- Status
I'm still in the middle of the analysis, however!
Here's something that Laine did in the worst period he's ever played:
https://streamable.com/kbp6
It's very unfortunate that his game won't translate to NHL as he requires so much time and space. It's not like he can receive a pass he's not even supposed to be able to receive and then get an excellent shot off while 1v4 surrounded by such no names as Matt Duchene, Connor McDavid, Ryan Ellis and Ryan Murray.
Here's something that Laine did in the worst period he's ever played:
https://streamable.com/kbp6
It's very unfortunate that his game won't translate to NHL as he requires so much time and space. It's not like he can receive a pass he's not even supposed to be able to receive and then get an excellent shot off while 1v4 surrounded by such no names as Matt Duchene, Connor McDavid, Ryan Ellis and Ryan Murray.
Last edited:
MardyBum
Registered User
He's probably 99% unlikely to play in the WJC anyways if he's drafted by the Jets, so him playing would just take a spot from another kid.
Maurice loves the WJC and think's it's great for players to experience it, but like Ehlers last year, if you've already played in one and you're with the big club you're likely not going.
Maurice loves the WJC and think's it's great for players to experience it, but like Ehlers last year, if you've already played in one and you're with the big club you're likely not going.
King In The North
Sean Bennett
Is Laine still actually getting heat from that Ovy comment? Wasn't the case that the reporter asked he could be as good as Ovechkin in 5 years and he simply replied "Yes."?
Seriously man, you need to chill. I didn't say his game wouldn't translate to the NHL, or that I even expect such an outcome to happen. I merely said I reserve judgement about it until I see him play in the NHL, that's it.
And I hate to break it to you but that performance shown in the clip isn't anything to brag about. Yeah, great hand-eye coordination displayed by him but the clip also shows what happened when the Canadians stripped him off time and space.
Lol @ you calling that muffin shot excellent.
None of your post makes any sense. You said that it's the "worst period he's ever played". That's what he did in the worst period he's ever played. It's obviously not supposed to be amazing. It's supposed to be him at his worst.
Yeah I think it was the worst period I have ever seen him play. He was brutal, as was most of the Finnish team.
But if that is the issue I gladly backtrack and restate my opinion just to get over with arguing over such a minor point in my post.
A minor point? It's your entire point. Without even mentioning the fallacy of using a game where he plays the wing he cannot play as evidence for anything.
What has his playing position anything to do with the issue at hand?
But whatever, I rephrase: He wasn't at his absolute worst I have ever seen him, he was just very bad.
- Feb 23, 2014
- 27,948
- 87,665
Finland will be the defending champions, though, and very much because of L-A-P. It's just proper for them to show up there while they're U20.
That is a very good shot, most players can't get a release like that with time to wind up. LOL @ you calling that a muffin shot.
The Winter Soldier
Registered User
- Apr 4, 2011
- 71,030
- 21,383
Whatever one may think of Laine, he sure has attracted the post traffic of any prospect on this board. Didn't realize this was the IX edition thread and we still have a month to go. Will be X edition sometime later today. Interesting person and terrific talent will do this I guess.
Now, I don't want to manually get statistics for Jokinen and Barkov as that's a bit too much trouble, but I do have Barkov's puck possession statistics in the finals by another source which is a decent point of comparison. Note that wingers generally touch the puck less often than centers do, for obvious reasons.
The criteria essentially is: Good plays are assumed, it's a good play if it ends up in the possession of your team, generally. Bad plays are ones that give the puck away to the opposing team or just are bad or dangerous even if the puck ends up with your team.
According to some data that is not my own, in the finals, Barkov touched the puck 43 times and his puck reliability % was rated at 82.9. Now, I guess that the different actions are weighed in some manner as this actually would come out to be 81.4%, but that's not very important. If we divide the amount of times he touched the puck by three to approximately get it for a single period, we arrive at around 14. Before even beginning the analysis, I'd estimate that if Laine did something with the puck at least 10 times, I'd be happy with that.
Laine is certainly not at the level of Barkov in this regard and his puck reliability %s had been ranging from around 65 to about 78(Barkov has been ranging from about 82 to 93). Keeping all of this context in mind, here are Laine's actions with the puck for the entire 3rd period, in order:
Good receive pass, Good pass (+2, -0)
Good receive pass, Bad pass (+1, -1). (I might point out that this still was a good idea)
Good receive pass, Good pass (+2, -0)
Bad loose puck (+0, -1)
Good receive pass, Good pass(+2, -0)
Good receive pass, Bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good loose puck, bad pass(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, good shot(+2, -0) (Feel like giving this receive an additional point)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good receive pass, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, bad shot(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good receive pass, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good loose puck, good pass(+2, -0)
Good loose puck(+1, -0)
Good receive pass, good dangle(+2, -0)
Bad dangle(+0, -1)
Bad receive pass(+0, -1)
32 times did something with the puck, 23 positive.
71.9%. It's above his average for the tournament. Considering I did this manually, there's some speculation possible, but at least I have some data backing up my claims.
Video of every time Laine touched the puck, point out where I'm incorrect: https://streamable.com/lhsa
Really, I don't think it was the worst period he's played. It wasn't great but he had a pretty good chance in the period and his stick broke in the other chance. He had issues with consistency and dangles against every team. I think that he might have been the best player of his line as at least he made or tried to make things happen. Barkov also had at least one terrible dangle and I noticed Jokinen pass the puck right to an opponent while compiling this.
Note that having 32 actions with the puck isn't really the average.
The criteria essentially is: Good plays are assumed, it's a good play if it ends up in the possession of your team, generally. Bad plays are ones that give the puck away to the opposing team or just are bad or dangerous even if the puck ends up with your team.
According to some data that is not my own, in the finals, Barkov touched the puck 43 times and his puck reliability % was rated at 82.9. Now, I guess that the different actions are weighed in some manner as this actually would come out to be 81.4%, but that's not very important. If we divide the amount of times he touched the puck by three to approximately get it for a single period, we arrive at around 14. Before even beginning the analysis, I'd estimate that if Laine did something with the puck at least 10 times, I'd be happy with that.
Laine is certainly not at the level of Barkov in this regard and his puck reliability %s had been ranging from around 65 to about 78(Barkov has been ranging from about 82 to 93). Keeping all of this context in mind, here are Laine's actions with the puck for the entire 3rd period, in order:
Good receive pass, Good pass (+2, -0)
Good receive pass, Bad pass (+1, -1). (I might point out that this still was a good idea)
Good receive pass, Good pass (+2, -0)
Bad loose puck (+0, -1)
Good receive pass, Good pass(+2, -0)
Good receive pass, Bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good loose puck, bad pass(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, good shot(+2, -0) (Feel like giving this receive an additional point)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good receive pass, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, bad shot(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good receive pass, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good loose puck, good pass(+2, -0)
Good loose puck(+1, -0)
Good receive pass, good dangle(+2, -0)
Bad dangle(+0, -1)
Bad receive pass(+0, -1)
32 times did something with the puck, 23 positive.
71.9%. It's above his average for the tournament. Considering I did this manually, there's some speculation possible, but at least I have some data backing up my claims.
Video of every time Laine touched the puck, point out where I'm incorrect: https://streamable.com/lhsa
Really, I don't think it was the worst period he's played. It wasn't great but he had a pretty good chance in the period and his stick broke in the other chance. He had issues with consistency and dangles against every team. I think that he might have been the best player of his line as at least he made or tried to make things happen. Barkov also had at least one terrible dangle and I noticed Jokinen pass the puck right to an opponent while compiling this.
Note that having 32 actions with the puck isn't really the average.
Last edited:
I can help you Jeepers Ceeper and ijuka:
Laine had solid 1st period and OK 3rd period on that game. His 2nd period was by far the worst with several bad dangles in the neutral zone.
Also that was the worst period for Finland in the tournament. Only Granlund did stand out.
I think his worst period in the tournament was that 2nd period in the final game. But his worst game was against Hungary. You know, he can't stand the heat...
Laine had solid 1st period and OK 3rd period on that game. His 2nd period was by far the worst with several bad dangles in the neutral zone.
Also that was the worst period for Finland in the tournament. Only Granlund did stand out.
I think his worst period in the tournament was that 2nd period in the final game. But his worst game was against Hungary. You know, he can't stand the heat...
I pretty much see a couple great pass receptions by using his excellent hand-eye coordination, a few good passes, and multiple turnovers, a couple brutal ones. I appreciate the effort but lets just agree to disagree. Maybe I was being too harsh in saying he was having the worst period ever, I didn't even mean for it to be taken literally, but I wasn't impressed at all with his play. Simply put, I thought he played very bad judging from the overall body of work.
He had some good plays against Hungary as well, although those were outshadowed by the amount of bad plays he had. I'd generally like to assume that it's because of him playing on the wrong wing, as Hungary as a team isn't even good enough to play in Liiga at all.
Just like how I feel that even if this period was terrible by him(It really wasn't), I wouldn't put much weight on it as he wasn't playing his wing. The entire WC 5v5 is stupid to use as any sort of reference for that very reason. He had massive issues even against several teams who would not defeat even the worst team in Liiga.
Gsus
MVP
I can totally see if someone sees it as a bad period for him. I mean one period is so small sample size that if you create 1-2 chances and make 3 turnovers, the turnovers will be remembered. In hockey turnovers are always bad and people remember them.
I would call that period as a pretty average period with couple of bad turnovers.
Yes, some brutal turnovers and I don't disagree with that. Laine had some in every single game if I recall correctly. The 2 in the middle of the ice were the most glaring to me. But really, most people underappreciate the ability to just simply receive passes and give passes. Take Esa Lindell for instance who couldn't receive a pass for his life and even someone like Hietanen who kept chilling behind his net until 3 enemy players surrounded him instead of passing. You don't notice these things but it should be appreciated.
Still, when I think about how outmatched Finland in general was, I don't consider it a failure. For some perspective, doing 32 things with the puck is a huge amount. I've seen periods where Laine touches the puck like 6 times. Generally the more you touch the puck, the more involved you are.
Still, when I think about how outmatched Finland in general was, I don't consider it a failure. For some perspective, doing 32 things with the puck is a huge amount. I've seen periods where Laine touches the puck like 6 times. Generally the more you touch the puck, the more involved you are.
teravaineSAROS
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2015
- 3,888
- 1,597
teravaineSAROS
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2015
- 3,888
- 1,597
teravaineSAROS
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2015
- 3,888
- 1,597
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 41,864
- 22,444
Canada had superior talent.
The whole team was getting completely dominated, it's way too much to then ask the youngest player in the tourney to have a good game.
If everyone else were fine but Laine was struggling I would understand, but boy were we bad in it.
That game showed what it meant to have 6 NHL players in the lineup vs 0.
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 41,864
- 22,444
But that yes answer is too much for some
He said he feels he and Matthews are quite even and can't say which one is better, that comment was said to be rude against Matthews.
Speaking of Granlund, I'll do his third period and see what kind of a comparison we can have to Laine in this regard. So as a reminder, Laine had 32 plays with the puck, 23 of which were good(71.9%):
Good receive pass, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good loose puck, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good loose puck, good pass(+2, -0)
Bad loose puck(+0, -1)
Good receive pass, bad pass(+1, -1)
Bad receive pass(+0, -1)
Good receive pass, good dangle, good pass(+3, -0)
Good loose puck, good pass(+2, -0)
Bad loose puck(+0, -1)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good loose puck, bad pass(+1, -1)
Total: 22 plays involving the puck, 15 of which were good. 62.2%.
It's also worth mentioning that while watching shift by shift, Granlund rarely if ever touched the puck during a good portion of the third period. I believe he was at around 12 plays when only like 5 or 6 minutes were left.
So here we can see the effect of statistics like this. The reality can be quite different from your impressions.
Good receive pass, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good loose puck, bad dangle(+1, -1)
Good loose puck, good pass(+2, -0)
Bad loose puck(+0, -1)
Good receive pass, bad pass(+1, -1)
Bad receive pass(+0, -1)
Good receive pass, good dangle, good pass(+3, -0)
Good loose puck, good pass(+2, -0)
Bad loose puck(+0, -1)
Good receive pass, good pass(+2, -0)
Good loose puck, bad pass(+1, -1)
Total: 22 plays involving the puck, 15 of which were good. 62.2%.
It's also worth mentioning that while watching shift by shift, Granlund rarely if ever touched the puck during a good portion of the third period. I believe he was at around 12 plays when only like 5 or 6 minutes were left.
So here we can see the effect of statistics like this. The reality can be quite different from your impressions.
But those are your impressions. They are hardly a representative of the reality.
For instance for Laine you seemed to add only one turnover into your "statistics." I counted at least four from the clip you put together. So your statistics are hardly fact-based and objective.
- Status
