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

[Li'l Fra]

I'd be pissed if we traded Dan Sedin for Larsson. And he's 35.

 

The Oilers backed themselves into this corner with their drafting. Chiarelli came out swinging, missed, and punched the wall.

 

[insomniac604]

3 minutes ago, khay said:

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. 

 

Corsi is only one side of the picture. NHL is a team game. A guy can drive play all he wants but if the teammates hate him, he won't get passes and opportunities. Same goes if he spends most of his time injured.

 

Larsson is going from a team disappointed in him from his play, to a city disappointed in him for his trade.. before they even see him play. The pressure is on. NJ gave him every opportunity. Edmonton's O will get him more points but will that equal to him being a better Dman?

 

Edmonton is a D killer so the fact that they traded their best forward for a guy who has yet to prove he can be a consistent #1 is scary. Maybe it works.

[Mattrek]

The only reason this happened was because of us getting Gudbranson. Kind of just adds some icing to the awesome cake we got.

[Bure1994Mclean]

Agree with the sentiment that Edmonton got fleeced. Out of all the good young stars you have on the Oilers: Hall, Eberle, RNH, McDavid, Yakupov, etc. Hall is one of the best RIGHT NOW, imagine how much better this kid is going to get in the future. Should've been someone like RNH, who is more expendable, or Yakupov, who just doesn't seem to have chemistry or a future in Edmonton, both attractive players with upside but trading Hall straight up for Larsson just doesn't seem right, no matter how much Chiarelli THINKS Larsson is going to be good. 

[oldnews]

7 hours ago, khay said:

Not even close? So Larsson better than Edler by a mile? LOL. 

 

Edler playing half more points than Larsson in half the games.

 

Last season, Larsson's possession numbers are terrible  at around 44%. Edler is about 47% last season. Both teams were poor offensively so this metric goes to show who contributes better in terms of generating shots on the ice. Clearly Edler wins.

 

Defensively, Edler does turn pucks over but so does every defenceman in the league.  You just think Edler sucks because you watch him a lot more than Larsson. I bet you will think Larsson sucks if you are NJ fan. The word for this is "bias." In this case your bias against Edler is so huge that you are overvaluing Larsson, a player that you probably don't even watch much at all (if at all).

 

If Chiarelli falls on the floor laughing at the Edler proposal, then he probably isn't taking his job seriously because defence is the area that Edmonton needs to improve the most so you really have to consider all possible options. It makes sense if Chiarelli doesn't want to trade Hall to a division rival but if he just flat out says no when offered Edler, then what can I say, he isn't doing his job. 

 

If Larsson gets you Hall, then there is a deal to be made surrounding Edler or even maybe even Tanev for Hall. 

 

LOL. Larsson better than Edler by a mile. Very typical of a biased Canucks fan.

 

21 minutes ago, khay said:

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. 

 

First of all, your cherry picking did in fact do 'harm' to the 'analysis' of the player.

 

You claimed his possesson numbers are "terrible" - and that is highly misleading.

 

You can't look at corsi - and ignore his situational use - and claim to have come to some kind of analytical conclusion about his possession numbers.

Larsson's 30.5% is extremely low.  Edler as you point out was 29th, and yet a full 11.5% higher - a great deal higher actually.

Your Larsson vs Edler argument is not what I was referring to - I was referring to the misrepresentation of Larsson - and if you follow your logic to a conclusion, you're implying Edler's are likewise, terrible.

 

What people need to understand is that when a player is weighted so heavily in a defensive, hard minutes role, you have to counter balance the weight you assign their corsi.  A -3.5 relative corsi is actually outstanding in that context, when he's clearly playing far, far harder minutes than virtually his entire team (his partner being the exception).

 

So I think you're missing the relevent point here.  I'm not 'cherry picking', I'm simply cutting right to the point - a basic misrepresentation of Larsson's underlying numbers.

Edler, likewise, played hard minutes - and had a negative corsi.  If Larsson's possession numbers are "terrible", so are Elder's, but in neither case is that true.

So called "Analytics" people for the most part continue to fundamentally misunderstand the possession numbers of shutdown players.

If you look at a guy like Malhotra and judge him by his corsi, you could mistakenly think he was one of the worst possession players in the NHL, which was simply anything but the truth.  The plus/minus of shot attempts can be as or more misleading than the simple plus/minus statistic - and yet some 'analytics' is scarcely any more sophistocated than simple plus/minus - regardless of whether it's wrapped up in fancy stats terms like puck possession, shot suppression/generation.  That's mere jargon that is not a substitute from actual analysis - that needs to attempt to integrate all the factors/metrics it has - and then realize and acknowledge the serious limits they are still subject to.

 

 

[Honky Cat]

13 minutes ago, insomniac604 said:

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.

I'm not disagreeing that NJ won the trade one for one..When you're trading for a projected top pairing D....9 times out of 10,you're going to lose the trade...It's almost become like trading for a top 10 draft pick..an overpayment is necessary..

 

Hall is gone..Puljujarvi is in,so is Larsson......The Oilers are better as an 'overall' team......is what I am saying. .

[The Brindy Gypsy]

Believe it or not, not all trades are made with trying to win that single transaction in mind. This is freeing up a spot on LW for Lucic and some cap to add another Dman. Chiarelli is changing the culture in Edmonton as well and Hall wasn't a guy he wanted apart of the core moving forwards for many reasons. 

[insomniac604]

4 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

I'm not disagreeing that NJ won the trade one for one..When you're trading for a projected top pairing D....9 times out of 10,you're going to lose the trade...It's almost become like trading for a top 10 draft pick..an overpayment is necessary..

 

Hall is gone..Puljujarvi is in,so is Larsson......The Oilers are better as an 'overall' team......is what I am saying. .

They were better with Puljujarvi & Hall than with Pul & Larsson.

 

I guess if you replace the word "overall" with "balanced" then you have a good point. But if you think "overall" with "quality of players vs quality of those in return" they have lost.

 

I think the biggest point most of us are trying to make is that, there must have been MANY other teams offering a better trade. Why did they choose NJ? In my initial post I speculated age, talent & cap. Which is the only way I can justify it. And even with all of that, I still think they should have gotten a pick.

[Beary Sweet]

I really think Hall was a good piece to play around there for the Oilers considering they have a franchise player in McDavid and might potentially have stolen another one in Puljujarvi. Personally it's a win win for both teams. But as of today, Devils won this trade. Not even close

[DeNiro]

I just clued in that Chiarelli has now traded the top 2 picks in the 2010 draft.

 

Both trades were met with outrage as well.

[SilentSam]

This is funny  ..

 

 

[Honky Cat]

2 minutes ago, insomniac604 said:

They were better with Puljujarvi & Hall than with Pul & Larsson.

 

I guess if you replace the word "overall" with "balanced" then you have a good point. But if you think "overall" with "quality of players vs quality of those in return" they have lost.

 

I think the biggest point most of us are trying to make is that, there must have been MANY other teams offering a better trade. Why did they choose NJ? In my initial post I speculated age, talent & cap. Which is the only way I can justify it. And even with all of that, I still think they should have gotten a pick.

We will find out how much better the Oilers are with Pul and Larsson....They will be a much 'better' balanced team..IMO..It was a sacrifice to give up Hall.....I disagree that the Oilers would be better with Hall and Pul,because the Oilers have been going down the road of drafting BPA forwards for a decade with ZERO success...

[Beary Sweet]

3 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I just clued in that Chiarelli has now traded the top 2 picks in the 2010 draft.

 

Both trades were met with outrage as well.

While he's selling Benning is grabbing a top 3 pick from the 2010 draft and boy did we ever fleece Florida..

[amplified0ne]

Should have probably ante' up and payed the price for Seth Jones.  Maybe Nashville never would have done that deal, but RNH straight up for Jones was a slap in the face.  EDM needed to add but didnt want to pay the price hoping for a "better" deal that basically never materialized.  To try and fix their defense, they've done Hall + what ultimately amounted to Barzal and Beauvillier for Larsson and Reinhart, OUCH.  To trade those assets and still not know if you have a true #1 Dman is horribad.

 

You could make the argument that they might not have gotten Beauvillier at 33 but they still could have had Sebastian Aho.

[DeNiro]

Quote

There was definitely discussion with Minnesota on a Ryan Nugent-Hopkins/Matt Dumba deal, but the Oilers made it very clear that wasn’t enough to pry loose Nugent-Hopkins and asked for more. That’s where it fell apart. One of the things Edmonton is looking for is a another second-round pick, because they owe one to Boston for Chiarelli’s hiring.

Interesting quote from Friedman about a potential trade with Minnesota. Apparently the sticking point was a second round pick.

 

A Nugent-Hopkins for Dumba deal makes alot of sense. You dump a center that really has no place being a third line center. Free up 6 million, and get a 21 year old D-man who I think is on the verge of breaking out offensively. If I'm an Olers fan I'm kind of annoyed a deal like this didn't get done.

[HC20.0]

Just realized... Does this trade remind anyone else of the Cory Schneider deal? Almost 3 years to the day. 1 for 1 deal, a western Canadian team gets a good player in return, but give up a much better player. New Jersey gets a top 5 player back in their respective positions. New Jersey's killing the 1 for 1 trades. 

[Neversummer]

Ray Shero, GM of New Jersey, just give him GM of the year award 2016/17 now.  

 

No way  Edm needed to trade Hall ... I can think of 3 others like Yak, RNH, Eberle which would be fair value before Hall. 

[insomniac604]

45 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

We will find out how much better the Oilers are with Pul and Larsson....They will be a much 'better' balanced team..IMO..It was a sacrifice to give up Hall.....I disagree that the Oilers would be better with Hall and Pul,because the Oilers have been going down the road of drafting BPA forwards for a decade with ZERO success...

Like I said it doesn't matter how the other picks play out. It matters how Hall vs Larsson plays out. At best, they will break even. Which won't be for years to come. At which point Hall is in his prime and is even better than now.

 

 

[THERETOOL]

1 hour ago, Li'l Fra said:

I'd be pissed if we traded Dan Sedin for Larsson. And he's 35.

 

The Oilers backed themselves into this corner with their drafting. Chiarelli came out swinging, missed, and punched the wall.

 

Sedin isnt dressing room cancer 

[Odd.]

10 hours ago, oldnews said:

I don't like Edmonton and I'm not a fan of Chiarelli, but imo he just did the one of the first things that had to be done in Edmonton - move the over-rated asset Taylor Hall and cash in on his value in acquiring a legitimate potential franchise defenseman.  

 

Disagree with this completely.