Firequacker
used wall of text! It's not very effective...
- Jun 3, 2022
- 483
- 963
I'm replying to this over here so as not to clutter the game thread with something only tangentially relevant, hopefully that's not a problem.
I didn't say Vaaks was "amazing", I said he performed better than LaCombe in that game (and in many games where LaCombe was on the top pair) according to the standard you presented as valid evidence. I don't even think that's an argument against LaCombe, because his deployment is absolutely the major problem, but seeing you constantly talk about fifteen minutes of Fowler-Vaaks like it was some kind of unmitigated disaster when nothing backs that up is getting old.
Speaking of, I know you're fully aware of why Fowler played so many more minutes in the Boston game, you've mentioned the issue repeatedly. But fine, since you want to play that way, Fowler's 5v5 ice time was 14:52. Defense partners, as you also certainly know, play together at 5v5. Special teams have different arrangements and are not a valid part of the 'Vaaks only succeeds because LaCombe is getting caved in on the top line' discussion.
LaCombe played 13:15 5v5. Most of the rest of his TOI was from the PK. He PKs more than Vaaks, most likely because a) they are prioritizing his development, which I already said was the correct decision, and b) he has the better stick. And considering at no point did I argue that Vaaks is the better player than LaCombe in every respect, I'm perfectly happy to say LaCombe PKing is a point in his overall favor. But once again, it has exactly nothing to do with whether his playing on the top 5v5 pairing is the reason for Vaaks playing well.
You don't think LaCombe is getting enough credit. I don't even disagree. You won't find me bashing how he's played while thrown to the wolves. But I don't think Vaaks is getting enough credit either. Every time there's a discussion about how well he's playing someone comes in with "yeah but look at his deployment". Well, I've looked at the deployment when it's actually comparable, and it largely still goes in Vaaks' favor at this time.
Again, I still think developing LaCombe is the correct priority, because developmental season. But it does suck for Vaaks, and the least he deserves is not having his genuinely good play discredited based on conventional wisdom that isn't backed up by facts.
Look, you're the one who cited the cards as sources when they don't even support your own argument, you don't have to get snippy and start burning strawmen down over someone pointing it out.
I didn't say Vaaks was "amazing", I said he performed better than LaCombe in that game (and in many games where LaCombe was on the top pair) according to the standard you presented as valid evidence. I don't even think that's an argument against LaCombe, because his deployment is absolutely the major problem, but seeing you constantly talk about fifteen minutes of Fowler-Vaaks like it was some kind of unmitigated disaster when nothing backs that up is getting old.
Speaking of, I know you're fully aware of why Fowler played so many more minutes in the Boston game, you've mentioned the issue repeatedly. But fine, since you want to play that way, Fowler's 5v5 ice time was 14:52. Defense partners, as you also certainly know, play together at 5v5. Special teams have different arrangements and are not a valid part of the 'Vaaks only succeeds because LaCombe is getting caved in on the top line' discussion.
LaCombe played 13:15 5v5. Most of the rest of his TOI was from the PK. He PKs more than Vaaks, most likely because a) they are prioritizing his development, which I already said was the correct decision, and b) he has the better stick. And considering at no point did I argue that Vaaks is the better player than LaCombe in every respect, I'm perfectly happy to say LaCombe PKing is a point in his overall favor. But once again, it has exactly nothing to do with whether his playing on the top 5v5 pairing is the reason for Vaaks playing well.
You don't think LaCombe is getting enough credit. I don't even disagree. You won't find me bashing how he's played while thrown to the wolves. But I don't think Vaaks is getting enough credit either. Every time there's a discussion about how well he's playing someone comes in with "yeah but look at his deployment". Well, I've looked at the deployment when it's actually comparable, and it largely still goes in Vaaks' favor at this time.
Again, I still think developing LaCombe is the correct priority, because developmental season. But it does suck for Vaaks, and the least he deserves is not having his genuinely good play discredited based on conventional wisdom that isn't backed up by facts.
