Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
I stopped paying attention after this point because it is demonstrably wrong.There is one true way
I stopped paying attention after this point because it is demonstrably wrong.There is one true way
If you say soI stopped paying attention after this point because it is demonstrably wrong.
Each and every single Cup winner for the past decade had question marks about guys and had teams playing different styles. While the most consistently reliable winning team is one that prioritize offense but doesn't skimp on defense, there have been plenty of winners that have tilted more in the direction of either of those two. Colorado just now was strongly offense-biased, for example, while the Blues were strongly defense-biased. Tampa Bay started out offense-biased and found itself obliged to adjust a tad.If you say so
I'll tell you a secret. That was all in the 2020/21 season, this one wasn't involved. Hmm, and I'm also wondering why the players were so complimentary of the dressing room this season, even though Laine was part of it?Both seasons. Being better than absolutely terrible is still not good and shouldn’t be seen as favorable. Individual points scored and statistics mean nothing to me.
The comment, “Torts nor Larsen have complained about his attitude”, is ridiculous. To who, the media??
Reality is you can’t say anything at all that could be perceived as “negative” about Laine in any way, without him pouting and handling it in the wrong way.
Patrik Laine 'a little annoyed' by Blue Jackets coach Brad Larsen comments
What do you think about the back and forth with Larsen on the bench and WHY it happened?? Or since it’s in the past, just forget about it??
Also regarding teammates comments on Laine, 1st it was just Del Zotto, then Atkinson, now Foligno. Again, these are all ON RECORD, just imagine what other guys think privately. That’s where I don’t think the “openness” of Del Zotto’s quick comment should be simply brushed off.
Your continued comments/jabs of Bjorkstrand are not unnoticed.
The difference between the guys is that Bjorkstrand has proven over his entire time in the CBJ organization that he will and can put in the HARD WORK and PRODUCE over long stretches and when the games are ACTUALLY important, in the playoffs or during stretches that the team ACTUALLY MADE the playoffs.
Bjorkstrand is also only paid 5.4mil, hes not paid like a superstar who is supposed to score 50. Hes a huge value contract and you need those guys in your lineup too if you want to win. Sure he has cold spells but hes still a useful player when hes not scoring and his effort level can be contagiousI'll tell you a secret. That was all in the 2020/21 season, this one wasn't involved. Hmm, and I'm also wondering why the players were so complimentary of the dressing room this season, even though Laine was part of it?
Besides, you're writing about Panarin here, but again. He was 27-28 when was here. One came to Chicago when he was 24. By then he was in the KHL, whose games I watched quite a bit. And I can assure you his play without the puck, defense, were not ideal at all.
Moving on. Yes, Bjorkie is a hard-working player. But how many important goals/points did he scote in important games when we were fighting for the PO?
Regarding Torts style. We couldn't play like that forever. First, play based on playing without the puck, hard fights has no future. Yes, it may be successful for a while, but opponents don't sleep. That's why, in my opinion, we are now in the development phase. Right now we have to work with young players, make sure who will help us and who won't.
I don't agree with Peeke and Boqvist, as both are still too young to draw conclusions. Nobody is going to trade Gavrikov's and especially Merzlikins, and you know it.
There is one true way and it’s very simple. You must focus on defense as much as you do on offense. Goals against are just as valuable and worth the same as goals forward.
Jenner with Laine GF/60 3.25 GA/60 2.86 (462:07)While Jenner is attacked for being the player he is, and is seen as holding Laine back offensively, the reality is that he is there COVERING for Laine to make the line adequate. Is it Jenners fault (or Patty’s) that no other center can cover for Laine’s deficiencies?? I could argue that both Nyquist and Voracek are being “forced” into a certain role attempting to mesh or work with Laine, also, and that both guys over long stretches seem to not work well with him. Not to mention, their ages and most peoples opinions on their future with the team. Are we to spend the next years trying to find players that will “fit” with Laine?
Jenner s Laine GF/60 3,25 GA/60 2,86 (462:07)
Jenner bez Laine GF/60 2,6 GA/60 3,47 (414:37)
Nyquist s Laine GF/60 3,25 GA/60 4,10 (350:48)
Nyquist bez Laine GF/60 3,22 GA/60 4,26 (746:16)
Voráček s Laine GF/60 3,04 GA/60 2,36 (355:36)
Voráček bez Laine GF/60 2,42 GA/60 3,02 (694:28)
Všetci hráči, ktorých ste spomenuli, mali lepšie výsledky s Laine ako bez:
Voráček +0,62 GF/60, -0,66 GA/60
Nyquist +0,03 GF/60 -0,16 GA/60
Jenner +0,65 GF/60 -0,61 GA/60
CBJ mal lepší výsledok s Laine ako bez:
s Laine 27-24-5 0,527 %
bez Laine 10-14-2 0,423 %
Laine bol zďaleka najlepší strelec 5v5:*
bodov/60 5v5
Laine 2,53
Domi 2.29
Roslovic 2.24
Jenner 2.05
Bjorkstrand 1,75
Voráček 1,66
Nyquist 1,64
Silinger 1,53
Kuraly 1.28
5v5 GF/GA Laine bol jedným zo 4 hráčov, ktorí boli pozitívni alebo vyrovnaní.*
*odohraných minimálne 500 minút.
Súhlasím. Preto ani nechcem, aby ho vymenili. Ale tu to bolo iné, viď diskusia.Bjorkstrand má zaplatené len 5,4 milióna, nie je platený ako superhviezda, ktorá by mala streliť 50 bodov. Je to kontrakt s obrovskou hodnotou a ak chcete vyhrať, potrebujete aj týchto ľudí vo svojej zostave. Iste, má zimomriavky, ale stále je užitočným hráčom, keď neskóruje a úroveň jeho úsilia môže byť nákazlivá
But Bjorkstrand has SHOWN!Jenner with Laine GF/60 3.25 GA/60 2.86 (462:07)
Jenner without Laine GF/60 2.6 GA/60 3.47 (414:37)
Nyquist with Laine GF/60 3.25 GA/60 4.10 (350:48)
Nyquist without Laine GF/60 3.22 GA/60 4.26 (746:16)
Voracek with Laine GF/60 3.04 GA/60 2.36 (355:36)
Voracek without Laine GF/60 2.42 GA/60 3.02 (694:28)
All the players you mentioned, had better results with Laine than without:
Voracek +0.62 GF/60, -0.66 GA/60
Nyquist +0.03 GF/60 -0.16 GA/60
Jenner +0.65 GF/60 -0.61 GA/60
CBJ had a better result with Laine than without:
with Laine 27-24-5 0.527%
without Laine 10-14-2 0.423%
Laine was by far the best 5v5 scorer:*
pts/60 5v5
Laine 2.53
Domi 2.29
Roslovic 2.24
Jenner 2.05
Bjorkstrand 1.75
Voracek 1.66
Nyquist 1.64
Sillinger 1.53
Kuraly 1.28
5v5 GF/GA Laine was one of 4 players that were positive or even.*
*atleast 500min played.
I have no idea what you just saidThanks for the great stats.
P.S. you have the Ukrainian flag the other way around. Blue is on top, yellow on the bottom. This is the flag of Ružomberok, Slovakia.
Súhlasím. Preto ani nechcem, aby ho vymenili. Ale tu to bolo iné, viď diskusia.
Jenner with Laine GF/60 3.25 GA/60 2.86 (462:07)
Jenner without Laine GF/60 2.6 GA/60 3.47 (414:37)
Nyquist with Laine GF/60 3.25 GA/60 4.10 (350:48)
Nyquist without Laine GF/60 3.22 GA/60 4.26 (746:16)
Voracek with Laine GF/60 3.04 GA/60 2.36 (355:36)
Voracek without Laine GF/60 2.42 GA/60 3.02 (694:28)
All the players you mentioned, had better results with Laine than without:
Voracek +0.62 GF/60, -0.66 GA/60
Nyquist +0.03 GF/60 -0.16 GA/60
Jenner +0.65 GF/60 -0.61 GA/60
CBJ had a better result with Laine than without:
with Laine 27-24-5 0.527%
without Laine 10-14-2 0.423%
Laine was by far the best 5v5 scorer:*
pts/60 5v5
Laine 2.53
Domi 2.29
Roslovic 2.24
Jenner 2.05
Bjorkstrand 1.75
Voracek 1.66
Nyquist 1.64
Sillinger 1.53
Kuraly 1.28
5v5 GF/GA Laine was one of 4 players that were positive or even.*
*atleast 500min played.
I mean the discussion with TheBus88.Neviem, čo si práve povedal:smiech:
Uh oh, all these decimals leads me to a bad place….you ‘Lazy Laine’ guys think I’m bad now…Jenner with Laine GF/60 3.25 GA/60 2.86 (462:07)
Jenner without Laine GF/60 2.6 GA/60 3.47 (414:37)
Nyquist with Laine GF/60 3.25 GA/60 4.10 (350:48)
Nyquist without Laine GF/60 3.22 GA/60 4.26 (746:16)
Voracek with Laine GF/60 3.04 GA/60 2.36 (355:36)
Voracek without Laine GF/60 2.42 GA/60 3.02 (694:28)
All the players you mentioned, had better results with Laine than without:
Voracek +0.62 GF/60, -0.66 GA/60
Nyquist +0.03 GF/60 -0.16 GA/60
Jenner +0.65 GF/60 -0.61 GA/60
CBJ had a better result with Laine than without:
with Laine 27-24-5 0.527%
without Laine 10-14-2 0.423%
Laine was by far the best 5v5 scorer:*
pts/60 5v5
Laine 2.53
Domi 2.29
Roslovic 2.24
Jenner 2.05
Bjorkstrand 1.75
Voracek 1.66
Nyquist 1.64
Sillinger 1.53
Kuraly 1.28
5v5 GF/GA Laine was one of 4 players that were positive or even.*
*atleast 500min played.
It’s about WINNING.
Uh oh, all these decimals leads me to a bad place….you ‘Lazy Laine’ guys think I’m bad now…
To put it simply, those “numbers” and “facts” don’t take into account the different USAGE of each individual player or all the different line matchups that occur throughout the year, both intentionally and by chance. There’s also different factors of “luck” and “chance” and the fact that 1 player makes up roughly just 20% of a team on the ice.
Or are you honestly saying you believe that Laine makes these players (and the team) better defensively while he is on the ice?? Is that what the numbers show??
Also, showing the with/without records of a player who has the cap hit that Laine has now and moving forward, to prove some point about him, is laughable.
Thanks for the great stats.
P.S. you have the Ukrainian flag the other way around. Blue is on top, yellow on the bottom. This is the flag of Ružomberok, Slovakia.
Súhlasím. Preto ani nechcem, aby ho vymenili. Ale tu to bolo iné, viď diskusia.
That's the wrong way.
You can't win a game without winning the scoring race. So a goal for is more valuable than a goal against. Because the game is decided on who wins the scoring race, it automatically puts more value on goal scored. If you are trying to win a hockey game, your first focus has to be on scoring more than the other team.
What!?!
See, we have completely different ideas of “reality” and what the “value” of these goals actually are. The value of each goal scored is EQUAL, it doesn’t matter which net it goes in.
The mindset of the players also has to be EQUAL. It’s like people automatically go to some overly defensive mindset that restricts all offensive creativity and aggression, just by saying you have to FOCUS on defense. Whatever amount of “aggression” or “focus” is directed towards producing offense has to be MATCHED defensively, simple as that.
The REALITY is that the best players in the league are CAPABLE of focusing on BOTH aspects, and if you want to get PAID like 1 of these players, you should be looked at to do the same.
I understand. But many people or organisations did it because they didn't know it. And they still do it now.I put it that way around, back in February, because I thought political statements were against the rules.
On principle, I completely agree. In practice, I think you've historically been a little inclined to overvalue the defensive side compared to the offensive. (This coming from someone who enjoys the hell out of good defensive play...)What!?!
See, we have completely different ideas of “reality” and what the “value” of these goals actually are. The value of each goal scored is EQUAL, it doesn’t matter which net it goes in.
The mindset of the players also has to be EQUAL. It’s like people automatically go to some overly defensive mindset that restricts all offensive creativity and aggression, just by saying you have to FOCUS on defense. Whatever amount of “aggression” or “focus” is directed towards producing offense has to be MATCHED defensively, simple as that.
The REALITY is that the best players in the league are CAPABLE of focusing on BOTH aspects, and if you want to get PAID like 1 of these players, you should be looked at to do the same.
Uh oh, all these decimals leads me to a bad place….you ‘Lazy Laine’ guys think I’m bad now…
To put it simply, those “numbers” and “facts” don’t take into account the different USAGE of each individual player or all the different line matchups that occur throughout the year, both intentionally and by chance. There’s also different factors of “luck” and “chance” and the fact that 1 player makes up roughly just 20% of a team on the ice.
Or are you honestly saying you believe that Laine makes these players (and the team) better defensively while he is on the ice?? Is that what the numbers show??
Also, showing the with/without records of a player who has the cap hit that Laine has now and moving forward, to prove some point about him, is laughable.
deja vuYou laugh at all the "facts" provided by anyone else, yet you don't seem to really provide any of your own. I see you have a very strong opinion on the matter but I don't see much in the way of providing any sort of argument for it.
I don't think that really reflected in expected goals, I have no explanation, maybe it was sheer luck.
The numbers simply show the team was better at outscoring the opposition with Laine on the ice. Did he make them better defensively? I dunno, it depends what you're looking at. Interestingly enough, most guys also seemed to get scored on less with Laine than without. I don't think that really reflected in expected goals, I have no explanation, maybe it was sheer luck. He did do a good job of breaking up plays in transition and played very responsibly in getting back to D-zone, often resulting in a good backcheck. Maybe him & his line did a good job of preventing on the rush changes and the shot share numbers were ugly simply because when they failed to manage to break up the play early on, they got hemmed in for a lot of shots against. Just guessing.
A lot of models will use the actual Goals For results to assess a player's offensive contribution, and then switch to xGA to assess a player's defensive contribution. An elite shooter like Laine will outperform his xGF but can't really do that much to outperform his xGA on any consistent basis. Pretty much everyone will see their GA and xGA deviate from each other based on goalie play. So I like this way of modeling.
And Laine's xGA was worst on the club and 2nd worst among league forwards. There were a few guys like Nyquist who had far worse GA but that discrepancy seems to be mostly driven by goaltending.
I don't think of Laine as a guy that doesn't try defensively. He's a good backchecker. But he's also frequently a one-and-done rush player. As opposed to a cycle line that will get pucks deep and work them around over the course of 30+ seconds (think Crosby's line, Bergeron's line, etc...), Laine and his linemates will go in on the rush, make a shot attempt, and then not get the puck back, possibly for the entirety of the shift. It's the other team's turn to try and score for most of their TOI. I'm pretty sure Laine didn't make the team better defensively.
That makes a lot of sense, though I gotta say I lost a lot of faith in xG models last season when I actually both watched & stat-watched a lot of games - in the past I used to do only one or the other mostly. But if looking at defensive impact like that, I do agree for the most part.
That said, no model is going to convince me Laine's defensive impact is anywhere near the worst for forwards in the league. The way I see it, I honestly think his defensive play in the neutral zone and backchecking were good, sometimes even very good this last season, I even saw little sparks of Barkov every once in a whileIn the D-zone he has mostly good positioning and he's smart about playing it safe and not chasing plays. I think his reads high up in the zone are pretty good, maybe because they seem easier to translate from his offensive game.
On the negative side, that "play it safe" style can lead to overly passive play which does nothing to break the cycle of the opposing team. And when he ends up chasing the play in the D-zone, or has to play down low, then he's downright bad and you're basically screwed. I think his defensive reads are no good that way.
Still, I don't think overall that adds to anything close to league worst even when looking at defensive impact only. In the end what matters most is the combined off/def impact which results in outscoring (or not) the opposition. In that department he's been mostly good, though looking only at his CBJ tenure it's been 50/50. 20-21 was a huge disappointment, somehow I thought against all odds him & Torts were actually going to be a great fit (I know?) and was expecting a beast mode season. Especially after that season opener as a Jet. At least he delivered this season, though I would've liked to see 82 games of it.