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

[higgyfan]

Hall must be choked.  His Oiler team will win a SC long before he does (if ever).

 

All those years as a basement dweller and then traded just before the team starts taking off.

[stawns]

5 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

So today was a pretty busy day in the NHL. Lots to talk about. Unfortunately, today was also the day of my kids' "Sports Day" field trip and I took the day off to be a parent supervisor. And then my wife had to work late tonight helping a patient. So I was full-time daddy duties from wake up until bedtime. And I missed out on all the whole trade discussion.

 

Which brings me to this point (now that the kids are asleep).

 

I agree with the posters who say that Larsson is an excellent young defenseman and very underrated. 

 

But unlike some of the previous posters, I don't want to base my argument for Larsson value around his zone starts and quality of competition (at least as far as that relates to his Corsi).

 

Certainly these stats are informative in terms of usage. Coaches put their best defensive players out for defensive zone starts. Larsson is an excellent defensive player.

 

And coaches will try to match their best defenders against the opposition's best players. Larsson was one of New Jersey's best defenders.

 

But as far as those high defensive zone starts and high quality of competition numbers being meaningful in unpacking Larsson's Corsi stats, it's just not all that significant.

 

Neither zone starts nor quality of competition has much of a real impact on a player's possession stats. At least not over an entire season. On a shift-by-shift basis, absolutely. But when you add up all the shifts for a season, the significance fades to something almost negligible.

 

I know that sounds counterintuitive so here's some evidence for what I'm saying:

 

https://puckplusplus.com/2015/01/15/how-much-do-zone-starts-matter-i-maybe-not-as-much-as-we-thought/

http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/23/the-importance-of-quality-of-competition

http://xtrahockeystats.com/wordpress/?p=17

http://hockeyanalysis.com/2015/03/16/zone-starts-corsi-and-the-percentages/

http://hockeyanalysis.com/2015/03/21/zone-starts-and-impact-on-players-statistics/

http://hockeyanalysis.com/2014/12/13/zone-starts-dont-matter-much/

 

So at the very most, Larsson's usage might have negatively skewed his relative Corsi by maybe 3-4%. Not entirely insignificant, but not really enough to starting calling him a "good Corsi" player even when you adjust for usage. So strictly speaking to Corsi numbers, analysts like Yost are "correct" in saying that Larsson doesn't "move the needle" when he's on the ice.

 

But maybe this really doesn't matter very much.

 

That's going to sound like sacrilege. Corsi doesn't matter? Well, not exactly. It does matter. Just not as much as the "hero charts" crowd might like us to believe (especially when it comes to players like Larsson).

 

As long as Larsson's Corsi numbers are close to even (i.e.: not "moving the needle" if we are quoting Yost), I don't really think they're all that important. Certainly not enough to truly gauge this player's value or his potential impact on team success.

 

Larsson simply doesn't play a style that's going to really create a huge positive effect in any shots-based "possession" numbers.

 

And if I was going to try to find an informative stat for determining the value of a player like Larsson, I'd probably start with his usage, and then look at his results.

 

At his age and development stage, it's probably fair to look at numbers over the past two seasons (2014-16).

 

We know from his zone starts that he gets heavy defensive usage. So we know that his coaches think he's one of the best defenders on his team. Same goes for his quality of competition.

 

But what about the results?

 

First, I'll just say that while goal based metrics certainly aren't very informative in small samples, once you get to something greater than maybe one full season of play, they do give us some of the best "results" data available. So while shot based metrics are certainly more popular these days (for good reason in some cases), I think they are often overused, and that there might be more value in looking at goals when you're dealing with the larger samples. Especially since goals are more meaningful in determining W/L effects (again, so long as the samples are large enough that the goals are actually "meaningful"). If that all makes sense?

 

So, getting back on track, what were Larsson's results?

 

Over the past two seasons (from 2014/15 through 2015/16), among defensemen with >70GP, Larsson actually ranks #1 in the NHL in (lowest) GA60 at 1.52.

 

Hmm... interesting. Maybe he's just played in front of some great goaltending?

 

Let's try to account for that: Larsson's teammates average 2.15 GA60. Larsson has a GA60 of 1.52. So that's a -0.62 GA60RelTM. This means when Larsen's on the ice, his team gives up 0.62 LESS goals against per 60 minutes.

 

That's the 2nd best (GA60RelTM) in the NHL among all defensemen with >70 GP between 2014-16.

 

Now it's certainly true that Larsson doesn't really "move the needle" very much as far as creating offense. His team basically scores at the same rate with or without him. But as far as preventing goals against, Larsson appears to have been an absolute beast over the last 2 seasons. And if those numbers can continue, he might actually develop into one of this league's premiere defenders. 

 

And it should be noted that I used the word "defender" and not "defenseman" in the previous sentence. This isn't to say Larsson's not a good defenseman. Indeed, I believe he's a damn fine young Dman. But he probably just doesn't create the offense necessary to be considered a true #1D (and he likely never will). That's OK. He does look like he might very well be one of the league's best defenders and that's nothing to sneeze at.

 

Larsson's usage tells us that he's put on the ice to prevent goals. That's his primary focus.

 

And his results tell us two things (over the past two seasons): When he's on the ice, he gives up fewer goals against per minute (GA60) than any other defenseman (with >70GP). And his on-ice effect (relative to his teammates) in preventing goals against (GA60RelTM) is second best among NHL defensemen (with >70 GP)

 

Probably fair to say that adding that type of player (i.e.: a player that "moves the needle" significantly in preventing goals against) is going to really help the Edmonton Oilers.

 

Edmonton's problem isn't that they lack scoring. They've had have plenty of high-end scoring forwards for several years now (like Hall). But they give up more goals than they score (which means they simply lose more often than they win). They've just really lacked quality defenders (again note the use of "defender" and not "defenseman"--although the word probably doesn't matter much in this case since they've really been lacking in both).

 

And I wouldn't be surprised if the goals Larsson prevents actually adds more value for that team than what they've given up in the goals Hall can create.

 

That's kind of an interesting point of comparison so I think I'll look up some numbers:

 

2014-16 Taylor Hall: 2.70 GF60; 2.53 GA60; 1.88 TMGF60; 2.85 TMGA60; +0.82 GF60RelTM; -0.32 GA60RelTM; +11.9 GF%RelTM

2014-16 Adam Larsson: 1.71 GF60; 1.52 GA60; 1.79 TMGF60; 2.15 TMGA60; -0.08 GF60RelTM; -0.62 GA60RelTM; +7.4 GF%RelTM

 

This actually suggests Hall has "moved the needle" for his team, in terms of overall GF% relative to his teammates, more than Larsson has (over the past two seasons). Most of this GF% effect is on the strength of Hall's offense but (at least compared to his team) his defense has also been a (somewhat surprising) positive. Although I don't really think that's a function of him actually "defending" all that well but more that his teams needs to spend less time defending when Hall is on the ice. Nevertheless, the overall results might suggest that Hall is a more impactful player on the whole, in terms of creating the greater positive effect on GF%.

 

But when you look at that Oilers GA60 (from 2014 though 2016), whether it's the team rate of 2.85 or Hall's (on-ice) 2.53, it becomes very obvious what adding a high end defender could do for that team. Adding a player that can consistently prevent goals-against (if indeed Larsson can continue to do this) is simply going to have a huge effect. And while losing Hall's goals-for will hurt, the Oilers do have this kid named Connor MacDavid, who was second only to Hall in GF%RelTM and who, purely in terms of offence, already provides almost double the (on-ice) positive effect (GF60RelTM) that Hall did.

 

Also worth noting that none of the Oilers defensemen (from 2014/15 through 2015/16) "moved the needle" anywhere near as much as Larsson did.

 

The Oilers need defensemen that "defend" well and can prevent goals. They appear to have this in Larsson. Whether it was worth the price is always going to be debatable. But there's no question that if Larsson can live up to his potential, they'll have come a long way toward potentially solving their D problem. And they will have done so by dealing from a position of strength (their riches in top-level young forwards) to address a position of weakness (their lack of good "defending" defensemen).

 

On a straight player-to-player comparison, they probably "lost" this trade. But in terms of actually addressing team needs, they've arguably come out ahead in this transaction. And given the current trend in how much good, young, RH shot defensemen (especially ones on good contracts) are coveted around the league, this trade might actually be pretty close to fair value (in the current market anyway).

I agree the oilers "lost" the trade in the sense that they probably have up the better player, but as you said, they got what they needed and that was the goal of the move.  I know many like to run down anything a rival does, but this will help the Oilers stabilize in their own end.

 

However, as other posters have mentioned, Hall should have brought back a true top pairing dman.  In all liklihood, Larssen was the best of the elem available.

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

57 minutes ago, riffraff said:

Agreed I've heard the rumblings. My post was more relating to the term "room cancer" and as you said, it's a dirty title that has becom frivolously thrown around.

 

from what I saw of hall, he was a competitor most nights. When mcdavid came to to town he was put under halls watch - I believed they roomed together?  That has to mean something positive.

I agree that calling someone a 'cancer', in any walk of life, is unnecessarily harsh.  However, I think it's safe to say that where there's smoke, there's something smouldering - it's not like we've seen any evidence of great leadership or character to contradict the rumours.

[70seven]

16 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

Hall must be choked.  His Oiler team will win a SC long before he does (if ever).

 

All those years as a basement dweller and then traded just before the team starts taking off.

 

 

 

However he's been the figure head of a losing franchise for 6 years.  They won the generational player sweeps, new building...  it makes sense for them to change up the team core and leadership.  What they had wasnt working regardless of how many points the player put up.

 

Unfortunate for him.  Obviously his personal pride would be hurt as he'd want to finish what he started and feels he should of had that opportunity...  Instead of being shipped out to a smaller market US team...  Tough luck for him for sure, especially since the Devils appear quite a bit further behind where the Oilers are in the rebuild, this move could set him back.  Hes got every right to be pissed, but thats the business of hockey.  At least he gets to play with an elite netminder, and they should be active in free agency with 29 miillion to spend.

[70seven]

Comparing Edmontons D to ours, I still like ours better for the now, and the future.

 

Tough trade, but good on Chirelli for having the gonads to make such an unpopular move for the betterment of the franchise.

 

 

[Nucker 67]

Chiarelli's interview after the trade yesterday was good, it had me smiling. He looked like a guy who was scrambling trying to answer for why he traded his former 1st overall, for a #3-4D. He looked shaken, and even came out and admitted: "Okay, he's (Larsson) not the sexiest defenceman" lol Good job Chia, make your new D feel like a loser before he even joins the team. This is why Benning's trade to get Gudbranson looks so genius. Benning dealt with the issue right away. Now, Chiarelli had to make a deal fast to bring in a D, any D, and took who he could get under the pressure. It cost him. I'm sure Larsson is a fine D, and will be better than what they have (which isn't saying much). If they don't get Lucic, Chiareli is going to look like a complete fool.  

 

Hall's interview was good as well, he's really POd, and says this will only motivate him next season.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

However, as other posters have mentioned, Hall should have brought back a true top pairing dman.  In all liklihood, Larssen was the best of the elem available.

It's certainly a 'loss' at their present values. And I've been saying EDM will have to overpay to fix their team for years now. Well, they did.

 

That said, Larsson could still easily turn in to a top pair D in the next few years. And Hall could be a train wreck of 'me-first, 1-dimensional team cancer' and we'll all view this very differently in a few years. 

 

The truth will probably be somewhere in the middle.

[nux4lyfe]

This was grand Larssony by New Jersey..Edm could have gotten much more..

[ForsbergTheGreat]

 

A 21 year old Kessel brought back 2 first round picks

A 27 year old Kessel + a 2nd round pick  (pits own)  brought back 1st round pick, Kapanen, 3rd round pick and Harrington (later flipped for Rychel)

A 30 year old Vanek brought back Moulson, a 1st and 2nd round pick

A 28 year old Nash and a 3rd round pick brought back Dubinsky, Anisimov, Erixon and a first-round pick

A 27 year old Lucic brought back Jones, 1st round pick, and Miller

A 30 year old Kesler brought back Sbisa, Bonino, and a 1st round pick

 

 

Edmonton did not get enough value back. But sometimes you need to lose a few trades to get your team back on the right track. 

[SilentSam]

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

A 21 year old Kessel brought back 2 first round picks

A 27 year old Kessel + a 2nd round pick  (pits own)  brought back 1st round pick, Kapanen, 3rd round pick and Harrington (later flipped for Rychel)

A 30 year old Vanek brought back Moulson, a 1st and 2nd round pick

A 28 year old Nash and a 3rd round pick brought back Dubinsky, Anisimov, Erixon and a first-round pick

A 27 year old Lucic brought back Jones, 1st round pick, and Miller

A 30 year old Kesler brought back Sbisa, Bonino, and a 1st round pick

 

 

Edmonton did not get enough value back. But sometimes you need to lose a few trades to get your team back on the right track. 

Seems the 3 way deals are a lost art  

[Jock Cousteau]

I don't always trade away my young superstars but when i do it's for 2nd pairing D

[b3.]

Reports out saying that Shattenkirk had no interest in signing an extension with Edmonton, or Hall would have been a Jacket.

 

Good decision Kevin!

[c00kies]

26 minutes ago, b3. said:

Reports out saying that Shattenkirk had no interest in signing an extension with Edmonton, or Hall would have been a Jacket.

 

Good decision Kevin!

 

Ermm...you mean a Blue, not Jacket

[PhillipBlunt]

Well. Benning looks a lot more like the astute and patient GM he is when you look at this trade.

 

Chiapet will never learn. Ever.

[Jock Cousteau]

6 minutes ago, c00kies said:

 

Ermm...you mean a Blue, not Jacket

 

[Gaudette Celly]

18 hours ago, oldnews said:

If 18 pts in 65 games as a 19 year old with a hair over 50% offensive zone starts is your idea of 'underwhelming'...

 

That was good enough to lead the Devils blueline in scoring.

 

Last year he scored 24 pts in 64 games - in very similar, extremely hard shutdown minutes to what he played this year (38.5% ozone starts, very strong qualcomp) and had a relative corsi of -0.2..

 

People are trying too hard to make this an absolute guffah on the part of Edmonton.

 

Hey, no one enjoys their failures more than I do. No one would love to see them frack up and sh!t the bed again.   I'd absolutely love to see Benning own Chiarelli repeatedly and emphatically.

 

But I can't pretend that Larsson is not one hell of a defenseman.

 

I understand the CDC laugh track - it's to be expected - but what is an absolute fail is how literally oblivious some people are, who pass themselves off as "analytics" guys.

How about commentary from a true authority?

 

Quote

Adam Larsson is a good player, he's a fine player.  I think that there's a lot of defencemen who are significantly better than him...including Chris Tanev.
- Botchford

 

[Shift-4]

1 hour ago, nux4lyfe said:

This was grand Larssony by New Jersey..Edm could have gotten much more..

That's a Hall of a play on words.  

[Kragar]

2 hours ago, nux4lyfe said:

This was grand Larssony by New Jersey..Edm could have gotten much more..

 

5 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

That's a Hall of a play on words.  

Thank you both for Tayloring your words so well!

[oldnews]

For folks thinking Larsson 'might be' a top pairing D 'in the future',  he already is/was a top pairing D in New Jersey.

He lead all their D in 5 on 5 ice time.

 http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=8&f1=2015_s&f2=5v5&f4=D&f5=N.J&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

He had 3.46/g of shorthanded ice time.

He was clearly a top pairing D - neck and neck to lead that blueline in minutes.

Wadr to Edmonton's blueline, he belongs in the same place there - more even strength and shorthanded ice-time than any Oiler D, 

He and Klefbom could give Edmonton a pretty solid young top pairing that can handle hard minutes.  It's been a while since you could say that about that team

 

[elvis15]

For those still wondering about Larsson, here's comments on him from Oates, who coached him in New Jersey:

http://oilersnation.com/2016/6/30/what-will-larsson-bring-to-oilers

Quote

I spoke to someone who knows him well. Adam Oates was an assistant coach in New Jersey during Larsson's rookie season, then left to be the head coach of Washington for two years, before returning to New Jersey for the 2014/2015 season.

 

"He is a minutes guy. He can play a lot of minutes. He's good. He's pretty smart. He needs to sense confidence from the coaches. He's one of those guys you can't yell at. You can challenge him, for sure, and teach him, but he needs to feel the love from the coaches," said Oates.

 

What differences did he see in his game from his rookie year compared to 2014/2015, when Oates returned to New Jersey?

 

"He was stronger, but I had to re-visit one change we'd made with him as a rookie. When I had him as a rookie he had a stick that was the wrong lie. I raised his lie, got him more standing up and he started to move better. After his rookie year he got a stick deal, and went back to his old stick and for the next two years he was up and down in the minors.

 

"We had a talk, and he agreed to use the stick we wanted him to use as a rookie. It was a higher stick with more of a toe curve and he had his best season. He scored 24 points, none on the PP, and he played with Andy Greene," said Oates.

What should Oilers fans expect from him?

 

"He's competitive. His skating is fine. He thinks the game well, and he has good instincts on when to move the puck. He'll move it quickly when needed, and he'll hold onto it instead of trying to force a pass. In New Jersey the system allowed him to be a top-pairing. In the right system he is a top-pairing guy, but you have to have that system," said Oates.

Top pairing right hand D are pretty valuable, even if Hall is the better piece.