way center thats looking like hes gonna be a point per game type or more for a long time. For someone to be in a different tier form that type of player they need to be VERY good offensively ie a 100 point type player. Its once again not disingenuous to say he had a 60 something point rookie season because thats exactly what he had. So before we go crowning anyone in different tiers, how about we let them actually play themselves into that different tier and not just put up 66 points once. A 66 point season doesnt put anyone in a different tier from Larkin and we dont know what he would do the rest of the season if he did play, maybe his ridiculously high shooting percentage comes down to earth those final games he missed and he barely does anything. I know youre not talking about tiers but that was the entirety of the post I was replying to when I said all this stuff.

As for your second paragraph, I'm saying development isnt linear not just for EP but for Larkin as well. Comparing their 1st and 2nd seasons isnt a great way to go about comparing a 15th overall pick who some thought was a reach at 15 to a top 5 pick. Larkin is already wearing a letter and is touted as the next captain of his team at 23 years old. He is vastly outplaying his draft position right now because development isnt linear.

An example of this would be Matt Barzal. I think after his rookie year, lots of people were ready to proclaim him in a different tier from other really good players and one of the best offensive players in the league but he hadnt really came out and shown its repeatable. Fast forward to the next season and he absolutely hasnt separated himself from a guy like Larkin.

Right now, Larkin is better. Theyre 2 years apart in age and Larkin is better. Any post saying EP is better right now is wrong, any post saying hes in a different tier is really wrong. Going forward it definitely becomes more plausible that it could be EP, but Larkin isnt a bad pick given their ages and what they are as players right now
 
  • Like
Reactions: cheesehead9099

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,797
NYC
Pettersson is way more overhyped than Larkin. These two players shouldn’t even be compared because Larkin is so much better. It’s like comparing Crosby to Anisimov.
Asking if I want Larkin or Pettersson going forward is like asking if I want $5000 or $10000. There's literally a wrong answer in this poll.
 

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,797
NYC
Larkin is really good, it's just that the hype is for the most pedestrian shit.

"He's good defensively and his team relies on him a ton!"

So he's... uhh, every #1 center in the NHL?
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
As a red wings fan and big fan of Larkin, this is very easily Pettersson.



(but to stir things up even more, there was a guy that suggested the Red Wings would obviously trade Larkin for Pettersson 1 for 1. They most definitely would not.)
 

Motte and Bailey

Registered User
Jun 21, 2017
3,692
1,556
Only Philip Larkin can match Pettersson’s pure poetry on ice. Dylan would stand a much better chance if his first name was Bob.
 

newfy

Registered User
Jul 28, 2010
14,718
8,241
Larkin is really good, it's just that the hype is for the most pedestrian ****.

"He's good defensively and his team relies on him a ton!"

So he's... uhh, every #1 center in the NHL?

Every number one center in the league plays as good defensively as him? His stats/advanced stats/play on ice last year should have had him in the selke consideration. If he had been around longer and had a bit of a reputation he would have gotten a lot of votes. Hes better defensively than most centers in the NHL at this point. He did all that at the age of 22 with a team with no help on it. Based on last season, hes definitely pushing top 20 center in the NHL if not higher and he did it as a 22 year old with no help.

For comparisons sake, at 22 he just had as good of a regular season as Ryan O'Reilly has ever had and as good of a season as Toews has ever had in his career. What Larkin did last year offensively and defensively and as a match up center on a team with that little amount of help is not pedestrian at all.

Probably not, this is the same fan base that won't trade Larkin straight up for Rantanen.

Why would Detroit trade their only thing close to a top 6 center in the NHL for a winger? Yes, Rantanens value is likely higher but play Larkin with a team like Colorado the offensive gap would get smaller. Then Detroit is left with Frans Neilson as their top line center? Yeah, doesnt make sense at all for Detroit to make that trade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cheesehead9099
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->