Player Discussion Patrik Laine: Part 2 - Healthy Living Edition

[Lafleurs Guy]

Corsi is +/- but with shot attempts substituting for goals. It's a statistic with superior precision at the cost of inferior accuracy.

We've been there done that.

You know better that to just sluff this off as +/-. If not, then you're not the poster I thought you were.

Posession numbers aren't the be all and end all of anything but they're useful. And again we have the benefit of seeing how his linemates did without him. He was terrible and you shouldn't need stats to see it.

 

[DAChampion]

We've been there done that.

You know better that to just sluff this off as +/-. If not, then you're not the poster I thought you were.

Posession numbers aren't the be all and end all of anything but they're useful. And again we have the benefit of seeing how his linemates did without him. He was terrible and you shouldn't need stats to see it.

You're right, I know better, far better (in terms of statistics and probability) than the people who promote corsi as being possession. Corsi is not a metric for a possession. Whenever you make that incorrect implication, I'll correct you.

Corsi is an analogue of +/- that replaces goals with shot attempts. You take it for what it is.

The basis of your argument is that Laine had a bad corsi -- you've written nothing about his possession numbers. So let's talk about Laine having had a bad corsi. The other teams were doing better at differential shot attempts when Laine was on the ice. That is partly a function of linemates, but also regardless, his shot attempts are more valuable. His career average shot percentage is 15%, not the NHL-wide 10%.

That said, is he curious to know what Laine's possession numbers. What fraction of the time does the puck stay on the Habs' team stick when he's on the ice?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You're right, I know better, far better (in terms of statistics and probability) than the people who promote corsi as being possession. Corsi is not a metric for a possession. Whenever you make that incorrect implication, I'll correct you.

Again, we've been there done that.

I didn't name it possession... but that's the term used.

Corsi is an analogue of +/- that replaces goals with shot attempts. You take it for what it is.

I'll take it for the best predictor of cup winners (actually it's Fenwick but similar.) I'll take it as a good indicator of where the play is when you're on the ice. I also like that you can use REL numbers so that you can compare relative to teammates and with/without numbers so we can isolate the player and his performance on his linemates.

+/- isn't a predictor of anything. Ovechkin had nearly identical seasons back to back and had a +/- of around 50. It's meaningless. But you already knew that right?

The basis of your argument is that Laine had a bad corsi -- you've written nothing about his possession numbers.

Again... I didn't name it possession. That's the term that's used. You want to fight city hall, be my guest.

So let's talk about Laine having had a bad corsi. The other teams were doing better at differential shot attempts when Laine was on the ice. That is partly a function of linemates,

That's why we have the other numbers. Relative, % and with and without. It's not just one number that we're relying on.

but also regardless, his shot attempts are more valuable. His career average shot percentage is 15%, not the NHL-wide 10%.

Great. But that doesn't mean that he's generating many shots and it doesn't mean that he's not giving them up.

When he's on the ice, the play is in our zone most of the time. When he wasn't on the ice with Newhook and Dach, their numbers were a lot better without him. Again, the caveat that we're looking at Dach's numbers only once Laine started playing because beforehand his numbers were just as bad.

That said, is he curious to know what Laine's possession numbers. What fraction of the time does the puck stay on the Habs' team stick when he's on the ice?

Again, the numbers only back up what we all saw. He wasn't playing well. But he's a cheat code on the PP so it mitigates those issues.

The question is whether or not he will be able to improve enough to warrant another big contract. If he wants 8 mil playing as he has, he won't get it here. Hughes is not going to pay him that money without substantial improvement. The good news is that he's improved since the tournament (and no I'm not using numbers for that) and he will likely continue to improve.

But to sit there and try to downplay his terrible numbers at 5 on 5 in order to pretend that he hasn't been awful is incomprehensible. Why you insist on doing this I don't know. He was bad. The eye test says so and the numbers only back it up.

 

[Vachon23]

Best for him would be to be used like Kessel was in Pittsburgh, on a bottom 6 but we used him on the 1st PP, at 4 on 4, 3 on 3.

 

[DAChampion]

Again... I didn't name it possession. That's the term that's used.

Nobody's suggesting fighting "city hall", it's a few failed nerds who are trying out blogging referring to corsi as "possession". You don't need to repeat the lie.

I think even the official NHL website refers to shot attempts as shot attempts. It did when I last checked.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Nobody's suggesting fighting "city hall", it's a few failed nerds who are trying out blogging referring to corsi as "possession". You don't need to repeat the lie.

Go to any hockey stat site and they use the term 'possession.'

Would I have named it that? No. But who cares? That's the term that's used. And it's used because generally speaking you have to have the puck in order to be able to shoot it. Teams/players with higher numbers have to have control over the puck in order to generate those numbers. Hence why they decided on 'possession.'

So no, it's not a lie.

I think even the official NHL website refers to shot attempts as shot attempts. It did when I last checked.

Here's the glossary. The term 'puck possession' is repeatedly used. NHL Stats

Again though, puck possession, shooting stats... whatever. Laine was bad. Why? Because he didn't have the puck.

 

[Marioesque]

I care about the positive difference in Gf/60 and Ga/60.

Or points per 60.

How effective you are with your ice time. That's the real tell

 

[Kennerback]

He sucks yet he scores so many key goals. Can’t compute.

 

[MoneyManny]

Yup no doubt, but being useful for more than ~4 mins a game is pretty damn important in hockey.

You guys complained for the entire last decade about our PP being horrific, and now that we have one of the best PP weapons in the league he's not a complete enough player for you?

He doesn't get prime 5v5 deployments, he doesn't need to be a complete player to do his job well.

We got him for peanuts, i'm not sure what you expected?

 

[No More Subban]

He sucks yet he scores so many key goals. Can’t compute.

He definitely needs two linemates who can create for him. It is what it is.

 

[Rob Sense]

If a guy is not all over the ice and dominating but gets a goal and an assist per game do we give a rat's ass what his metrics are? I don't care if he doesn't play the last 10 minutes if he caused us to be up 3-1 in the third.

 

[DAChampion]

He sucks yet he scores so many key goals. Can’t compute.

A lot of people don't value power play production. I don't agree but I'll list the arguments as they're not intrinsically stupid.

1) Power play production is less useful in the playoffs.

I think that's true. There are fewer power plays in the playoffs, so once you're there you need better 5on5 play to advance. But a team like the Habs needs a good PP to advance.

2) Someone has to score on the power play.

That's usually true. So if a team has a league average power play, you shouldn't credit any of their players for producing on the power play. But the Habs' power play is drastically improved with Laine on it, so he gets credit for that production over replacement.

The counterexample to Laine was Desharnais during 2012-2016. He was producing on that power play and racking up points, but there was no shortage of players that could have done the same in that context.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Btw, just for fun there is stat for all situations GF & GA this season. Yes, this is apples to oranges and hurts everyone who plays PK and does not play PP, but anyhow, it seems that Laine has been on ice for 37 goals for, 27 goals against in total, contributing clearly for the Ws. Not a surprise that the 1st line leads this stat as well.

View attachment 993669

This is an absurdly flawed way to arrive at a players value....laughable at best.

 

[Halberdier]

40 is not average. It's bad. 50 is average.

Going into the tourney, Laine's was in the bottom 20 players in the league possession wise. But you shouldn't have needed numbers to see that he was a turnover machine and couldn't hang onto the puck. Moreover, his linemates did much better without him than with him (if you're looking at Dach post late December - before that his numbers were as bad as Laine's.)

On the flipside, Laine has been arguably the best PP man in the league. It's not like he isn't contributing, he is. But people have to make believe that he's been solid at even strength... no he hasn't. But that's okay. You expect that from a player coming back from a long layoff. And he's imrpoving - at least eyetest wise - I haven't looked at his numbers since the tournament but I would be really surprised if they weren't better.


Not sure why you'd say this. Stats are fine to use. And they back up that Laine has not been good at 5 on 5 this season.


As I said many times, there is no denying the man has talent. That shot is all world. Even if he just played as is he's valuable to us.

How valuable? Not 8 mil worth. But if he improves his play next year then it's a different story. There's no reason he can't hit 40 goals with the right center and playing with Demidov. But he needs to be engaged and he needs to work a lot on his conditioning over the summer.

50 is average only on a team that's average on 5-on-5. Montreal is below average team on 5-on-5, hence 50 on Montreal is way over average and pretty great to be honest. Literally Hutson-level great. Only 3 Habs forward are over 50, so by any possible definition that is not average for Habs, and these stats should be always looked relative to the team.

Like on the league leader Jets this season you have to be quite bad to not be over 50, as your team is winning about every game. And on the bottom feeder Sharks there is exactly 1 guy over 50.

 

[Halberdier]

This is an absurdly flawed way to arrive at a players value....laughable at best.

I hope you can read.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Suzuki and Caulfield are certainly more effective at this point, though they too would nosedive with significant injuries. Caulfield took a step back to 28 goals last year, it's because his shoulder was hurting him the first half of the year.

Laine is doing what he's doing with a week knee, and has also had multiple flu episodes, I think two which will lead to some loss of strength. He's playing with leftover linemates. And he's doing well. He's transformed the Habs into a playoff team.

I think Suzuki has the highest IQ among the forwards. By a comfortable margins. But IQ is only the most important ingredient to effectiveness, not the only ingredient.

I think if Laine recovers nicely this summer, he can be a 40-40 player next year -- from the second line.

I am not sure I fully buy into the flu symptom excuse or the knee excuse. They could be valid but he has taken way too much time with his flu symptoms and nobody really knows about the knee. He has been an utterly embarrassingly lazy player his entire career and really does rely on better players to feed him the puck. I do not in any way see a 40-40 season in the cards as he has never done it before and he will not be on the first line.

I can't stand his demeanor and I question his character, hopefully these things are better next year and he is healthy because he could be a great player if he put any effort at all into his game.

He is one of a few players that just give me the "ick" with Phil Kessel being another similarily lazy, one dimensional player who was also as likeable as a genital wart.

I truly wish the best for him and hope he turns it around, it will just take a lot more than the odd one timer pp goal to win me over.

 

[Goldthorpe]

If Laine was playing with better linemates, on a productive 2nd line, people wouldn't care so much he's a PP specialist.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

You need to stop letting your personal feelings overwrite facts.

This 100% applies to you my friend as you are entirely blinded by your oddly overwhelming affection for this stick in the mud.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

If Laine was playing with better linemates, on a productive 2nd line, people wouldn't care so much he's a PP specialist.

If he was as good as @Marioesque claims he is he would make his line mates better and carry the line. He has never done this and it doesn't look at all as though he is trending towards becoming that calibre of player.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I hope you can read.

I hope you try watching hockey games and learn how to evaluate the game without letting your cherry picked stats tell you what you are seeing.

 

[Marioesque]

He definitely needs two linemates who can create for him. It is what it is.

And that line is gonna be really effective.

That's proper asset management. Laine is the best from long distance, as effective as others from the crease.

You can't ignore the lesson he's teaching on PP. The more shot chances you create for him, your opportunity of winning increases.

It works on 5 on 5 as well. Create room for Laine to shoot, results follow.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I care about the positive difference in Gf/60 and Ga/60.

Or points per 60.

How effective you are with your ice time. That's the real tell

That explains everything as you put the most weight on players who have an increased likelihood to be one dimensional as the players that benefit the most from these models are exploitation players who are pp specialists and do not kill penalties......almost like you searched for the stat that would most support your case without expecting to get called out for it by posters who are experienced at exposing charlatan apologetics.

 

[Marioesque]

If he was as good as @Marioesque claims he is he would make his line mates better and carry the line. He has never done this and it doesn't look at all as though he is trending towards becoming that calibre of player.

He does, historically always has. When has he not made his linemates better?

 

[BullLund]

Laine's biggest problem offensively, in my opinion, is entering the zone. He just doesn't have a whole lot of speed going in and he often drives into a bunch of defenders. Apart from a hailmary pass, his success rate in making a clean entry is pretty low.

Once he is in the zone, he is pretty good at finding guys with his passes. And his shot is always a threat which draws defenders into him, opening up space for the rest.

It'd be interesting to see how he does with some players who can do most of the heavy lifting in that regard. The 1st line is working so well though that there's really no sense in changing it. And the options are pretty limited outside of the 1st line.

 

[BullLund]

I am not sure I fully buy into the flu symptom excuse or the knee excuse. They could be valid but he has taken way too much time with his flu symptoms and nobody really knows about the knee. He has been an utterly embarrassingly lazy player his entire career and really does rely on better players to feed him the puck. I do not in any way see a 40-40 season in the cards as he has never done it before and he will not be on the first line.

I can't stand his demeanor and I question his character, hopefully these things are better next year and he is healthy because he could be a great player if he put any effort at all into his game.

He is one of a few players that just give me the "ick" with Phil Kessel being another similarily lazy, one dimensional player who was also as likeable as a genital wart.

I truly wish the best for him and hope he turns it around, it will just take a lot more than the odd one timer pp goal to win me over.

Kessel won a couple of Stanley Cups with the Penguins still. I think most Montreal fans would be happy if Laine can contribute in a similar fashion.