Ok I want to hear it, why is Lindholm soooooooooooooooooo much better than OEL. Facts please not just fan homerism and naming 50 thousand advanced stats that at best, are only 50% of a players evaluation.

Go

Nate your up
Philly your up
Matt59 your up

Trade wise, Lindholm has much more value than Oliver Ekman Larsson. Lindholm's contract has long term security at a very reasonable cap hit for a top pairing defenseman. Lindholm's current cap hit is already less than Larsson's and given that Larsson is due a raise in two years combined with the UFA factor, no team with cap constraints would be wise to make the deal straight up.

From a playing perspective, Larsson and Lindholm have two completely different defensive styles which makes it more difficult to compare their play as defensemen and impact. Larsson is an offensively minded d man coming off of a slightly down season. Lindholm is a more defensive minded defenseman who is still very capable of moving the puck effectively, but his offensive numbers were diminished last season as well. The way I think of it, Lindholm is the much safer bet. If Lindholm's offensive numbers decline, he still is a very capable defensive d man who can excel in a shutdown role. Lindholm has brilliant defensive smarts and awareness that can make up for a lack of offense. If Larsson's numbers decline on offense, his defensive play isn't quite as strong and won't be able to support his play as much. It is unlikely that either player is traded IRL which means that OEL's stats are more likely to suffer along with his play style, while Lindholm is on a better team that can help mask any deficiencies if there are any. It's important to note this since hypotheticals of "well Lindholm wouldn't be as good if he was on ARI or OEL would be better if he was on a good team" don't hold any water since these are unknown variables in player evaluation. Both are good skaters as well, allowing their play styles to for the most part thrive in the modern NHL.

Straight up I think the deal is slightly biased towards Arizona as they'd be getting a player with a good cap hit and term, which is critical to the success of any franchise in the modern cap world. Resources must be allocated efficiently to set up the best odds to succeed and Lindholm achieves that better from a money to value standpoint. I definitely wouldn't add to Lindholm though in any case.

Is there anybody that actually watches them both enough to make a fair determination on this? Prolly not.

1) How much will OEL get in his new contract? 11-12-13M??? Not sure where these crazy numbers you may be thinking of are coming from but I think between 7-8 is about right. AND If he gets more than that, then it just goes to show how ELITE he really is. Adding to my further points.

2) What impact does being a UFA in the GM game have if we will be allowed to resign our UFA's? I could be wrong about that but I was under the impression that we'll be able to resign our best UFA's if we want to? If not and they all go straight to free agency than yeah this point is lost and i defer but I was under the impression the V2 free agency was going to give teams a more honest chance to resign their players and since outside factors like owner spending and team structured cap limits aren't a problem, then who cares? You now have Oliver Ekman-Larsson, just sign him already! The teams with the best structures salary caps are not necessarily the best teams. Stanley cup wise at least. We only stress about UFA status in real life because the player really does have the choice to leave. In the GM game (At least from what Im told) its no longer a detractor. LONG TERM SECURITY? The idea of long term security is only relevant when the player can actually leave of his own accord.

3) "If Lindholm's offensive numbers decline, he still is a very capable defensive d man who can excel in a shutdown role. Lindholm has brilliant defensive smarts and awareness that can make up for a lack of offense. If Larsson's numbers decline on offense, his defensive play isn't quite as strong and won't be able to support his play as much."

And OEL's defensive game is not up to snuff? Take away the scoring and he is another bottom 6 dman? Are we playing favoritism here Matt or what? OEL is a fantastic dman that skates the puck out of danger and makes crisp outlet passes just as good as Larsson does. If not better. Not sure where this lack-lustre defensive play your thinking of comes from but OEL is not a Shayne Gostisbehere, He is not a Torey Krug. He is a top pairing dman. Meaning he is not deployed only in offensive minded situations. He does the PP, he does the PK he does the OZS he does the DZS. You don't play 24-26 mins a game because you can score points only and that's it.. You do because you're an all round solid player. Larsson on the other hand, not only plays less than OEL but is deployed less than the offensive minded Fowler on the same team. Where's the logic in that? OEL also is more physical than Lindholm. Nearly doubling his hit totals. He also avg's less give aways while having more take aways per season. Something that surprising for the more offensive minded dman.

4) I don't think you can't make that point about swapping players on opposite teams, yeah its hypothetical but so is saying Lindholm's defensive game will continue to shine in absence of his offensive stats while OEL would not be able to rely on his . You don't know that. I think a case can absolutely be made that OEL in Anaheim instead of Lindholm would have you eating your words right now. You yourself said that having a good team in front of you can mask your deficiencies, that also works in the opposite direction making a player who is constantly thought of as a top 10 dman even better when considering the players and team he's played on these past 6 years. Mike Smith has been his goalie. Yandle, Stone, Murphy his D partners. Yeah, you can definitely swap player valuations and estimate based on talent and whatnot to get a better idea of a players capabilities if they were drafted on opposite teams. Having a winning team not only covers up blemishes, it gives you confidence. Anaheim has been a really good team for a while now with tons of depth at every position. The could not be said about Arizona these past years. I have multiple sources that rank OEL ahead of Lindholm in both fantasy and realistic valuations. They all cant be wrong.

5) Money to value standpoint is a little short sighted if you ask me. So lets go through this. 5.5M for two years then lets say 7.5M for another 8 years afterwards? Whats Lindholm , who is by your estimation the better player, gonna cost after his contract is up? With inflation lets say 10M in 5 years from now? Thats going to even out OEL's raise pretty fast IMO. The age gap is only two years so im not too sure by the time they are both 30-32 that Lindholm may even be costing more over the long term.

"Resources must be allocated efficiently to set up the best odds to succeed and Lindholm achieves that better from a money to value standpoint." That's why the back to back Stanley cup winners added Phil Kessel right? A team with already two 9M players and a 7+M player...... yes its important to not make costly mistakes. Dmitiri Kulkov at 4M? Alzner at 4.65M? Yeah those are the examples you should be pointing to. Not the OEL's of the world. Pinching pennies on star power doesn't help you. Wasting it on players like Alzner do however.

Yes every penny counts but it also depends on your teams cap situation. Arizona for example has no problem paying OEL 7.5M. A team like Anaheim within the GM game has 14M coming off the books next year as well as a speculated 5M increase in the salary cap. So Its not a problem for Arizona IRL, its not a problem for Anaheim within the GM game. What exactly is the problem? In the GM game we aspire to have the lowest cap with the best team possible but in reality, what difference does it make? We have no owner to please. Its about putting the best players on the ice and whether you want to believe it or not, many people in the know around the NHL put OEL ahead of Llindholm, so its not just me master (de)bating my way out of this one....

Given the constraints the GM game has and the fact that we can use IRL events to add to our in game players attributes, aside from Lindholm being locked up a little longer for a bit cheaper for two years then appox 2-3M for the following 3, followed by a higher cap hit than OEL's for X season after that for Lindholm, I don't see how this is even close? At the very least not an even trade with a cherry on top.

Not too mention many too easily dismiss what players have done in the past and only look at the now now now. Whose the flavor of the week today? OEL has a repertoire of statistics and accolades that place him among the best in the game for a reason. Down season or no down season, the same can not be said about Lindholm.

Fair enough, would it be better to defer to professional evaluations then? Looking at where professionals rank these players and use that as a basis for your opinion? (Real question for you)

It would have to be the basis for those opinions, but can't completely rely on them. A lot of factors play in here. For example, OEL has barely had any support in his prime, while Lindholm has played on an Anaheim team that's always winning the division. What happens if Lindholm is paired with Luke Schenn and OEL gets a partner like Vatanen or Manson? What happens if Lindholm has an offense lead by 38 year old Shane Doan, and OEL has Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry up front?

The "professionals" would all prefer OEL, but that's because his offensive abilities are superior to those of Lindholm. However, if I'm up by one with a minute left, I would want Lindholm on the ice over OEL. But I couldn't tell you how much better OEL's offensive ability is than Lindholm's, or how much better Lindholm's defensive abilities are than OEL's.

I don't listen to analytics at all. I feel like only the most obvious ones tell the story, like Dan Girardi isn't so good in his own end. I feel like Corsi is the only analytics that make sense. There's no statistic that can measure a good first pass, no statistic that can measure defensive positioning, etc. Eye test > any analytics.

I see OEL a lot more since I reside in Arizona, so my personal preference would be OEL. If I watched more Ducks games, maybe that gap closes. Just because of this debate, I'll watch the next couple Ducks games and give my evaluations for you guys. But I don't see how you can legitimately say Lindholm is the better player, just because you don't see him enough to say that.

OEL is way better IMO.

Like others have said, OEL is better offensively and Lindholm is better defensively. The way they are utilized is different also.

Arizona uses OEL as an offensive catalyst, putting him on the first PP unit and relying on him as a true number one defenseman on the top pairing. Since he hasn't had much of a defensive supporting cast around him until this season (addition of Hjalmarsson and Demers), he's primarily been an all-situations kind of guy, whereas Anaheim has a much better defensive core where they can use Lindholm in select situations.

Anaheim uses Lindholm as more of a shutdown defenseman, as he has spent most of his career playing with Josh Manson, forming a true shutdown pair for Anaheim. He doesn't get a lot of PP time, as Anaheim has a number of offensively-minded defensemen in Cam Fowler and Sami Vatanen, both of whom get more PP time than Lindholm. Brandon Montour has even seen quite a bit of time this season on the top PP unit.

My personal opinion:
Lindholm is the prototypical defenseman. He can shut down the best lines in the game and transition to offense seamlessly. His age, contract, and ceiling are all favorable when compared to OEL. I'd take Lindholm every day of the week.

In regards to the trade in the GM Game:

OEL and Lindholm play very different styles, so comparing them is difficult without context. The biggest argument for Lindholm > OEL is that Lindholm's contract is longer and will be cheaper than OEL's next.

But at the end of the day, these types of trades happen all of the time. Contending teams sacrifice great young talent to go after bigger names that they think will push them over the top, regardless of term/AAV/age. If the player fits in the system and they can fit his salary, they'll do what it takes to win. It's not smart in this case, and most GMs would take Lindholm before OEL, but it's not insane to think that their value to certain teams would be nearly even. That is, if Anaheim thinks the added offensive production will get them to a cup, and they think they can afford to re-sign him (and he'd be willing), they could justify this trade. Obviously, like Doc MorningFood says above, the real Ducks have Vatanen, Fowler, and Montour that contribute offensively from the back-end. But in the GM game, we trade like crazy, and re-structuring the team is ordinary (ANA already moved Vats, Fowler, Montour (for the similar Dumba).

TL: DR; it's a bad trade, but bad trades happen all the time.

So if Lindholm is the prototypical defensemen, why isn't he played more? I keep hearing he is an all round elite dman yet if he is that good, why not deploy him as such? Many people would agree Fowler is inferior to Lindholm defensively yet Fowler played more SH time per game then Lindholm the past 3-4 years. Even strength they are quite similar. Sooo... why not deploy Lindholm 25+ mins a game instead of 22 on avg? Give more minutes to Lindholm on SH and more even strength also? Hell even through him out there on the PP more. Why not?

Because playing defense is not only about being good defensively. A certain level of offense is needed to be among the top pairing dmen in the league. Its the same reason anyone with a right mind will take Burns over Vlasic any day of the week....... Defense by committee is possible. Scoring by committee as defensemen while not be a liability defensively isn't. Defensively minded dmen, generally are worth less than offensive minded ones. Plenty of data to show that. The NHL is starting to be more about how many goals you score and less about how little you stop.

But as Krak put it, who are we to say who is better? Do any of us really watch that much of both players? Are we accurate judges of talent and value? Maybe. Maybe not. I'm ok with letting "professionals" make that decision for us. They're the ones who are at games constantly watching and analyzing a player way more then we ever could given we all have our day jobs or School and what not. Yeah I watch hockey games from TV. I can get a good read on a player based off that as much as anyone else can but then again, who am I? Who are any of us to make that distinction?

So let's take professional opinions on the matter at face value. Show me where professionals rate Lindholm ahead of OEL in any thing other than advanced analytics charts?

I see OEL having been nominated for the Norris way more than Lindholm. Even rated higher than some surprising names. What does that say about the Professional Hockey Writers' Association? Do they not have at the very least a more accurate representation of a players season/value when they are constantly around the game and the players?

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/e/ekmanol01.html
https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/l/lindhha01.html


Or how about hockey analysts making top 30 lists and ranking players based on all factors? The NHL network seems to agree with me.

https://www.nhl.com/news/top-20-defenseman-nhl-top-players/c-290772362

Or fantasy ranking:

http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/thn-s-top-200-fantasy-players-for-2017-18

Seems pretty clear what they think. Hard to argue that Lindholm is the more valuable player talent wise. But that's only one side. Lets look at other aspects.

Contractually speaking. Lindholm is locked up for 3 years more than OEL at roughly the same pay currently. (Lindholm slightly less) What can OEL reasonably expect in his next contract? Lets look at the numbers:

Will he get more than Doughty? Karlsson? I don't think so and judging by many of your opinions of him I don't think you do too. What will those guys get? Probably around 9.5-11M right? Definitely not more than McDavid, right? So OEL is under that for sure. So lets look at what players got recently at around the next range of dmen:

PLAYER AGE POS TEAM DATE TYPE LENGTH VALUE CAP HIT
Marc-Édouard Vlasic 30 D San Jose Sharks July 1, 2017 Standard 8 $56,000,000 $7,000,000
Brent Burns 31 D San Jose Sharks November 22, 2016 Standard 8 $64,000,000 $8,000,000
Victor Hedman 25 D Tampa Bay Lightning July 1, 2016 Standard 8 $63,000,000 $7,875,000
Aaron Ekblad 20 D Florida Panthers July 1, 2016 Standard 8 $60,000,000 $7,500,000
Dustin Byfuglien 30 D Winnipeg Jets February 8, 2016 Standard 5 $38,000,000 $7,600,000

Is he worth more than Burns? at 8M? Highly doubt that. What about Hedman? Highly doubt that. Both players are easily top 5 in the league. He's better than Vlasic at 7M. I think many would agree Ekblad was paid way too much in his first contract and Buff got higher AAV for taking less term so he'd be less if for longer term. So is it not fair to say OEL should get anywhere between 7.1 - 7.8M? Given that inflation might bump it up another half mil or so, it is also important to note that Arizona has some of the lowest tax rates in the league. Staying in Arizona means in most cases not having to pay as high as some other teams. Keep that in mind.

So if we throw a general estimation out there, is 7.5M not reasonable? So now let's do the math.

17-18 and 18-19: OEL makes 250K more per year.
Starting 19-20 to 21-22 OEL makes 2.3M more per year.

OK now what about Lindholms new contract will be at least 7.5M right? He's regarded as the better more valuable player, right? But lets keep it even, even though with inflation he should be technically making more than OEL at that point. That means throughout the entire prime years of both these guys playing years starting this year ending 5 years from now, OEL WILL HAVE ACCUMULATED only 7.5M more in that 5 year span...That's not taking into account that Lindholm, the more valuable player according to some, won't be making more money than OEL in his next contract after his current one. Which may not be plausible.

So where is this major difference coming from between Lindholm and OEL?

Age? OEL is only 2.5 years older. We're not talking Subban vs Weber here. Yes technically speaking Lindholm has the advantage here but its not about who has the advantage. Its about how much does that advantage change anything? 2.5 years is pretty insignificant.
Contract? Based on the analysis I've shown, OEL could reasonably make 7.5M more than Lindholm over a 5 year period. Which comes to approx 1.5M per year. If we were to do the same analysis for Lindholm on his new contract, would he be making more or less than OEL? If he makes more because he is the better dman, than that 7.5M over the duration of the next 10 years could become negligible with Lindholm making 8m a year in his next contract. If OEL still gets more on his next contract, how can anyone consider Lindholm better than OEL at that point? Either way my point of contractual status being not as important as you are making it out to be is valid.

Now this is the one that slightly pisses me off. Ceiling is higher....???.....What does that even mean exactly and what is that even based off? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. There is literally nothing that can be said that proves that point. NADA, ZILCH. Because given all the same data I mentioned above, I find it very surprising anyone can say Lindholm has a higher ceiling than OEL especially at their given ages. Especially when at the same age OEL accomplished more on a worse team than Lindholm. These guys don't have very much more to grow. What you see is more than likely what your going to get with Lindholm having a bit more obviously because of the 2.5 year diff. Cap cost being that big a difference really? We're talking approximately 2.8% of the teams overall cap space in difference between the two when OEL gets his new contract based off the above analysis. that's at 80M speculation. Yeah every penny counts, so then tell Steve Yzerman (Widely renown GM) to stop wasting his money on Girardi!!! That is where teams needs to cut out unnecessary spending, not the negligible differences from a star top pairing dman.

Now comes the important part everyone is forgetting but that you nailed AK. This is the GM game. Not real life. Real life Anaheim doesn't need to make that trade necessarily......with Fowler in the mix. Look at GM game Anaheims roster. All their firepower is on the right side. He doesn't have any true top pairing PP quarterback dmen on the left side at all. His only other lefty is Nick Holden........

So I ask people again, give me proof as to why Lindholm is worth more than OEL, because yet again I've given irrefutable facts as to why he isn't and all people keep bringing up are their personal feelings and less to do about actual facts.

*throw

Some added fuel to the fire:

https://www.fiveforhowling.com/2017/9/5/16222334/nhl-arizona-coyotes-the-hockey-news-matt-larkin-nhl-top-10-norris-oliver-ekman-larsson
Wait, OEL is good defensively also? Who would of thunk it?

https://www.rawcharge.com/2017/8/11/16136338/comparing-victor-hedman-and-oliver-ekman-larsson
Whats this? Hedman getting some slack for playing on a power house team? What does that say about OEL?

https://www.si.com/nhl/2016/02/15/oliver-ekman-larsson-arizona-coyotes
Captain material you say?


Btw not saying there isn't ample evidence that Lindholm is a good player either. I know he is. That's not the debate here. Its which one is better and probably worth more in value.

I'd defend some of your questioning by bringing up the fact that Lindholm is only 23 years old. He's gaining ice time every year, and he won't be relied upon in all situations (not a PP guy). I'd definitely argue that in professional sports, 2.5 years can be significant. Or more importantly, Lindholm has played in 200 fewer NHL games, as a percentage that's only 60% of the amount of experience that OEL has. Hence, he might have a higher ceiling and doesn't yet deserve as many minutes. Don't hate on me Marco, I'm supporting your opinion that the trade should stand, and honestly, commending you for targeting Lindholm over OEL

Consider me team Lindholm.

I guess I’ll talk about offense first since that’s the first thing everyone seems to be bringing up as to why OEL is better. Let’s look at how the two compare at 5v5 among defenseman to play 3,000 minutes since 2010 – ranks will be in parenthesis. OEL has a 0.83 pts/60 (36th ) and 0.54 P1/60 (32nd ) compared to Lindholm who has a 0.79 (45th ) and 0.53 (34th ). I know most hate it, but just so everyone knows, OEL CF% is 49.99 (104th ) with a CF%rel of 1.99 (47th ). Lindholm has a 53.28 CF% (17th ) and has a 3.93 CF%rel (6th). So by looking at these numbers you can say that basically both players can score at top pair level 5v5, but Lindholm drives play/possession at an elite rate compared to OEL who really only drives play at 2nd pair level. OELs teammates also preform pretty similarly in play driving when he’s on the ice whereas without Lindholm the Ducks are significantly worse. In short, scoring is basically the same, however, Lindholm drives play a lot better.

When factoring in the seven main playing styles here is how they compare to others at the position in percentiles:

Transition: Lindholm (100th %), OEL (75th %) / Shot Volume: Lindholm (45th %) , OEL (95th %) / Primary Shot Assists: Lindholm (95th %), OEL (90th %) / Passing: Lindholm (100th %), OEL (90th %) / Influence/Shot Contributions: Lindholm (95th %), OEL (95th %) / Dangerous Shots: Lindholm (95th %), OEL (90th %) / Build Up Plays: Lindholm (95th %), OEL (85th %).

For the PP everyone seems to think OEL is significantly better too, but I think it’s a lot closer than most think. When Lindholm is on the ice during the PP his unit equals OEL in shots generated – and that is with working with the 2nd PP unit. Now, OEL has the advantage in GF% on the PP (87.44 to 85.29), but looking at xGF% you see that Lindholm has suffered from lower quality teammates on PP2 and bad luck whereas OEL’s unit is basically what we should have expected. The xGF% goes to Lindholm when comparing the two (90.33 to 87.93) – essentially meaning law of averages playing out Lindholm might actually be better on the PP than OEL.

Now, moving onto defense everyone has their own way of evaluating players, but I’ll focus on a stat most people love and one that I find useful which are +/- and expected +/-. It’s not really fair to completely compare +/- IMO so I’ll stick with e+/- for these two. Currently, Lindholm falls in at 33.51 and OEL at a -13.86. For reference that would place Lindholm as #3 among defensemen since 2010 and OEL at #219. All this really does is show some context between the two. Where I will concede OEL is better is defending the blue line and preventing entries. OEL’s break up % of almost 12% is considered elite while Lindholm’s of about 7% is around league average. However, both players are about equal in CarryIn% against at 65% putting them just below league average – basically meaning Lindholm forces dump ins and OEL prefers to step up to break up entries completely instead. For the Ducks system, this is what they preach since they have always been a team that prefers board battles so the data still matches the team styles. The next most important thing about defense is getting the puck out and getting it out with control is obviously more important than just throwing it out to center ice. Lindholm excels in this area with a possession exit % over 50% whereas OEL sits at 38%. You could sum it up by saying Lindholm prefers to force a dump in, win the board battle and retrieve it, and send a pass out of the zone to a teammate. OEL prefers to break up the entry completely, but if he fails is not nearly as effective at regaining possession and exiting the zone which leads to his numbers being so bad. When comparing the PK it’s not really that close. Lindholm is an elite PKer. His CF% on the PK ranks 4th among defensemen with 500 minutes since 2010 – just behind Karlsson, Byfuglien, and Subban. OEL, although not terrible ranks 65th out of defensemen in that time frame next to players like Grossman, Hamonic, and Scandella.

I know everyone likes to specifically label a defenseman, but the above labels are wrong. OEL is not an offensive D and Lindholm is not a defensive D. They are both All-Around defensemen IMO, but Lindholm is more complete. Lindholm breaks even with OEL offensively and has far superior defensive numbers with metrics to back it up. The other thing I’d like to mention is that Lindholm plays the same amount of time 5v5 as OEL – 35.31% to 35.97% so I’m not sure why that is even an argument. It’s ridiculous to say that if Lindholm is so good he’d have more ice time. It’s almost the same situation in Philly. Provorov is better than Ghost and plays more 5v5 but games when there are a ton of PP’s Ghost will lead him in ice time. If you factor in all situations Lindholm plays 35.37% of the teams share of ice time among defensemen and OEL is at about 38.5%. As far as eye tests go, living in ANA I see plenty of both teams and I just can’t bring myself to give OEL the edge even though I really do like him. If I’m building a team I’m taking Lindholm 10 times out of 10.

Also, for the GM Game purposes we have to factor in contract and age which both go to Lindholm. I know you want to know who is just the best out of the two and I’ve made my piece that it’s easily Lindholm (IMO), but you forgot to mention that you got Sam Steel, Max Jones, Lindholm, AND a top-5 pick in the 2018 draft for OEL, Duclair, Merkley, and a 2nd. That factors in too. I wouldn’t trade Lindholm for OEL/Duclair/Merkley (combined) let alone give up a lottery pick with it. If you’d restructure the trade to get rid of the draft picks then it would be more fair, but you know you got the better player and a top-5 pick for next to nothing and are trying to act like you don't know that lol

.. didn't bother proof reading so if something doesn't make sense let me know..

dude they are using HERO charts but picking bad players. Look/compare Lindholm to OEL. Way different than Slavin/Suter

All right, about time Nate! Won't bother quoting the whole thing since its pretty lengthy as is.

First off, I'd like to know where it says these statistics you're referencing are the "be all end all" of evaluating hockey talent? You must have it sourced somewhere, right? The greatest hockey minds collectively agreeing that is the best and only way to measure a players value? Its ok I'll wait for it, let me know....................................................................................

Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh that's right, there isn't a consensus at all and in fact many in the hockey world still think that those numbers you put so much value in can be misleading. Or at the very least, only give you a part of the equation but not the whole thing. (Which believe it or not falls into the same category I agree with) Now with that said, I don't want this to be a analytics vs eye test debate. that's not my goal nor my position on the matter. Both have parts to play and can be used deduct an analysis of a player.

See this is where I knew "Its quite apparent its an analytics vs everyone else type mentality" with this debate. You reference millions of advanced stats stating that as the only truth yet professionals in that very field have not yet fully accepted all of it. You have to understand that the advanced stats side isn't a single, uniform group, there are on-going battles amungst "new school" guys going on all the time, but those don't tend to extend beyond the advanced stats community, so what is "right" is often in contention on that side of the aisle, only.

Leaning too heavily on analytics side of your opinion leads to arguments being brought up like why is this guy (whose clearly not as good) higher than this guy? With an explanation as to why one statistic is skewed for one player while not for the other...Some of the best in the NHL suffer this too. We're not talking Girardi vs Doughty here. Those numbers don't need explanation, the eye test backs that one up pretty easily. But when analyzing between % points and decimals, I think you're over analyzing certain aspects of a players game and the minute differences one has over the other. Lindholm having a 53.28 CF% does not correlate to him being a better player.

Then there is the fact of quality of the team the player plays with. Look up and down those statistics, tell me how many of the good players on the bottom 5 teams every year are among the top echelon of those statistics? When comparing middle of the pack to bubble teams, its not so apparent but bottom feeder teams year after year? Their is a correlation. Generally speaking, if you are a really bad team, suppressing shots will be harder to do on avg than if you are a very good team. Same for scoring, same for just about all other statistics.

The past 5 years OEL has played on one of the worst teams in the league where as Lindholm has played on arguably one of the best over that same time. What those advanced stats don't show are confidence levels a player has when a team is absolutely rolling vs struggling mightily. Kind of easy to take risks and make plays under pressure when you have a stalwart group all around you firing on all cylinders all the time. Confidence is a non quantitative aspect that isn't shown in those statistics either. Yet it makes a huge difference to a players statistics. Ask anybody whose played the game. Or team sports in general. Winning breads confidence which breeds better play.

Also "Provorov is better than Ghost and plays more 5v5 but games when there are a ton of PP’s Ghost will lead him in ice time." - Yeah and games where there are more PK's Provorov will play more and Ghost will sit. Except Provorov also plays pretty significant time on the PP too so....

As for the rest for the trade, once again, you're automatically saying that pick is a top 5 pick. What governs where a teams pick will be? Now how fast can that change based on the following 6 months? Power rankings have a large part to play so what is stopping the Anaheim pick from going from top 5 to 20? 5 good trades, some waiver claims and all of a sudden that pick isn't so low anymore isn't it? maybe it just gets high enough to not be a lottery pick. How many GM have been changed the past 1 month? Is it not possible that if a replacement GM comes in and makes some great moves, that the teams power rankings can't turn around? Still plenty of good pieces on that team to work with.

Jones is not a top prospect. Please everyone say it with me. Jones is not a top prospect. You know it, I know it. Another Tom Wilson in the making. Lawson Crouse #2 on my team. He has potential to be a solid 3rd liner but that temper of his has to be calmed or else he'll end up being a teams lightning rod for criticism. Sam Steel's point totals can't be taken too seriously. Its juniors. Teams stock up on over age talent and can absolutely pummel weak teams in any given year. This isn't the NHL where even the lowly Coyotes make a game of it every night. Regina was thumping teams in the 7-8-9-10 goals a night range on the regular last year. Does it mean he has offensive skill? yes. is he a lock to translate that skill into NHL success? Lets look at other players drafted in the late 1st round and see how many times that worked out. Surprisingly enough Steel didn't crack the WJ team last year either. I like the kid but lets not crown him the next superstar because he scored in juniors. Plenty players have done that and fizzled in the pro ranks. He has potential but I need to see more in the pro ranks first.

So that is why the trade for me, is at the crux of it, Lindholm for OEL. The difference in value is tilted one way or the other based on how one views how important analytics are. That's what annoys me about all your (Not just you) arrogant remarks. You, Jab, Matt. You ploy all these fancy statistics out as the truth about a player but dismiss any of the stats anyone else brings to the table. Can't quantify leadership so that's meaningless now. Team a player plays on isn't important. Essentially saying I'm right and your wrong but not only that, by a lot too! Unfortunately if we're being realistic here. Most NHL GM's are not overly convinced by a players advanced stats therefore the probability of them being more persuaded by my line of thinking is valid. Less so for anyone who relies heavily on analytics which by most within the NHL is not a perfect science and not the be all/end all to pro scouting a player.

What annoys me is that this is an automatic dismissal. No chance what so ever trade. Im clearly 100% wrong and you wouldn't even do "Lindholm for OEL/Duclair/Merkley". Oh and what about all this garbage I see then?

Rickard Rakell
Jesper Bratt
2019 3rd round pick (FLA)
2018 4th round pick (NYI)
for
Alex Galchenyuk
Sven Andrighetto
2019 5th round pick (TOR)

Taylor Leier
Isaac Ratcliffe
for
philadelphia_flyers.svg
Jakob Silfverberg


Brayden Schenn (1M retained)
Joshua Ho -Sang
2019 1st Round Pick (NYI)
for
Adam Henrique
Denis Malgin
2019 1st Round Pick (FLA)

Brandon Saad
Alexandre Fortin
for
Alzner
De La Rose
1st (MTL - 2019)

God don't even get me started on this!!

James Reimer
Radim Vrbata
Ian McCoshen
Juho Lammikko
Alex Grenier
Reece Scarlett
Chaise Balisy
Maxim Mamin
Michael Downing
for
Corey Schneider (2M retained)
Nathan Bastian
Jesper Bratt
2018 6th round Pick (DET)
Bracken Kearns
Ryan Kujawinski
Brandon Gignac
Colby Sissons


Fine you think Lindholm is better, that's your opinion but saying our trade isn't valid while these are??? Come on now. Seems like we're cherry picking trades to call 1's while others are getting the benefit of the doubt....