Laine very easily, not even close.
Odd results.
Ainec really. As good of a thread as any for it.Ainec really? bad thread for it.
Ainec really. As good of a thread as any for it.
Laine's scored significantly more goals than Barkov had scored points to this point in his career. Laine also has more room for improvement than Barkov had.
My only agenda is to kill this meme. It's an absolute fallacy and yet it gets regurgitate here over & over again. In a year where the much-dumped-on Nathan MacKinnon is looking like a good bet to win the Hart with 10 games left, it is time for this myth to die.
We simply have no clue how Laine will develop so making definitive statements about how his trajectory will continue is asinine. Maybe he'll steadily score 10 more goals a year until he's a 100-goal scorer, or maybe he gets complacent after Winnipeg wins the cup this year and in the end this turns out to have been his peak, or (more likely) it'll be somewhere in the middle and he may face downs as well as ups as he continues to grow into the premier goal scorer of his generation that most expect.
What we do know is that Barkov has taken those consistent steps to become the dominant player that Laine is expected to become by most...myself included...that much is certain. But you can't just compare their 1st two years & assume that Laine's going to evolve the same way as Sasha did because that isn't certain.
PS I'm an avs fan, so I have no horse in this race. I love Mikko & his chemistry with MacK is absolutely beautiful, but he doesn't deserve to win this poll. I love Barkov from his draft year when we were debating MacKinnon v Sasha on our boards. And until Dallas got Radulov (my favorite player), the Jets were my second favorite non-Colorado central division team...I live in Chicago, so they are my favorite non-Avs team because of how many of my friends they turned into hockey fans...because I love Wheeler, Little & Buff and for a handful of years it seemed like they drafted all of my favorite prospects (morrissey, connor, roslovic, etc.).
I just hate this assumption that development is linear, which underpins so many posts on this board.
Ainec really? bad thread for it.
Laine is going to score 15 more goals than Barkov had points at the same age but its not AINEC? Stop over thinking it HF nerds.
The only fallacy I read is this ridiculous idea that because a player plays center he is more valuable despite one player being vastly superior at producing offense. This thread is about as insane as the one where HF posters think they understand the game better than actual players that play in the NHL. None of you are that smart, stop over thinking it.
Big players specifially forwards almost always take longer to develop if you dont believe this you probably havent been watching hockey for very long.
So ill ask you this, why is it that Laine is going to take a different development curve than Barkov?....... Why do you think he is going to just top out and stop improving. It makes absolutely no sense to give one player the benefit of the doubt in this situation than the other. Its because you have an agenda.
The difference in the players at the same age isnt even in the same hemisphere but to try and prove your point your argument is that he is going to stop developing. Its actually funny. Laine is the only player ever that just stopped getting better once he leaves his teenage years. Ok man.
The only fallacy I read is this ridiculous idea that because a player plays center he is more valuable despite one player being vastly superior at producing offense. This thread is about as insane as the one where HF posters think they understand the game better than actual players that play in the NHL. None of you are that smart, stop over thinking it.
Big players specifially forwards almost always take longer to develop if you dont believe this you probably havent been watching hockey for very long.
So ill ask you this, why is it that Laine is going to take a different development curve than Barkov?....... Why do you think he is going to just top out and stop improving. It makes absolutely no sense to give one player the benefit of the doubt in this situation than the other. Its because you have an agenda.
The difference in the players at the same age isnt even in the same hemisphere but to try and prove your point your argument is that he is going to stop developing. Its actually funny. Laine is the only player ever that just stopped getting better once he leaves his teenage years. Ok man.
Barkov is more talented and impactful than both AINEC, although both are just as productive as Barkov. Nonetheless, more productive =/= better player.
Good job ignoring international competitions and playoffs.Barkov pre-draft liiga stats
53 games 48 points, 2 points but 4 games played less than the leader
Laine pre-draft liiga stats
46 games 33 points, 26 points but 10 games played less than the leader
something something linear development, he's better at younger age
Good job ignoring international competitions and playoffs.