William Nylander Discussion: 2016 v2

[Stephen]

I find it rather disingenuous that some of the same posters that call out Larkin for not being good defensively due to comments from the coach, have then no problem with saying that Nylander is better, despite him being called out more frequently by his own coach.

I don't get this need some posters have for trying to put our own players on a pedestal built on the corpses of their comparables. I also don't get the absolute refusal to accept that Nylander is not perfect. I love the guy, I'm one of those that screamed "Yes!" out loud when we drafted him. I am probably more biased for him than any other hockey player in the world. I still find that I'm flabbergasted by the opinions presented by some, by too many. They laud some attributes that he's great at defensively, but completely ignore or dismiss others. Again, disingenuous. Fortunately, Nylander has a great transition game, and that is ultimately better for team defense anyway.

As for Larkin, he's been lauded for defensive excellence for many years, way before he was drafted by Detroit, and has been so now as well. It does not surprise me though that there's some that jump on any chance to tear down that reputation, especially not in a thread dedicated to Nylander, the guy that has been a comparable so many times.

So true. I'm all about William Nylander and his potential as a top end player, but why on earth are we making these pointless little comparisons so prematurely.

 

[teeder333*]

I for one,hope Larkin and Nylander turn into gems. We don't have enough shining stars to entertain us. Be happy for Detroit, they need it.

 

[zeke]

I find it rather disingenuous that some of the same posters that call out Larkin for not being good defensively due to comments from the coach, have then no problem with saying that Nylander is better, despite him being called out more frequently by his own coach.

I don't get this need some posters have for trying to put our own players on a pedestal built on the corpses of their comparables. I also don't get the absolute refusal to accept that Nylander is not perfect. I love the guy, I'm one of those that screamed "Yes!" out loud when we drafted him. I am probably more biased for him than any other hockey player in the world. I still find that I'm flabbergasted by the opinions presented by some, by too many. They laud some attributes that he's great at defensively, but completely ignore or dismiss others. Again, disingenuous. Fortunately, Nylander has a great transition game, and that is ultimately better for team defense anyway.

As for Larkin, he's been lauded for defensive excellence for many years, way before he was drafted by Detroit, and has been so now as well. It does not surprise me though that there's some that jump on any chance to tear down that reputation, especially not in a thread dedicated to Nylander, the guy that has been a comparable so many times.

there's nothing disingenuous about pointing out that some people are claiming that larkin has a certain advantage over nylander, despite there being no evidence for it.

nobody said nylander hadn't had his defensive game questioned by his coach, just like larkin.

of course, coaches' actions always do speak louder than words.

 

[Mats13]

I'm sorry but I refuse to believe that Willy is better than Larkin defensively right now.

Prove it.

I mean if Larkin is so unequivocally better defensively, it should be relatively easy to prove.

For the record, I don't think either of them are great defensively. But, they're only 19 and that'll change. I just don't like how Larkin is somehow better defensively because of nothing more than reputation.

They're both 19, Larkin transitioned in as a winger and is still a winger currently. Nylander is a center. They are scoring at roughly the same pace. Larkin has a way better team and plays the easier position. Offensively, it shouldn't be a debate and Nylander will prove it next year.

 

[saltming]

Prove it.

I mean if Larkin is so unequivocally better defensively, it should be relatively easy to prove.

For the record, I don't think either of them are great defensively. But, they're only 19 and that'll change. I just don't like how Larkin is somehow better defensively because of nothing more than reputation.

They're both 19, Larkin transitioned in as a winger and is still a winger currently. Nylander is a center. They are scoring at roughly the same pace. Larkin has a way better team and plays the easier position. Offensively, it shouldn't be a debate and Nylander will prove it next year.

Just wanted to add larkin played on a line with 2 vets pretty much all the time and willie with 1 vet on his linefor most of his games.

 

[91Stammer*]

Prove it.

I mean if Larkin is so unequivocally better defensively, it should be relatively easy to prove.

For the record, I don't think either of them are great defensively. But, they're only 19 and that'll change. I just don't like how Larkin is somehow better defensively because of nothing more than reputation.

They're both 19, Larkin transitioned in as a winger and is still a winger currently. Nylander is a center. They are scoring at roughly the same pace. Larkin has a way better team and plays the easier position. Offensively, it shouldn't be a debate and Nylander will prove it next year.

I would honestly say Larkin is not going to be as good as Nylander. And for PPG Larkin and Nylander are both on pace for somewhere around 45-50 points over 82 games. Now the real twist here is that one plays with Zetterberg/Datsyuk while the other plays with Greening, Hyman, Grabner.

 

[as Pure as Evil]

Just wanted to add larkin played on a line with 2 vets pretty much all the time and willie with 1 vet on his linefor most of his games.

nylander had p.a and greening

larkin has had zetterberg/gazoo(which you gotta feel for the wings, 7.5 mil in deadcap)abby and so fourth. he has had players that garnered that attention away from him so he could do what he did

its comparing apples and oranges

 

[saltming]

nylander had p.a and greening

larkin has had zetterberg/gazoo(which you gotta feel for the wings, 7.5 mil in deadcap)abby and so fourth. he has had players that garnered that attention away from him so he could do what he did

its comparing apples and oranges

Hyman was on his wing to start though.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I don't know what stats you're looking at, but from the advanced statistics I've used (HERO charts, corsica.hockey), Zetterberg is not a Selke-level player, in fact his defensive impact is more like a third liner. While Larkin is only 19 and he will improve defensively, his defensive impact this year was atrocious, which can be supported by shot suppression stats and CA/60.

That's because the advanced stats measure generalized defensive impact, not defensive ability. Zetterberg has slowed down so much that his transition game has suffered tremendously.

I've followed Larkin very closely this year (I was a big advocate for him at the 2014 draft) and his defensive game is very mature for a rookie. Willy's defensive awareness just doesn't strike me on a level that Larkin's does.

This can all change very quickly with players at that age mind you.

Yeah I agree. I've been tremendously impressed watching Larkin's two-way game.

Prove it.

I mean if Larkin is so unequivocally better defensively, it should be relatively easy to prove.

For the record, I don't think either of them are great defensively. But, they're only 19 and that'll change. I just don't like how Larkin is somehow better defensively because of nothing more than reputation.

They're both 19, Larkin transitioned in as a winger and is still a winger currently. Nylander is a center. They are scoring at roughly the same pace. Larkin has a way better team and plays the easier position. Offensively, it shouldn't be a debate and Nylander will prove it next year.

Can't be proven. We have absolutely zero stats to judge defensive ability, just defensive impact. Hence a lot of the misunderstandings about someone like Gardiner, for example.

The reputation you mentioned is built upon rave reviews going back years from all kinds of professionals watching his game. It's certainly not infallible (far from it), but he's got a reputation for a reason. Meanwhile, Nylander has had a reputation for the opposite, one that has been there for a reason, if you've watched him through the years, and that he's now shaking off.

Also, not sure where the argument "because he plays for Detroit" even comes from. Nobody is claiming that Nyquist is a defensive stud. Never seen it about Tatar either. To be honest, I've never really seen Detroits players have unfair reputation more than any other franchise, a dissonance born from ignorance about the players, not bias towards the franchise.

there's nothing disingenuous about pointing out that some people are claiming that larkin has a certain advantage over nylander, despite there being no evidence for it.

nobody said nylander hadn't had his defensive game questioned by his coach, just like larkin.

of course, coaches' actions always do speak louder than words.

Interactif-ing me, zeke? I said that it's disingenuous to use coaches word as an argument for why Nylander is better than Larkin when the former has had twice the amount of comments directed at him. Don't twist my words around, I never claimed what you are now defending.

But sure. And if people said "Hey guys, there's nothing that supports Larkin over Nylander defensively right now", I wouldn't have said anything. But that's not what happened.

Actions speak louder than words perhaps, but actions are also ruled by context. Babcock wanted Nylander on the wing, but that opportunity wasn't afforded to him. It was with Larkin. Nylander has been mostly sheltered (been very interesting seeing him pitted against top competition at times though), Larkin hasn't.

It's semantics in the end. We don't have much to go on in this discussion. We can look at defensive impact, but it leans more heavily on transition abilities than defensive abilities. We have reputations, and we all know how correct those can be.

Personally, when I watch Larkin I've been tremendously impressed with his defensive game. When I watch Nylander, I've been very impressed with how far he's come, but it's also been very obvious he has far to go. Nylander will probably be the better offensive player and transition player, and as such he'll likely be the overall more impactful player as well.

 

[Atomos2]

Hyman was on his wing to start though.

And Grabner

 

[The_Chosen_One]

there's nothing disingenuous about pointing out that some people are claiming that larkin has a certain advantage over nylander, despite there being no evidence for it.

nobody said nylander hadn't had his defensive game questioned by his coach, just like larkin.

of course, coaches' actions always do speak louder than words.

Larkin's flaws have a lot more to do with being a rookie than defensive form. He really does seem like a tactician out there and it isn't really due to being paired with Zetterberg. I'd argue that Larkin is more two-way much like Marner than say as an offensive superstar.

My comparison initially had more to do with offensive targets. We will have our more two-way centre in Mathews, Marner or even Dubois.

 

[zeke]

Actions speak louder than words perhaps, but actions are also ruled by context. Babcock wanted Nylander on the wing, but that opportunity wasn't afforded to him. It was with Larkin. Nylander has been mostly sheltered (been very interesting seeing him pitted against top competition at times though), Larkin hasn't.


.

Nylander 12:40estoi, 49.3oppcf%, 27.2 dzone start %
Larkin 13:25estoi, 49.9oppcf%, 24.9 dzone start %

 

[TheProspector]

Nylander 12:40estoi, 49.3oppcf%, 27.2 dzone start %
Larkin 13:25estoi, 49.9oppcf%, 24.9 dzone start %

So Larkin and Nylander have had nearly identical zone starts. And, despite the fact that the Wings are a muuuuuch better team and Larkin has olympic/1st ballot HOF linemates, Willie has a better 5v5 Corsi (53.9% vs 51.9%).

In fact, Willie has a higher shot attempt generation rate (60 per 60m vs 56.7 per 60m) and a lower shot generation rate against (52.5 vs 56.7).

To summarize: when Willie is on the ice, he gives up less shot attempts against and generates more shot attempts, despite being utilised in almost exactly the same way, and on a much better team.

Yeah, Willie is objectively better defensively. And offensively.

Can't be scored on while Willie is wheeling in the offensive zone for a solid minute....

 

[Macallan18]

Maybe I am naive, but when I look at Nylander and Larkin I see two excellent prospects with great offensive talent. That can't be taught. The defensive game can be learned, and I don't doubt we are not seeing finished products in that regard. I suspect both will learn to up their defensive games, and be entertaining for a long time.

 

[Shwaguy*]

nylander had p.a and greening

larkin has had zetterberg/gazoo(which you gotta feel for the wings, 7.5 mil in deadcap)abby and so fourth. he has had players that garnered that attention away from him so he could do what he did

its comparing apples and oranges

You can still compare them, they're both fruit.

 

[mobizziness]

best player, you mean.

nah JVR is still clearly better for the time being

 

[Willy Stylez]

When will he be able to choose his own number? And what number do you think he will choose/what do you want him to choose?

 

[ACC1224]

When will he be able to choose his own number? And what number do you think he will choose/what do you want him to choose?

I believe he wears 39.

 

[Willy Stylez]

I believe he wears 39.

You do, huh?

 

[saltming]

When will he be able to choose his own number? And what number do you think he will choose/what do you want him to choose?

I honestly don't understand the infatuation with player numbers. The only one I cared about was mine.
Would you please explain it to me?

 

[ACC1224]

You do, huh?

Yes, I'm sure someone can confirm.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Nylander 12:40estoi, 49.3oppcf%, 27.2 dzone start %
Larkin 13:25estoi, 49.9oppcf%, 24.9 dzone start %

Glad to see you ignore some of the stats there. Like the 5+ point more ozone% for Nylander. But I'll give it to you, all things considered, that comment of mine was not very correct. I took a quick glimpse and saw a noticeable difference in ozone%, but all in all the difference didn't end up so big.

 

[Willy Stylez]

I honestly don't understand the infatuation with player numbers. The only one I cared about was mine.
Would you please explain it to me?

Good question, somebody just don't care about it. I always liked it, how it fits a player and a bit of identity.

 

[saltming]

Good question, somebody just don't care about it. I always liked it, how it fits a player and a bit of identity.

So higher number means more swagger and lower numbers means less flash type idea?

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

So higher number means more swagger and lower numbers means less flash type idea?

Yeah, think #93 Franzén and #40 Zetterberg. One is a star the other is good squad player.