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

[Up the Irons]

But this doesn't account that Hall+Lucic was also a possibility. Its why its unbalanced accounting of the respective moved assets.

Its not an essential given that its either/or.

Sure it's possible. But it makes less sense of have both.

It matters not what is possible but what PC was thinking. None of us know, but I'm betting he knew he could trade Hall the second he knew he had Lucic.

It is unfair to judge that trade in a vaccum. But go ahead if u must.

 

[McFlyingV]

Another reason is quite simple. Easier for D to keep puck in if Right plays right and so on.

Yeah it seems to matter a lot more for D-men than forwards.

Also on the subject of Larsson and his corsi numbers. It really isn't surprising why his corsi numbers are poor after re-watching a bunch of NJ games. Their team is atrocious at keeping puck possession in the offensive zone. I thought watching the Oilers the last 5 years trying to create off the rush all the time was bad, but NJ doesn't create much off the rush or control zone time much at all. Their forwards really are very poor at establishing a useful forecheck and even if they do gain possession in the offensive zone their cycle game is quite poor and they often lose possession before they ever have a chance to create anything. Their game seems to revolve around playing a strong defensive game and trying to score off the rush or on the power play when the other team makes a mistake. Most of their games honestly look like how teams play in the final minute of a tied game trying to survive until overtime.

Also one other thing I noticed with Larsson is he actually does try to sneak in from the point quite often, but usually has to turn back because his team loses possession down low. Imo his offensive instincts are there, and while he may not have an elite shot he could easily contribute more in the offensive zone on a team that can gain sustained offensive zone possession and utilize the point (something that McDavid does extremely well, and also something that our team is much more built for with some of the new additions over the last year).

 

[Ogopogo*]

Yeah it seems to matter a lot more for D-men than forwards.

Also on the subject of Larsson and his corsi numbers. It really isn't surprising why his corsi numbers are poor after re-watching a bunch of NJ games. Their team is atrocious at keeping puck possession in the offensive zone. I thought watching the Oilers the last 5 years trying to create off the rush all the time was bad, but NJ doesn't create much off the rush or control zone time much at all. Their forwards really are very poor at establishing a useful forecheck and even if they do gain possession in the offensive zone their cycle game is quite poor and they often lose possession before they ever have a chance to create anything. Their game seems to revolve around playing a strong defensive game and trying to score off the rush or on the power play when the other team makes a mistake. Most of their games honestly look like how teams play in the final minute of a tied game trying to survive until overtime.

Also one other thing I noticed with Larsson is he actually does try to sneak in from the point quite often, but usually has to turn back because his team loses possession down low. Imo his offensive instincts are there, and while he may not have an elite shot he could easily contribute more in the offensive zone on a team that can gain sustained offensive zone possession and utilize the point (something that McDavid does extremely well, and also something that our team is much more built for with some of the new additions over the last year).

Read the bolded over and over and over again until you stop referring to Corsi as something useful.

 

[McFlyingV]

Read the bolded over and over and over again until you stop referring to Corsi as something useful.

I'm not much of an advanced stats supporter and certainly not much of a corsi supporter, I was just giving some context to the posters who have criticized him for his corsi.

 

[Fourier]

Yeah it seems to matter a lot more for D-men than forwards.

Also on the subject of Larsson and his corsi numbers. It really isn't surprising why his corsi numbers are poor after re-watching a bunch of NJ games. Their team is atrocious at keeping puck possession in the offensive zone. I thought watching the Oilers the last 5 years trying to create off the rush all the time was bad, but NJ doesn't create much off the rush or control zone time much at all. Their forwards really are very poor at establishing a useful forecheck and even if they do gain possession in the offensive zone their cycle game is quite poor and they often lose possession before they ever have a chance to create anything. Their game seems to revolve around playing a strong defensive game and trying to score off the rush or on the power play when the other team makes a mistake. Most of their games honestly look like how teams play in the final minute of a tied game trying to survive until overtime.

Also one other thing I noticed with Larsson is he actually does try to sneak in from the point quite often, but usually has to turn back because his team loses possession down low. Imo his offensive instincts are there, and while he may not have an elite shot he could easily contribute more in the offensive zone on a team that can gain sustained offensive zone possession and utilize the point (something that McDavid does extremely well, and also something that our team is much more built for with some of the new additions over the last year).

Stats can be deceptive without context:

Corsi is one of the worst offenders in this regard. On another topic

There have been comparisons between Fayne with Greene and Larson with Greene as pairings. Here are some of the actual numbers. People can interpret them as they will.

Greene with Larsson 2014-2016:

TOI 1943
GF/60 1.64
GA/60 1.42
GF% 53.5%
CF% 45.5%
OZ% 34.1%

Top 8 forwards in TOI for: Zajac (32%) , Henrique (27%) , Palmieri (22%), Cammalleri (19%), Gionta (19%), Elias (16%), Tootoo (15%), Stempniak (13%)

Top 10 forwards in TOI against: Crosby, N. Foligno, Stepan, Atkinson, Pacioretty, Kreider, Ovechkin, J. Staal, Zuccarello, Giroux

GA /60 with Schneider 1.48
GA/60 with Kinkaid 1.82

Goals against for the Team 258 in 164 games = 1.57g/gm

Greene with Larsson 2015-2016:

TOI 1467
GF/60 1.57
GA/60 1.27
GF% 55.2%
CF% 44.1%
OZ% 31.8%

Top 6 forwards in TOI for: Palmieri (38%), Zajac (35%), Henrique (29%), Stempniak (23%), Kalinin (23%), Gionta (18%), Cammalieri (17%), Tootoo (14%)

Top 10 forwards in TOI against: Giroux, Zuccarello, Crosby, Stepan, Ovechkin, Nordstrom, Saad, Jenner, J. Staal, Atkinson

ES Goals against for the Team 133 in 82 games = 1.62 g/gm

GA /60 with Schneider 1.30
GA/60 with Kinkaid 1.62


Greene with Fayne 2012-2014

TOI 1085
GF/60 2.27
GA/60 2.10
GF% 51.9%
CF% 57.2%
OZ% 47.1%

Top 8 forwards in TOI for: Zajac(31%), Zubrus(27%), Henrique (24%), Jagr(23%), Bernier(23%), Elias(22%), Gionta(19%), Ryder (18%)

Top 10 forwards in TOI against: Giroux, E. Staal, Voracek, St. Louis Backstrom, Kessel, Bozak, B. Boyes, Crosby, JVR

GA/60 with Schneider 2.28
GA/60 with Brodeur 2.28

ES Goals against for the Team 210 in 130 games =1.62 g/gm


I won't say much other than the following observations: While the rate at which the team gave up ES goals against stayed relatively constant the Larsson/Greene pairing had far better results, particularly last year, in preventing ES goals against than the Greene/Fayne despite the fact that the former pairing seemed to have a much more defensively challenging assignment. This success is sometimes attributed to better goal tending but that does not seem to be the case.

The Fayne/Greene pairing played against a relatively similar group of high quality players but the difference is that many of the top players they played against put up much better numbers against them than they did against Larsson/Greene. This is especially true for the 2015-2016 season.

 

[doubledown99]

Replacement, re: the RH/LH thing....I never played organized hockey so I'm like you that I'm RH and shoot right. I did this because it felt more natural and also because I had more power in my shot. I had friends that did play organized hockey. They were also RH like me but the coaching they received told them to shoot left. I asked them why there coaches did this and the reasons they told me were:

Having your dominant hand on top of the stick (not in the middle like us) improves accuracy, passing, puck control and stick handling. One of my friends was told that if they wanted to play hockey at a high level this would improve his odds. So he listened and shot left.

Now is this theory true? I have no clue. But I'm guessing it was/is the prevailing wisdom and has stuck at the grass roots level of hockey and thus why there seems to be more LH shots than RH shots. I did a quick google search (just looked at the top 3 articles) and found this:

http://www.hockeygiant.com/should-i-shoot-left-handed-or-right-handed.html

 

[Young Lions*]

So what's Montreal's excuse? They have the best goalie in the world AND had a #1 D who is definitely top 10 in the league, yet they look no where close to winning a cup with that crap lineup.

They would have made the SCF a couple years back if Kreider doesn't take out Price. Got beat by a pretty good Tampa Bay club the following year and got sunk by Therrien and .900 goaltending last year. Even with the downgrade from Weber to Subban, they are probably a contending team next season unless Therrien continues his DarK Ages approach to the game.

Chia' building it the right way. Strong Depth down the middle, Depth at D, fill in the rest with best available wingers.

LOL @depth at D. We've got two proven top four NHL D men on the roster in Larsson and Sekera.

Even if both Klefbom and Larsson max out as #2-3 guys, their more than worth it for their contracts.
If in the near future, we can add one more good middle pairing guy, we will make some serious noise.

We're still talking about a team that is loaded with talent up front, middling D and average goaltending. Without a real #1D, the team would have to get extremely lucky to even get a sniff.

 

[PositiveCashFlow]

Mind == Blown

I've been holding my stick wrong the past 30 years

 

[Replacement*]

Replacement, re: the RH/LH thing....I never played organized hockey so I'm like you that I'm RH and shoot right. I did this because it felt more natural and also because I had more power in my shot. I had friends that did play organized hockey. They were also RH like me but the coaching they received told them to shoot left. I asked them why there coaches did this and the reasons they told me were:

Having your dominant hand on top of the stick (not in the middle like us) improves accuracy, passing, puck control and stick handling. One of my friends was told that if they wanted to play hockey at a high level this would improve his odds. So he listened and shot left.

Now is this theory true? I have no clue. But I'm guessing it was/is the prevailing wisdom and has stuck at the grass roots level of hockey and thus why there seems to be more LH shots than RH shots. I did a quick google search (just looked at the top 3 articles) and found this:

http://www.hockeygiant.com/should-i-shoot-left-handed-or-right-handed.html

Thanks for the post. A lot of consistency in what people have said about this and what I remember. Yeah, never listened to coaches on this but I started playing street hockey age 4 (man, those were different times, who would let preschoolers play on the street now) and so I started that before organized hockey. So my right hand was established before I'd ever seen a coach and I liked it that way.

It makes no sense for coaches to say you have more accuracy with the non dominant hand.

Heres something to think about. I've played tennis for years. Like anybody my forehand is my better shot and I one hand it using right hand.

now with backhand it gets interesting. If I can manage I try also to make the backhand just with the right hand, and get better accuracy that way. However when I note that I need more velocity to have a chance on the backhand return I'll use two hands and with left being up the shaft from the right hand. I can hit the ball harder, but my accuracy suffers..Thing is it makes sense that you have more control over a shot if your dominant hand is the closest one to the shot releasing point (blade of hockey stick or tennis racket)

Also, for strength doesn't everybody hold a shovel with dominant hand down and that they have more force that way? Man, I tried to do it the other way once when I injured my right arm and it was futile. I was throwing dirt all over the place, some landed on my head..

This all runs counter to what the coaches are saying in hockey. My experience in tennis is not isolated either. A lot of players have more trouble controlling accuracy with 2 handed backhand. Just food for thought.

 

[Replacement*]

Mind == Blown

I've been holding my stick wrong the past 30 years

That's exactly what it was for me when I found out. Its strange that I went a longtime without really noticing because my best friends were like me and shot with their dominant hand. I just assumed that somehow a lot of the players I'd played with were left handed, lol. My older brother was left handed and shot left.

Any chance this sidebar that started on last page can be moved into a thread by mods? Would be good discussion, sorry for this being OT. But it is important to understand why Larsson being RHD is significant.

 

[PositiveCashFlow]

How have I not known this?

 

[Replacement*]

How have I not known this?

heh, good one. Some people notice things like this right away and others don't. I'm the latter.

As another example of the phenomenon some people would immediately notice that Rexall cameras were all pointing in opposite side of ice (as opposed to other NHL rinks) and unless someone mentioned it its something I would never notice in decades. I just don't process the difference.

Maybe a right brain left brain spatial thinking thing..

ps the lady in the red looks shocked as well that he's a righty.

 

[nightfighter]

Thanks for the post. A lot of consistency in what people have said about this and what I remember. Yeah, never listened to coaches on this but I started playing street hockey age 4 (man, those were different times, who would let preschoolers play on the street now) and so I started that before organized hockey. So my right hand was established before I'd ever seen a coach and I liked it that way.

It makes no sense for coaches to say you have more accuracy with the non dominant hand.

Heres something to think about. I've played tennis for years. Like anybody my forehand is my better shot and I one hand it using right hand.

now with backhand it gets interesting. If I can manage I try also to make the backhand just with the right hand, and get better accuracy that way. However when I note that I need more velocity to have a chance on the backhand return I'll use two hands and with left being up the shaft from the right hand. I can hit the ball harder, but my accuracy suffers..Thing is it makes sense that you have more control over a shot if your dominant hand is the closest one to the shot releasing point (blade of hockey stick or tennis racket)

Also, for strength doesn't everybody hold a shovel with dominant hand down and that they have more force that way? Man, I tried to do it the other way once when I injured my right arm and it was futile. I was throwing dirt all over..

This all runs counter to what the coaches are saying in hockey. My experience in tennis is not isolated either. A lot of players have more trouble controlling accuracy with 2 handed backhand. Just food for thought.

A hockey stick is basically a lever, and power for shooting comes from applying pressure on the fulcrum (lower hand) and whipping the other end of the lever forward/backward (top hand/blade). Of course kids don't know or care about this so most kids or beginners start off with their dominant hand on the bottom, treating it more as a bat or a stick (fulcrum at the top). Also as noted, your dominant hand is also more dexterous. To be able to stick handle and pass at an elite level, you need to adjust your blade, not just the stick (lever) as a whole. Thus, having your dominant hand on top at the top allows you to make quick deft movements.

I'm like you guys though, learned hockey on the street and played what felt natural. Now, I have resigned myself to stick handling like I'm chopping wood

 

[Replacement*]

A hockey stick is basically a lever, and power for shooting comes from applying pressure on the fulcrum (lower hand) and whipping the other end of the lever forward/backward (top hand/blade). Of course kids don't know or care about this so most kids or beginners start off with their dominant hand on the bottom, treating it more as a bat or a stick (fulcrum at the top). Also as noted, your dominant hand is also more dexterous. To be able to stick handle and pass at an elite level, you need to adjust your blade, not just the stick (lever) as a whole. Thus, having your dominant hand on top at the top allows you to make quick deft movements.

I'm like you guys though, learned hockey on the street and played what felt natural. Now, I have resigned myself to stick handling like I'm chopping wood

I was interested in a physics type of interpretation and that sounds like one. But RH golfers grip with dominant hand down right? They hit right handed? So that they have accuracy and control. This is bizarro world.

 

[Aerrol]

heh, good one. Some people notice things like this right away and others don't. I'm the latter.

As another example of the phenomenon some people would immediately notice that Rexall cameras were all pointing in opposite side of ice (as opposed to other NHL rinks) and unless someone mentioned it its something I would never notice in decades. I just don't process the difference.

Maybe a right brain left brain spatial thinking thing..

ps the lady in the red looks shocked as well that he's a righty.

...LOL. Aaand for an even further display of cluelessness, I had no idea what the pictures were for until I read this post. I even followed the whole discussion on handedness, and I still looked at those pictures and went 'what, was there a McDavid signing everyone missed? Why is that relevant to the Larsson-Hall discussion?'.

Next level clueless.

 

[nightfighter]

I was interested in a physics type of interpretation and that sounds like one. But RH golfers grip with dominant hand down right? They hit right handed? So that they have accuracy and control. This is bizarro world.

I don't know much about golf, but seems like the pivot point for a golf club is at the end of the handle. Only other real comparison for a hockey stick I can think of is a lacrosse stick, and in this case the more dexterous hand is also usually at the end of the handle. The power comes more from the middle hand in this case I believe, but the shooting motions are slightly different since Lacrosse can't use the ground to increase leverage.

 

[Up the Irons]

They would have made the SCF a couple years back if Kreider doesn't take out Price. Got beat by a pretty good Tampa Bay club the following year and got sunk by Therrien and .900 goaltending last year. Even with the downgrade from Weber to Subban, they are probably a contending team next season unless Therrien continues his DarK Ages approach to the game.



LOL @depth at D. We've got two proven top four NHL D men on the roster in Larsson and Sekera.



We're still talking about a team that is loaded with talent up front, middling D and average goaltending. Without a real #1D, the team would have to get extremely lucky to even get a sniff.

Come on man, ur nitpicking, now. A healthy Klefbom is without a doubt a top 4d, and Davidson is a pretty safe bet to be one. Not to mention, that the two you mentioned, Larsson and Sekera, are both PC acquisitions. So he has improved the D depth.

 

[Replacement*]

...LOL. Aaand for an even further display of cluelessness, I had no idea what the pictures were for until I read this post. I even followed the whole discussion on handedness, and I still looked at those pictures and went 'what, was there a McDavid signing everyone missed? Why is that relevant to the Larsson-Hall discussion?'.

Next level clueless.

heh, you can thank me for giving it away. I haven't even had any coffee today.

Would make an interesting "whats wrong with these two pictures" mental exercise.

I really hope the last couple pages can be merged into its own thread. These are some great posts on this and hopefully doesn't get erased because its wandered off topic. But again, Larrson is RHD and so Important related discussion on how the unintuitive shortage of RHD arises.

 

[doubledown99]

I'm not going to argue the Hall for Larsson trade was bad. I loved Taylor....the funny thing is that if we would have got a 1st round pick with Larsson I would have been happy with the trade. Even a 2nd rd pick and I'd say NJ got the better end but I could have understood it. Now a 1st or 2nd would have been nice but who is to say we would have got a player with that pick?

I also want to be hopeful. I'm hoping Chia is right and Larsson turns into what we all want him to be (a #1 stud D). And on that account I'm willing to give Chia some slack. I think he seems to have a good eye with dmen. He signed Chara. Traded for Seidenberg and Boychuk (from the Avs for Hendricks lol), signed Krug.

Swedish dmen sometimes do take a few years before they breakout so we could be getting Larsson at the exact right time. I went through his old scouting reports and there is some good stuff there:


"Larsson had some up-and-down performances in international tournaments, but saved some of his best for the World Jr. Championship. He showed off his powerful stride and ability to move well laterally, and was especially good at moving the puck and making outlet passes. Larsson is a smart guy who sees the ice well and has a high panic point, meaning he'll hold onto the puck until the last possible second for his teammates to get open, meaning he often takes a good amount of hits over the course of a game and season. He also has a booming shot and can score his share of them from the point. Larsson was not a dominating player, but that's not really his game."

"You're looking at the first or second overall pick with this kid- make no mistake about that. It will be interesting to see how he develops at the NHL level, but given his pro experience abroad, don't be surprised to see him in the big show as early as next season if his contract situation permits. He has the physical and mental makeup to play right away."- Kirk Luedeke


"Adam is one of the best skater’s in this year’s draft -- he has excellent speed and mobility. He also has patient puck handling abilities and can surprise an opponent with a solid hit. His size and skating ability make him comparable with Tampa Bay Lightning defenseman Victor Hedman."- NHL Central Scouting’s Chris Edwards


"Do his numbers jump out at you? They shouldn't, but when you compare Larsson's performance in the past two seasons when he was 16/17 to Rundblad and Erixon you can see how advanced defensively he seems to be. At age 16 Larsson was on the ice for roughly 17 minutes a game in the regular season/playoffs. Rundblad/Erixon didn't get those type of minutes until they were both 18 years old. This year at age 17 Larsson was playing almost 23 minutes per playoff game (for a team that went to the finals). Rundblad/Erixon also played a similar amount of minutes...at age 19." – Tom Stivali

"NHL Player I’d compare him to…

Ryan Suter: Top pairing defenseman who excels in all aspects of the game- Larsson has the potential to put up points and shut down the opposition."

http://www.allaboutthejersey.com/2011/6/17/2207795/adam-larsson-2011-nhl-draft-prospect-profile

Here is some more good stuff about Larsson:
http://thehockeywriters.com/thenextones-adam-larsson/

Yes he hasn't displayed all of his abilities (especially offensively) at the NHL level but he seems to have them and like I said earlier, maybe his true breakout is really close and Chia acquired him at the right time (before he became untouchable). As a Oiler fan all I can be is hopeful

 

[Young Lions*]

Come on man, ur nitpicking, now. A healthy Klefbom is without a doubt a top 4d, and Davidson is a pretty safe bet to be one. Not to mention, that the two you mentioned, Larsson and Sekera, are both PC acquisitions. So he has improved the D depth.

You'll note I said "proven top 4." Klef's a good bet provided he can stay healthy which itself isn't a good bet. Davidson? I like the player a ton, but it's way too soon to tell.

Building a Cup contender always requires a lot of things to go right for a team, but Chia isn't exactly minimizing his exposure to risk with his approach.

 

[dustrock]

People were asking about the importance of handedness for defencemen.

Did a quick search and I believe the results are small, but significant.

Same-handedness matters less on the PP than 5v5, which makes sense, but otherwise, you'd basically need a superior LHD playing his off-side to equate for your "regular" RHD.

https://puckplusplus.com/2013/09/21/do-defensemen-play-worse-on-their-off-hand/

https://hockey-graphs.com/2016/03/04/quantifying-the-importance-of-handedness/

 

[Aerrol]

Interesting to see the mention of a "booming shot" for Larsson. Probably hyperbolic prospect hyping since I've never seen such a thing or read anyone else say such, but it'd be nice if it was true and he rediscovered it here.

 

[Replacement*]

Interesting to see the mention of a "booming shot" for Larsson. Probably hyperbolic prospect hyping since I've never seen such a thing or read anyone else say such, but it'd be nice if it was true and he rediscovered it here.

A few of his goals (there aren't many) appear to be good shots but as anybody knows who has played the game is sometimes you get "all of one" and it ends up being a better shot then you are usually delivering. So its hard to say, but he has scored on a few good shots.

To me though is consistency. I like D that can hammer 10 pucks in a row in practice and get behind all of em. Any Jersey fans seeing that in practice? Would be good to know. Practice can reveal if a player really has it down or not. In games you just get such limited opportunities to see the rote delivered shot.

 

[Mr Positive]

A few of his goals (there aren't many) appear to be good shots but as anybody knows who has played the game is sometimes you get "all of one" and it ends up being a better shot then you are usually delivering. So its hard to say, but he has scored on a few good shots.

To me though is consistency. I like D that can hammer 10 pucks in a row in practice and get behind all of em. Any Jersey fans seeing that in practice? Would be good to know. Practice can reveal if a player really has it down or not. In games you just get such limited opportunities to see the rote delivered shot.

pretty much. A lot of low offense players have good shots. Being able to use it is just as important. The great point shots in the league come from players with a ton of skill and offensive awareness. Getting the shot off quickly is important, as is reading the play and having good positioning. It is possible that Larsson will mainly be a defensive zone player and that's where he'll mainly be used. That's all we can count on right now, although in fairness he has show some offense even with his rough assignments. He's not in the most bottom tier in offensive output for Dmen.

 

[missinthejets]

Thanks for the post. A lot of consistency in what people have said about this and what I remember. Yeah, never listened to coaches on this but I started playing street hockey age 4 (man, those were different times, who would let preschoolers play on the street now) and so I started that before organized hockey. So my right hand was established before I'd ever seen a coach and I liked it that way.

It makes no sense for coaches to say you have more accuracy with the non dominant hand.

Heres something to think about. I've played tennis for years. Like anybody my forehand is my better shot and I one hand it using right hand.

now with backhand it gets interesting. If I can manage I try also to make the backhand just with the right hand, and get better accuracy that way. However when I note that I need more velocity to have a chance on the backhand return I'll use two hands and with left being up the shaft from the right hand. I can hit the ball harder, but my accuracy suffers..Thing is it makes sense that you have more control over a shot if your dominant hand is the closest one to the shot releasing point (blade of hockey stick or tennis racket)

Also, for strength doesn't everybody hold a shovel with dominant hand down and that they have more force that way? Man, I tried to do it the other way once when I injured my right arm and it was futile. I was throwing dirt all over the place, some landed on my head..

This all runs counter to what the coaches are saying in hockey. My experience in tennis is not isolated either. A lot of players have more trouble controlling accuracy with 2 handed backhand. Just food for thought.

I don't know that a comparison of a hockey stick and a tennis racket is a really great one, a lot of the accuracy in tennis comes from the wrist and having just one hand on the thing allows more control in that regard. The only reason people started two handing shots in tennis was simply to get more power on the ball.

No one ever taught me how to hold a hockey stick, when we were young my parents just bought sticks with no curve on the blade and we held it however we felt more comfortable. My older brother and I are both right handed but I shoot left and he shoots right just because that's what felt right for us.

For the record when I am using a shovel my dominant hand is always at the top of the shovel too. It's the only way because if I put my left hand on top I have no control over where the shovel is going.

I think overall the biggest thing with a hockey stick is a lot of the power comes from the flex on the shaft as opposed to anything else and if you are right hand dominant shooting right you get more force applied to bending the stick. However I find that having the dominant hand at the top allows for greater control of what the stick is actually doing. Accuracy is probably a bit of an over simplification. A better way to phrase it is probably control whether it's stick handling or consistency in a shot.

All that being said people can train their non dominant hand to work better, a tennis example would be Nadal who is naturally a right hander but plays tennis left handed because his coach way back when he was a kid decided it would be an advantage to be a lefty in the sport.