Please explain how somehow it's fair that Laine being 5 months older with TWO years of NHL experience over Ovi is somehow putting them on an even playing field? Stop pretending that NHL experience is nothing, when it is just as important (ie. look at Gaudreau and how he needed NHL experience to become the elite player he is today, being 20 years old when he played his first NHL game was no advantage, or planarian being fully developed as far as his body goes, and being better today than he was 2 years ago due to EXPERIENCE, or kuznetsov as well)
Yet SOMEHOW when Ovi gets 7 months of an age advantage (
only 2 more than what you are giving Laine), whilst still giving Laine a year of NHL experience, this is somehow unfair and ludicrous.
So no, NHL experience isn't the only thing that Laine gets in his favour (which is indeed very valuable), but also 5 months of age gap (which is very close to the age difference that Ovi has in hand in the NORMAL way of comparing players). So don't say I'm trying to 'slice and dice it' in any way, as I am using the normal draft comparison (which still gives Laine a larger advantage anyways), and you are trying to find ways to give Laine an even bigger advantage since he didn't outperform Ovi this year (funny how you didn't comment on the Matthews age gap, it would fit your agenda so well to make more excuses for him)
As I said, it's very cut and dry how the situation is, I'm done arguing with you about it, as it's only you and a couple other Laine fanatics trying to change the logical and fair way of comparing the two players. Have a great day