Dylan Larkin's comments on ASG Last Man In voting...

[13dangledangle 965]

Yeah I didn't really get the hate on this one.  Larks was most definitely making the comments because of how he feels he's played this season and nothing more-he simply feels he doesn't deserve to go so he'll take the time off...I love Burke but he just misread what he was saying, no big deal it happens and at this point Im sure Larkin wishes he reworded it or simply kept his mouth shut like burke suggested he should.  

 

Also why are we choosing between Zadina and Fabbri?  I prefer to be stoked we have them both and hope we can lock up Fabs.  The thought of them sprinkled into our current line up with Veleno, Ras, Svechnikov and our mystery draft after losing some dead weight makes me happy

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

On 1/8/2020 at 7:54 AM, krsmith17 said:

Where are you getting these numbers? Not a single one of them are right...

Bergeron - 86 points
Staal - 32 points
Larkin - 52 points

Larkin is still closer to Staal, but not even you're dumb enough to think Larkin is closer to a 32 point center than an 86 point center... Larkin is having a down season, playing on a s*** team, with, relatively speaking, s*** linemates. Again, if Larkin had a Pastrnak caliber winger, he'd be a hell of a lot closer to that 86 point pace, than his current 52 point pace.

I'm not saying Larkin IS a Bergeron caliber center, but the potential is definitely there. He's already proven that he can produce. His defensive numbers are off the charts good this season. If he can combine that offensive ability he showed in 2018-19, with the defensive ability he has shown in 2019-20, along with playing with legit top line wingers (Mantha / Lafreniere / Zadina), I think he could be very close to a Bergeron level center.

Oi IDK why my numbers were wrong? Did I pull last seasons numbers or something?

Larkin has the best linemates on the team
If there's anyone on the team who can't complain about linemates it's Larkin.

"If Larkin had Pastranak" is sucha bad argument. Ur basically admitting Larkin is only good if he has good line-mates. And the scariest part is he has had good line-mates.

I'm not gonna be nice to Larkin cause he's young. He needs to be a lot better than he is, and in the the meantime I'm gonna call him a ******* loser as is deserved.

On 1/8/2020 at 10:40 AM, krsmith17 said:

 

Says the man a few months away from losing his job in the NHL

On 1/8/2020 at 10:57 AM, marcaractac said:

People always complain about how cookie-cutter/generic hockey players media responses are. This is why. They crack a joke, or show any sort of personality, someone s***s on them for it. 

Zetterberg never had an interview like this.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

39 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Larkin has the best linemates on the team
If there's anyone on the team who can't complain about linemates it's Larkin.

"If Larkin had Pastranak" is sucha bad argument. Ur basically admitting Larkin is only good if he has good line-mates. And the scariest part is he has had good line-mates.

Zetterberg never had an interview like this.

1. Not saying much.

2. Even the best players see their numbers go up with improved linemates. Doesn't mean they're dependant on them.

3. And his interviews were dry and boring.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

11 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

1. Not saying much.

2. Even the best players see their numbers go up with improved linemates. Doesn't mean they're dependant on them.

3. And his interviews were dry and boring.

1. Larkin sucks and does drugs

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

3 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

1. Larkin sucks and does drugs

[Insert yo momma joke here]

[krsmith17 7,191]

10 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Oi IDK why my numbers were wrong? Did I pull last seasons numbers or something?

Larkin has the best linemates on the team
If there's anyone on the team who can't complain about linemates it's Larkin.

"If Larkin had Pastranak" is sucha bad argument. Ur basically admitting Larkin is only good if he has good line-mates. And the scariest part is he has had good line-mates.

I'm not gonna be nice to Larkin cause he's young. He needs to be a lot better than he is, and in the the meantime I'm gonna call him a ******* loser as is deserved.

Says the man a few months away from losing his job in the NHL

Zetterberg never had an interview like this.

I said this in the other thread, but again, I know you're not this dumb... There's a HUGE difference between the best players on the worst team in the NHL and the best players on one of the best teams in the NHL. I'm not saying Larkin "needs" a Pastrnak level player to be effective (he's proven he doesn't), but it sure as hell helps. No one is saying Larkin is an elite 1C, but he is absolutely a 1C in this league. Give him two capable linemates, and he will once again prove this.

*The scariest part is, he has proven that he is a legitimate 1C...

No one is asking you to be "nice" to Larkin because he's young, or even because the team is bad. Larkin deserves some scrutiny this season, but the argument here is, is Larkin a legitimate 1C given adequate linemates? The answer is yes, he is. mackel (and maybe you) are suggesting no, he is not... 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

16 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I'm not saying Larkin "needs" a Pastrnak level player to be effective (he's proven he doesn't), but it sure as hell helps.

"Larkin doesn't need an elite winger, but also he does"

Ok?

16 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

No one is saying Larkin is an elite 1C, but he is absolutely a 1C in this league. Give him two capable linemates, and he will once again prove this.

Bertuzzi, Fabbri, and Mantha aren't capable linemates? Please extrapolate on this

16 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

*The scariest part is, he has proven that he is a legitimate 1C...

Larks is the best C on this team.  That being said he should have another center put on top of him. 300+ NHL games and he's regressing.

16 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

No one is asking you to be "nice" to Larkin because he's young, or even because the team is bad. Larkin deserves some scrutiny this season, but the argument here is, is Larkin a legitimate 1C given adequate linemates? The answer is yes, he is. mackel (and maybe you) are suggesting no, he is not... 

1C or 2C it doesn't matter to me. He hasn't been good enough this year. If the team was at least winning or holding their own I could prolly see to it to look the other way. But that isn't the case.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Larkin apologizes for his ASG comments

Quote

“I didn’t mean to disrespect the league. I feel I did that, and disrespected the Red Wings. My main goal as a hockey player in the state of Michigan is to represent myself and the Red Wings and be a good example for kids growing up playing the game. I felt I wasn’t that, so I’m sorry about that.”

“I have to own up to them,” he said. “I didn’t mean for them to become that big of a thing. I saw what Brian Burke said and I have a lot of respect for Brian. He was in the right to say that. I have to represent this team and this franchise and my teammates better than that.”

Good on him for apologizing.

Say dumb stuff. Win dumb prizes.

[krsmith17 7,191]

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

"Larkin doesn't need an elite winger, but also he does"

Ok?

No, he doesn't "need" elite wingers, as he proved last season. But it would help to have some consistency and maybe a slight upgrade in his linemates. Larkin isn't elite, therefore, he's not the type of center (Crosby, McDavid, MacKinnon) that can make whoever he plays with look amazing. He needs help. That doesn't mean he's not a number one center. There are plenty of number one centers in the league that can't do it all on their own.

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Bertuzzi, Fabbri, and Mantha aren't capable linemates? Please extrapolate on this

Capable was probably the wrong choice of word there, but Mantha, in my opinion, is the only legit top line winger of the three, and he's been injured half the season. Bertuzzi and Fabbri are both middle six (2nd line) wingers on a contending team. That's not to say they can't or won't play up the lineup, similar to Hyman with the Leafs, but they're not legitimate top line wingers in my opinion. Give Larkin two legit top line wingers and he's a stud.

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Larks is the best C on this team.  That being said he should have another center put on top of him. 300+ NHL games and he's regressing.

He's not regressing. He's having a down year. There's a huge difference. If he finishes this season and next with sub 50-60 points, I'll get on board. But to sit here and bash him under these circumstances is absurd.

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

1C or 2C it doesn't matter to me. He hasn't been good enough this year. If the team was at least winning or holding their own I could prolly see to it to look the other way. But that isn't the case.

So, the team playing like s*** is on Larkin? Do you even watch the games anymore?

Edited January 12, 2020 by krsmith17

[Dabura 12,207]

I think we can all agree that Larkin hasn't been good enough this season and that he's far from blameless in this team's borderline-historic futility. I think we can also agree that a 1-2 center punch of [Guy who is better than Larkin]-Larkin would be better than our 1-2 punch of Larkin-Filppula.

I think everyone not named CRL is probably taking this more seriously than CRL is. Beer leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to s***posting.

[krsmith17 7,191]

49 minutes ago, Dabura said:

I think we can all agree that Larkin hasn't been good enough this season...

Definitely not good enough, offensively. But not bad, considering his defensive game this season.

50 minutes ago, Dabura said:

... and that he's far from blameless in this team's borderline-historic futility...

Far from blameless, but also far from THE blame. Everyone shares the blame from top to bottom.

51 minutes ago, Dabura said:

... I think we can also agree that a 1-2 center punch of [Guy who is better than Larkin]-Larkin would be better than our 1-2 punch of Larkin-Filppula.

Absolutely. No denying that. Larkin is / will be a legit 1C, but if he's our 2C in a couple years, we'll be in great shape.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

No, he doesn't "need" elite wingers, as he proved last season. But it would help to have some consistency and maybe a slight upgrade in his linemates. Larkin isn't elite, therefore, he's not the type of center (Crosby, McDavid, MacKinnon) that can make whoever he plays with look amazing. He needs help. That doesn't mean he's not a number one center. There are plenty of number one centers in the league that can't do it all on their own.

So then why the down year? He didn't need elite wingers last year to get it done. He has over 300+ career games now, this player should have things figured out.

4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Capable was probably the wrong choice of word there, but Mantha, in my opinion, is the only legit top line winger of the three, and he's been injured half the season. Bertuzzi and Fabbri are both middle six (2nd line) wingers on a contending team. That's not to say they can't or won't play up the lineup, similar to Hyman with the Leafs, but they're not legitimate top line wingers in my opinion. Give Larkin two legit top line wingers and he's a stud.

And again we're right back to "Larkin needs elite wingers to be a stud". He objectively didn't need elite wingers last year to be studly. What's changed?

His "middlesix" wingers Bertuzzi and Fabbri are out-pacing him in scoring right now. If anything he's benefiting from playing with them.

4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

He's not regressing. He's having a down year. There's a huge difference. If he finishes this season and next with sub 50-60 points, I'll get on board. But to sit here and bash him under these circumstances is absurd

Having a down year, AKA gave up on the season in October and would rather f*** around and party with AA.

4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

So, the team playing like s*** is on Larkin? Do you even watch the games anymore?

Nice strawman

Larkin is our supposed best player and face of the franchise. That's both a blessing and an extra burden he has to carry. If he was having a down year personally but the Wings were okay I'd be inclined to look the other way, but he's having a down year and the team is record breakingly bad. He's absolutely gonna face more finger pointing than an Ehn would.

[krsmith17 7,191]

5 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

So then why the down year? He didn't need elite wingers last year to get it done. He has over 300+ career games now, this player should have things figured out.

No, you're right. Players should never have down year's. In fact, no players ever have down year's and bounce back...

5 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

And again we're right back to "Larkin needs elite wingers to be a stud". He objectively didn't need elite wingers last year to be studly. What's changed?

So, let's get back to the original topic, shall we? Was Larkin a 1C last year? Yes. Is he a 1C this year? Yes. Would Bergeron have elite numbers without elite wingers? No. This has been proven throughout his career. Does Larkin need elite wingers to be effective? No. Does Larkin need elite wingers to be elite? Yeah, probably. Because Larkin isn't elite.

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

His "middlesix" wingers Bertuzzi and Fabbri are out-pacing him in scoring right now. If anything he's benefiting from playing with them.

Again, not the same defensive responsibility, but keep telling yourself it's the same thing. Larkin is heating up. He's a better all around player than Bertuzzi and Fabbri, and will likely end the season with more points than either.

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Having a down year, AKA gave up on the season in October and would rather f*** around and party with AA.

Sounds like you have it all figured out. All from your Twitter source...

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Larkin is our supposed best player and face of the franchise. That's both a blessing and an extra burden he has to carry. If he was having a down year personally but the Wings were okay I'd be inclined to look the other way, but he's having a down year and the team is record breakingly bad. He's absolutely gonna face more finger pointing than an Ehn would.

This is THE dumbest thing you've spewed yet. If the team were winning, you wouldn't care about how great or poor Larkin was playing... So you're not looking at the individual player, you're looking at the team, and picking one underperforming player, and placing the blame on him. Cool.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

• Edmonton - McDavid - 1.5 ppg
• Buffalo - Eichel - 1.3 ppg
• Winnipeg - Schiefele - 1.1 ppg
• NY Rangers - Zibanejad - 1.1 ppg
• Colorado - Mackinnon - 1.5 ppg
• Detroit - Larkin - 0.65 ppg
• Los Angeles - Kopitar - 0.85 ppg
• St. Louis - O'Rielly - 0.87 ppg
• Pittsburgh - Crosby - 1.1 ppg
• Toronto - Matthews - 1.2 ppg
• Vancouver - Horvat - 0.87 ppg
• Florida - Barkov - 1.00 ppg
• Philadelphia - Couterier - 0.80 ppg
• Chicago - Toews - 0.76 ppg
• Calgary - Lindholm - 0.77 ppg
• NY Islanders - Barzal - 0.86 ppg
• Boston - Bergeron - 1.0 ppg
• Carolina - Aho - 0.89 ppg
• Washington - Backstrom - 0.92 ppg
• Las Vegas - Karlsson - 0.69 ppg
• Ottawa - Pageau - 0.67 ppg
• Dallas - Seguin - 0.78 ppg
• Anaheim - Getzlaf - 0.70 ppg
• Montreal - Danault - 0.67 ppg
• San Jose - Couture - 0.76 ppg
• Tampa Bay - Point - 0.98 ppg
• New Jersey - Hischier - 0.72 ppg
• Nashville - Johansen - 0.59 ppg
• Minnesota - Staal - 0.73 ppg
• Columbus - Luc-Dubois - 0.74 ppg
• Arizona - Dvorak - 0.56 ppg

Averaging scoring rate for 1C in Jan 2020 is 0.96 ppg.

Larkin is well below that at 0.65 and is in the bottom 3 with RyJo and Dvorak

He's playing decent D, but this kid is looking like a 2C right now

[krsmith17 7,191]

14 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Averaging scoring rate for 1C in Jan 2020 is 0.96 ppg.

Larkin is well below that at 0.65 and is in the bottom 3 with RyJo and Dvorak

He's playing decent D, but this kid is looking like a 2C right now

Finally a valid point to add to the discussion...

If Larkin plateaus as a 50-55 point center, I will agree that he is a 2C. I see Larkin as more of a 65-75 point center, potentially better if / when we're a legit contender, and that absolutely is a 1C.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

No, you're right. Players should never have down year's. In fact, no players ever have down year's and bounce back...

You're again strawmanning and steering the conversation into the weeds. Plz stop, it's just a waste of time for both of us if we're not staying on topic. I sincerely hope Larkin figures his crap out and bounces back. But he's making a serious case for Yzerman to draft a center this year so he can be moved to 2C. If you have any real excuse as to why he's having a down year I'd love to hear it, but it sounds like you're content to just be okay with Larkin's play no matter what.

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

So, let's get back to the original topic, shall we? Was Larkin a 1C last year? Yes. Is he a 1C this year? Yes. Would Bergeron have elite numbers without elite wingers? No. This has been proven throughout his career. Does Larkin need elite wingers to be effective? No. Does Larkin need elite wingers to be elite? Yeah, probably. Because Larkin isn't elite

Yeah he was a 1C last year. No one is questioning that. This year year however he's one of the worst 1C's in the league. That's a serious issue, and his wingers you keep citing haven't changed from last year to this. In fact his wingers have gotten better this year. Again, that makes the issue even more glaring.

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Again, not the same defensive responsibility, but keep telling yourself it's the same thing. Larkin is heating up. He's a better all around player than Bertuzzi and Fabbri, and will likely end the season with more points than either.

23 year old former ppg 1C's with 300+ NHL games played should not be "heating up" in January. Which is why I'm starting to dig into his off ice behavior. Enjoying his time away from the rink a little too much would explain a lot.

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

This is THE dumbest thing you've spewed yet. If the team were winning, you wouldn't care about how great or poor Larkin was playing... So you're not looking at the individual player, you're looking at the team, and picking one underperforming player, and placing the blame on him. Cool.

THE dumbest thing huh?

I'll metaphor this with business. If my company is healthy, profits where they need to be, and growth steady, I don't care too much if one of my sales guys is having a down year. We figure out what went wrong with his accounts and try to correct it for next season.

If the company is failing, profits are down, and growth stagnating. I start firing people. Especially the guys at the top who are supposed to be my main drivers.

This is business 101, but apparently it's the dumbest thing ever to you?

Edited January 13, 2020 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

45 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Finally a valid point to add to the discussion...

If Larkin plateaus as a 50-55 point center, I will agree that he is a 2C. I see Larkin as more of a 65-75 point center, potentially better if / when we're a legit contender, and that absolutely is a 1C.

To add to these stats

For scoring per 60 minutes of 5v5 play for players who have played more than 15 games, Larkin is tied for #234 in the league

That's REALLY bad. Who's scoring more with their icetime than Larkin? Alex Iafallo, Justin Dowling, Joel Farabee, Alexander Texiere, Sam Lafferty, Andrew Mangiapane, Carter Verhaeghe, the list goes on and on and on and onnnnnn of guys ive basically never even heard of.

Larkin has been great defensively, and I don't wanna take that from him at all, but this fanbase should be a lot more panicked about this player. Zetterberg and Datsyuk basically never had a season like this. Not even when they were older.

[krsmith17 7,191]

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You're again strawmanning and steering the conversation into the weeds. Plz stop, it's just a waste of time for both of us if we're not staying on topic. I sincerely hope Larkin figures his crap out and bounces back. But he's making a serious case for Yzerman to draft a center this year so he can be moved to 2C. If you have any real excuse as to why he's having a down year I'd love to hear it, but it sounds like you're content to just be okay with Larkin's play no matter what.

I've stated why I believe Larkin is having a down season. It's not my fault you refuse to acknowledge or accept it as valid reasons... This is the worst iteration of the Red Wings any of us have ever witnessed. They're historically bad. If you want to place the blame on Larkin, go for it. I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone that agrees with you on that though.

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Yeah he was a 1C last year. No one is questioning that. This year year however he's one of the worst 1C's in the league. That's a serious issue, and his wingers you keep citing haven't changed from last year to this. In fact his wingers have gotten better this year. Again, that makes the issue even more glaring.

His offensive stats have not been 1C caliber this season. No one is arguing that. That does not mean he isn't / won't be a legitimate 1C. He's working his ass off defensively, and it's showing.

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

23 year old former ppg 1C's with 300+ NHL games played should not be "heating up" in January. Which is why I'm starting to dig into his off ice behavior. Enjoying his time away from the rink a little too much would explain a lot.

LOL you do that...

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

THE dumbest thing huh?

I'll metaphor this with business. If my company is healthy, profits where they need to be, and growth steady, I don't care too much if one of my sales guys is having a down year. We figure out what went wrong with his accounts and try to correct it for next season.

If the company is failing, profits are down, and growth stagnating. I start firing people. Especially the guys at the top who are supposed to be my main drivers.

This is business 101, but apparently it's the dumbest thing ever to you?

Yeah, that's exactly the same thing...

Let's relate your analogy back to the NHL... How often does a rebuilding team trade their number one center, just entering the prime of his career, because he's having a down season?

I guarantee Jeff Blashill and Steve Yzerman are looking beyond Larkin's sub par offensive stats. They're looking at the big picture. They know how bad this team is / was supposed to be this season. They see his defensive game evolving. I'm sure Yzerman remembers conversations with Scotty Bowman 30 years ago, about how he needs to be a more defensively responsible center. Yzerman learned to sacrifice offense for defense. I'm not saying Larkin is the same caliber player as a young Yzerman, but I'm sure he's learning a few things from the man himself.

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

To add to these stats

For scoring per 60 minutes of 5v5 play for players who have played more than 15 games, Larkin is tied for #234 in the league

That's REALLY bad. Who's scoring more with their icetime than Larkin? Alex Iafallo, Justin Dowling, Joel Farabee, Alexander Texiere, Sam Lafferty, Andrew Mangiapane, Carter Verhaeghe, the list goes on and on and on and onnnnnn of guys ive basically never even heard of.

AGAIN, no one is saying that Larkin is having a good season offensively. He's not. In saying that, he could still easily top 60 points this season.

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Larkin has been great defensively, and I don't wanna take that from him at all, but this fanbase should be a lot more panicked about this player. Zetterberg and Datsyuk basically never had a season like this. Not even when they were older.

You must have missed @Dabura post yesterday... I'll quote some of it here...

Datsyuk was 23 years old for his his whole rookie season. He put up 35 points in 70 games. The next season, he put up 51 points in 64 games, as a 24-year-old. Season after that, he put up 68 points in 75 games, as a 25-year-old. Season after that, he exploded: 87 points in 75 games, as a 26-year-old.

Zetterberg was 22 for his whole rookie season. He put up 44 points in 79 games. The next season, he put up 43 points in 61 games, as a 23-year-old. Season after that, he exploded: 85 points in 77 games, as a 24-year-old.

I'll also add that Datsyuk and Zetterberg played most of their career on one of / if not the best teams in the entire league. Larkin is currently playing on THE worst team in the entire league, and it's not even like they're really underachieving. They were supposed to be bad. That is not the fault of Larkin. Does he need to be better? Sure. Does he deserve the blame for this awful season? No.

[toby91_ca 620]

Here's my basic logic...which is a cop out really, but it's true at the same time.  Those suggesting Larkin has proven himself as a 1C.....I want to say are wrong, but at a minimum, would have a hard time supporting that.  I'm not going to say he won't prove to be one over the course of his career, but he hasn't shown the consistency yet to suggest he's "proven".  Did it look like he was well on his way last year after building and improving on 60+ points the year before?  Absolutely.  I'm guessing he'll bounce back at this year is just a stumbling block.  Bad teams or not though, that can't be a big excuse.  There are + and - in terms of being able to produce based on how good your team is.

On the flip side, has this season proven anything regarding his ability to be a 1C going foward?  Absolutely not, however, it's fair for people to be concerned.

[marcaractac 3,963]

With Yzerman stepping in, I don't think it's all that far fetched for Stevie to have had chat with Larkin about focusing more on defense this year, and ensuring him that the points will come. As for the Datsyuk and Zetterberg comparisons, Larkin was also thrust into the 1C role at a much younger age. Even when Dats and Hank were the go to guys, they had each other to lean on. Larkin is seeing more responsibility at a younger age, and it's not like he is s***ting the bed at it. He is having growing pains, but it would be insane to not expect that. The guy has the skill set, IQ, and work ethic to keep getting better. So I have no doubt he'll do so. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I've stated why I believe Larkin is having a down season. It's not my fault you refuse to acknowledge or accept it as valid reasons... This is the worst iteration of the Red Wings any of us have ever witnessed. They're historically bad. If you want to place the blame on Larkin, go for it. I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone that agrees with you on that though.

Oh right. Those crappy wingers he's stuck with. The same wingers he had last year that helped him to 73 pts and 32 goals. The same wingers who are even better now than they were last year. Yes very valid.

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

His offensive stats have not been 1C caliber this season. No one is arguing that. That does not mean he isn't / won't be a legitimate 1C. He's working his ass off defensively, and it's showing.

1C's are point getters.
2C's are shutdown men.
Larkin is a shutdown man.

If A = B, and B = C...

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Yeah, that's exactly the same thing...

Let's relate your analogy back to the NHL... How often does a rebuilding team trade their number one center, just entering the prime of his career, because he's having a down season?

I guarantee Jeff Blashill and Steve Yzerman are looking beyond Larkin's sub par offensive stats. They're looking at the big picture. They know how bad this team is / was supposed to be this season. They see his defensive game evolving. I'm sure Yzerman remembers conversations with Scotty Bowman 30 years ago, about how he needs to be a more defensively responsible center. Yzerman learned to sacrifice offense for defense. I'm not saying Larkin is the same caliber player as a young Yzerman, but I'm sure he's learning a few things from the man himself.

You seem to be under the false impression that I want to trade Larkin?

The analogy was purely to demonstrate why under-performing employees in bad companies absolutely do and should get high levels of scrutiny. And that increases directly with role responsibility.

Larkin is not an inexperienced youth anymore. He's played 4+ full seasons and scored at high levels. He's giving indicators to Yzerman that he needs to be demoted to 2C. But my best guess is Yzerman won't be able to stick another high level center on top of him for some time, so he will definitely have his chance to bounce back yet here.

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

AGAIN, no one is saying that Larkin is having a good season offensively. He's not. In saying that, he could still easily top 60 points this season.

Sure, I could see him hitting 60. Those stats are about ice time though, and suggest that even if he does hit 60 pts his scoring per 60 minutes of play would still be really bad. That's super concerning.

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

You must have missed @Dabura post yesterday... I'll quote some of it here...

Datsyuk was 23 years old for his his whole rookie season. He put up 35 points in 70 games. The next season, he put up 51 points in 64 games, as a 24-year-old. Season after that, he put up 68 points in 75 games, as a 25-year-old. Season after that, he exploded: 87 points in 75 games, as a 26-year-old.

Zetterberg was 22 for his whole rookie season. He put up 44 points in 79 games. The next season, he put up 43 points in 61 games, as a 23-year-old. Season after that, he exploded: 85 points in 77 games, as a 24-year-old.

I'll also add that Datsyuk and Zetterberg played most of their career on one of / if not the best teams in the entire league. Larkin is currently playing on THE worst team in the entire league, and it's not even like they're really underachieving. They were supposed to be bad. That is not the fault of Larkin. Does he need to be better? Sure. Does he deserve the blame for this awful season? No.

Agreed that Zbergs and Datsyuks situations we're entirely different. Different teams in terms of leadership and skill level. Different draft pedigrees. Different eras of NHL hockey.

The truly unfair part for Larkin that I feel bad about is he started on this team with Zberg as a leader, and now that leadership insulation bottom fell out, and he exists in a leadership vacuum.

Kinda sucks for him and seems like he was not completely ready for it.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

7 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

With Yzerman stepping in, I don't think it's all that far fetched for Stevie to have had chat with Larkin about focusing more on defense this year, and ensuring him that the points will come. As for the Datsyuk and Zetterberg comparisons, Larkin was also thrust into the 1C role at a much younger age. Even when Dats and Hank were the go to guys, they had each other to lean on. Larkin is seeing more responsibility at a younger age, and it's not like he is s***ting the bed at it. He is having growing pains, but it would be insane to not expect that. The guy has the skill set, IQ, and work ethic to keep getting better. So I have no doubt he'll do so. 

I somewhat disagree. Larkin has had his Bertuzzi/Mantha/Fabbri to play with. The scoring should be there for a player of his talent level with the experience he already has.

I think the teams confidence was crushed early and Larkin is drowning. Not a good sign. I'd honestly be for an Alfredsson type signing this offseason just to take some of leadership burden off of him

[marcaractac 3,963]

10 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

1C's are point getters.
2C's are shutdown men.
Larkin is a shutdown man.

The best 1C's do both. We know Larkin can do either or at this point. Let's just hope he can put that together. 

It's pretty clear his focus on defense this year is what has impacted his scoring. So if right now Larkin is a great 2C with the potential to become a legit 1C, I'll take it. 

5 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I somewhat disagree. Larkin has had his Bertuzzi/Mantha/Fabbri to play with. The scoring should be there for a player of his talent level with the experience he already has.

I think the teams confidence was crushed early and Larkin is drowning. Not a good sign. I'd honestly be for an Alfredsson type signing this offseason just to take some of leadership burden off of him

As I said, he's had HUGE responsibility thrust into him very early. In such a sink or swim situation, he certainly hasn't sunk. Has he struggled? Sure. Most players his age in that role would. I'll be concerned if he struggles as much next season. But for the time being, he is showing signs of heating up offensively again. 

I do, however, agree that the team needs an Alfredsson-type of veteran to help out. We've needed that since Hank hung them up. I think Larkin has done well considering he's had no such help. 

The great sign is that he hasn't given up. The guy is still working his ass off to improve. So I strongly disagree with the idea that he is drowning. He's fighting through it and is starting to get rewarded for it. 

Edited January 13, 2020 by marcaractac

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, marcaractac said:

The best 1C's do both. We know Larkin can do either or at this point. Let's just hope he can put that together. 

It's pretty clear his focus on defense this year is what has impacted his scoring. So if right now Larkin is a great 2C with the potential to become a legit 1C, I'll take it. 

I mean but what changed between this year and last that Larkin is having such a dramatic decline in scoring? He still played great D last year too.

Vanek, Nyquist, and Kronwall are gone.
Fabbri, Filppula, Zadina, and Nemeth are in.
Bertuzzi, Mantha, and Hronek are better.
Nielsen, Howard, Green, and AA are worse.

The only real thing I can point to is the leadership looks worse?
 

[marcaractac 3,963]

There was a recent interview he did where he specifically mentioned an added focus on defense this season. Alluded to a convo with Yzerman about it. Focus on d now, the points will come, yada yada. He has been better lately, so perhaps he'll finish the season strong.

Leadership no doubt looks worse. Scoring depth is a lot worse. PP is worse. Mantha missing a lot of time, despite being a beast when he was playing. Losing Kronwall hurt this team a lot more than any of us thought. He was solid in his last couple seasons after that one real bad year. 

Next season, imo, will tell a lot more about Larkin in terms of 1C or 2C than this season. He needs to finish strong and carry that into next year. My guess is he'll also look great again in the World Championships when he isn't the only center for our opponents to target.