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

[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.

Yes, so this is it a big thing too, it shows that they didn't know that much Euro players, not what side they play, some even write their name something like Jessi Puliujorvari or something. Points are many rankings wrong and sometimes the team or nationality is wrong too. It shows that they really haven't seen them much and don't even bother to write everything right in their lists.

 

[psycho_dad*]

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?

That is a fantastic post full of facts. Exactly why it will go ignored.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

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

Scouts also weight in what the level of competition and stature of these games. You do not compare regular season club games to Playoff games, or WHC/WJC games as an equal. I always smile when I read the small sample argument come up. It would be more valid if the importance of games were all the same. But we all know they are not. And Laine excelled best when the playoff games and tournaments were most important. He was clutch when it came to this. Another plus in his corner.

 

[TheLeastOfTheBunch]

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.

NHL scouts didn't list him as a RW. Those are the commercial scouting services like ISS, CSS, etc. Nothing to do with NHL teams and their scouts.

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.

No, we don't know where their base is. They are the most informed people regarding this draft, as they also interact with fellow colleagues who also scout in other parts of the world, for one. NHL teams have the largest resources on these prospects, you're a fool to believe these NHL scouts gave their input into choosing between AM and Laine without being greatly informed.

 

[psycho_dad*]

hence why Matthews is considered the BPA by over 80% of pro scouts

Where do you get that number from? Is it that they think he's the #1 pick OR BPA because those two things are not necessarily the same thing.

And yes, that is an argument from popularity and argument from authority which are both logical fallacies.

People here are trying to use facts and numbers for this debate and some of you are arguing from popularity and sort of using that to brush away the numbers that clearly favor Laine.

Maybe if you are so interested in arguments from popularity, Laine thread is twice as big as Matthews one and I believe even bigger than the McDavid one was. So does that make Laine better than both? Argument from popularity.

 

[IFK]

No, we don't know where their base is. They are the most informed people regarding this draft, as they also interact with fellow colleagues who also scout in other parts of the world, for one. NHL teams have the largest resources on these prospects, you're a fool to believe these NHL scouts gave their input into choosing between AM and Laine without being greatly informed.

No we don't know where they base is, but i am pretty sure they are NA scouts cause most of top prospect every year is from NA and NA scouts is scouting NA, you understand. McKenzie already say that most of Euro scouts he has talk say Laine is number one, so it shows that those scouts are NA or if they were in Euro it would be Laine something like 7/3 or at least 5/5.

 

[Deadly Dogma]

Where do you get that number from? Is it that they think he's the #1 pick OR BPA because those two things are not necessarily the same thing.

And yes, that is an argument from popularity and argument from authority which are both logical fallacies.

People here are trying to use facts and numbers for this debate and some of you are arguing from popularity and sort of using that to brush away the numbers that clearly favor Laine.

Maybe if you are so interested in arguments from popularity, Laine thread is twice as big as Matthews one and I believe even bigger than the McDavid one was. So does that make Laine better than both? Argument from popularity.

Laine thread is bigger due to the extreme things we see in here, if this thread didn't have the Fin 5 it would be on part 3 or 4

Well there are many different scouting lists, some are BPA lists same are mock drafts. I have seen only 2 lists with Laine @1 and tons with Matthews at 1.
So with that in mind its an easy conclusion that most feel that Matthews is the BPA.
Keep in mind this is BPA for the NHL.

 

[Deadly Dogma]

Scouts also weight in what the level of competition and stature of these games. You do not compare regular season club games to Playoff games, or WHC/WJC games as an equal. I always smile when I read the small sample argument come up. It would be more valid if the importance of games were all the same. But we all know they are not. And Laine excelled best when the playoff games and tournaments were most important. He was clutch when it came to this. Another plus in his corner.

I guess its those factors that have 2 out of 10+ think Laine is the BPA. However even with all those factors most still feel that Matthews is the BPA

 

[IFK]

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

This is better showing things. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...xT7wnbA752y6DCERtM7555Hlw/edit#gid=1854770418

And none of those are Euro scouting services but NA scouting services and top3 play in Europe, so i wouldn't put much weight of they rankings when most of them haven't seen these 3 this year live than several times and McKenzie already have said that Laine is 1st in most Euro scouts list. Also only who have ranked Laine 1st have him LW, which he is in every interview, he can play left but it not his side, just like it not Ovechkin side.

 

[ijuka]

"I predict around 45 goals and 45-50 assists."

This is an NHL scout. He predicts Laine to get 90-95 points.

So why are my predictions unrealistic?

 

[IFK]

Laine thread is bigger due to the extreme things we see in here, if this thread didn't have the Fin 5 it would be on part 3 or 4

Well there are many different scouting lists, some are BPA lists same are mock drafts. I have seen only 2 lists with Laine @1 and tons with Matthews at 1.
So with that in mind its an easy conclusion that most feel that Matthews is the BPA.
Keep in mind this is BPA for the NHL.

Actually is long because you biased Leafs fans come here to ask same question every day with one liners, nothing to show or good arguments, only AM is best, IMO etc. Should we look if i go Matthews thread say that Laine is easily BPA, what a **** storm would it be. Should i try?

 

[Deadly Dogma]

"I predict around 45 goals and 45-50 assists."

This is an NHL scout. He predicts Laine to get 90-95 points.

So why are my predictions unrealistic?

I can see those #'s for his best years. Its never been an issue that Laine won't put up #'s

 

[ijuka]

I can see those #'s for his best years. Its never been an issue that Laine won't put up #'s

"I saw Laine a little more than Matthews, and I like everything about his game. He's big, strong, can skate and shoot. He's the complete package."


Has it been an issue that Laine is not a complete package?

Love these 2 scouts. Such good quote material. And I can even quote them as NHL scouts when people bring them up.

 

[TheLeastOfTheBunch]

No we don't know where they base is, but i am pretty sure they are NA scouts cause most of top prospect every year is from NA and NA scouts is scouting NA, you understand. McKenzie already say that most of Euro scouts he has talk say Laine is number one, so it shows that those scouts are NA or if they were in Euro it would be Laine something like 7/3 or at least 5/5.

You can guess their "base" all you want, it doesn't matter much since they have seen these two play for themselves, and most likely have interacted and discussed the two with their NHL scouting colleagues. The fact is they're one of the most, if not the most, informed people regarding this draft. I know Finns are pulling hard for Laine here, but let's not be so ridiculous to start questioning NHL scouts in such a manner.

If there was ever a question regarding the polling process with his NHL scouts, McKenzie would've mentioned they are NA scouts or have a bias with NA players for added context, the way you're doing here. And McKenzie did just that with those Euro scouts that you're talking about

 

[Deadly Dogma]

Actually is long because you biased Leafs fans come here to ask same question every day with one liners, nothing to show or good arguments, only AM is best, IMO etc. Should we look if i go Matthews thread say that Laine is easily BPA, what a **** storm would it be.

How are we biased? We have the 1st OA pick so we looked at both players very closely and most of us feel that Matthews is the better player.
Why would I be biased towards an American over a Finn when I root for the Finns over the Americans

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I guess its those factors that have 2 out of 10+ think Laine is the BPA. However even with all those factors most still feel that Matthews is the BPA

Would you know if any of these scouts you refer to say it was an easy decision? Considering it was 10 out of 10 and no decision in that same ranking you are mentioning earlier in the year. I think 'most still feel it' as you term it is the operative phrasing here.

 

[ijuka]

You can guess their "base" all you want, it doesn't matter much since they have seen these two play for themselves, and most likely have interacted and discussed the two with their NHL scouting colleagues. The fact is they're one of the most, if not the most, informed people regarding this draft. I know Finns are pulling hard for Laine here, but let's not be so ridiculous to start questioning NHL scouts in such a manner.

If there was ever a question regarding the polling process with his NHL scouts, McKenzie would've mentioned they are NA scouts or have a bias with NA players for added context, the way you're doing here. And McKenzie did just that with those Euro scouts that you're talking about

Call me crazy, but if a scout says that they've seen a European player play more than an American one, I'd assume that it's a European scout.

 

[ijuka]

Would you know if any of these scouts you refer to say it was an easy decision? Considering it was 10 out of 10 and no decision in that same ranking you are mentioning earlier in the year. I think 'most still feel it' as you term it is the operative phrasing here.

Here are some quotes by the ones who picked Matthews:

"I'd pick Matthews because he's a center. He's a more complete 200-foot player."

"I like Matthews but the team holding the No. 2 pick is going to get a darn good player. Matthews has a little bit of an edge, and can shoot the puck just as effectively. He has an I'll-show-you type of attitude."

"This is a tough decision actually, but Matthews gets my vote by a narrow margin" ... "when you have a center that plays zones like Matthews does, it's pretty exceptional."

"I think the big center is so hard to come by and Matthews separates himself just because of that. "

 

[Deadly Dogma]

"I saw Laine a little more than Matthews, and I like everything about his game. He's big, strong, can skate and shoot. He's the complete package."


Has it been an issue that Laine is not a complete package?

Love these 2 scouts. Such good quote material. And I can even quote them as NHL scouts when people bring them up.

With a simple web search we can find tons of NHL scout quotes putting Matthews>Laine .
The European scouts are more biased than the N.A scouts. I have seen the interviews and the Finn scout at the WHC even said on live T.V that he took Laine because he was a Fin

 

[psycho_dad*]

Laine thread is bigger due to the extreme things we see in here, if this thread didn't have the Fin 5 it would be on part 3 or 4

Well there are many different scouting lists, some are BPA lists same are mock drafts. I have seen only 2 lists with Laine @1 and tons with Matthews at 1.
So with that in mind its an easy conclusion that most feel that Matthews is the BPA.
Keep in mind this is BPA for the NHL.

What extreme things? I see people using rational statistical analysis and mainly a couple of leafs fans arguing against the numbers with opinions and shoddy logic. Nothing extreme in pointing out the fact that Laine has outproduced Matthews. It's a fact. To you it's extreme because the facts insult your preconceived notion that AM has to be better. If numbers and play suggested it I would agree with you. But your arguments are circumstancial and cherry picked, heavily favoring popularity and which one is better known to NA fans. Instead of facts that matter.

 

[IFK]

You can guess their "base" all you want, it doesn't matter much since they have seen these two play for themselves, and most likely have interacted and discussed the two with their NHL scouting colleagues. The fact is they're one of the most, if not the most, informed people regarding this draft. I know Finns are pulling hard for Laine here, but let's not be so ridiculous to start questioning NHL scouts in such a manner.

If there was ever a question regarding the polling process with his NHL scouts, McKenzie would've mentioned they are NA scouts or have a bias with NA players for added context, the way you're doing here. And McKenzie did just that with those Euro scouts that you're talking about

Sorry, but McKenzie cant say anything those scouts, not team, not where they base is. But if he say that most Euro scout have Laine first it means that those 10 is NHL scouts who scout NA, how hard that to be understand? If they are Euro scouts all, it will be Laine 1st do you really not understand what you have been said?

 

[ijuka]

With a simple web search we can find tons of NHL scout quotes putting Matthews>Laine .
The European scouts are more biased than the N.A scouts. I have seen the interviews and the Finn scout at the WHC even said on live T.V that he took Laine because he was a Fin

Look, I'm not going to look up proof that goes against my position. These scouts' quotes are useful for myself. Heck, I can even point at nearly all the scouts that were quoted in the NHL.com article that picked Matthews saying they did so because he's a big center. I don't need a scout to point that out for me. I can look at the "C" in wikipedia.

 

[IFK]

With a simple web search we can find tons of NHL scout quotes putting Matthews>Laine .
The European scouts are more biased than the N.A scouts. I have seen the interviews and the Finn scout at the WHC even said on live T.V that he took Laine because he was a Fin

This is not a fact, NA scouts have been more biased whole history of NHL and there is a proof. So show me some proof what you saying?

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Here are some quotes by the ones who picked Matthews:

"I'd pick Matthews because he's a center. He's a more complete 200-foot player."

"I like Matthews but the team holding the No. 2 pick is going to get a darn good player. Matthews has a little bit of an edge, and can shoot the puck just as effectively. He has an I'll-show-you type of attitude."

"This is a tough decision actually, but Matthews gets my vote by a narrow margin" ... "when you have a center that plays zones like Matthews does, it's pretty exceptional."

"I think the big center is so hard to come by and Matthews separates himself just because of that. "

Best Center available seems to be the theme here. Not a surprise. Not best player available. Would you agree? Or do you have a different read.

 

[TimeZone]

"I saw Laine a little more than Matthews, and I like everything about his game. He's big, strong, can skate and shoot. He's the complete package."


Has it been an issue that Laine is not a complete package?

Love these 2 scouts. Such good quote material. And I can even quote them as NHL scouts when people bring them up.

Nobody is saying Laine isn't a great player, he's just not Matthews good. I know it's difficult to accept, but this is the case.