Dynheart
Registered User
- Aug 21, 2011
- 2,039
- 54
You must not have been here for Johnny Gaudreau, that was hilarious
I didn't really pay attention to him. But I did read it was pretty bad.
You must not have been here for Johnny Gaudreau, that was hilarious
Gaudreau still hasn't proven anything in the Olympics. I don't understand all the hype.You must not have been here for Johnny Gaudreau, that was hilarious
Had a lot better game against Tampa than against Carolina. The pass was a good one. Sure, the defense didn't do much (didn't pressure Larkin NOR didn't cover Zetterberg). But it still was a good play.
And I really have to mention the change in the narrative.
Before the season started there was this narrative him being a future Toews/Kopitar center. When I said that it is not what Larkin really is, he is not that kind of offensive player at all - he is a high motor, straightforward guy. Many Wings fans told me how I don't have any clue what I'm talking about.
Now when Wings fans actually have watched him (which many of them clearly hadn't done before the season, some most likely had, and they most likely weren't the ones making these pretty off comparisons), no one really says he's similar to Toews/Kopitar (because you really have to be unfamiliar to hockey to think so).
It's interesting to see how he ends up being when it's time for him to carry his line against tougher competition. Luckily, there's no hurry for that because Zeta still is and most likely will be at least couple of year capable of carriyng the burden. So there's time to groom.
Larkin being sent down to AHL at this point would be close to lunacy, and I don't think that the risk of losing a tweener like Andersson/Ferraro should have any weight in that decision.
I think the Kopitar/Toews comparisons were more about Larkin being a 2 way center (good offensively and defensively) like those guys more so than anything stylistically. At least that's how I always saw the comparison.
I didn't really pay attention to him. But I did read it was pretty bad.
Had a lot better game against Tampa than against Carolina. The pass was a good one. Sure, the defense didn't do much (didn't pressure Larkin NOR didn't cover Zetterberg). But it still was a good play.
And I really have to mention the change in the narrative.
Before the season started there was this narrative him being a future Toews/Kopitar center. When I said that it is not what Larkin really is, he is not that kind of offensive player at all - he is a high motor, straightforward guy. Many Wings fans told me how I don't have any clue what I'm talking about.
Now when Wings fans actually have watched him (which many of them clearly hadn't done before the season, some most likely had, and they most likely weren't the ones making these pretty off comparisons), no one really says he's similar to Toews/Kopitar (because you really have to be unfamiliar to hockey to think so).
It's interesting to see how he ends up being when it's time for him to carry his line against tougher competition. Luckily, there's no hurry for that because Zeta still is and most likely will be at least couple of year capable of carriyng the burden. So there's time to groom.
Larkin being sent down to AHL at this point would be close to lunacy, and I don't think that the risk of losing a tweener like Andersson/Ferraro should have any weight in that decision.
And I really have to mention the change in the narrative.
Before the season started there was this narrative him being a future Toews/Kopitar center. When I said that it is not what Larkin really is, he is not that kind of offensive player at all - he is a high motor, straightforward guy. Many Wings fans told me how I don't have any clue what I'm talking about.
Now when Wings fans actually have watched him (which many of them clearly hadn't done before the season, some most likely had, and they most likely weren't the ones making these pretty off comparisons), no one really says he's similar to Toews/Kopitar (because you really have to be unfamiliar to hockey to think so).
That's weird, because high motor and straightforward is pretty much how I'd describe Toews' game. Maybe I'd add "two-way", but that's pretty much it. He's never struck me as a flashy finesse player. I don't think Kopitar is that kind of guy either.
Not that I think Toews (or Kopitar) is the best comparison, but I think you're really downplaying Larkin's skill level. Unduly so. You don't produce offense against top pairing defensemen through hard work alone. Guys like Glendening are a testament to that. And this point should be extra strong because Larkin is a rookie, and he's got lots to learn.
Is Larkin a flashy player? Maybe not. But if he produces lots of points, who cares? There's no style award. As the saying goes: they don't ask how, they ask how many.
No narrative change from what I've seen. Wings' fans still regularly compare him to Toews.
Out of curiosity, who would you say he best compares best to?
"Controlling the pace of the game" seems to always be used in reference to guys that can slow the game down when they have control of the puck. From what Larkin has showed so far the game seems to go faster when he's on the ice. He is everywhere and chases down pucks, forechecks, pushes the pace and tilts the ice towards the offensive zone. If that's not 'controlling the pace' I don't know what is. It's not like he's unable to slow down and make those patient plays when that's the best option. You see that very clearly in both his assist on Abdelkader's goal against Toronto and Z's goal aganst Carolina.
It's referred to slowing the game down more often (eventhough it means the opposite as well, as I mentioned), because it is in fact a lot more difficult to do. It's not as difficult to play high tempo in a game where the speed is generally low. Becuase generally all the other players are playing slower. But to slow it down yourself when all the other players are playing with high speed, that's a lot more difficult. You have to be able to thinka nd read the game a lot faster while you still have to be able to be more than reactive - you have to be exceptionally creative. More than often players just get drawn in to the game and rather react than anything else. It's not controlling the game.
Being able to react and act fast in specific situation has really little to do with what I'm talking about.
Evander Kane and Zemgus Girgensons usually do the same thing, but they have nothing to do with controlling the pace of the game.
I'm pretty baffled, to be honest. You guys have had Babcock as your coach (who did a great job in order to find the right pace systematically for the team. I'm still honestly really impressed what he did in the Tampa-series last year) for a decade and Datsyuk (who is really good at controlling the pace of the game) as your center even longer.
It's pretty difficult to play the game at the tempo Dylan Larkin does also. Tampa is not a slow-skating team. I kinda get what you're saying but I just think you're grasping at straws.It's referred to slowing the game down more often (eventhough it means the opposite as well, as I mentioned), because it is in fact a lot more difficult to do. It's not as difficult to play high tempo in a game where the speed is generally low. Becuase generally all the other players are playing slower. But to slow it down yourself when all the other players are playing with high speed, that's a lot more difficult. You have to be able to thinka nd read the game a lot faster while you still have to be able to be more than reactive - you have to be exceptionally creative. More than often players just get drawn in to the game and rather react than anything else. It's not controlling the game.
Being able to react and act fast in specific situation has really little to do with what I'm talking about.
Evander Kane and Zemgus Girgensons usually do the same thing, but they have nothing to do with controlling the pace of the game.
I'm pretty baffled, to be honest. You guys have had Babcock as your coach (who did a great job in order to find the right pace systematically for the team. I'm still honestly really impressed what he did in the Tampa-series last year) for a decade and Datsyuk (who is really good at controlling the pace of the game) as your center even longer.
Toews is not exceptionally creative. He protects the puck well, he retrieves the puck well, and he makes the smart play 95% of the time. That's literally Larkin's game. Larkin doesn't have to play the game like Datsyuk to be a franchise player. Datsyuk never had the athletic abilities that Larkin has so he was forced to become an elite player through his skill and creativity. The Toews comparison isn't a perfect one, but no comparison really is. He plays the game very similiarly, especially with his board play. The way he steals pucks reminds he very much of Toews with the way he leans on players with his stick.
You can protect the puck with your body or by outskating your opponent. There isn't one single way to do it. I've seen Larkin carry the puck enough as a 19 year old playing through the first 3 games of his career to know that he has the potential to take over games. Larkin plays more like a Fedorov stylistically than anyone else, and he certainly could control the game and drive possession in his prime.
I'm not sure why you are acting like you've been vindicated by his first 3 games. I recall you saying that Larkin isn't good at driving possession or playmaking when that's literally all he's done.
I don't think it's fair to criticize Larkin for not slowing the game down. He is 19 years old just starting his NHL career. It will take time for him to get more and more comfortable in the NHL, to the point where he is more willing to try and slow the pace of the game and understands different situations better. He has shown an aptitude for slowing the game down at lower levels, but for right now he is likely more comfortable just using his speed to impact the game and understanding that Zetterberg can slow the pace of the game on his line. I guess when there is nothing else to criticize bringing up one of, if not the, hardest things to do in the NHL is the only option left to scrutinize him.
Claiming that Larkin isn't a player to control the pace of a game at this point in his career isn't really a knock against him. Maybe at some point he will, maybe he won't. Saying that he hasn't shown that he is a franchise center isn't either. He has looked great so far and plays at a really high tempo, but right now he isn't going to carry a line at the NHL level, so it's a good thing that he isn't expected to.
I don't mind if he turns out to be Evander Kane rather than Toews.
Really? Because I'm pretty sure the entire Wings board minus you would be outraged if he turned into a 40-50 point player.
That's a pretty silly thing to be upset about.Really? Because I'm pretty sure the entire Wings board minus you would be outraged if he turned into a 40-50 point player.
Exactly. I'm not saying that Larkin has no potential to be better than Kane, but it wouldn't bother me if that is the type of player he becomes. Minus some of the locker room grumblings.I think it says a lot about the Red Wings drafting that the fanbase would be outraged by picking a two way #2c at 15th OA.