Laine blows a goal THROUGH Seider's stick

[tapi]

While he is on a decent streak, we should not overlook that he is scoring from a singular position on the ice and exclusively on the PP. Good teams who actually prepare for this should shut him down quite easily, as has been earlier seen over his career. Also, Laine typically disappears for up to half a season after good stretches. We will see if there is something extraordinary about his current in game in Montreal to offset these historical facts.

 

[Maple Leaf]

why did cbus give up laine
are they dumb or something?

 

[VT]

Only thing I don't like about the guy is the handful of absolutely rabid fans of his that follow him around in these forums. Turning people against Laine simply by being too annoying to bear. Making everything about his current team about him and only about him. All of his mistakes and shortcomings are a conspiracy by the current team too, or linemates or whatever.

I know about the forum feature. I made a mistake when he was traded and I am going to fix it, right now.

It's one thing to point out his partners (chemistry)/injuries (that applies to every player, that's why I'm sticking up for the others), it's another thing to point out his mistakes, like bad using his body to cover the puck, often wanting to bring the puck into the OZ himself, even though that's not his strong suit, but quick and accurate passing is. Of course I say about his play in CBJ.

The Habs have Hutson, who is a top PP quarterback, which helps the forwards (Zach Werenski is more of a sniper), and also an ideal PP unit. I think Marchenko/Chinakhov would have more goals with him.

 

[Planetov]

Easily

Depending on which point of his you were responding to, I’d say the words “arguably” and “barely” are more appropriate.

 

[VT]

Yeah he was the best player in Columbus when ever available, made all his teammates perform better and team was winning more with him than without him

Bus ignored all of these facts for years and always argued from his feelings.

It's a childs argument

But making uncritical excuses is not good either.

 

[Marioesque]

Depending on which point of his you were responding to, I’d say the words “arguably” and “barely” are more appropriate.

About Ovechkin shot. Laine is a lot more accurate, but also much more selective. Ovechkin has always scored a lot because he kept shooting every time he got the puck. Laine doesn't

But making uncritical excuses is not good either.

Oh yeah but we've always acknowledged Laine's shortcomings as part of the package, he's not a great two way player, he's an average one at that.

Bus thinks there's one correct way of playing and what matters to him is how the player looks in his opinion. I don't care what it looks like as long as results are had. That difference creates a problem

 

[Planetov]

About Ovechkin shot. Laine is a lot more accurate, but also much more selective. Ovechkin has always scored a lot because he kept shooting every time he got the puck. Laine doesn't

I don’t know that I’d consider a 1.9% higher career shooting percentage to be “a lot more accurate.” So once again “easily” is not the right word to describe such a small difference. I’d go with “marginally,” “slightly”, or maybe “somewhat”.

And “kept shooting every time he has the puck” is once again poorly worded. He quite literally does not “shoot the puck every time he has the puck.”

You realize you can praise one player without tearing another down, right? Or if you choose to go about it that way, maybe hyperbole isn’t the best strategy.

Either way, Ovechkin has indeed “scored a lot.”

 

[TimeZone]

I'm not saying Laine would ever hit 60+ goals but the stat watching you're performing is kinda narrow minded view.

Would Matthews produce as many goals in Columbus than he has scored with elite line mates in Toronto? No f***ing way, but that would not take away the pontential to score a lot more. This is just an example and could be said about any goal scorer.

You also just choose to ignore all the injuries hes had. You literally can not predict by watching the stats what he is capable of when he is fully healthy and in his prime since we've never seen it yet.

Absurd response, Matthews has shown time and time again he will produce at an elite level whether he's playing with Marner, Nylander or even Max Domi for that matter, he had 19 goals in 24 goals at EVEN STRENGTH alone last season without Marner on his wing, all respect to Laine but he's shown nothing to indicicate he's capable of playing anywhere near the kind of level Matthews has.

Laine has spent most of his career playing on a stacked Winnipeg team, talk about ignoring reality.

We have a near 500 game sample size for the near 27 year old, I think it's safe to say we have a good grasp on his ceiling at this point and can agree it's higher than what he's produced thus far, he has 50+ potential in a good situation, but he's shown to be extremely streaky, there's no room for small inconcistency patterns when you're talking 60+ goals in a season, and Laine has shown some massive ones his entire career through nearly 500 games.

He has no business being compared to elite centers around the league who are even better than him at his own bread and butter by a significant margin like Matthews has proven to be.

 

[BB88]

While he is on a decent streak, we should not overlook that he is scoring from a singular position on the ice and exclusively on the PP. Good teams who actually prepare for this should shut him down quite easily, as has been earlier seen over his career. Also, Laine typically disappears for up to half a season after good stretches. We will see if there is something extraordinary about his current in game in Montreal to offset these historical facts.

That’s worked so well against Ovy

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

I don’t know that I’d consider a 1.9% higher career shooting percentage to be “a lot more accurate.”

It's not 1.9%, but 14.6% higher.

14.9/13.0 = 1.146

 

[CashMash]

I thought MTL would have been a bad fit for Laine given all the pressure, but so far so good! *knocks on wood* I am REALLY happy to see him do well. Injuries are his main problem, though.

 

[BullLund]

While he is on a decent streak, we should not overlook that he is scoring from a singular position on the ice and exclusively on the PP. Good teams who actually prepare for this should shut him down quite easily, as has been earlier seen over his career. Also, Laine typically disappears for up to half a season after good stretches. We will see if there is something extraordinary about his current in game in Montreal to offset these historical facts.

The hope is that when this inevitably happens, and teams start chasing after Laine, the other shooters on Montreal's power play can get free opportunities to shoot (Caufield, Suzuki). The issue with Columbus is that they didn't really have a goal scoring threat apart from Laine on the power play.

Hutson is also making some great plays which shouldn't be overlooked. It's not just Laine's shot that's the danger. This kid so far looks like a superstar on offense.

 

[HabsQC]

why did cbus give up laine
are they dumb or something?

And they paid a 2nd on top of it.

 

[Marioesque]

I don’t know that I’d consider a 1.9% higher career shooting percentage to be “a lot more accurate.” So once again “easily” is not the right word to describe such a small difference. I’d go with “marginally,” “slightly”, or maybe “somewhat”.

And “kept shooting every time he has the puck” is once again poorly worded. He quite literally does not “shoot the puck every time he has the puck.”

You realize you can praise one player without tearing another down, right? Or if you choose to go about it that way, maybe hyperbole isn’t the best strategy.

Either way, Ovechkin has indeed “scored a lot.”

I'm not putting Ovechkin down when saying his shot isn't as good as Laines. He's still a much better scorer, right?

Nothing wrong with Laine being the best shot but not the best goal scorer.

He's the best distance shooter quite convincingly but he's not as effective up close as an Ovie or Matthews, and a lot has to do with his stick length and flex which is optimized for distance shooting rather than close up puck battles stick on stick. It's also about angles, he shoots from further away from his body than the aforementioned

 

[elmaco]

And they paid a 2nd on top of it.

To be fair he asked for a trade, good for CBJ to facilitate that.

 

[NotCommitted]

Yeah this "OMG Columbus were so stupid to trade him for nothing" narrative can go rest in peace, what were they supposed to do? Play hardball with a guy who lost his father while playing in the org, got depressed and entered the PAP and wanted a fresh start somewhere else?

Now retaining 50% or something would've made a ton of sense in their situation and with the timing of the trade, but apparently ownership didn't want to retain, so the GM had very little options.

 

[BB88]

Yeah this "OMG Columbus were so stupid to trade him for nothing" narrative can go rest in peace, what were they supposed to do? Play hardball with a guy who lost his father while playing in the org, got depressed and entered the PAP and wanted a fresh start somewhere else?

Now retaining 50% or something would've made a ton of sense in their situation and with the timing of the trade, but apparently ownership didn't want to retain, so the GM had very little options.

The stupid thing they made was to be determined to trade him at full cap hit

That just gave Montreal all the leverage, Laine at 50% would have brought have the league into the mix

With how the 2016 draft went for Montreal in the end they could be the ones smiling when thinking back

 

[Planetov]

It's not 1.9%, but 14.6% higher.

14.9/13.0 = 1.146

You know exactly what I meant.

 

[Tryamw]

It is getting ridiculous…what‘s next? Blasting shots through the goalies glove?

For the canes it'd have to be the goalies crest... I don't have high expectations of it occurring (thank goodness)

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

You know exactly what I meant.

Indeed I do,

But that doesn't make you less wrong.

Laine has been 14.6% more efficient with his shots than Ovie.

 

[Planetov]

Indeed I do,

But that doesn't make you less wrong.

Laine has been 14.6% more efficient with his shots than Ovie.

Then allow me to amend what I typed to reflect what I meant:

“I don’t know that I’d consider 1.9 percentage points higher career shooting percentage to be ‘a lot more accurate.’”

Fitting that it’s my diction that has caused this little left turn.

As for your last sentence, are you conflating accuracy with efficiency? Because I distinctly remember typing the word “accurate”.