LW Patrik Laine - Tappara, Liiga (2016, 2nd, WPG) XI

[93LEAFS]

Who? Where does that number come from? What sources?

Mckenzie's list, the current NHL.com and all these sources. Its actually higher than 80% prefer Matthews, but I was feeling generous.

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016-draft/nhl-draft-rankings/

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Read Pronman's piece on it, its shown it doesn't matter at the top of the draft in expected return, scouts properly assess talent at that rank, the divide between late and early birthday's expands the later someone is picked, with the real divide starting between 5-15. With top prospects scouts rarely get it wrong, but they overvalue late-birthdays the deeper you get into a draft. Pay for espn insider and read the full article if you don't understand it. I've posted the quote multiple times. And since you now like Pronman, maybe you should support him.

Did he apply it to Laine and Matthews? If it doesn't and he is showing it for other players. This we would be call anecdotal evidence at best.

Laine is 7 months younger than Matthews. Most of us know he started taking off after the WJC. He has outplayed and outscored Matthews this year head to head and comparable pro leagues in the playoffs(though most would agree Liiga is a better pro league. Chart below will profile their playoff stats.

All you have presented is a piece detailing past picks and players. Nothing to do with Laine(the topic BTW)and Matthews. It is a distraction from the real discussion points. Head to head play, comparable stats from each pro leagues, accomplishments of each player which we factor who is projected to be the better player. 7 months in a draft year is significant. Especially when you consider one player missed the draft by 48 hours last year. You have a young 2016 draft birthday playing an almost young 2015 draft birthday. To most this is a significant variable in Laine's favour.

 

[ijuka]

Landeskog and RNH is a wash at this point, and its measuring compared to draft position. How about this Doughty vs Bogosian, Tavares vs Duchene, Kane vs JVR, etc. And considering this study focused on 1990 to 2010 becuase most of those classes are in development, great logic. Maybe pay to read the one guy championing the cause of Laine in the mainstream sports media.

You mean Stamkos vs Doughty.

Well, it's irrelevant anyway. None of the drafted u-18s had achievements even close to Laine's except perhaps Connor McDavid. Those studies can concentrate on players that aren't like Laine all they want.


As for popularity: Pop is the most popular type of music. That usually is my argument.

 

[93LEAFS]

And i think those 2 was Euro scouts who you should ask? Not NA scouts cause best 3 play in Europe. Just like McKenzie, i believe he have those 10 NA scouts, cause most of prospects come to NA.

You have absolutely no proof of this outside of guessing, the article says nothing of the like.

 

[Ippenator]

I have no idea what your point is with all this? I tried following your line of thinking. What are you saying today is nonsensical. You mentioned 7 months difference in a prospect is meaningless? If so, when did you adopt this new found philosophy? And now a list of players that have nothing to do with Laine in a Laine thread. No idea where this is going...

The inconsistency with his comments really seem to grow the more he has been proven with hard cold facts of how good and talented Laine really is. The cherry picking and logical fallacies are really getting more and more confusing and even amusing

 

[93LEAFS]

Did he apply it to Laine and Matthews? If it doesn't and he is showing it for other players. This would be call anecdotal at best evidence.

Laine is 7 months younger than Matthews. Most of us know he started taking off after the WJC. He has outplayed and outscored Matthews this year head to head and comparable pro leagues in the playoffs(though most would agree Liiga is a better pro league. Chart below will profile their playoff stats.

All you have presented is a piece detailing past picks and players. Nothing to do with Laine(the topic BTW)and Matthews. It is a distraction from the real discussion points. Head to head play, comparable stats from each pro leagues, accomplishments of each player which we factor who is projected to be the better player. 7 months in a draft year is significant. Especially when you consider one player missed the draft by 48 hours last year. You have a young 2016 draft birthday playing an almost young 2015 draft birthday. To most this is a significant variable in Laine's favour.

No, its a discussion point and I'm linking an article that points out that how scouts evaluate the top of the draft is not messed by not-factoring in age, it happens at a later point in the draft. And it seems to be a pretty overwhelming consensus siding with Matthews at this point. We'll see what Bob has Monday, but I'm guessing it stays 8-2.

 

[Halberdier]

Most of us know he started taking off after the WJC.

Laine started his season very well, actually. AFAIK he was also wearing that "golden helmet" for a moment (top scorer), and was close to PPG.

A bit later he got a minor shoulder injury, which caused him to miss some games, and also reduced his point production for a while. It's true that after WJC he played better, but it was not like ON/OFF, night vs. day as it was for Puljujärvi.

 

[IFK]

...and again Highest Point Total by a U-18 Player at a World Championship Tournament (behind no one).

And of course:
Most Goals by a U-18 Player at a World Championship Tournament (behind no one)
Most Assists by a U-18 Player at a World Championship Tournament (behind no one)

Fabulous OP's by JetsAlternate. I'm just nitpicking the only thing that's always missing from these.

Also, like i post. Laine after about 50 games before WJC and year 2016, make this kind of points:

WJC which is tougher competition at least 17 years old playing with other 17 years old and 18 years 2nd rounder (no one could see what they can do and what they did in WJC against players who should be better than them). 7 game 7+6=13 (AM have same age 3 points). This year Laine has FEL regular season 13 games 9+8=17. FEL playoffs 18 games 10+5=15 and then WHC 10 games 7+5=12. No it's not sample size opinion. If we don't look WJC, Laine have this year 41 games and 26+18=44 points so much more tougher competition than NLA and most of games and points is much tougher competition than FEL regular season. If we put WJC there too, it's 48 games and 33+24=57. So there you have, it's not anymore just little sample, but almost same amount of games what AM play whole season (AM have 10 games more). With medals, honors, records and awards that no one just not a single player in Europe have had in 17-18 years old.

 

[ijuka]

The inconsistency with his comments really seem to grow the more he has been proven with hard cold facts of how good and talented Laine really is. The cherry picking and logical fallacies are really getting more and more confusing and even amusing

It's obvious this kind of a common theme will arise. If you use solid facts and logical reasoning, Laine is the obvious choice every single time. Hence, you cannot be logical if you argue otherwise. This is how logic works.

It's kind of annoying this kind of a desperate, insecure argument is being thrown to this thread while I for instance made a video compilation I'd have liked to have seen some discussion on. Can't the Leafs fans go to their own matthews vs laine thread to agree with each other?

 

[93LEAFS]

It's obvious this kind of a common theme will arise. If you use solid facts and logical reasoning, Laine is the obvious choice every single time. Hence, you cannot be logical if you argue otherwise. This is how logic works.

It's kind of annoying this kind of a desperate, insecure argument is being thrown to this thread while I for instance made a video compilation I'd have liked to have seen some discussion on. Can't the Leafs fans go to their own matthews vs laine thread to agree with each other?

Yeah, that is why paid scouts or scouting services are siding with Matthews. Just look at the polls of scouts and the various scouting rankings. I'll post it for you again. But as said earlier, I'll leave if you stop responding. We will just continue talking in circles.

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016-draft/nhl-draft-rankings/

 

[PhilJets]

I hope he slots in with
laine Schiefele and Ehlers as the offensive 2nd line

Little wheeler and perrault gets the tough match up

 

[IFK]

You have absolutely no proof of this outside of guessing, the article says nothing of the like.

Yes, no proof but you have no proof that they weren't NA scouts. McKenzie have use same scouts long and i believe he have those 10 NA scouts or at least most of them cause he tweet before that most of Euro scouts have Laine over Matthews, just like that article where that Swiss scout say same and i think he have seen Matthew a lot, but still he think Laine is better.

 

[ijuka]

Yeah, that is why paid scouts are siding with Matthews. Just look at the polls of scouts and the various scouting rankings. I'll post it for you again

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016-draft/nhl-draft-rankings/

I know these rankings. I'm not sure why you even bother. I've read every news article on both laine and matthews I've found.


Here I'll throw this curveball:

Matthews became the consensus #1 pick in the u-18 tournament where Laine couldn't go because he broke his knee. Before that, Laine was scoring hat trick after hat trick at u-17s, ending with 12+5=17 in 7 gp.

Here's a question:

Would the scouts have had the same opinion and have had their mind set on Matthews as the #1 overall in that tournament if Laine had been in there?


Personally, I'm of the opinion that most of the NHL personnel, scouts included, are pretty "old school" and find it difficult to grasp that someone touted #1 overall for over 2 seasons might not be #1 overall after all.

What do you think about this line of reasoning?

 

[Halberdier]

Yeah, that is why paid scouts are siding with Matthews. Just look at the polls of scouts and the various scouting rankings. I'll post it for you again

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016-draft/nhl-draft-rankings/

I'm fine with most scouts preferring Matthews as a most probable pick for Toronto.

What I'm not fine with is when people go crazy and deny the fact, that Laine has outproduced Matthews in comparable international tournaments by a mile.

Maybe you want to comment this post I made:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=119453475&postcount=17

Any problems with the method I used?

 

[TheLeastOfTheBunch]

Yes, no proof but you have no proof that they weren't NA scouts. McKenzie have use same scouts long and i believe he have those 10 NA scouts or at least most of them cause he tweet before that most of Euro scouts have Laine over Matthews, just like that article where that Swiss scout say same and i think he have seen Matthew a lot, but still he think Laine is better.

They aren't NA scouts in the same mold of the Euro scout (Thomas Roost) that you're talking about. They're NHL scouts. They have massive resources at hand to scout whoever they want, whether by video, going to games, or even discussing these sort of things amongst themselves. You're really reaching here IFK.

 

[Deadly Dogma]

I know these rankings. I'm not sure why you even bother. I've read every news article on both laine and matthews I've found.


Here I'll throw this curveball:

Matthews became the consensus #1 pick in the u-18 tournament where Laine couldn't go because he broke his knee. Before that, Laine was scoring hat trick after hat trick at u-17s, ending with 12+5=17 in 7 gp.

Here's a question:

Would the scouts have had the same opinion and have had their mind set on Matthews as the #1 overall in that tournament if Laine had been in there?


Personally, I'm of the opinion that most of the NHL personnel, scouts included, are pretty "old school" and find it difficult to grasp that someone touted #1 overall for over 2 seasons might not be #1 overall after all.

What do you think about this line of reasoning?

Well I think its because seeing player who is top at ALL aspects of the game will trump a player who is elite at 1 aspect.
Scouts understand there is more to the game than just scoring, hence why Matthews is considered the BPA by over 80% of pro scouts

 

[ijuka]

Well I think its because seeing player who is top at ALL aspects of the game will trump a player who is elite at 1 aspect.
Scouts understand there is more to the game than just scoring, hence why Matthews is considered the BPA by over 80% of pro scouts

Alright. But well, 80% of the scouts don't make the choice. If the one deciding the pick is part of the 20%, that's that.

What do you think Lou Lamoriello thinks? Does he have a philosophy he follows?

 

[93LEAFS]

I'm fine with most scouts preferring Matthews as a most probable pick for Toronto.

What I'm not fine with is when people go crazy and deny the fact, that Laine has outproduced Matthews in comparable international tournaments by a mile.

Maybe you want to comment this post I made:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=119453475&postcount=17

Any problems with the method I used?

Its fine, and I'm not denying Laine could be the better scorer, but Matthews is the better all around player. The scouts don't prefer Matthews for Toronto, they prefer him overall, they aren't trying to mock draft. And I wouldn't say he outproduced him by a massive margin outside of the WJC. Also factor in that Matthews was put behind two guys who were top quality rookies in the NHL this year (Eichel and Larkin), and the team the USNDP sends to the U-18 is quite strict in order.

 

[93LEAFS]

I know these rankings. I'm not sure why you even bother. I've read every news article on both laine and matthews I've found.


Here I'll throw this curveball:

Matthews became the consensus #1 pick in the u-18 tournament where Laine couldn't go because he broke his knee. Before that, Laine was scoring hat trick after hat trick at u-17s, ending with 12+5=17 in 7 gp.

Here's a question:

Would the scouts have had the same opinion and have had their mind set on Matthews as the #1 overall in that tournament if Laine had been in there?


Personally, I'm of the opinion that most of the NHL personnel, scouts included, are pretty "old school" and find it difficult to grasp that someone touted #1 overall for over 2 seasons might not be #1 overall after all.

What do you think about this line of reasoning?

At that point in time Sean Day was still the front runner for number 1OA (man has that kids stock collapsed), and you ignore that Matthews broke his Femur earlier in that season, and still managed to move us a tier at the USNDP (very rare, only recent players to do it are Eichel, Hanifin and Keller), and still get a spot at that tournament.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Laine started his season very well, actually. AFAIK he was also wearing that "golden helmet" for a moment (top scorer), and was close to PPG.

A bit later he got a minor shoulder injury, which caused him to miss some games, and also reduced his point production for a while. It's true that after WJC he played better, but it was not like ON/OFF, night vs. day as it was for Puljujärvi.

That's fair. And I do think it illustrates as he got closer to his actual 18th birthday his play and why Mckenzie wrote the quote below which illustrates Laine's development throughout the year. Laine just got better. Let's remember he didn't start the year as a 18 year old. He played almost the entire year as a 17 year old that was injured not too long ago. These are things you factor when you are a scout. And why many have stated he has the biggest upside in the draft.

At face value, nothing has changed from TSN's Mid-Season NHL draft rankings. Matthews is still No. 1; Laine is still No. 2.

But when 10 NHL scouts were surveyed by TSN in late January/early February, all 10 had Matthews at No. 1. This time, in a survey of the same 10 scouts – conducted in the run-up to Saturday's NHL draft lottery – two of the 10 said Laine is now No. 1 on their team's lists. Others suggested they had to think long and hard about their decision to keep Matthews at No. 1.

 

[Deadly Dogma]

I'm fine with most scouts preferring Matthews as a most probable pick for Toronto.

What I'm not fine with is when people go crazy and deny the fact, that Laine has outproduced Matthews in comparable international tournaments by a mile.

Maybe you want to comment this post I made:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=119453475&postcount=17

Any problems with the method I used?

he has out produced him at international tourneys but pro scouts, especially NHL scouts understand sample size and what attributes to look for when scouting for the NHL.
I am sure if they were scouting for a international tourney on big ice then most will have Laine>Matthews but they are paid to scout for the NHL so it makes sense to evaluate the players based on metrics specific to the NHL, Ie puck smarts, 2 way play etc and thats why over 80% feel that Matthews is the BPA

 

[ijuka]

Laine is really good at puck smarts as well as defensive play. In fact, I cannot even recall a more defensively mature NHL-ready winger being drafted in recent times.


Landeskog, huh?

 

[Ippenator]

They aren't NA scouts in the same mold of the Euro scout (Thomas Roost) that you're talking about. They're NHL scouts. They have massive resources at hand to scout whoever they want, whether by video, going to games, or even discussing these sort of things amongst themselves. You're really reaching here IFK.

And yet most of them list Laine as RW, when he has played about 95% of this season's games as LW. I mean if they can't get even this kind of simple but important fact right, what do they really know about about European hockey, compared to what they know about North American hockey? I can tell you that there is still a huge bias in this, although of course many people want to deny it.

 

[IFK]

They aren't NA scouts in the same mold of the Euro scout (Thomas Roost) that you're talking about. They're NHL scouts. They have massive resources at hand to scout whoever they want, whether by video, going to games, or even discussing these sort of things amongst themselves. You're really reaching here IFK.

Yes NHL scouts, but they base is NA, if you didn't know that? They are in WJC and U18 and WHC if there is draft eligible players, but they scout whole season in NA and players in CHL and USA.

 

[X66]

I hope he slots in with
laine Schiefele and Ehlers as the offensive 2nd line

Little wheeler and perrault gets the tough match up

That would be a great line.

Laine and Schiefele will definitely be a handful, and Ehlers can finish a ton. Making mistakes against that line will be very costly.