Speculation: Armchair GM - Offseason Thread (Summer Edition)

[thebus88]

Laine is an ECHL level player who is hated by the entire universe for @thebus88 .

He’s a $5.5-6 million dollar, intensity and awareness lacking, 1 dimensional offensive minded winger, with a very good shot that you should want to be playing on your 2nd line.

He’s no “superstar” or “franchise level” talent. Many other NHL players are just as good as he is at scoring goals, and shooting the puck, and he lacks versatility to change the way he plays on a game to game basis.

He’s also nowhere near as good of a “two way” player that many -for whatever reason- give him credit for currently.

We will see. The excuses are running thin. Fantasy statistics mean NOTHING.

 

[VT]

I predict Laine will have his best NHL season (so far) this season.

I hope not only Laine but most players too, especially goalies and d-men. I think Provorov will show why he was drafted so high.

 

[majormajor]

We will see. The excuses are running thin. Fantasy statistics mean NOTHING.

Excuses for what? Laine has the most points on the team over the last two years, about a point per game.

The team was terrible with him on the bench or injured last year, outscored at 5v5 198 to 107. With Laine on the ice they outscored opponents 36 to 33.

So tell me who is making excuses and for what?

 

[stevo61]

Excuses for what? Laine has the most points on the team over the last two years, about a point per game.

The team was terrible with him on the bench or injured last year, outscored at 5v5 198 to 107. With Laine on the ice they outscored opponents 36 to 33.

So tell me who is making excuses and for what?

Larsen just gave him the easy minutes, duh.

 

[majormajor]

Larsen just gave him the easy minutes, duh.

There's numbers for that too, but they might have decimals in them and I don't want to make bus's brain hurt.

 

[thebus88]

Larsen just gave him the easy minutes, duh.

I mean, I think this pretty much IS it. He’s set up to “produce” and/or “flourish” mores so than essentially any other player on the team. Then factor in his cap hit. Maybe if we want the team to win more games, which should be the goal over Laine scoring goals, he doesn’t play with Jenner or Gaudreau as much. And counting points playing with another overly offensive minded player in Roslovic means nothing, IMO.

He’s nowhere near as good of an overall player or impactful as any other player of similar cap hit/salary. Guys like Panarin and Nash would “carry” their lines and impact entire games in ways Laine barely ever has.

I’d love to see the numbers showing WHEN Laine scores goals. Scores the majority in “garbage time” when the games are out of reach, and he’s considered such a great goal scorer and yet he probably hasn’t hit double digit “garbage goals” for his entire career. I’d also love to point out how much he’s looked at as the “trigger man” on the ice the last few years, most noticeably in the PP, and 1st have people acknowledge how that impacts his numbers, and when looking at the team in relation to other teams, Laine’s impact on this should be looked at carefully.

There's numbers for that too, but they might have decimals in them and I don't want to make bus's brain hurt.

“The numbers” can mean whatever you want them to mean. The mathematician’s creating the numbers or the fans interpreting them turn them into whatever they want.

However, please give me a “summary” of whatever these numbers are and what they apparently are showing.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

I’m just excited for training camp to start so we can stop these same old recycled offseason arguments.

 

[Monstershockey]

I mean, I think this pretty much IS it. He’s set up to “produce” and/or “flourish” mores so than essentially any other player on the team. Then factor in his cap hit. Maybe if we want the team to win more games, which should be the goal over Laine scoring goals, he doesn’t play with Jenner or Gaudreau as much. And counting points playing with another overly offensive minded player in Roslovic means nothing, IMO.

He’s nowhere near as good of an overall player or impactful as any other player of similar cap hit/salary. Guys like Panarin and Nash would “carry” their lines and impact entire games in ways Laine barely ever has.

I’d love to see the numbers showing WHEN Laine scores goals. Scores the majority in “garbage time” when the games are out of reach, and he’s considered such a great goal scorer and yet he probably hasn’t hit double digit “garbage goals” for his entire career. I’d also love to point out how much he’s looked at as the “trigger man” on the ice the last few years, most noticeably in the PP, and 1st have people acknowledge how that impacts his numbers, and when looking at the team in relation to other teams, Laine’s impact on this should be looked at carefully.


“The numbers” can mean whatever you want them to mean. The mathematician’s creating the numbers or the fans interpreting them turn them into whatever they want.

However, please give me a “summary” of whatever these numbers are and what they apparently are showing.

It is interesting if you dig into the numbers and see how some other things worked out. You are right that you can twist numbers to how you want them to fit.

If you look at Laine's splits for last year it shows some interesting things. In the 15 wins with him playing he was very good. 23 points and a +14. His shooting percentage was very good also at over 20%. Looking at the losses with him playing is pretty much the opposite. 23 points in 34 games and a -23. His shooting percentage also dropped to under 10%.

Then you look at the overall records with or without him it is still interesting. With him playing the team had a much worse record at 15-34-6 compared to 10-13-3 without him.

So you can take stats and make them fit whatever you are trying to say. You can say he was the best player 5 on 5 because they outscored opponents when he was on the ice. Or you can say he wasn't much of a difference maker because they lost at a higher rate when he played, and he wasn't as good when they lost as when they won.

I am not bashing Laine, just showing how you can look at the numbers and get what you want out of them.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I don't find the numbers and stats and even advanced stats business so confusing at all. I merely dismiss them if they don't fit my already-formed thoughts and opinions.

 

[VT]

I would still add when he played (if after injuries, he was hardly in shape), possibly with injury, what teams he played against, who with, etc. Anyway, this applies to every player. Besides, the club statisticians have the most information, and they have more accurate information than the best independent statisticians.

 

[stevo61]

I’m just excited for training camp to start so we can stop these same old recycled offseason arguments.

It will only stop if they are winning

 

[Viqsi]

It will only stop if they are winning

Not even then.

 

[CBJ goalie]

I mean, I think this pretty much IS it. He’s set up to “produce” and/or “flourish” mores so than essentially any other player on the team. Then factor in his cap hit. Maybe if we want the team to win more games, which should be the goal over Laine scoring goals, he doesn’t play with Jenner or Gaudreau as much. And counting points playing with another overly offensive minded player in Roslovic means nothing, IMO.

He’s nowhere near as good of an overall player or impactful as any other player of similar cap hit/salary. Guys like Panarin and Nash would “carry” their lines and impact entire games in ways Laine barely ever has.

I’d love to see the numbers showing WHEN Laine scores goals. Scores the majority in “garbage time” when the games are out of reach, and he’s considered such a great goal scorer and yet he probably hasn’t hit double digit “garbage goals” for his entire career. I’d also love to point out how much he’s looked at as the “trigger man” on the ice the last few years, most noticeably in the PP, and 1st have people acknowledge how that impacts his numbers, and when looking at the team in relation to other teams, Laine’s impact on this should be looked at carefully.


“The numbers” can mean whatever you want them to mean. The mathematician’s creating the numbers or the fans interpreting them turn them into whatever they want.

However, please give me a “summary” of whatever these numbers are and what they apparently are showing.

Does this count?
And feel free to point out it's just one example. Or that it was against a bad Montreal team.

 

[cbjthrowaway]

He’s a $5.5-6 million dollar, intensity and awareness lacking, 1 dimensional offensive minded winger, with a very good shot that you should want to be playing on your 2nd line.

He’s no “superstar” or “franchise level” talent. Many other NHL players are just as good as he is at scoring goals, and shooting the puck, and he lacks versatility to change the way he plays on a game to game basis.

He’s also nowhere near as good of a “two way” player that many -for whatever reason- give him credit for currently.

We will see. The excuses are running thin. Fantasy statistics mean NOTHING.

oh look, we've started The Cycle once again!

 

[thebus88]

Does this count?
And feel free to point out it's just one example. Or that it was against a bad Montreal team.

Count for what? What does it show? That Laine has a very good 1 timer (or shot in general) that he can get off with tons of space and time on the PP? Even I admit that. My whole issue is that he needs to do MORE things than what this video is showing.

Yes, it’s just 1 goal. I’d like to see the “numbers” (time in game and teams goal totals) from all his goals the last 3 years. I’d also be interested in what the CBJ’s PP numbers have been with and without Laine. Maybe these numbers would show him favorably. Maybe they should since he makes 8-9 million f***ing dollars a year.

oh look, we've started The Cycle once again!

Yes, the cycle of misinterpretation, misrepresentation, and misinformation.

 

[majormajor]

Count for what? What does it show? That Laine has a very good 1 timer (or shot in general) that he can get off with tons of space and time on the PP? Even I admit that. My whole issue is that he needs to do MORE things than what this video is showing.

Yes, it’s just 1 goal. I’d like to see the “numbers” (time in game and teams goal totals) from all his goals the last 3 years. I’d also be interested in what the CBJ’s PP numbers have been with and without Laine. Maybe these numbers would show him favorably. Maybe they should since he makes 8-9 million f***ing dollars a year.


Yes, the cycle of misinterpretation, misrepresentation, and misinformation.

You are the fount of misinformation.

Here you just asserted that Laine scores the majority of goals in garbage time, and now you're demanding others to pull up the numbers, because you don't actually know the truth. You probably think you're lying in service of some greater truth, but you're not.

 

[thebus88]

You are the fount of misinformation.

Here you just asserted

I like the term hypothesized better.

that Laine scores the majority of goals in garbage time, and now you're demanding others to pull up the numbers, because you don't actually know the truth. You probably think you're lying in service of some greater truth, but you're not.

I’m not demanding anything. I have a feeling about something and would love to see the “numbers” on it. Admittedly, the overall performance of the the team the past few years will “skew” the results into my argument almost naturally, yet also admittedly, all of this is blamed on every single player, other than Laine somehow.

Keeping track of something like the times and score of the game when a player scores goals is something that seems easier to keep track of than many of the things the “advanced statisticians” attempt and FAIL to keep track of. No, I will not take my time to look, but, there’s plenty out there who spend time looking at much more ridiculous and complicated “numbers”.

 

[majormajor]

I like the term hypothesized better.

Okay, next time you want to play this game, state it like a hypothesis "my hypothesis is...", and not like an outright lie.

You're trying to provoke other people with falsehoods and extreme statements and then calling out misinformation when you're the greatest source of it.

 

[thebus88]

Okay, next time you want to play this game, state it like a hypothesis "my hypothesis is...", and not like an outright lie.

You're trying to provoke other people with falsehoods and extreme statements and then calling out misinformation when you're the greatest source of it.

You guys start piggybacking on posts and I end up having to argue multiple unrelated points and defend things I haven’t even said or meant.

I literally asked for the numbers based on a “hunch”. Different numbers than the same ones parroted over and over to apparently “prove” something about Laine that they don’t actually show.

 

[Marioesque]

I literally asked for the numbers based on a “hunch”.

I could link several different compilation reels from youtube, like his last season playoffs in Finland, U20 2016 reel, or all of those OT wins he has secured to crush this hunch but it's too much work. Just search for Patrik Laine OT and you'll get your answer. You must look the other way when he scores OT goals or last second goals to keep this reality avoiding "hunch" alive.

 

[NotCommitted]

@thebus88 you keep asking for numbers in different occasions but always when you actually get some numbers to refute some claim you made, suddenly the numbers are meaningless. Maybe do your own leg work so someone can tell you numbers mean nothing for a change

 

[Marioesque]

Admittedly, the overall performance of the the team the past few years will “skew” the results into my argument almost naturally, yet also admittedly, all of this is blamed on every single player, other than Laine somehow.

Well, he's just about the last person to blame because he's been the most productive and positive with his ice time. Of course there's things he could have done better but it's super weird to START the blame from the player that has objectively performed the best. Logic would suggest to first focus on the ones with the worst impact and record if you want to improve the overall product.

It's backwards thinking that's all. You do get it though when it comes to Korpi and Elvis, you can find the one more to blame and stats agree with you.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

 

[thebus88]

@thebus88 you keep asking for numbers in different occasions but always when you actually get some numbers to refute some claim you made, suddenly the numbers are meaningless. Maybe do your own leg work so someone can tell you numbers mean nothing for a change

Don’t tempt me. To add, the teams record with and without Laine (and some other stats) is dismissed constantly for no good reason.

Give me a sec.

I assume, as with most things Patrick Laine, we are ignoring the 20/21 season?? Let’s see, 26 goals in 21/22 and 22 goals in 22/23.

Talking numbers, stats and facts, would calling Laine a “20 goal scorer” be accurate?? Why or why not??

 

[thebus88]

Well, he's just about the last person to blame because he's been the most productive and positive with his ice time. Of course there's things he could have done better but it's super weird to START the blame from the player that has objectively performed the best. Logic would suggest to first focus on the ones with the worst impact and record if you want to improve the overall product.

All of the things said for Laine could be said for Rick Nash in the past, regarding “performance” and “production”. And Nash arguably had a much bigger impact on games (and the team) individually and was a much better overall player. Yet, the team was better with him replaced by “lesser” players. How or why??

It's backwards thinking that's all. You do get it though when it comes to Korpi and Elvis, you can find the one more to blame and stats agree with you.

Great example. Literally. But, not why you are thinking. “The stats” vary from year to year, MUCH more than a players actual ability.

I was looked at (by many) as “wrong” about Elvis and Korpisalo (because of the numbers) for quite a long time. Until I wasn’t.