[Trade] F Taylor Hall to Devils for D Adam Larsson

[oldnews]

Thread has descended to the level of Botchford rumours - definitely the point of diminishing returns.

[HC20.0]

49 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

The Islanders are gaining a track record of ruining top 5 picks.

 

I was reading an article about the 17 worst top 5 picks since 2000 and I think the Islanders had like 6 of them.

 

Something seriously wrong in their development,

Nino Neiderreiter is a prime example of that. The Islanders nearly destroyed his career. He had practically no value at all. When he was traded to Minnesota, away from New York, his career finally started taking off. That's no coincidence. There is something seriously wrong with both Edmonton and the Islander's prospect development.

[thad]

4 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

So Horvat. Tanev, and the 5th for Subban?

 

Glad Benning isn't that desperate.

 

Gotta wonder what the Oilers would have offered us for Edler or Tanev though.

 

 

Nuge for Tanev? Makes more sense to them but not sure I'd do it. I'd hold out for Hall haha.

[insomniac604]

14 minutes ago, DoughtysCheck said:

people rip on the oilers for drafting forwards and not defensemen. when they trade for an established top 4 young d man with potential to be top 2, they are called idiots...

it's not what they got. it's who they traded for it. Hall > Larsson in every possible category.

 

Like I outlined in my previous post, the BEST Edmonton can hope for is an even trade. Which might take Larsson a few years to settle. At which point Hall will be in his prime and a beast beyond being already one of the top 5 LWs.

 

If there was a high pick involved I could swallow this. Even considering all the parameters involved, including future cap space. They made a huge mistake. Even if Larsson ends up being who they want him to be. Hall will be better, because he already is.

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

9 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

BizNasty always looking at the bright side.

 

My jaw hit the floor.  I was like, "it would take three Halls to get Ekman-Larsson".  

 

But I like this trade for Edmonton.  It's addition by subtraction in the room and on the ice in terms of team-play, defense, and game management, and they can easily afford the loss in terms of their obscene depth.  I see Larsson as a cornerstone #2, which is so hard to get, and so needed in Edmonton.  Even if he wasn't that good already, how are people so confident about the ceiling of such young player, who already has a tonne of experience?

 

I think there'd be a different response if they got a first round pick on top, but obviously teams aren't clamouring to get the Spoilers' young over-paid bad team-players who are steeped in failure.

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

I thought it was the bag of Lays and the stalker phone calls from Messy-eh that were so comforting.

"Pick up, pick up, pick up, pickup.....wow, we're havin' a real game of phone tag here..."

[Monteeun]

5 hours ago, combover said:

Benning needs to take NOTE a trade CAN be made with out throwing draft picks in.

Oilers didn't get nearly enough for hall that's getting fleeced could/should have been a second player. 

The gm of the oilers was the gm of the Bruins no where did I say Boston fleeced the oilers....so ex Bruins (cherelli and benning) seem to have a hard time getting value for there players hence getting fleeced. 

Your welcome. 

To be fair, with a name like Taylor Hall, you don't need additional picks to sweeten the deal. 

Taylor Hall and Jared McCaan are not at the same level. And it also depends on who you are trying to get. 

[insomniac604]

11 minutes ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

My jaw hit the floor.  I was like, "it would take three Halls to get Ekman-Larsson".  

 

But I like this trade for Edmonton.  It's addition by subtraction in the room and on the ice in terms of team-play, defense, and game management, and they can easily afford the loss in terms of their obscene depth.  I see Larsson as a cornerstone #2, which is so hard to get, and so needed in Edmonton.  Even if he wasn't that good already, how are people so confident about the ceiling of such young player, who already has a tonne of experience?

 

I think there'd be a different response if they got a first round pick on top, but obviously teams aren't clamouring to get the Spoilers' young over-paid bad team-players who are steeped in failure.

I can't talk about the room but on the ice, Hall is their best player. He is fearless and tenacious. Yes, he gets injured, but it's because of those attributes. Statistically he is behind only Jamie Benn.

 

It's not about Larsson's ceiling. It's about the fact that Hall is already SO much better, and still isn't in his prime.

Even if Larsson turns out to be everything they expected, Hall will be better. Needs and cap included, they should have negotiated a pick. Any pick.

[MoneypuckOverlord]

my gosh...

 

my hockey team, half the 70% of the guys are OIler fans, ALL OF THEM hates the trade.  

 

 

[DeNiro]

Just now, MoneypuckOverlord said:

my gosh...

 

my hockey team, half the 70% of the guys are OIler fans, ALL OF THEM hates the trade.  

 

 

Think of it as if it was your team. Would you be happy with a trade like that?

 

It would be very hard to appreciate this trade right now. Maybe in 3 or 4 years they'll see what Chiarelli sees. For right now they're going to have to watch Hall tear it up in New Jersey.

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

Just now, insomniac604 said:

I can't talk about the room but on the ice, Hall is their best player. He is fearless and tenacious. Yes, he gets injured, but it's because of those attributes. Statistically he is behind only Jamie Benn.

 

It's not about Larsson's ceiling. It's about the fact that Hall is already SO much better, and still isn't in his prime.

Even if Larsson turns out to be everything they expected, Hall will be better. Needs and cap included, they should have negotiated a pick. Any pick.

I know how good he is, but he is a puck-hog that causes a lot of turnovers.  He drives the play, but his team-game is suspect and his defensive effort is questionable.  He is the best player other than McDavid, but like Subban, the way he plays hurts the team.

 

I think that New Jersey will be good for him, and I like to watch him play, even though his unique style makes me cringe at times.  

 

But Edmonton got better here, and Larsson is really good already.  He's not first team all-star good, so yeah, there is a disparity, but guys like him are impossible to find, and defencemen develop a little differently in most cases (look at Hedman).

 

But of course, I'm not gonna to say they're equally good players, but they definitely have equal market value (by definition, obviously, but I see it as fair).  Edmonton can definitely sustain the loss.

[Bang Bang Boogie]

54 minutes ago, shiznak said:

In his rookie year (2012?), where he was strictly used in offensive situations.

Keep in mind he was an 18 year old rookie playing defense in the NHL at that time.  If he didn't perform well, you can't put the blame all on him.

[kenhodgejr]

I am going to disagree with most people in the hockey universe. I like this trade for Edmonton. I felt long ago that Hall was the problem in Edmonton. I think he is an elite talent who was developed wrong and has a bad work ethic. I have observed him over the years not back checking. giving up on the play. night after night of loosing when you think your a star. He is the cancer in the room. Oilers needed a new energy and new culture for Mcdavid and Draisaitl's team. I like RNH i think he has a good attitude. Also like Eberle. Hall was the guy to go. I think replacing him with Lucic is brilliant. Lucic will create a lot of space for Mcdavid, be ready for a shot from the slot, keep other players honest. I bet he puts up 30 goals with Mcdavid and Eberle/Puljujarvi. Thats how scary good Mcdavid is. But any good Team needs intelligent defence man who can stop scoring chances and set up plays. I think Edmonton is still two good D men and a good goalie away from a contender. They are moving in the right direction as a team. This trade can't be viewed in terms of 1 for 1 value but rather; have they moved closer towards the team they are trying to build? The team I see today is night and day better than what it was last summer! I think Edmonton will be a contender 2018  

[insomniac604]

5 minutes ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

I know how good he is, but he is a puck-hog that causes a lot of turnovers.  He drives the play, but his team-game is suspect and his defensive effort is questionable.  He is the best player other than McDavid, but like Subban, the way he plays hurts the team.

 

I think that New Jersey will be good for him, and I like to watch him play, even though his unique style makes me cringe at times.  

 

But Edmonton got better here, and Larsson is really good already.  He's not first team all-star good, so yeah, there is a disparity, but guys like him are impossible to find, and defencemen develop a little differently in most cases (look at Hedman).

 

But of course, I'm not gonna to say they're equally good players, but they definitely have equal market value (by definition, obviously, but I see it as fair).  Edmonton can definitely sustain the loss.

I agree with Hall's detriments. Combined with his style of play that often left him injured..

I would stop short at saying Hall was a detriment to his team. Perhaps so when he was out. But on the ice he was one of the best LWs in the NHL.

 

Obviously in NJ he will be THE GUY. But he was already so in Edmonton before McDavid came in.

 

Edmonton did not get better. They got better on defense. But what they gave up for that return was, in every mathematical way, a loss. The only argument is "intangibles" and I would say that Edmonton is one of the least qualified teams to calculate those reasonably. Otherwise they wouldn't be consistent losers with such high talent.

 

Larsson was initially compared to Hedman. But where Hedman grew, he stumbled. He had one "good" year sandwiched between mediocrity, being sent to the AHL and injuries.

 

Like I said, even if Larsson pans out to be who he was supposed to, this trade is - at best - even in spirit. But when you factor in that Larsson may take a couple years to get there, and Hall is already there poised to surpass it..

 

IDK. I can't justify not getting a pick.

[Honky Cat]

8 minutes ago, insomniac604 said:

I agree with Hall's detriments. Combined with his style of play that often left him injured..

I would stop short at saying Hall was a detriment to his team. Perhaps so when he was out. But on the ice he was one of the best LWs in the NHL.

 

Obviously in NJ he will be THE GUY. But he was already so in Edmonton before McDavid came in.

 

Edmonton did not get better. They got better on defense. But what they gave up for that return was, in every mathematical way, a loss. The only argument is "intangibles" and I would say that Edmonton is one of the least qualified teams to calculate those reasonably. Otherwise they wouldn't be consistent losers with such high talent.

 

Larsson was initially compared to Hedman. But where Hedman grew, he stumbled. He had one "good" year sandwiched between mediocrity, being sent to the AHL and injuries.

 

Like I said, even if Larsson pans out to be who he was supposed to, this trade is - at best - even in spirit. But when you factor in that Larsson may take a couple years to get there, and Hall is already there poised to surpass it..

 

IDK. I can't justify not getting a pick.

Subtract Hall....add Puljujarvi and Larsson...Edmonton will get over it,and will be a better team for it.

[kenhodgejr]

I agree I was shocked a pick was not included. I would have thought a 1st-3rd was part of the trade. The other thing about team culture is that Hall is a bad leader. The young players in Edmonton would have benefited from a player like Shane Doan (5 years ago) as a captain. A guy who would keep the team in line. Hall is a great hockey player but a bad leader/role model with the attitude of a spoiled baby. Mcdavid is getting the opportunity to make this team his own like what Pitsburg had with Crosby. Hall needed to go. Adding a younger D man who has a good attitude and is a team guy is a good thing for Edmonton plus saving money. 

[Standing_Tall#37]

37 minutes ago, insomniac604 said:

I can't talk about the room but on the ice, Hall is their best player. He is fearless and tenacious. Yes, he gets injured, but it's because of those attributes. Statistically he is behind only Jamie Benn.

 

It's not about Larsson's ceiling. It's about the fact that Hall is already SO much better, and still isn't in his prime.

Even if Larsson turns out to be everything they expected, Hall will be better. Needs and cap included, they should have negotiated a pick. Any pick.

Who exactly did Larsson have to throw the biscuit to in Jersey? I think we'll see how good he is, now that he has some options to distribute the puck to.

[insomniac604]

16 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Subtract Hall....add Puljujarvi and Larsson...Edmonton will get over it,and will be a better team for it.

Doesn't matter who you add outside of the trade.

 Sure Puljijarvi and Lucic make it nicer. But they had nothing to do with the swap. We are ranking Hall for Larsson and in that trade alone they lost, hard. Now and in the future.

 

The others soften the blow but that's just a testament to Edmonton banking on the overall picture instead of trying to win single player trades. In an offense-rich team, throwing Hall away might be ok. But if, in the next, 1-9 years.. they find themselves injured or starved of LW offense, it will come right back to him.

 

Parise led the Devils to the Finals on his production. Hall is of the same caliber, if not better. Perhaps not the same leader but better points.

 

Also if Larsson falls anywhere short of legit #1 Dman capable of O and shutting guys down.. then it will be a fail. If he does reach that, it's even. The math just doesn't support it.

 

They could have gotten a way better deal from a team like.. Phili? Who has a crap load of NHL-ready D prospects that are younger, and better, than Larsson.

 

They could have gotten one with probably Schenn thrown in.

[The Big Luongo]

Beautiful always nice seeing the Coilers making more bad moves.

 

Foolish as usual.

[khay]

6 hours ago, oldnews said:

 

  8 hours ago, oldnews said:

Out of 277 NHL defenseman to play 5 or more games last year, Adam Larsson had the lowest offensive zone starts in the NHL.  30.5%.

 

277th among 277 defensemen.

 

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=63&f1=2015_s&f2=5v5&f4=D&f7=5-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67#snip=f

 

His relative quality of competition was 29th in the NHL.

 

He quite simply played some of the hardest minutes of any defenseman in the NHL.

 

He was a +15 in those minutes.  A wortheless statistic when taken out of context, but in the context of his situational use, outstanding.  His relative corsi was -3.5, something corsi gazers would look at and conclude his 'possession numbers' aren't very good, but that is utter nonsense. 

 

163 hits.

 

148 blocked shots.

 

A 23 year old playing 23 of the NHL's hardest minutes per night.

 

His offensive production is highly under-rated in that context.  He did not have a single powerplay point - had 18 points and + 15 in a strict shutdown role.

 

Elite young defenseman - no question about it.   'Analytics' dimwits like Yost suggesting that a player like this does not even 'move the needle' is absurd.

 

Thanks for sharing this.

 

And I get that context is important but you can't just criticize others for using corsi without reading the overall context of what the person is saying.

 

The overall corsi basically is a summary statistic of player's performance over a large sample of the player's performance. If it is used without considering additional context, to claim that a player is bad, then you are correct. That would be a cherry picking and create a selection bias in the person's argument.

 

But that's not what I am claiming here. 

 

I "cherry picked" the corsi stat to say that Edler is better than Larsson at least right now. I never argued that Larsson is a bad player.

 

Going over the link you provided (http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=63&f1=2015_s&f2=5v5&f4=D&f7=5-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67#snip=f), I see that Edler is 259 on the list. 18 spots up on Larsson.

 

So me cherry picking on corsi in this case does not do the harm that you were alluding to. In this case, since both players are assigned hard minutes, it is more or less fair to just compare them using just corsi as it roughly portrays two players's performances over a long run period. And if you cared to read my post more carefully, then you would read something like,

 

"Both teams were poor offensively so this metric goes to show who contributes better in terms of generating shots on the ice."

 

So even though I didn't check the ozone starts, I roughly knew that they were assigned hard minutes due to lack of good teammates and that their corsi would suffer because they aren't playing for an offensively gifted teams.

 

So it seems that you are cherry picking as much as I. But the difference is that you cherry pick other people's comments. Maybe you should read other people's post more carefully.

 

And perhaps you are cherry picking a bit on this hard assignment stat (the % ozone start) to make a case that Larsson is elite?

 

If he is as good as you claim, then even if he is assigned tough minutes, maybe he should do a bit better and it should show in his corsi?

 

I agree that he is a good defensive player (I've seen him play live when he came to Van, he is solid) and he has good potential but he hasn't shown anything to lead us to believe that he is elite.