W.Nylander vs Larkin in overall value

[Ctrain2k]

He's -9 going up against the +20 guy, who led the league in neutral zones takeaways, and higher PPG% than Crosby and McDavid.

...but I know you're pure hate.

Why would you bring up a team stat, didn’t know about the “neutral zone takeaways” good for him Larkin’s still better than him defensively and what kinda stat is that? Power play goal percentage or something? Really scrapping the bottom of the barrel here.

 

[Pavels Dog]

It’s close but Larkin right now. Early stages of their career though, and Nylander has a much better situation. It will be interesting to see if either of them can take a step forward. Nylander is playing with Matthews, Marner and Tavares. 70+ points should come rather easily.

 

[Pyrophorus]

Why would you bring up a team stat, didn’t know about the “neutral zone takeaways” good for him Larkin’s still better than him defensively and what kinda stat is that? Power play goal percentage or something? Really scrapping the bottom of the barrel here.

Tell me how?

 

[Binister]

Larkin 'cause you know he's a C. [/joke]

But the actual reason is that Larkin produces well in a rebuilding team.

 

[Ulysses31]

Nylander better vision, shot, hands, passing

Larkin better speed(both speedy tho) defense, effort, physicality, intangibles

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

He's -9 going up against the +20 guy

...but I know you're pure hate.

Did you just try to use +/- to compare two players on two different teams playing different positions?

Because that’s about as useless as nipples on a breastplate.

 

[Binister]

Did you just try to use +/- to compare two players on two different teams playing different positions?

Because that’s about as useless as nipples on a breastplate.

Talking about insecurity trying to make all Leafs players better than their comparatives.

 

[Pyrophorus]

How is Larkin better defensively then?

 

[chewbaccaman]

I'd rather build a team around Larkin. His speed is game breaking.

 

[Mitchy]

The one way winger who led the league in neutral zones takeaways

Yeah, a lot of people don't know that.

His play in the neutral zone and his transition game are game-breaking. That's the reason I would take Nylander.

 

[obey86]

* Larkin gets to play center

Nylander is a natural center, it's just that he can't play C here because the Leafs have Tavares, Matthews and Kadri up the middle. If he played for a team without that kind of center depth he would have the opportunity to play center. He still takes more than his fair share of draws with him and Matthews splitting them and he's over 50% in FO. Larkin wouldn't be a center here either, he'd be on the wing.

Tavares wasn't even on the team last year.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

Larkin, not that close.

 

[Atomos2]

Nylander, not close

 

[Holymakinaw]

i like Larkin a lot, but.......I go with Nylander.

So far, he's been way more consistent.

 

[DDRhockey]

In overall value? Well they're both relatively similar statistically, but Larkin's a center. So logically, it's Larkin.

Similar? Nylander has had back to back 60p seasons wheras larkin regressed to 35p just 2 sesasons ago.

 

[BAM]

They didn't have Tavares up until now and he still wasn't playing center...

Just don't forget that while you can claim the Leafs have better options, that means he's getting better players to play with too.

And before that they had Bozak who is a great center in terms of faceoffs and has performed that role for years. Matthews, Kadri and Bozak were down the middle and Nylander's chemistry with Matthews led to them being a duo on a line. He still takes more than his fare share of FO and is over 50% at it. If he played for the Wings or Sens or Habs he'd be a center.

 

[olli]

McDavid does score at a significantly higher rate on the PP than at ES... A 1.2pts/60 increase on the PP compared to ES last year, compared to only .3 for Larkin.

Even if McDavid was hardly better at scoring on the PP than compared to ES, there's obviously a difference when you're scoring at an elite rate at 5v5 than when you're merely scoring at a good rate 5v5.

If you're the best player in the world, you can afford to be relatively worse on the PP. If you're a low-end #1 C, you have less room for error.

My point was Larkin being bad on the PP is a result of playing On a bad PP more than anything else. Stick him on the leafs PP in Nylanders position and his PP stats would be similar to Nylander. The fact is ES scoring is harder and Larkin is better at it with worse linemates.

 

[Maplebeasts]

I’ll take the two way center over the one way winger who gets to play with Matthews.

But that's not accurate. Nylander is a possession and take away wizard.

 

[BAM]

Tavares wasn't even on the team last year.

Cool, He still wasn't going to be center over Bozak when Bozak has been a top 6 C for years and great on FO. If you have center depth and an abundance of centers one of them will have to shift to the wing.

 

[newfy]

Close, but Nylander.

They are similar 5v5 but Nylander is significantly better on the PP.

Larkin is a proven C, which helps his case, and is probably better than Nyander defensively, though it's debatable considering Nylander is a takeaway god.

Larkin's value is really hurt by how ineffective he is on the PP.

So f theyre comparable at 5 on 5 offensively and Nylander is significantly better on the PP, why did Larkin outscore him last year? You would think if one has a significant edge somewhere offensively that they would be able to outproduce the other.

I really dont see how you can make that argument. Their rate stats are pretty comparable 5 on 5, but Nylander gets to play with the best 5 on 5 goal scorer in the league while Larkin is the go to guy on his line. The only real difference in their time on ice per game is the amount of time Larkin plays short handed, theyre less than a minute apart at even strength. And I would say that playing with the leagus best 5 on 5 scorer, and not having to waste non-offensive time/energy for 2 or more mins a game killing penalties more tha nmakes up for that difference.

Theyre very comparable offensively while one is a two way center, a GM is going to trade more for a two way center than a softer winger.

 

[Critical13]

Hard for me to really evaluate this without Nylander signing. Obviously right now I'd rather have Larkin on that guaranteed contract. If we're talking in a vaccuum I think Nylander has the higher ceiling.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

Similar? Nylander has had back to back 60p seasons wheras larkin regressed to 35p just 2 sesasons ago.

Oh, you're going with two seasons ago rather than the most recent season... Interesting.

And before that they had Bozak who is a great center in terms of faceoffs and has performed that role for years. Matthews, Kadri and Bozak were down the middle and Nylander's chemistry with Matthews led to them being a duo on a line. He still takes more than his fare share of FO and is over 50% at it. If he played for the Wings or Sens or Habs he'd be a center.

And if Larkin played with Matthews on his line, the point spread between the two would probably be much different, since we're talking hypothetically.

 

[RedWingzz]

Larkin...it is close though.

 

[RedWingzz]

He's -9 going up against the +20 guy, who led the league in neutral zones takeaways, and higher PPG% than Crosby and McDavid.

...but I know you're pure hate.

Not saying I disagree with you, but +/- is rarely an accurate indicator for 2-way play.

 

[DDRhockey]

Oh, you're going with two seasons ago rather than the most recent season... Interesting.

What else should i go on? You said statistically similar and their careers so far isnt close. Nylanders ppg is much higher.