"he is the best scoring C since Crosby"...ahahahaha! So a guy with 40, 34 and 37 goals in 3 seasons = "the best scoring C since Crosby". AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA! So forget Stamkos with his 51 goal season in 2009-10, his 60 goals in 2011-12 and his perennial 90+ pt seasons. No, no, no... the guy who has peaked at 40 goals and 73 pts = "the best scoring C since Crosby".

Bro! with comments like that you've only gone and proven that you're absolutely clueless and your opinion is less than worthless. The best scoring C since Crosby is McDavid (1.3 pts/gp to Crosby's 1.29 pts/gp). Matthews = generational..... ahahahahaha!



That was exactly your point. You're just backtracking now because you've realised how nonsensical your point was.



I don't think Kucherov is generational. IMO, he's an elite winger on a godly offensive team. His 128 pt and 100 pt seasons are mostly assists and somewhere between 40-50% of those are secondary assists. Compare this with Crosby and McDavid and their 2nd assists only account for 20-25% of their total assists. I think this demonstrates that Kucherov is riding a strong offensive team pretty hard. It's not difficult to post high pt totals when you can just pass the puck to Stamkos and watch him setup Point for a goal while you skate to the bench.

If Kuch meets your definition of a generational player, I still don't think Laine is well-rounded enough or even cares enough to get reach Kucherov level, and Kuch is miles off Ovi, so there is no chance Laine gets to Ovi level.



No they're not mirror images of each other. Why not go and actually watch Ovi as a rookie (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRvY4MVW_lo&t=182s ) vs. Laine (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsiytivPIlQ). Ovi plays like a powerforward. He's a poucher and hounds the puck around the net. He's got a wicked slapshot, but most of his goals come from hard work around the net and being in the right place after a rebound. He's not being fed perfect passes from elite playmakers - Nicklas Backstrom hadn't even been drafted in Ovi's first season and WSH sucked! How do you think they drafted Ovi in 2004? by winning the Stanley Cup (sarcasm)? No, they came 2nd from last in the league in 2003-04. Do you even know who Ovi had as his top 6 Cs in his rookie season? I'll tell you, those amazing, world class passers Dainius Zubrus and Jeff Halpern. To be fair, both posted career highs in pts of 57 for Zubrus and 44 for Halpern (clearly elite point totals). Meanwhile, Ovi had a measly 106 pts and 52 goals... clearly that's because he was getting so much help from his Cs (more sarcasm).

By comparison, Laine is a pure sniper. He doesn't play hard around the net, he doesn't poach the puck, he doesn't have good positioning, he's not active at all. This is probably why in Ovi's rookie season he had near double the point total of the next higher scoring player (106 pts to 57 pts of Zubrus) and Laine finished 3rd on WPG and by quite some margin (64 pts to the 82 pts of Scheifele). Oh, but Laine didn't score over a 100 like Ovi because Scheifele, who scored more points and only 4 less goals, wasn't good enough, or the right type of player, or hand-holding the future legend that is Laine enough (even more sarcasm!).

Laine is a good player with an elite shot, but he doesn't have the game, drive or ability to play at Ovi's level. They are completely different players and, in 3 whole seasons, Laine hasn't shown any signs of sniffing Ovi's level and play.

Anyway, you're excuses are wearing real thin. You have no data to support your arguments, just thoughts and feelings. It's pathetic.



Nope... see above. I am comparing rookie vs rookie, 21 year old for 21 year old. Go and watch the highlight videos. They are completely different players.

Stammer was the best (and was a generational talent) until his slew of injuries which seriously hurt his game. That’s why I didn’t add him. Unless Matthews sees a similar regression, he holds that title. 40 goals, 45 goal pace x2. That his consistent goal scoring at a high level (without playmaking nylander last year)

I said goal scoring not scoring so that’s just you twisting my words again.

That’s backtracking not what I did. I didn’t say the sedins were generational and that wasn’t my point lol. The sedins were elite but not generational.

Kucherov is genrational because his skill, speed, and shot are only matched by Kane and mcdavid (not shot for either) who are both genrational as well

Those are just his highlights lol. Highlights always look great. Look at actual games. They play almost the same way (score a differently as ov shoots closer to the net and laine farther). They were also both liabilities in their own end. As far as c’s go, he didn’t have good c’s in his first season but after that ov has great c’s. Ov also came into the league a year older than Laine dod (nhl lockout 04-05) not to mention he was an absolute beast when he did. Zubras was a very underrated playmaker and possession driver. Let’s not forget that laine’s Linemates were Stafford and little. Little still doesn’t work and worked even less in his rookie season and stafford isn’t in the league anymore. Little a 40-50 pt guy, zubrus a 50+ pt guy. Don’t see much difference in heir rookie season in terms of goal scoring and Laine was younger. Yes ov was a much better driver but he also has the biggest role on the team. He was the go to guy. Laine was not with the jets. 19yr old ov 52 goals. 19 yr old laine 44. Similar linemates similar output. Both had a down season the next year (laine especially as he played on the 3rd line, like come on Maurice) 46vs30. Not good comparison here but Laine was struggling everywhere.

To be clear, My point isn't to say Laine is as good as ov was or is. He isn’t. Ov was an absolute beast in the offensive zone. Laine was simply very good. Ov was much more refined coming into the league whereas some debated if Laine would even be in the league because of his lacklustre defence. However, Laine has all he tools to become ov’s heir and he is in fact a generational talent. I only bring this up to show the raw goal scoring ability Laine has that he is in fact a generational talent.

The fact is that my opinion isn’t uniformed and incorrect it’s yours. I’ve watched entire games of ov in his first few season and clearly you haven’t. He was just as bad as laine in his own end. One aspect where they do differ is how they score goals. Ov scores much closer to net which when laine does, he scores at a very high rate (higher than 65 per). And hat is part of the refinement ov had before coming into the league.

I am not saying that laine will become as good as ov, but he has a chance if he works hard. He is starting to show he can drive play and become that p

Mb posted again

Sorry to interject here. you cant say matthews is a generational scorer and then use his projections and not his actual stats. he got hurt. he didnt score 45.

Onto Ovechkin vs Laine. SERIOUSLY. If you think ovechkin and laine are AT ALL similar you need to go look at some game film. Their ONLY similarity is the one time slapper with accuracy. Ovechkin was absolutely dominant when he came into the league. Zubrus sucked. ovechkin carried the hell out of that line. Laine doesnt necessarily carry play. He is lazy and takes shifts/games off. Ovechkin NEVER did that. Adding backstrom only helped the team. Ovechkin would have put up numbers regardless of who his center was. Little had 47 points in 59 games. thats almost a point per game clip, ide hardly say thats bad.

Just because a player got hurt doesn’t mean he’s not genrational. He still scored at that rate and was considered a generational talent before his draft. Mcdavid got hurt and produced 48 in 45, you say he wasn’t generational in his rookie season? Of course not. That fact is that Matthews scores goals at a rate we haven’t seen from a c since Crosby/stammer before he got hurt

I’m not saying that hey are the same but they are in fact similar. Ov was a complete liability in his own end. Ov was dominant yes but so was laine. He was great in the offensive zone. The days of rookies scoring that much are over. Zubras did very well. Yes his point total was carried by ov but he was already going to be a 40 ish point guy without him. Laine carried little’s and stafford’s offensive numbers a lot. I’m not saying laine will become that good, but saying Laine isn’t generational is incorrect. That’s he whole argument. Ov is a legend he isn’t just generational. However, Laine can get to that high level in goal scoring with the right amount of work. That’s he whole argument. As you can see I didn’t argue about ov’s 106 point cause that’s not even close. That what makes Ov so good. He isn’t just goal scoring, he is a driver. Laine can be that to some extent and can match the goal scoring

In conclusion the argument is: Laine is a generational talent. With the right amount of work he could become ov’s heir. He is not there yet though. All those comparisons were to show that laine has what it takes to potentialy be his heir and is in fact a generational talent. I’m sorry if I could get that through

Thanks for the input though as it helped me clear up any misunderstandings in my argument.

Says this^



Followed by this (in response to hanson493)^

You can't even keep your bull**** straight. I can't use projections to say that Stammer is a better goalscorer than Matthews, but you can use projections to explain why Matthews is better.

Stammer just came off a 98 pt season, but you're right he's "regressed". In any event, why does it matter that Stamkos career has been affected by injuries. We're talking about pure talent and Stamkos is a better goal scorer than Matthews and, thus, he's the "best goal scoring C since Crosby".



Huh? I am talking about goal scoring. No body is twisting your words, you're getting wrecked in a debate in which I have data, stats and video to support my argument and you have feelings and assertions.



You literally just said that you mentioned the Sedins to point out that "generational talents aren’t necessarily 1st oa talents". You tried to use the Sedins as an example of generational players who weren't drafted 1OA. Then you realised that you can't back that argument and switch to Kuch. If I am wrong, please explain why you mentioned the Sedins and be specific?



Disagree. I've stated my case as to why Kucherov isn't generational. It's one opinion vs. another except mine has data to back it up and yours is based on your perception of "skill, speed and shot". Clearly your perception trumps my real numbers.



It's their goals from their rookie seasons. We're talking about goal scoring.



Nope. If they don't score the same way, how do they play the same way? You're making more weak excuses. At least send me some video to prove your point. Let me guess, you don't have time or it's my fault if I can't see it. You're such a joke.



Except one was a liability and posted 106 pts while the other was a liability and posted 64 pts. That's the difference between a generational talent and just a good player. Oh...I forgot, Laine didn't have the right C. Oh... but Ovi also had a bad C during his rookie year when he posted 106 pts... however, because he had better ones to look forward to that is what got him his 106 pts... but, wait! he also had Dainius Zubrus in 2006-07 and still posted 92 pts and 46 goals. Oh, but then in 2007-08 he had Backstrom, who is an elite playmaking C. Oh... except he was a rookie and only posted 69 pts to Ovi's 112 pts. But it's clear to see from these numbers that Backstrom was carrying Ovi.

The mental gymnastics you have to do to keep your bull**** dream alive is unreal.



Hahahaha... total backtrack!



That's fair (it's not, but whatever)... let's compare Laine + 1 yr to Ovi as a rookie ------ 40 goals - 70 pts vs. 52 goals - 106 pts. Yep Laine is still nowhere near Ovi! What a shock... not!



Ahahahahahahahahaha!



AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA! Say Laine is generational and then complains about his linemates. Generational players don't need good linemates to be good. That's what makes them generational. The fact you don't get this is quite frankly concerning.



No he's not generational. Look, we can agree to disagree on whether Laine is generational or not. Clearly you think any player that posts 40 goals and 70+ pts within their first 3 years of NHL experience = generational. I view it as a player that defines an era. Someone who will always be remembered as a great i.e. Gretzky, Lemieux, Jagr, Hull, Orr, Coffey. For me, Crosby, Ovi, McDavid and maybe Malkin fit the bill. Everyone below that tier is just a really good player. In any event, it doesn't matter. My key gripe is that you think Laine has the potential to reach Ovi's level. That isn't happening and the fact you think there is even a 0.000000000000000000000001% chance that it will just demonstrates how much of a delusional, stick your head in the sand, "lalalalalala I can't hear you" fan you are.

It boggles my mind how closed-minded other fans can be to outside opinion. I am guessing you're a lot younger than me because it really shows a lack of maturity.



I've watched every game of Ovi's and Laine's and you clearly haven't, so my opinion beats yours. We can all through out meaningless assertions. Where is the data that backs up your argument.



Backtrack! You said they "they are almost mirror images of each other except for the output". Now you admit they play a completely different game around the net. I am confused how Laine becomes as good as Ovi, but Laine scores in a completely way to Ovi and Ovi's way is much more effective. Are you expecting Laine to completely change his play style from sniper to powerforward?

Holy ****. Lol my notifactions just erupted lol.

Mathews’ scoring didn’t regress because he got injured but stamkos’ did to a point where a once generational talent isn’t generational anymore. Matthews still scores at a high rate. Considering that stamkos is still in the league saying that Matthews is the best goal scoring c since Crosby isn’t wrong. Stamkos just doesn’t play at that level anymore. Clearly you can’t help twisting someone elses words just to win an argument (which I honestly couldn't care less about which is why I’m done with this as it’s a waste of time). Who scores more goals Mathews or stamkos. Matthews there you go. Numbers on my side cause stamkos just isn’t the same player

“Stamkos with his 51 goal season in 2009-10, his 60 goals in 2011-12 and his perennial 90+ pt seasons. No, no, no... the guy who has peaked at 40 goals and 73 pts = "the best scoring C since Crosby".”

Right here bud you started talking about 90 pt season even though I said I was talking about goal scoring. I also said I was talking about current players and stamkos just don’t the same player as he was before and numbers are on my side. If stammer didn’t get hurt, yeah he is probably the best goal scoring c since we’ll before Crosby. But the fact is that he did and his game regressed as a result. Matthews’ game didn’t.

Again ur twisting my words with the sedin bros. I meant to say that the guy Atlanta picked first wasn’t generational. A 1st oa doesn’t necessarily mean generational. In fact, often times generation guys (kucherov) can be found later in rounds. Who I didn’t bother backing up with numbers cause I don’t see why I guy who is clearly one of the top 3 wings in the game (ov, Kane, kuch) isn’t generational as the guys he is with are also generational. Also saying that he is a product of tampa’s High offence is crazy. He drives that bus. He was directly involved (ie got a point) in just under 40% of their goals. Guys don’t just get 128 pts in a season cause they play with good teammates. He is also primarily a playmaker on even strength as shown by his high assist total. He is generational imo. If you don’t agree that’s fine. As I said I couldn’t care less.

Laine doesn’t score the right way is what I’m trying to say. Ov gets closer to the net which Laine doesn’t do. And when he does he erupts offensively (see November 2018 run for a video. I do not want to find it I told you what it look for now do it if ur that interested) however their play with the puck is very similar. They play a very similar style save for where they score. According to you then, laine and ov aren’t similar players because of where they score their goals from on he ice? That’s absurd

Then again you went to point totals

Look at his advanced stats. Zubras was a top possession player much like perreault on the jets (who for some reason was never played with Laine who struggled with possession **** you Maurice)

Yes generational players do need linemates if they are so raw in terms of everything other than that skill that is genrational. Laine was so raw that imo if he didn’t have that shot he wouldn’t ever be in the league (like ever).

I think we have found the root of our argument. Clearly we different from our definition of generational talents. I say a generational talent is a player who’s talent only comes once in a generation. Ie Laine’s shot. Mathews’ ability to create seems, kucherovs mix of speed, skill, shot, and hockey iq.

I honestly don’t see why laine cant reach that level in general (including pts as ov doesn’t put up 100+ anymore which is clearly a sign of a different less scoring nhl). Seeing laine consistently hit 50 goals and 90+ pts for the next 7 is years isn’t just a dream. It’s probably a reality. Laine has grown so much in the past 3 years (ie as a player and not height so you can’t twist my words again). He was one of the jets’ best players in the stl playoff series and drove the 3rd line with copp and little. He is starting to show that he can become that power forward who is a threat night in night out.

I completely understand that ov is at a very high level and most parts of his game are nowhere near Laine. However, Laine has all the tools to become that player and he is getting there fast. He already has the shot, size, and skill. Now he just needs he commitment to work and connect all those and bring it on a nightly basis.

I haven’t watched all of ov’s games as his best season aren’t from my era (yes I am young but I’m not like 12 yr old sitting on a computer young), but have watched plenty. I know that ov had commitment issues in his own end. But he was also a beast that controlled the offensive zone. I think laine can be that as I said he has all the tools. I have watched all of the jets games since they came back and seeing his November and playoffs, he clearly has an absurd amount of talent. If he can use that he could get there. Even if he doesn’t he is still generational.

Laine isn’t just a sniper. He showed that in the playoffs and in November. He also showed in those times that he is willing to get in those areas to score and that increased his scoring significantly. In his liga season, he consistently scored from in front of the net which is what he had scouts had raving about. So yes I do expect him to change his scoring method as he used to score that way but has shied away (maybe cause of the rigours of he nhl or his hopefully gone back issues). He can be both a sniper and a power forward just like ov

I never argued against matthews being or not being a generational talent. All im saying is you cant back up your argument up with projected stats. We know what happened. he missed 34 games in 2 years. would his goal totals have been around 45 both years? probably. were they? no. so while the rate is similar, you cannot say he scored 45 goals, even if projecting it out, because he didnt play those games. He might not have scored.

Ovi was not a liabilty in his own end to the extent laine is. was ovi the two way player he is now, no. but laine is goal scorer only. he isnt a good passer. he can shoot the puck and thats it. Little is way way better a centerman than zubrus was. Could laine become ovi? absolutely. Will he? honestly i think no. I think especially after this past year he wants to be a goal scorer and only a goal scorer. I dont think he wants to play the physical 2 way hockey game. i think he wants to play offense only and thats fine. but that projects to mike hoffman/ thomas vanek as goal scoring specialty guys not so much ovechkin. Laine has a better scoring ability than hoffman/vanek but he is closer after this past year to them than he is to ovechkin.

Imo this past year was a fluke. Nothing went well for the kid. But he shows in the playoffs he is willing to play that power forward game and he drove and entire line. He was one of our best guys in the playoffs. Laine is also a very good passer. He can make passes that most players only dream about. However, because he has such a good shot everyone, including him, would rather have him shoot the puck. Oh no little is great and I think he is still a 2c in the league. However, little doesn’t work with laine but zubras worked with ov. Zubras did what ov needed of him (ie win draws, play good defence, zone entries/exits). Little doesn’t mesh well with laine.

If Laine didn’t show in the playoffs like he did, I do not honk I would say he could be the next ov. However, he played a powerforwards game. He was great.

Saying Mathews was genrational was the argument. He is the best goal scoring c since Crosby. That was the argument. (I didn’t include stamkos because his injuries made his play seriously digress.

Overall I think Laine can be ov’s heir and he has show he can. Will he? That’s as much up in the air as a plane. However, Laine has the determination to be the best and I think he will but thats my opinion.

I think I am done. You're being totally disingenuous now. Rather than argue the facts you just complain about me listing points when you were talking about goals, even though I listed both goals and points and both prove you are wrong. The fact of the matter is that you don't know what you're talking about and have no argument. Stamkos literally just posted a 45 goal season vs. Matthews 37, but yeah Stamkos has "regressed" and "Matthews is the best scoring C since Crosby". SMH! Stamkos even has a higher g/gp (0.53 vs 0.52) - it's not a big difference, but it's still a difference Stamkos has 8 more seasons under his belt.

Lol at Zubrus being a great playmaking C. More excuses. Please free to PM me and rub it in my face when Laine becomes Ovi after he gets that sweet C he needs. I going to assume I won't hear from you ever again.

Anyway, I can't be bothered to converse with someone who is so clueless on hockey. Your unwillingness to admit you're wrong and your stubbornness really shows your age - In fact, I guarantee you'll respond to this post just because you want to have the last word... real mature.

I like that idea. We will see in a few years as Laine will be a perennial 50 goal scorer in a few years when the rest of his game rounds out. You won’t probably hear from me as I don’t have near the commitment to find this comment and make it again but I’ll have this conversation in the back of my head and will make a post. However, I think laine will be ov’s heir in a few years (in goal scoring) and will prove that he is in fact generational.

The fact that y didn’t bother to look at any of the facts I gave you showed your immaturity. For hexample look at zubras’s career possession play. He was very good. Not saying that was all the reason for ov to be good but having a c that you can work with helps. All i was trying to prove with that point there was that zubras was a better c for ov than little is for laine.

This isn’t about having the last word but it’s about accepting this challenge. Also u have already tried to have the last word with ur last reply since I clearly ended this conversation. Not my maturity u should be doubting it’s urs.

I think you ought to look up the word "generational". Laine isn't even the best goal-scorer of his draft.

There are guys from the 2015 and 2014 drafts who are as good or better, too.

I said his shot is genrational.

If it was, he'd have more goals than anyone in his generation. He doesn't.

He did before his down season. His shot is arguably the best we’ve ever seen however the rest of his game isn’t up to par to take real advantage of it. Give him a few years

Everyone has "down" seasons, injuries, etc. You can't cherry pick a player's best seasons to make a bold claim when the balance of his play doesn't support said claim. The results over the past 3 years suggest that all of McDavid, Matthews, Pastrnak and Draisaitl are as good or better than Laine at scoring goals. And if you insist on cherry picking, I should remind you that Draisaitl is the only non-Ovi player in the league to pot 50 in quite some time. (Yet I don't think he's the best goal scorer of this group, just illustrating how Cherry picked stats can deceive.)

All I’m saying is that his shot is generational. Give him a few years and he will dominate imo

Ps: Draisaitl has mcdavid, Laine has well little (who he has no chemistry with)

That's because Laine isn't good enough to play on the 1st line in Winnipeg.

He would if we didn’t have a top 10 winger on our 1st line. He isn’t beating wheeler any time soon. Not because wheeler scores more (since that’s not the case) but he plays great defence.

I’m not saying that he needs to play with scheifele just get him away from little. They have litterally no chemistry.

Doesn't Laine play LW?

Also, 1582 minutes together and zero chemistry is NOT an excuse, it's a really bad sign.

Laine mainly plays rw. The only time he has played lw is with scheifele and wheeler to get his game going. He isn’t ready to play on his off wing yet. He isn’t good enough defensively yet. (Cf has him listed as LW because they updated positions when he was with 55 and 26)

It’s not a good sign for Maurice. It’s not that they don’t produce, they do just not well. Take them away from each other and they both do well. Their play styles and even the way they think the game is different. Not to say Laine thinks wrong they just don’t play well together. It just doesn’t work and the faster Pomo realizes that the better it is for the jets