Dude, you're looking stupider and stupider.

at least in this one the majority of the value isn’t in hronek, a player the islanders have no need for whatsoever, so that’s a plus i suppose

LMFAO. You said the islanders are trading barzal for nothing

huh?

I'm saying you suggesting Barzal>>>Larkin is ludicrous, that's it.

I mean I’d gladly take Barzal before Larkin. Swap teams and Barzal becomes a 80-90 point guy pretty easily. An islanders trade for Larkin would be Raty, 2022 First (pick 10-15 or so) and Pageau

Wings aren’t moving him.

Of course you would, you're an Islanders fan. But that doesn't mean you're right.

Larkin is at least as good a player as Barzal, on every single level. Neither are top tier 1Cs but very good 2Cs. Barzal is much more of a perimeter player than Larkin.

The swap teams argument is hilarious and false, we can move on from that. Larkin plays a 200 ft game just as much as Barzal does.

That is not what a trade for Larkin would look like. It would look almost exactly like what a trade for Barzal would look like.

This is the first season Larkin has been better than Barzal. From 2018-21 season Barzal was much better . I'm not sure why you think its realistic that the isles would trade Barzal.
">

From 2018-21 Barzal was a top 15 center in the NHL. The analytics and rate stats back that up .

It isnt about playing a 200 ft game lmao. Barzal is forced to dump and chase. he is forced to pokecheck to keep in the zone instead of taking control. the islanders play trap. detroit doesnt. thats the difference.

and a Larkin trade would take the same thing. A prospect, roster player and first. Im taking the downgrade from Vrana to JG as equal to the first going from 20s to around 10-15

how do you get screenshots in here? ive been trying forever lol. thats exactly what I was gonna send

What year is it? I forget...

Between '18 and '21 Barzal barely reached 60 points haha (on a much better team, I might add). I'm not really sure how you can claim he's a top 15 center in the NHL....borderline laughable.

Again, both great players, negligible difference between them. You just don't watch the Wings.

Larkin >>>> Barzel

Imgbb.com, screenshot what you want, upload it to the site. Copy the link and put it in the photo link on here

thank you

So you're saying a 3 year sample doesn't matter, by every offensive advanced metric Barzal was top 15. He was on pace for 67 points last season, and ranked top 10 among centers in 5v5 points per 60. If you want to be ignorant and ignore the numbers, that's on you.

It's easier to put up points on the redwings than the isles, so "playing on a much better team" doesn't hold much weight.

"It's easier to put up points on the Red Wings than the isles".....this is a new favorite of mine.

He was on pace, and then what happened?

I'm not ignoring any numbers, it's just fun to hear you try to rationalize your bias.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Why don't you ask him out to dinner

I mean, I'm just chiming in because watching two fan bases bash each others top (ish) players has been entertaining, but re: the above question-I'd assume that he's referencing the fact that there was (is?) a pandemic that limited teams to 56 regular season games last year...Barzal had 45 pts/55 games=0.818 ppg x 82 games=67 point pace.

Also, vote Bunting for Calder.

(I'll see myself out )

I'm just alluding to the ridiculousness of the "on pace" argument. I got paid today, so that means I'm on pace to get paid every day for the rest of the year....

Still....67 points ain't all that haha

Car pfp

On pace? If a player has 95 points in 65 games vs 100 in 82, who did better?

But doesn't that tie in with his argument of the 3 year sample size vs. the 1 year sample size? Like, sure, you got paid today, but did you get paid yesterday? A week ago? 2 weeks ago? The larger the sample size, the more accurate the data typically is...If this is the first time you've been paid in 2 weeks, and the time before that was 2 weeks before, I can more accurately assume that you won't be paid for another two weeks. 1 month sample > 1 day sample.

I've got no horse in this race, and think both are excellent players, I'm just a bigger fan of larger sample sizes, because they typically dictate where a player will likely be a year from now. For instance, Barzal's pace over the past 4 seasons has pretty much put him in the 67ish pts/82 games every year, consistently. I feel like that gives us a pretty good idea of where he's at as a player. Hilariously, over that same 4 year sample, Larkin has scored at a 68ish/82 game pace.

It is, Trotz rolls 4 lines - doesnt really give anyone top line minutes. Doesn’t put his top forwards out in empty net situations. There are many cases of players putting up great numbers on bad teams because they get more opportunity

Idk man maybe you’ve heard of a covid shortened season.

It’s not bias if I can prove it’s a fact. If anything you’re the one using confirmation bias, all the analytics/rate stats put him in the 10-15 range among centers. You can try to prove me wrong, but there’s not an advanced metric out there that says he isn’t a star 1C

With the caveat that Larkins team was garbage for most of that time (gutted in 2019-2020) and he had a down year last year when he played while half crippled for the season and without any talent to assist him (dark dark days in Detroit).

Regardless completely ignoring that caveat and taking it at face value, pretty rough take to claim Barzal >>>> Larkin with that 4 year sample size. Especially as goals > assists.

Yeah, I mean, again, no horse in the race here, but for discussion sake, I'd probably argue that the Isles haven't exactly been an offensive juggernaut either. I'd assume that the original Barzal >>>> Larkin was just an over reaction, where they're pretty close to even at the end of the day.