Captain Timo
Registered User
- Dec 4, 2015
- 2,319
- 1
But if you're going to play that game, Laine is going to be the best goalscorer to ever grace NHL ice? See what happens when we use the opinions of people who are clearly outlandish?
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
But if you're going to play that game, Laine is going to be the best goalscorer to ever grace NHL ice? See what happens when we use the opinions of people who are clearly outlandish?
Purity*
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2010
- 8,446
- 1
Cool story bro, where did I say any of that? And how is that relevant to anything I'm replying to?
Ovechkin being the starting point to Laine's potential is absolutely insane. Ovechkin as a prospect was WAY more insane.
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Hawks!
Purity*
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2010
- 8,446
- 1
Ok so 22/26 scouts are just too swayed by positional bias that it completely shifts their opinion of the next Ovechkin. Sounds totally feasible. And where did I say that #2 overall never becomes better than #1 overall?
Zero logic found in this post.
Conspiracy Theorist
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2016
- 5,840
- 2,071
Matthews had a low risk and his position mattered the most for the Leafs. Laine strikes to me as a Lemieux guy.
Plural
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2011
- 33,873
- 5,084
He was also widely considered as the best player in the draft. Even if the Leafs weren't looking for a center, they still draft Matthews.
That said, Laine can end up as the better player. They are relatively close and I actually see Laine having even higher potential. Though his skillset is harder to implement in to the NHL ice. Meaning, there is a higher chance of Laine not reaching his potential than Matthews.
The overwhelming majority of the scouts said this word when asked for their reasoning: "Center".
Ovechkin was a late birthday, just like Matthews. Laine was not, just like Malkin. Late birthday went #1 overall. See a trend here?
If Malkin was so much better a prospect than Laine, why did it take him 2 more years after draft to become NHL ready?
Malkin did not outplay Ovechkin in a single international competition, by the way, unlike with a certain other recent #1 #2 duo...
Oh and finally: Ovechkin has a PPG of 1.15 in NHL and Malkin has PPG of 1.18 in NHL. Hence, would it have been a mistake to pick Malkin in spite of all this evidence pointing towards a larger difference between him and Ovechkin than Laine and Matthews? At least Malkin has won something called the Stanley Cup for his team.
Plural
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2011
- 33,873
- 5,084
They said that word only? Or was it one of the words used? Nevertheless, Matthews was widely considered as the best player in the draft. There was some support for Laine, but not that much. But they are still close and Laine can end up as the better player.
It didn't take Malkin 2 years to become NHL ready. You are proving that you have no idea what you are talking about. Want to know why Malkin came to NA so late? Read up on it, don't make assumptions out of your arse.
For the last part, yes. If Caps management gets a time machine and can go back to that draft, they 100% take Ovechkin again. It's not even a question.
Coaches Coroner
Member
- Mar 12, 2009
- 7,563
- 7,891
According to some (after briefly skimming) Laine is apparently similar to Lemieux but with Ovechkin's shot, I'd take that over a guy a step below Crosby or around his level.
Well on the one at nhl.com 3 of 4 scouts mentioned center, 2 of them as "almost" the sole reason.
"I think the big center is so hard to come by and Matthews separates himself just because of that."
And
"I'd pick Matthews because he's a center."
The one non-center-mentioning scout's evaluation doesn't make any sense to me:
"I like Matthews but the team holding the No. 2 pick is going to get a darn good player. Matthews has a little bit of an edge, and can shoot the puck just as effectively. He has an I'll-show-you type of attitude."
The heck is this...
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Hawks!
2 of 10 scouts McKenzie spoke to would have taken Laine 1OA, so you're part of that segment.
Plural
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2011
- 33,873
- 5,084
So, one could make an argument that some, maybe even half of the scouts thought that Laine and Matthews were close to equal players but positions mattered? Another half probably thought that Matthews was better anyways.
As I said, not a lot of people thought that Laine should have gone first. Some scouts thought that he was equal or close to it. But not a lot thought Laine was actually better.
Maybe, but my position has actually never been that "so and so many scouts thought that", it's been that "so and so many scouts should have thought this instead". Scouts aren't some ungodly source of undeniable truth, they make mistakes too, especially regarding players from a league that hasn't produced many top talents in NHL in the years past. How often in the very recent years have we seen Finnish prospects rated below where they should be? Barkov, Rantanen, Aho... It's not like this is unheard of.
But heh, even those scouts have said that Laine is the best goal-scoring prospect since Ovechkin so that's pretty good. That's not really my issue either, my issue with these scouts is that they evaluate Laine's game incorrectly. If you talk about a player who Laine is not, how do you expect me to take your evaluation of his skill level seriously? I don't think we even are watching the same player most of the time.
On that topic, Pronman is probably the only one who has actually talked in detail about what kind of a player Laine -actually- is like. Now, is it a coincidence that having done that, he also has Laine #1 for 2016 and also has Laine #2 for the best prospect of recent years, only behind McDavid?
If another scout correctly categorizes Laine and then gives an evaluation, I can take that seriously as well. But if they talk about some imaginary player that they decide to call "Laine", that's not worth a thing in my book.
Plural
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2011
- 33,873
- 5,084
Of course. I agree. These are young kids who take development leaps every week. It's really difficult to pinpoint with exact accuracy which is better when two prospects are so exceptional. Like in this case. You have Laine and Matthews who both have tremendous upside and immense talent level.
There's a good chance that Laine ends up better than Matthews. Then there's even better chance that neither of these two ends up as the best player from this draft. It might be PLD, Pulju or someone else.
My point was, that Ovechkin was a rare prospect. Not quite as highly touted as McDavid or Crosby, but close to it. If we go back until Ovechkin's draft year, two prospect stand out. Crosby and McDavid. Then there's a small gap and Ovechkin is alone in that tier. Then comes the rest.
But there has been a lot of players, even from recent drafts, that prove to be better than their draft year suggested. Then there has been a lot of players who failed to meet the expectations. Only time will tell us what happens with these kids. I'm rooting for them all.
The Winter Soldier
Registered User
- Apr 4, 2011
- 71,030
- 21,383
I wonder why some fans seem intent in posting in a Laine thread only to run him down, where I can only surmise so they can feel better about another prospect. Are we really this insecure? Does Laine threaten them this much? Laine is potentially the best player in this draft.
He is a terrific prospect who had uniquely one of the best draft years any prospect has had in recent memory.
If people want to get excited about him, it is reasonable to do so based on what he did as mostly a 17 year old turned 18 year old late in the year. He is 6'4 201 lbs. Elite skill combined with an elite personality. As one reporter noted, he is a breath of fresh air for hockey. To me this should be celebrated.
He is a terrific prospect who had uniquely one of the best draft years any prospect has had in recent memory.
If people want to get excited about him, it is reasonable to do so based on what he did as mostly a 17 year old turned 18 year old late in the year. He is 6'4 201 lbs. Elite skill combined with an elite personality. As one reporter noted, he is a breath of fresh air for hockey. To me this should be celebrated.
This is what I mean. Matthews doesnt have worse defnse than Barkov and is much better offensively. Laine will never score 50 maybe 40 but not 50. Ovi is the only guy that is capable of scoring 50 nowadays. Stamkos is a far better goal scorer than Laine and cant reach 50 anymore. How does Laine? Just the typical put down one player and pump up the other.
Laine's style of play resembles Lemieux's. This is different from him being Lemieux.
They are saying his style is similar to Malkin not that he is going to be as good.
watch him play instead of finding more ways to hype up Laine, you will see what they are talking about.Let's wait until a player steps foot in NHL before calling him "much better" offensively than a player who just scored 59 points(28 goals) in 66 games, shall we? Barkov also is a defense-first player while Matthews is not so I don't follow your logic in stating that he's not worse than Barkov defensively.
Do you think that the reason Stamkos no longer scores above 50 goals might have something to do with his enormous leg injury? He was absolutely beasting at the start of the 2013-2014 season, too.
And yes, Ovi is the only guy capable of scoring 50 nowadays. That's because Laine is not in the league yet. Next season there will be two players "capable of scoring 50 nowadays".
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 41,750
- 22,237
They are saying his style is similar to Malkin not that he is going to be as good.
I mean you are doing the same thing here, maybe you could read and watch him play.
Yes more BS. Matthews defensive game is the whole reason why he is the #1 pick and is compared to Toews and Kopitar. It isn't outlandish to suggest that Matthews will be a PPG+ center but it is outlandish to say Laine will score 50. He scored 17 goals in the finnish league. Yah it was 45 games but over 82 thats around 30. And thats in a league that is terrible compared to the NHL. How will he score 50 in the NHL?
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 41,750
- 22,237
That is one damm weak argument.
Who the .... is saying he will score 50 next year?
I also like how it's okay to say Matthews will be a +ppg C with Selke defense but you're insane if you suggest Laine could be the best scorer in his prime.
Last edited:
- Status
