HadThomasVokounOnFortSt 878 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 Larkin.. He kinda good Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,803 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 Larkin.. He kinda good He better not antagonize John Scott during the game or try to show him up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nosyt612 103 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 Sidney's rookie year was in 2006, this was the first year post lockout when a ton of rule changes were made to increase scoring. The "trap era" arguably ended in 2004. 2006 had the most goals per game in the last 20 years. http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html He was still sixth in league scoring which is pretty incredible, and Ovie was third. Rookies that dominate amongst their peers like those two did are extremely rare. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
amato 3,210 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 He better not antagonize John Scott during the game or try to show him up. With how the central looks, I doubt they face each other Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) I have a question then. Do we consider Crosby and Ovechkin elite in their rookie years - basically from the get-go? And I mean elite among all players not just looking at the 2005/06 rookies. Because it seems like the general consensus (except Bill) is that Larkin is not elite yet. I'm wondering how people feel about Crosby and Ovechkin in their rookie years. Would you have labelled them as elite their first year? Or "not yet" Edited January 7, 2016 by kickazz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/all-star http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/elite?s=t Yup. Just me, kickazz. The rest of the earth thinks he's average. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/all-star http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/elite?s=t Dam right! John Scott is the best Left Wing in the league. Top 10 for sure. Weak. Edited January 7, 2016 by kickazz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 Dam right! John Scott is the best Left Wing in the league. Top 10 for sure. Weak. Ok, you failed. I got your back even though the all star selection completely blew up your side. I got your back still, brah. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 (edited) Ok, you failed. I got your back even though the all star selection completely blew up your side. I got your back still, brah. That point to prove Larkin is elite doesnt work because : - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy Edited January 8, 2016 by kickazz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted January 7, 2016 I don't respond to people who dismiss plus minus. It's a great stat over time, and that's why it's the third one on the NHL.com stat page. Only 4 stats are tracked for forwards on the leaders page, and that's one of them. People with favorite players at a minus 11 over the first 40 games want to blow the stat off right now. Gee, I wonder why. I will respond to you though. You got faced, and now you want your tracks covered. The NHL has deemed Dylan Larkin elite. His peers deem him elite. You're just having a vocabulary issue right now. That's all. And that's why I still got your back, brah. You're good! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 So he's elite because of +/- and because he's an all star after a bunch of vets said no. 1 DatsyukianDekes reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,763 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 He was still sixth in league scoring which is pretty incredible, and Ovie was third. Rookies that dominate amongst their peers like those two did are extremely rare. My point wasnt to dismiss Crosby's accomplishment, it was to dismiss 2006 being the "trap era" and a hard time to score goals. Crosby is obviously an elite offensive talent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) I don't respond to people who dismiss plus minus. It's a great stat over time, and that's why it's the third one on the NHL.com stat page. Only 4 stats are tracked for forwards on the leaders page, and that's one of them. People with favorite players at a minus 11 over the first 40 games want to blow the stat off right now. Gee, I wonder why. I will respond to you though. You got faced, and now you want your tracks covered. The NHL has deemed Dylan Larkin elite. His peers deem him elite. You're just having a vocabulary issue right now. That's all. And that's why I still got your back, brah. You're good! Your biggest argument for Larkin is +/- stat and you fail to look at other aspects. And when others point out the "points" category, you hypocritically say "points isn't the only determining factor". Your supporting reasons are flawed and you're using dictionary.com to justify elitism in a game in which players are picked by fan voting, one representative per team per division with up to 6 forwards - some of who didn't get in because there's a limit to how many can get in (i.e Crosby). Most of your arguments are flawed - and the amount of fallacies you commit when debating are incredible. You consistently "cherry pick" (fallacy of incomplete evidence) by focusing on the +/- stat as your go-to and ignoring all of the other stats that point against Larkin's true rank among players. You also have straw man arguments (another fallacy) when you interpret that people somehow "dismiss" the +/- stat when in reality they are telling you that it's not the complete picture. It's just part of the picture. Also you're acting a bit childish with your comments (ad hominem) - how do you expect people to take you seriously. Edited January 8, 2016 by kickazz 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) Lol I'm done. No point in engaging further. Larkin is great. Not among the elite, hopefully one day. One of our MVPs. That's what I've concluded in the games played so far. Edited January 8, 2016 by kickazz 2 PavelValerievichDatsyuk and kliq reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) I don't respond to people who dismiss plus minus. It's a great stat over time, and that's why it's the third one on the NHL.com stat page. Only 4 stats are tracked for forwards on the leaders page, and that's one of them. People with favorite players at a minus 11 over the first 40 games want to blow the stat off right now. Gee, I wonder why. I will respond to you though. You got faced, and now you want your tracks covered. The NHL has deemed Dylan Larkin elite. His peers deem him elite. You're just having a vocabulary issue right now. That's all. And that's why I still got your back, brah. You're good! You're arguing against your own position here. It is a stat that can say something with context (comparing to other players on a team) or, yes, over a longer period of time. When a player has played around, say, 39 games like Larkin has, it can often be inflated one way on the other. For instance, Mr. Nyquist was +16 in 57gp in 13-14. Last year, he was -11. Which one tells his story? both do. You have to wait a longer period of time. Edited January 8, 2016 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nosyt612 103 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 I have a question then. Do we consider Crosby and Ovechkin elite in their rookie years - basically from the get-go? And I mean elite among all players not just looking at the 2005/06 rookies. Because it seems like the general consensus (except Bill) is that Larkin is not elite yet. I'm wondering how people feel about Crosby and Ovechkin in their rookie years. Would you have labelled them as elite their first year? Or "not yet" To me it's pretty obvious they were elite players immediately. I still can't believe Gretz left Crosby off the Olympic team. I think what a lot of people forget too is that Crosby is a year younger than Ovie, who had been playing pro in the Super League for 4 years already. In Crosby's 19 year old year he jumped to 120 points and winning the Art Ross. All of this is no knock on Larkin, as these are two of the best young players ever to play in the NHL, but just that Larkins having a great year for a rookie, but has to continue on this path and improving for a few years before we can talk about elite. 1 kickazz reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 Lol I'm done. No point in engaging further. Larkin is great. Not among the elite, hopefully one day. One of our MVPs. That's what I've concluded in the games played so far. Good. You're getting vuhklemped for no reason. We are just debating, brah. Larkin's an all star. I dont know what else he could do right now to make you feel he is elite. He's lighting the lamp, he's assisting, he's killing it in plus minus, coach is starting to double shift him. What do u want out of the guy? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nosyt612 103 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 Good. You're getting vuhklemped for no reason. We are just debating, brah. Larkin's an all star. I dont know what else he could do right now to make you feel he is elite. He's lighting the lamp, he's assisting, he's killing it in plus minus, coach is starting to double shift him. What do u want out of the guy? He's an all star because the NHL mandates every team be represented, and each division make a team. I love Larkin, but he's tied for 62nd in league scoring, hardly elite. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 He's an all star because the NHL mandates every team be represented, and each division make a team. I love Larkin, but he's tied for 62nd in league scoring, hardly elite. So all that matters is points? Funny how Wings fans used to say Lidstrom should have won the Norris when he wasn't in the top 3 in points. Now that Larkin is playing a Selke caliber 2 way game, we are going to say that all that matters is points? Jesus. And god, how completely HORRENDOUS is 62 out of 560 skaters league wide when you're 19 years old. What a bum. Time to send him to GR. BTW, 2 more pts and he's tied for 41st. And he's leading the league in +/- now again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) Good. You're getting vuhklemped for no reason. We are just debating, brah. Larkin's an all star. I dont know what else he could do right now to make you feel he is elite. He's lighting the lamp, he's assisting, he's killing it in plus minus, coach is starting to double shift him. What do u want out of the guy? Passive aggressive much. Nobody is saying Larkin isn't doing well enough. We ALL are saying he's excellent. What we're talking is about is where he stands among the elites. So quit puttin' words in my mouth bruh. Everyone's dissproved your theory (and noticed how you've ignored them) So he's elite because of +/- and because he's an all star after a bunch of vets said no. You're arguing against your own position here. It is a stat that can say something with context (comparing to other players on a team) or, yes, over a longer period of time. When a player has played around, say, 39 games like Larkin has, it can often be inflated one way on the other. For instance, Mr. Nyquist was +16 in 57gp in 13-14. Last year, he was -11. Which one tells his story? both do. You have to wait a longer period of time. The Berzeench is silent and refuses to engage ya'll xD Edited January 8, 2016 by kickazz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nosyt612 103 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) So all that matters is points? Funny how Wings fans used to say Lidstrom should have won the Norris when he wasn't in the top 3 in points. Now that Larkin is playing a Selke caliber 2 way game, we are going to say that all that matters is points? Jesus. And god, how completely HORRENDOUS is 62 out of 560 skaters league wide when you're 19 years old. What a bum. Time to send him to GR. BTW, 2 more pts and he's tied for 41st. And he's leading the league in +/- now again. Nowhere do i say this is horrendous, he's obviously a very good player, but elite means being among the very best of your sport. 62nd in the league puts him as essentially the third best point producer on average for an NHL team, if you want to take elite that deep into the talent pool I guess we're not going to see eye to eye. Also nobody is going to give somebody who has played wing all season any Selke consideration. Plus minus is also an extremely circumstantial stat, that is only useful(if it is at all) over the long run. Edited January 8, 2016 by nosyt612 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 So all that matters is points? He's leading the league in +/- now again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill Berzeench 310 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 We finally get the next superstar to come along since Zetterberg and Datsyuk, and you guys all want to downplay it. It's hilarious. In the words of Dany Heatley, "He's a f%$king all-star"!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 We finally get the next superstar to come along since Zetterberg and Datsyuk, and you guys all want to downplay it. It's hilarious. In the words of Dany Heatley, "He's a f%$king all-star"!!! So is John Scott. So are a bunch of generally unspectacular players. Once again I ask you, what about his game right now makes him elite, other than the cherry picked +/- stat. He's a center who needs to learn how to win faceoffs, he needs to get stronger, and he needs to stop making rookie mistakes. All that combines to make him NOT elite yet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,763 Report post Posted January 8, 2016 We finally get the next superstar to come along since Zetterberg and Datsyuk, and you guys all want to downplay it. It's hilarious. In the words of Dany Heatley, "He's a f%$king all-star"!!! Not a single person has said anything bad about Larkin. EVERYONE has said the kid is good, and has a bright future. What is baffling is that you are putting the kid at a level he is just not at YET. Myself and 90% of this board think he is going to be elite one day, but he is not at the level of a Seguin, Ovie, Crosby etc. as of January 8th, 2015. I would put money on it that if you asked Larkin himself, he would agree with this statement. Stop trying to create a narrative that the board are trying to downplay him, we are not, people are just annoyed at how over the top you are. 3 PavelValerievichDatsyuk, kickazz and krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
