Taylor Hall For Adam Larsson V | 4,000+ Posts and Counting!

[nabob]

If we go by most recent seasons, Hall is clearly on the decline.

Subban too

6 goals is not top 5 in the NHL :

 

[nabob]

Really cool to see some guys like Fourier, Panda, Jase and others put some real solid research into looking beyond the surface with Larsson. Good work guys. I think with more knowledge comes better understanding, and while I hated this trade and was pissed at first, it's easier to get behind it now.

 

[Jet Walters]

I agree with you.

My problem with going low-to-high is that it emphasises shooting from the point, an area which I still think we are weak in. If we work low-to-high so that the defenders can pick a pass, Larsson will shine. If Larsson's expected to rocket the puck every time, we're going to be slightly disappointed.

That is his strength, yes. He will still get his fair share of shots though, and having a guy like Maroon/Kassian/Pouliot/Lucic on the ice creating havoc in front of the net is a more important factor in scoring goals these days than having a rocket of a slapper IMO. Not many goalies get beat clean by a point shot when they get a clean look at it anymore.

In any case, I'm excited to see what Larsson looks like as an Oiler and I feel our forward group is in a much better position to help the defense than in years past.

 

[Young Lions*]

Young Lions, found some other thing I wrote about Larsson in 15/16 regarding his deployment and situation:

• New Jersey Devils scored the fewest number of goals in the league with 182. The second worst team (Vancouver) scored 186 goals, and the third worst team (Carolina and Toronto) scored 192. New Jersey allowed 202 goals. Their GF% was 47.3%.
• But that includes powerplay time, and Larsson was too busy playing averaging 22:31 a game in even strength and penalty kill.
• At even strength, New Jersey had a GF% of 45.2%.
• Larsson's GF% was 55.4%. He was one of four players on his team to have a positive +- On/60.
• New Jersey Devils were worst in the league at generating shots with 24.4 shots generated per game and allowed 28.6 shots per game. The team's Corsi% was 46.0%.
• Adam Larsson's 44.9%, which is -1.1% relatively, but...
• When games were close and you adjusted for zone, New Jersey's Corsi% was 47.3%. So was Larsson's with the same adjustments.
• He had one of the highest defensive zone start percentages in the league at 47.4%. His OffZone Start % was 30.5%, and his OffZone Finish % was 42.5%. His ZSO%Rel was -24.9%.
• The only defencemen who had worse Corsi Quality of Teammates (i.e. average Corsi of Teammates, weighted by ice time together) were players from Colorado, who are blessed with the worst head coach in the NHL right now.

So when you look at the quality of his teammates, his defensive zone usage, and then skip over to places like behindthenet.ca, war-on-ice, hockey-analysis and other websites with their fancy metrics, you see a player who did extremely heavy lifting and somehow did well in it.

I'll take you at your word here since you've clearly done the work. The confounding thing this is that sample is fairly small at this point (which is to be expected given his age). It doesn't help that he's evidently a low event player who toils in obscurity in a eastern swamp.

Now, I'll also be the first to admit that I'll be looking at this kid with a jaundiced eye for a very long time as a result of what he cost to acquire. If there isn't a 30 point guy in there who can be seriously considered a top 25 d-man league wide at worst by next year, we're in trouble IMO.

 

[Panda Bear]

Well, we have a two season sample size.

One has Larsson being a very good even strength producer with a good defensive game under first/second pairing circumstances, and the other has Larsson being an ordinary even strength producer who managed to do very well defensively as one half of the league's most abused shutdown pairing.

And then we see it's the league-worst scoring team, the Devils, who have awful possession metrics too.

 

[Panda Bear]

Idea: pretend we traded Lucic with his current contract for Hall with his current contract, and that we signed Larsson from free agency to his current deal.

Suddenly we have the best free-agent defenceman on an unbelievably friendly contract!

 

[nightfighter]

Idea: pretend we traded Lucic with his current contract for Hall with his current contract, and that we signed Larsson from free agency to his current deal.

Suddenly we have the best free-agent defenceman on an unbelievably friendly contract!

History is written by the victors right?

 

[Bryanbryoil]

I didn't say Hall was carrying him, simply pointed out that they both vanished at the same time. Funny how Hall gets torn down for that despite having the track record he does while Drai gets a free pass.

Hall was the veteran, Drai basically a rookie playing his first full pro season. Sorry but the vet catches the **** over the young player every time in this case.

Because it's absurd to think that he's peaked at 24.

Yet he's had two or his poorest seasons back to back since his rookie season. You may think that it's absurd but it is not impossible.

This. oilers value Draisaitl > Hall. RNH =/>Hall.

I still remember defending this logic to guys like chaotic back last year. One of hall, nuge or eberle had to go.

1)Moving RNH doesn't get us a significant return, while at the same time creates a hole at center which isn't easy to fill. McLennan loves his center depth.

2)Eberle doesn't make sense to move either. His value is so low. Plus he's one of few right handed players we have. He's easily our best goal scorer, good on the power play. He's our best Shootout guy as well which gets so undervalued as that directly reflects points in the standings.

3)Moving Hall returns a better player who can contribute right away. replacing a winger is so easy to do by either trade or FA, it's also the position of least importance as well. He doesn't contribute on either pp,pk or the shootout. Players will always have to adjust their game to fit with Taylor Hall. Hall will never adapt his game to fit with anyone else.

I would have been happy with Hamonic + Lee for Hall. I think Larsson has more upside than Hamonic and Lucic is >>> than Lee so this oilers fan is happy with the outcome.

I couldn't have said it any better myself. I agree word for word

Jet: Another concern is McLellan's fascination for low-to-high offensive tactics, which emphasizes shots from the point rather than puck movement.

A positive, though, is that Larsson will get to use his breakout pass on McDavid. It'd be like Ryan Whitney under Crosby all over again.

That would be epic.

 

[Vanqu1sh]

I didn't say Hall was carrying him, simply pointed out that they both vanished at the same time. Funny how Hall gets torn down for that despite having the track record he does while Drai gets a free pass.



Because it's absurd to think that he's peaked at 24.



Actual evidence that it was the Habs that pulled out when PLD came off the board would be nice. All reports were that the Habs' ask was too rich for the Oilers.



Being interested in one player does not preclude interest in another.



It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest they would have passed up a package like the one rumoured because of the draft pick involved. Who would do that? Why?

I would be very, very surprised if Hall isn't past his peak already. First off, it's common for offensive forwards to peak very early in their career, Hall was what, 21-22 when he had his best seasons, that's very similar to many of the other great scorers of the past and ones in the league today.

He's not as explosive as he once was. Maybe he's just out of shape and he could get it back, I don't know. As much as the team sucked all these years, Hall also just played for points basically. Any improvement he gains from better support through coaching and structure in NJ is lost to the fact he's going to have to be way more committed to the entire ice.

He's a guy who is as good as he is because of his physical talents. Hockey sense is way down his list of attributes. As he gets older he will get worse and I am very confident in saying that.

He says he's motivated now (finally), and he's still in his prime, he'll be a good player and have good years still, but I think the odds are against him that he'll hit 80 again in his career. Perhaps his overall effect on the game and winning will be better, though.

 

[Tyrolean]

I would be very, very surprised if Hall isn't past his peak already. First off, it's common for offensive forwards to peak very early in their career, Hall was what, 21-22 when he had his best seasons, that's very similar to many of the other great scorers of the past and ones in the league today.

He's not as explosive as he once was. Maybe he's just out of shape and he could get it back, I don't know. As much as the team sucked all these years, Hall also just played for points basically. Any improvement he gains from better support through coaching and structure in NJ is lost to the fact he's going to have to be way more committed to the entire ice.

He's a guy who is as good as he is because of his physical talents. Hockey sense is way down his list of attributes. As he gets older he will get worse and I am very confident in saying that.

He says he's motivated now (finally), and he's still in his prime, he'll be a good player and have good years still, but I think the odds are against him that he'll hit 80 again in his career. Perhaps his overall effect on the game and winning will be better, though.

i always thought Hall's weakness was his puck sense and recklessness. He's gotten a bit more mature and picks his spots, He hasn't lost his explosiveness or slowed down. He still is a bot of a defensive liability but still drives plays and is a threat to score all the time. Alas you can't have both Hall and Larsson at the same time.

 

[Young Lions*]

I would be very, very surprised if Hall isn't past his peak already. First off, it's common for offensive forwards to peak very early in their career, Hall was what, 21-22 when he had his best seasons, that's very similar to many of the other great scorers of the past and ones in the league today.

How common? Give some examples.

He's not as explosive as he once was. Maybe he's just out of shape and he could get it back, I don't know. As much as the team sucked all these years, Hall also just played for points basically. Any improvement he gains from better support through coaching and structure in NJ is lost to the fact he's going to have to be way more committed to the entire ice.

Not really. Hall's defensive issues, whatever they may be, are moot if he continues to be an outscorer who helps his team when he's on the ice, which is what he was in Edmonton.

He's a guy who is as good as he is because of his physical talents. Hockey sense is way down his list of attributes.

Ah yes, "hockey sense" that thing which means whatever one wants it to mean, but no one can define.

As he gets older he will get worse and I am very confident in saying that.

Boy you're really going out on a limb there.

He says he's motivated now (finally), and he's still in his prime, he'll be a good player and have good years still, but I think the odds are against him that he'll hit 80 again in his career. Perhaps his overall effect on the game and winning will be better, though.

I don't think 80 is out of the realm of possibility in the more wide open east. But 80 is a high benchmark for any player in this league (there were 5 80 point guys last year). 70+ is more than reasonable though.

 

[Mr Sakich]

I don't think 80 is out of the realm of possibility in the more wide open east. But 80 is a high benchmark for any player in this league (there were 5 80 point guys last year). 70+ is more than reasonable though.

interesting point here. If 70 points for Hall is considered a good year, how many points for Lucic before we consider the trade a win?

If Lucic scores 60, would losing 10 points but gaining a 1st pairing RHD be considered a win? What is the separation between Hall and Lucic that tips the trade into a win or loss?

 

[MessierII]

interesting point here. If 70 points for Hall is considered a good year, how many points for Lucic before we consider the trade a win?

If Lucic scores 60, would losing 10 points but gaining a 1st pairing RHD be considered a win? What is the separation between Hall and Lucic that tips the trade into a win or loss?

If Lucic shows chemistry with Connor I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him out score Hall next year that's assuming both are play around the same amount of games.

Hall only out scored Lucic by 10 points this past season.

 

[Took a pill in Sbisa]

interesting point here. If 70 points for Hall is considered a good year, how many points for Lucic before we consider the trade a win?

If Lucic scores 60, would losing 10 points but gaining a 1st pairing RHD be considered a win? What is the separation between Hall and Lucic that tips the trade into a win or loss?

People on Hall's side would argue that you're changing the goal posts.
You're suggesting it's Lucic + Larssom vs Hall rather than Lucic + Larsson vs Hall + Lucic

 

[LaGu]

How common? Give some examples.



Not really. Hall's defensive issues, whatever they may be, are moot if he continues to be an outscorer who helps his team when he's on the ice, which is what he was in Edmonton.



Ah yes, "hockey sense" that thing which means whatever one wants it to mean, but no one can define.



Boy you're really going out on a limb there.



I don't think 80 is out of the realm of possibility in the more wide open east. But 80 is a high benchmark for any player in this league (there were 5 80 point guys last year). 70+ is more than reasonable though.

Since I had nothing to do the last 30 minutes I took a look at this. I just looked at each players best and second best season in terms of pts, obviously there are many more factors that play in. For example I would say the Bergeron was and is a much better player at 24+ years than before even though his best pts seasons were at the age of 20 and 21. Also, a few players on the list are still young and could improve.

Players included: Crosby, Benn, Spezza, Jagr, Stamkos, Giroux, Kessel, Kane, Thornton, Seguin, Eberle, Kopitar, Ovechkin, Backstrom, Tavares, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Perry, L.Eriksson, Krejci, Hossa, Datsyuk, Toews, Zetterberg, Nash, Malkin, Hull, Shanahan, Gretzky, Tkachuk, Modano, Sundin, Lindros, Sakic, Forsberg, Kariya, Selanne.

edit: the players in bold had their best season under the age of 24 (I know, Seguin and a couple more are probably too young to be counted).

Age 19: 1
Age 20: 5
Age 21: 10
Age 22: 13
Age 23: 12
Age 24: 11
Age 25: 5
Age 26: 6
Age 27: 5
Age 28: 2
Age 29: 1
Age 30: 1
Age 31: 1

Seems to be a relation as well to draft position. Players like Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Hull, Alfredsson peaked much later than high picks and they bring up the average quite a bit so it could be interesting to divide this more based on where the players were drafted.

 

[Young Lions*]

interesting point here. If 70 points for Hall is considered a good year, how many points for Lucic before we consider the trade a win?

If Lucic scores 60, would losing 10 points but gaining a 1st pairing RHD be considered a win? What is the separation between Hall and Lucic that tips the trade into a win or loss?

IMO, for the trade to be a win, Larsson has to be a bona fide #1D man in short order. 30+ points, 25 minutes a night in all situations. Lucic has nothing to do with it.

 

[Halibut]

People on Hall's side would argue that you're changing the goal posts.
You're suggesting it's Lucic + Larssom vs Hall rather than Lucic + Larsson vs Hall + Lucic

In some ways that's exactly what it is though. You dont get Larsson unless you trade Hall, you know you are losing the trade if it's Hall straight up for Larsson but you know you have a replacement for Hall you can get for nothing. It's what you focus on really. There is no way to look at this trade and say we won it but it is entirely possible to look at the moves together and say that we probably have a better team. Our management in the past has been unable or unwilling to do just that even though MacT talked about it when he took over. A deal like this has been coming for a long time, the only question is if Larsson was the right piece. There was an interview with Scott Cullen on TSN from a radio piece, I think it was out of Winnipeg, he said the Oilers were back into a corner. They waited so long on making this type of deal that it probably ended up being worse than it had to be.

 

[Young Lions*]

Since I had nothing to do the last 30 minutes I took a look at this. I just looked at each players best and second best season in terms of pts, obviously there are many more factors that play in. For example I would say the Bergeron was and is a much better player at 24+ years than before even though his best pts seasons were at the age of 20 and 21. Also, a few players on the list are still young and could improve.

Players included: Crosby, Benn, Spezza, Jagr, Stamkos, Giroux, Kessel, Kane, Thornton, Seguin, Eberle, Kopitar, Ovechkin, Backstrom, Tavares, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Perry, L.Eriksson, Krejci, Hossa, Datsyuk, Toews, Zetterberg, Nash, Malkin, Hull, Shanahan, Gretzky, Tkachuk, Modano, Sundin, Lindros, Sakic, Forsberg, Kariya, Selanne.

edit: the players in bold had their best season under the age of 24 (I know, Seguin and a couple more are probably too young to be counted).

Age 19: 1
Age 20: 5
Age 21: 10
Age 22: 13
Age 23: 12
Age 24: 11
Age 25: 5
Age 26: 6
Age 27: 5
Age 28: 2
Age 29: 1
Age 30: 1
Age 31: 1

Seems to be a relation as well to draft position. Players like Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Hull, Alfredsson peaked much later than high picks and they bring up the average quite a bit so it could be interesting to divide this more based on where the players were drafted.

Thanks. I think for this to be a bit more accurate you'd need to adjust for scoring levels. For example, scoring rates overall were a lot higher when Crosby and Ovi were just starting out, so those numbers would be inflated compared to the current dead puck era.

 

[AUAIOMRN]

How common? Give some examples.
Ah yes, "hockey sense" that thing which means whatever one wants it to mean, but no one can define.

I'm not agreeing that Hall has poor hockey sense, but it's pretty easy to define the term.

"Hockey sense" is simply how good you are at decision making. How good you are at the strategic aspect of the game.

 

[Bangers]

Since I had nothing to do the last 30 minutes I took a look at this. I just looked at each players best and second best season in terms of pts, obviously there are many more factors that play in. For example I would say the Bergeron was and is a much better player at 24+ years than before even though his best pts seasons were at the age of 20 and 21. Also, a few players on the list are still young and could improve.

Players included: Crosby, Benn, Spezza, Jagr, Stamkos, Giroux, Kessel, Kane, Thornton, Seguin, Eberle, Kopitar, Ovechkin, Backstrom, Tavares, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Perry, L.Eriksson, Krejci, Hossa, Datsyuk, Toews, Zetterberg, Nash, Malkin, Hull, Shanahan, Gretzky, Tkachuk, Modano, Sundin, Lindros, Sakic, Forsberg, Kariya, Selanne.

edit: the players in bold had their best season under the age of 24 (I know, Seguin and a couple more are probably too young to be counted).

Age 19: 1
Age 20: 5
Age 21: 10
Age 22: 13
Age 23: 12
Age 24: 11
Age 25: 5
Age 26: 6
Age 27: 5
Age 28: 2
Age 29: 1
Age 30: 1
Age 31: 1

Seems to be a relation as well to draft position. Players like Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Hull, Alfredsson peaked much later than high picks and they bring up the average quite a bit so it could be interesting to divide this more based on where the players were drafted.

This isn't surprising. Most young star forwards are used to being 'the guy' and want to score points for the fame and a better contract. Once they realize that's not going to win any championships (or the coach/veterans make them realize it), they start cheating less for offense and sacrifice points for better 2 way play.

Yzerman was a good example of this; he wanted out of Detroit when Bowman demanded that he either played a 2 way game or he would be benched. Eventually, he saw the light and became one of the best 2 way Cs in the game (at the expense of his point totals).

If Crosby cheated for offense all the time (and stayed healthy), he'd probably get 120 - 150 points in a season even in the modern era.

 

[AUAIOMRN]

interesting point here. If 70 points for Hall is considered a good year, how many points for Lucic before we consider the trade a win?

If Lucic scores 60, would losing 10 points but gaining a 1st pairing RHD be considered a win? What is the separation between Hall and Lucic that tips the trade into a win or loss?

It doesn't matter if we win the trade; what matters is if we are a better team.

It's ok to pay $100 for a bottle of water if you're dying of thirst. It doesn't matter if it's a "fair price".

 

[Young Lions*]

I'm not agreeing that Hall has poor hockey sense, but it's pretty easy to define the term.

"Hockey sense" is simply how good you are at decision making. How good you are at the strategic aspect of the game.

If you mean "decision making, then why not just say "decision making?" Hockey sense, AFAIC, tends to be a nebulous catch all term that means whatever the person using it wants it to mean at a given moment.

Anyway, I don't think Hall's decision making is that bad, but it's simple that he has the puck so much that mistakes are going to happen. I think he has great vision and can read the play exceedingly well.

 

[Replacement*]

If Lucic shows chemistry with Connor I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him out score Hall next year that's assuming both are play around the same amount of games.

Hall only out scored Lucic by 10 points this past season.

Why insist on paying attention to only one season when the difference in production between the players is much more, typically, than 10pts?

Also, as multiple posters have taken the time to express Lucic was playing in LA with fantastic players like Kopitar and Carter. I get that McDavid is good, But he's a sophomore while the LA players are SC champions and among the best linemates in the NHL
Next, LA gets good service from Doughty springing players on productive rushes.

The comparisons are apples and oranges.

In anycase I take that bet that Hall gets more pts than Lucic any day of the year. Lucic is 1 season removed from a pedestrian 44pt season in Boston. I really doubt Lucic gets 60 pts, I really doubt Hall doesn't get 70 or more.

 

[Replacement*]

I'm not agreeing that Hall has poor hockey sense, but it's pretty easy to define the term.

"Hockey sense" is simply how good you are at decision making. How good you are at the strategic aspect of the game.

So the #1 picked player in his draft year, in a good draft, who has excelled at NHL hockey and has been that rarest of quantities, an over PPG player twice so far in his career doesn't have "hockey sense" Doesn't make good decisions out there?


My oh my, people would be lining up here to critique Mark Messiers game who turned the puck over a lot more than Taylor Hall ever did.

Players that drive offense and consciously attack D on every shift end up either breaking it or having some turnovers. On a team that was largely peripheral in attack I would take what Hall is offering any day of the week.

 

[Dorian2]

How common? Give some examples.

Since I had nothing to do the last 30 minutes I took a look at this. I just looked at each players best and second best season in terms of pts, obviously there are many more factors that play in. For example I would say the Bergeron was and is a much better player at 24+ years than before even though his best pts seasons were at the age of 20 and 21. Also, a few players on the list are still young and could improve.

Players included: Crosby, Benn, Spezza, Jagr, Stamkos, Giroux, Kessel, Kane, Thornton, Seguin, Eberle, Kopitar, Ovechkin, Backstrom, Tavares, Bergeron, Getzlaf, Perry, L.Eriksson, Krejci, Hossa, Datsyuk, Toews, Zetterberg, Nash, Malkin, Hull, Shanahan, Gretzky, Tkachuk, Modano, Sundin, Lindros, Sakic, Forsberg, Kariya, Selanne.

edit: the players in bold had their best season under the age of 24 (I know, Seguin and a couple more are probably too young to be counted).

Age 19: 1
Age 20: 5
Age 21: 10
Age 22: 13
Age 23: 12
Age 24: 11
Age 25: 5
Age 26: 6
Age 27: 5
Age 28: 2
Age 29: 1
Age 30: 1
Age 31: 1

Seems to be a relation as well to draft position. Players like Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Hull, Alfredsson peaked much later than high picks and they bring up the average quite a bit so it could be interesting to divide this more based on where the players were drafted.

Thanks. I think for this to be a bit more accurate you'd need to adjust for scoring levels. For example, scoring rates overall were a lot higher when Crosby and Ovi were just starting out, so those numbers would be inflated compared to the current dead puck era.

With all due respect Young Lions, I've noticed this little motif in your posting style on a number of occasions. I have been involved in a couple myself, and I'm not on here often You make a statement, somebody else counters with their opinion, you ask for examples from THEM to support THEIR opinion.

A few of these posters put in a certain amount of extra work and time, LaGu being the most recent example I've seen (amongst many others), and you counter their time and effort they could have spent elsewhere with you asking for more details than they've already provided for 30 minutes of work and more accuracy.

You are basically micromanaging people's reasoned responses to your opinion. To top it off, you yourself are asking other posters to put in more work than you apparently are willing to provide yourself. Do you seriously think that you can just make a statement without any detail or accuracy (your own words) and expect someone who disagrees to do what you seem to be refusing to do?

This isn't some "fly by" post that has just spawned because I want to pile on. Just a common miscourtesy that I've noticed by yourself on a number of occasions. Take this post for what it is, just my opinion. I on't speak for any others here.