LW Patrik Laine (2016, 2nd, WPG) XVI

[Randy Randerson]

Ok, now attacking me personally, you are looking, if possible even more pathetic that way.

What you can´t get in to your head is that he shoots that well that 20% or more is very reachable, especially if you would know hockey and watch his games. Neither which seems to apply to you.

Toronto made a mistake at draft day, picking the (probably) second best player in the draft, 2 bad, no cups for you!

Not really a personal attack, your outlook is delusional

I can't get that in my head because I don't see Laine as the best shooter of the modern era by a large margin, like you do if you think he can sustain a 20%+ shooting percentage for 50+ goals. Only Stamkos on a 60 goal season was close in his 4th full NHL season. So the reason I can't get my head around that standpoint is because it doesn't stand up to even the most basic scrutiny, and we haven't looked at the advanced stats (which heavily favour Matthews as the better player thus far, bee tee dubs.)

If you want to talk about personal attacks, there's one bolded in your post

The resounding "I told you so" awaits you when the bubble bursts - and if Laine goes 70+ games with that shooting percentage, then I'll eat crow...I feel pretty good about my odds

 

[Booster*]

I can't get that in my head

I know.

 

[Purity*]

I never have suggested that, so don't ask me to not act like I have not been acting. Right?

And you should not pretend that Scheifele would be racking up as much points without the best goal scorer in the game.

What happened to Ovechkin?

 

[4thline]

Winning that bet would be like a stanley-cup for a leaf fan, right?

You take what you get as a leaf fan, amarite?

Lol atleast Psycho had a plausible cover for not backing his hyperbole, you just tapdance.

I'd say it'd be closer to having any 1st round pick. Likely to happen status quo but still satisfying on draft day .

 

[Randy Randerson]

I know (that I am wrong.)

well that works both ways....and really isn't that productive

 

[psycho_dad*]

The resounding "I told you so" awaits you when the bubble bursts

And our "told you so" is already reality. We told you so. Maybe you'll have a moment at some point too, who knows.

So hang on to that hope because future possibilities are what you are banking on. Past and present is all Laine.

It's like someone betting on a stock that has been second best for years, claiming that it one day will be the better investment than the one that has been outproducing for a couple of years. Yeah, it's possible. No, it's not likely.

 

[Randy Randerson]

And our "told you so" is already reality. We told you so. Maybe you'll have a moment at some point too, who knows.

So hang on to that hope because future possibilities are what you are banking on. Past and present is all Laine.

It's like someone betting on a stock that has been second best for years, claiming that it one day will be the better investment than the one that has been outproducing for a couple of years. Yeah, it's possible. No, it's not likely.

Um....if you want to talk about stocks being better for years, maybe have a look at some draft rankings from....2013 through to draft day? http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016-draft/nhl-draft-rankings/

Its actually more like someone seeing big dividends from a stock with a weaker balance sheet, declaring it the best thing ever, only to find out that it's Bre-X

I'm not trying to bash Laine, but c'mon man, neither has played 20 games and you want to declare him the obvious best pick after years in Matthews shadow (he only actually got to Matthews shadow after a very strong second half + playoffs). Is it possible that he turns out to be the better player, sure....does what he's done so far make it so? absolutely not

 

[Booster*]

Lol atleast Psycho had a plausible cover for not backing his hyperbole, you just tapdance.

I'd say it'd be closer to having any 1st round pick. Likely to happen status quo but still satisfying on draft day .

Just sinking to your level, i appologize for that but leafs fans coming in here trying to twist and turn everything to discredit Laine. People trying to use logic and reason from evaluating games they have actually watched and still you refuse to get it.

Go write in the Matthews thread instead, he should be a far more interesting propect from your viewpoint.

 

[4thline]

It's like someone betting on a stock that has been second best for years, claiming that it one day will be the better investment than the one that has been outproducing for a couple of years. Yeah, it's possible. No, it's not likely.

Its actually more like someone seeing big dividends from a stock with a weaker balance sheet, declaring it the best thing ever, only to find out that it's Bre-X

Lol exactly. If goals were share price and underlying statistics were performance ratios this would be like looking at the share price two months after an IPO as justification that very same share price isn't overvalued vs. it's expected value based on performance ratios. It's circular, premature, and betting on the unicorn being real.

 

[Booster*]

well that works both ways....and really isn't that productive

Making up quotes?

 

[Randy Randerson]

Lol exactly. If goals were share price and underlying statistics were performance ratios this would be like looking at the share price two months after an IPO as justification that very same share price isn't overvalued vs. it's expected value based on performance ratios. It's circular, premature, and betting on the unicorn being real.

I probably overstated that, but the setup to make a stock market analogy rebuttal only comes around so often (thanks for that, psycho dad)

It's more like choosing a stock with a big potential (gold startup fits) over one with a very well rounded balance sheet (big bank, maybe?), getting a good dividend in the first quarter (ooh, only 20% of the way through the season, so close) and wanting to declare your stock the best pick to hold indefinitely while ignoring the underlying performance metrics

 

[4thline]

Just sinking to your level, i appologize for that but leafs fans coming in here trying to twist and turn everything to discredit Laine. People trying to use logic and reason from evaluating games they have actually watched and still you refuse to get it.

Go write in the Matthews thread instead, he should be a far more interesting propect from your viewpoint.

Twist and turn everything to discredit Laine: recognize that he's in a fantastic situation to succeed and is doing so, albeit at a rate that he is unlikely to keep up.

Matthews discussion is currently just as boring as Laine's should be. Opposite sides of the same coin, two young players playing well, one whose statistical output is likely to fall and the other's who's likely to rise, likely to meet in the middle. That's what logic and reason would lead to.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Making up quotes?

following suit

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Actually Laine's shot selection has been pretty selective....he is passing off the puck, quite a bit. Not wildly taking shots from all over the place. Is also dropping back quickly, when opposition has the puck.

Smart kid.

Maybe even too selective, I'd still rather have a smart shooter rather than a mindless shot generator, but I think he can shoot more. Now again I do not mean take meaningless shots from the blue line where he actually thinks he can beat a goalie cleanly.

But there are times, a player can shoot on net for rebounds and pick up some assists. Laine's shot is heavy and hard to handle. I would like him to learn that sometimes you do not have to beat the goalie clean to help the team. Most goalies will give up rebounds due to his shot. This could be good for Scheifele and Ehlers and the Jets.

 

[psycho_dad*]

What happened to Ovechkin?

Time and evolution of the game. What happened to Mike Bossy? He was the best goal scorer of his time. Then people like Selanne, Bure, Ovechkin etc set new heights.

Laine will NOT be the best shooter or goal scorer forever. Someone, probably someone who is born already, will take it from him. It's just how this **** goes with the game evolving and people being younger and younger when they start, and more organized and coached from earlier on. Just like he took it from Ovechkin.

Of course for the majority to understand that he actually has taken it, they require him to do it for a longer period because Ovechkin has a massive head start.

But as far as goal scorers go, 18 year old Ovechkin was not even close to as good as Laine is today, no matter how much people will say "but he was hyped as the second coming of christ and Laine wasn't". At the same age, Ovechkin was scoring decent (amazing for a player his age) in the RSL which at the time was about the same level as Finnish league, maybe a little lower. We're not talking KHL here, RSL was very different. Finnish league teams bought better players from there, with KHL it's the opposite, they buy who ever they want from the Finnish league because they are a better league and have more money. 18 year old Laine has scored almost as many goals in the best league in the world in 18 games, as 18 year old Ovechkin did in the 5th (or so) best league in a full season. Give that some thought.

Laine is on a pace to rival Ovechkins goals in their first year, and there's almost a 2 year difference in age when entering the league (Laine being much younger, much more raw physically).

Nobody has EVER scored 11 in 14 as an 18 year old, except Patrik Laine. None of the all time greats have done it. And all of them played in an era when goal scoring was easier than it is today.

So tell me again why "normal players" averages and standards should be applied to him and what he can do? If he is shooting at a higher than normal percentage, there is a good argument that it in fact IS sustainable because he does not operate in the same range as others.

 

[Harmonica1]

1. Hurricanes

2. Maple Leafs

3. Maple Leafs

4. Maple Leafs

5. Stars

6. Stars

7. Red Wings

8. Rangers

9. Stars

10. Stars

11. Stars

12. Blackhawks

SO 1. Kings

 

[Booster*]

Twist and turn everything to discredit Laine: recognize that he's in a fantastic situation to succeed and is doing so, albeit at a rate that he is unlikely to keep up.

Matthews discussion is currently just as boring as Laine's should be. Opposite sides of the same coin, two young players playing well, one whose statistical output is likely to fall and the other's who's likely to rise, likely to meet in the middle. That's what logic and reason would lead to.

So that´s why you´re here. Well nothing is boring about Laine so maybe you´ve come to the right place after all.

"likely to" is a very good argument indeed

 

[Purity*]

Time and evolution of the game. What happened to Mike Bossy? He was the best goal scorer of his time. Then people like Selanne, Bure, Ovechkin etc set new heights.

Laine will NOT be the best shooter or goal scorer forever. Someone, probably someone who is born already, will take it from him. It's just how this **** goes with the game evolving and people being younger and younger when they start, and more organized and coached from earlier on. Just like he took it from Ovechkin.

Of course for the majority to understand that he actually has taken it, they require him to do it for a longer period because Ovechkin has a massive head start.

But as far as goal scorers go, 18 year old Ovechkin was not even close to as good as Laine is today, no matter how much people will say "but he was hyped as the second coming of christ and Laine wasn't". At the same age, Ovechkin was scoring decent (amazing for a player his age) in the RSL which at the time was about the same level as Finnish league, maybe a little lower. We're not talking KHL here, RSL was very different. Finnish league teams bought better players from there, with KHL it's the opposite, they buy who ever they want from the Finnish league because they are a better league and have more money. 18 year old Laine has scored almost as many goals in the best league in the world in 18 games, as 18 year old Ovechkin did in the 5th (or so) best league in a full season. Give that some thought.

Laine is on a pace to rival Ovechkins goals in their first year, and there's almost a 2 year difference in age when entering the league (Laine being much younger, much more raw physically).

Nobody has EVER scored 11 in 14 as an 18 year old, except Patrik Laine. None of the all time greats have done it. And all of them played in an era when goal scoring was easier than it is today.

So tell me again why "normal players" averages and standards should be applied to him and what he can do? If he is shooting at a higher than normal percentage, there is a good argument that it in fact IS sustainable because he does not operate in the same range as others.

So TL;DR version; you think Laine is a better goal-scorer than Ovechkin right now?

Ok.

 

[psycho_dad*]

Um....if you want to talk about stocks being better for years, maybe have a look at some draft rankings from....2013 through to draft day? http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016-draft/nhl-draft-rankings/

Yeah I have numbers and you offer opinions (rankings) as a counter?

I'll take the numbers, thank you very much. Opinions are like *******s, everyone has one. But numbers only show one guy at the top, and it's a different one than the one from opinions.

Don't ever use "popularity" or "hype before draft" as an argument when talking to me. I have absolutely zero interest in people like Button saying that Matthews is the best goal scorer of the draft or other absurdities caused by ignorance. He was flat out wrong, and so were most of the NA experts and most of them will correct their views and outright say it during this season. Are you going to accept their opinions when they have revised them and the will tell you Laine was the best player in this draft? Because that IS coming, you know that right? I bet you if you asked Button today, he'd already tell you.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

1. Hurricanes

2. Toronto

3. Toronto

4. Toronto

5. Dallas

6. Dallas

7. Red Wings

8. Rangers

9. Stars

10. Stars

11. Stars

12. Blackhawks

SO 1. Kings

He's just lucky. Seriously, the typical player who some are comparing him to when shooting % is brought up would probably have scored maybe 1 or 2 of those goals you have cited.

Bookmarking this post any time someone brings up lucky goals.

 

[psycho_dad*]

So TL;DR version; you think Laine is a better goal-scorer than Ovechkin right now?

Ok.

Yes.

And so does the NHL scoring chart.

 

[randomhockeyfan]

1. Hurricanes

2. Maple Leafs

3. Maple Leafs

4. Maple Leafs

5. Stars

6. Stars

7. Red Wings

8. Rangers

9. Stars

10. Stars

11. Stars

12. Blackhawks

SO 1. Kings

Wow, every single one is beautiful..

 

[Booster*]

1. Hurricanes

2. Maple Leafs

3. Maple Leafs

4. Maple Leafs

5. Stars

6. Stars

7. Red Wings

8. Rangers

9. Stars

10. Stars

11. Stars

12. Blackhawks

SO 1. Kings

Finally

So beautiful to watch, especially #2 #3 and #4

 

[Narow]

1. Hurricanes

2. Maple Leafs

3. Maple Leafs

4. Maple Leafs

5. Stars

6. Stars

7. Red Wings

8. Rangers

9. Stars

10. Stars

11. Stars

12. Blackhawks

SO 1. Kings

I guess he shut up all those people saying he'd simply be an pp specialist, the guy simply oozes skill why cant people just appreciate the talent or atleast not talk down on him. Man some people just hate to see others suceed

 

[Randy Randerson]

FWIW to reasonable jets fans - Laine looks like a superstar in the making and you guys should be super pumped. You guys were the real winners of the 2016 draft because you weren't expecting to draft in the top 3 and snagged a guy who was deserving of a #1 selection in most drafts and hasn't disappointed

Its the contingent of your fanbase that wants to use 17 games of results to declare him the hands down best prospect in that draft, while ignoring that Laine's results have been influenced by the things beyond his control breaking his way and that Matthews has had the opposite effect that we take issue with. And those that want to declare him the best goal scorer in the NHL already