Prospect Info: Elias Pettersson | Pt. IV

[vcanuck]

Relying on 3 rookies to make the Top 9 is not a bet I would take.

not saying they all make it next season, im talking bout the future. notice no Gagner there

 

[Addison Rae]

Pettersson is tracking incredibly well, one of the best draft + 1 seasons I've seen from a Canuck, but saying people don't know anything about prospects due to preferring Vilardi to him pre-draft is stupid.

Vilardi is yet to play a game since beimg drafted, using him as an example
of people being wrong is laughable. But yeah Pettersson obviously looks amazing right now, excellent pick.

Also those calling Vilardi a "meat and potatoes" type pick have never watched him play a single time.

 

[thefeebster]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/2017-nhl-draft.2360963/page-30


Some of the reactions in that thread is gold. I especially love the posters who flaunt their chest on every little ‘prediction’ they’ve made, but have been dead quiet on Elias this whole year

I would say even up to May when i awoke from my HF hibernation, there were only 3 ppl that i remember who were even actively considering him for a top 5 selection. I know Love, Evolu7ion, Askel and myself were pretty much the only ones. There was some resistance based on his body and his WJC physical play.

Even though i liked him then, i'd have to say its still surprising to see this season so far. Beyond any reasonable expectations.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Pettersson is tracking incredibly well, one of the best draft + 1 seasons I've seen from a Canuck, but saying people don't know anything about prospects due to preferring Vilardi to him pre-draft is stupid.

At the time, there was nothing to refute Vilardi's placement within the top5. Obviously, recent performance is going to colour things, but as you said, Vilardi hasn't played.

I had Vilardi, Makar and Pettersson in my top5. About a month before the draft, Pettersson had edged out the others for me. That takes nothing away from Vilardi or Makar though... In fact, Makar may shift perception the other way with a strong WJ performance.

 

[Yggdrasil]

I'll give Benning some credit for ultimately makong the correct choice at the draft. However, if the Canucks didn't drop their draft position, I doubt they would have chosen him which is a scary thought.

oh yea, he looks to be the best pick of that draft class.

 

[Verviticus]

Pettersson is tracking incredibly well, one of the best draft + 1 seasons I've seen from a Canuck, but saying people don't know anything about prospects due to preferring Vilardi to him pre-draft is stupid.

Vilardi is yet to play a game since beimg drafted, using him as an example
of people being wrong is laughable. But yeah Pettersson obviously looks amazing right now, excellent pick.

Also those calling Vilardi a "meat and potatoes" type pick have never watched him play a single time.

i assumed they were talking about all the people screaming noooooooooooooooooooo jim you f***ed it up again and such

 

[Verviticus]

At the time, there was nothing to refute Vilardi's placement within the top5. Obviously, recent performance is going to colour things, but as you said, Vilardi hasn't played.

I had Vilardi, Makar and Pettersson in my top5. About a month before the draft, Pettersson had edged out the others for me. That takes nothing away from Vilardi or Makar though... In fact, Makar may shift perception the other way with a strong WJ performance.

its funny, i think i was leaning heiskanen >= pettersson > glass. i always have trouble recalling exactly, but i didnt really want makar or middelstadt. NO M PLAYERS, thats calgarys gimmick. give me the bs and the ps

 

[Josepho]

I haven't seen that draft thread before, wow. Some rather... interesting reactions. Surprised people made a big deal about "reaching" when most considered the draft pretty open after Nico and Nolan.

And yeah, preferring Vilardi or Glass at the time was absolutely acceptable -- being outraged was pretty absurd. I think I had Nico/Nolan/Heiskanen/Pettersson/Glass/Vilardi at the time.

 

[Bleach Clean]

its funny, i think i was leaning heiskanen >= pettersson > glass. i always have trouble recalling exactly, but i didnt really want makar or middelstadt. NO M PLAYERS, thats calgarys gimmick. give me the bs and the ps

Makar's offensive upside is still intriguing. Makar has that very unique skill set that team's crave: Right shot PPQB that could provide top4 defense at ES.

I didn't want Mittlestadt either.

Really though, anything beyond one's final pick doesn't matter. Vilardi/Heiskanen/Makar/Mittlestadt/Other... it doesn't matter. EP or bust. Same with Tkachuk even if Keller supplants him. After all, that's what teams have to put up with, why not fans/posters?

 

[Verviticus]

we're not keeping score; ostensibly the point of the conversation regarding how close people were is to build a sort of consensus on the opinions of other people to figure out whose opinion to trust. in that regard id rather have as granular as an analysis as possible from those people so i can weight them

while it wouldnt surprise me if owners and gms use hit/miss criteria to judge gms and scouts respectively, thats only because its insanely stupid and we know the average nhl owner and gm is a complete f***ing moron

 

[F A N]

Really though, anything beyond one's final pick doesn't matter.

That's an overly simplistic view. Most of us "make picks" based on our own personal preference and or viewings and are on the fence between a couple or several players. But in a GM's role we would have access to what the scouting staff thinks and the decision we make may not be based on personal opinion and viewings.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Elias Pettersson is taking his place among some all-time Swedish greats

 

[elitepete]

I would say even up to May when i awoke from my HF hibernation, there were only 3 ppl that i remember who were even actively considering him for a top 5 selection. I know Love, Evolu7ion, Askel and myself were pretty much the only ones. There was some resistance based on his body and his WJC physical play.

Even though i liked him then, i'd have to say its still surprising to see this season so far. Beyond any reasonable expectations.

IIRC I had him at 5 but Vilardi at 4.

 

[stampedingviking]

i feel like glass and vilardi had the lion share of the votes, pettersson might've been like 8th when we started doing polls and ended around 5th?

Just glad I went for Elias.

 

[Bleach Clean]

That's an overly simplistic view. Most of us "make picks" based on our own personal preference and or viewings and are on the fence between a couple or several players. But in a GM's role we would have access to what the scouting staff thinks and the decision we make may not be based on personal opinion and viewings.

I don't really know what you're trying to say here, but I'll take a shot at it: A GM still makes a decision to defer or accept a scouts opinion. It's on him in the end. This is especially true when the GM sees himself as a scout, first and foremost.

As fans, we can be on the fence on several players, true. In the end though, one pick is made. That's the pick that is on record, should anyone try to reference it, for any reason. (Can't really hide from it/disavow ourselves of it)

 

[F A N]

I don't really know what you're trying to say here, but I'll take a shot at it: A GM still makes a decision to defer or accept a scouts opinion. It's on him in the end. This is especially true when the GM sees himself as a scout, first and foremost.[/QUOT E]

But those who are critical of management inevitably lump things together. For example, if Benning's personal opinion is that player A will end up being the better player but his scouting staff think player B will end up being the better player, the right "management decision" may not reflect Benning's scouting abilities.

As fans, we can be on the fence on several players, true. In the end though, one pick is made. That's the pick that is on record, should anyone try to reference it, for any reason. (Can't really hide from it/disavow ourselves of it)

Again you are discounting the fact that we lack information. Many of us don't purport to be this great scout that some posters purport to be. I would venture to say that most of us prefer to be a great GM than a great scout. So just because we end up having some prospect ahead doesn't mean that we wouldn't have changed our rankings had we had more information. In the end, we, as in the majority of posters here I would think, would have taken into the scouting staff's opinions into account when we make "our pick." I personally would have picked Glass ahead of Pettersson without knowing what the Canucks' scouting staff thought. But it wasn't some strong opinion and all along I said I would have been okay with a different selection if the scouting staff sees it differently. Therefore, just because I personally would have picked Glass doesn't mean I would make the same pick if I knew the Canucks' scouting staff preferred Pettersson. A good manager is suppose to listen to his staff. If you're the GM and you prefer Glass over Pettersson slightly and your staff tells you Pettersson is going to end up being the BPA, a good GM would likely be convinced.

 

[vancityluongo]

I personally would have picked Glass ahead of Pettersson without knowing what the Canucks' scouting staff thought. But it wasn't some strong opinion and all along I said I would have been okay with a different selection if the scouting staff sees it differently. Therefore, just because I personally would have picked Glass doesn't mean I would make the same pick if I knew the Canucks' scouting staff preferred Pettersson. A good manager is suppose to listen to his staff. If you're the GM and you prefer Glass over Pettersson slightly and your staff tells you Pettersson is going to end up being the BPA, a good GM would likely be convinced.

This is the whole point that people seem to miss.

we're not keeping score; ostensibly the point of the conversation regarding how close people were is to build a sort of consensus on the opinions of other people to figure out whose opinion to trust. in that regard id rather have as granular as an analysis as possible from those people so i can weight them

Exactly.

A GM's job is not to watch every single draft eligible player play a meaningful sample of games and then decipher who is the best of the bunch using arbitrary or tangible criteria. The job is to manage resources (scouts, statistical analysis, video, references) and basically weight the massive amounts of information associated with each of these players to make decisions with high probabilities of success. Any analysis that the GM does should involve assessment the reliability and quality of those resources.

Good managers pick up on this quickly. It can also just be done over a huge period of time. I've posted on this board for long enough to know which posters have a reliable track record of knowing their shit with regards to prospects (verified easily by looking back). Depending on how convinced they are on a certain player, it's not difficult to amalgamate a pretty decent list that isn't the same as the Button/McKenzie type lists. Problem is, taking years and years to identify capable people was probably Gillis' biggest managerial downfall.

while it wouldnt surprise me if owners and gms use hit/miss criteria to judge gms and scouts respectively, thats only because its insanely stupid and we know the average nhl owner and gm is a complete ****ing moron

Hmm. Not that you are really saying it doesn't, but the result (hit vs miss) has to matter somewhat.

Posters on this board have a fraction of the resources that teams have, so the natural understanding is that no one here should be able to "outperform" the average GM. But when we control for factors that we mutually have access to (stats, highlights, public interviews), there are often infuriating decisions (Nylander) where posters end up getting it right based on what we know and the team f***s up. The excuse for that is often something about how maybe his character was garbage and we never got insight into Gradin or whoever telling Benning that Nylander's compete level was low or something. But the result should have a lot of merit here, because even without controlling for all of the information we didn't have that the GM did, we made the better decision. Those other factors were either assessed incorrectly or never mattered to begin with. Going forward, it would be hard to take a serious character assessment from that same scout.

 

[Grub]

This is the whole point that people seem to miss.



Exactly.

A GM's job is not to watch every single draft eligible player play a meaningful sample of games and then decipher who is the best of the bunch using arbitrary or tangible criteria. The job is to manage resources (scouts, statistical analysis, video, references) and basically weight the massive amounts of information associated with each of these players to make decisions with high probabilities of success. Any analysis that the GM does should involve assessment the reliability and quality of those resources.

Good managers pick up on this quickly. It can also just be done over a huge period of time. I've posted on this board for long enough to know which posters have a reliable track record of knowing their **** with regards to prospects (verified easily by looking back). Depending on how convinced they are on a certain player, it's not difficult to amalgamate a pretty decent list that isn't the same as the Button/McKenzie type lists. Problem is, taking years and years to identify capable people was probably Gillis' biggest managerial downfall.



Hmm. Not that you are really saying it doesn't, but the result (hit vs miss) has to matter somewhat.

Posters on this board have a fraction of the resources that teams have, so the natural understanding is that no one here should be able to "outperform" the average GM. But when we control for factors that we mutually have access to (stats, highlights, public interviews), there are often infuriating decisions (Nylander) where posters end up getting it right based on what we know and the team ****s up. The excuse for that is often something about how maybe his character was garbage and we never got insight into Gradin or whoever telling Benning that Nylander's compete level was low or something. But the result should have a lot of merit here, because even without controlling for all of the information we didn't have that the GM did, we made the better decision. Those other factors were either assessed incorrectly or never mattered to begin with. Going forward, it would be hard to take a serious character assessment from that same scout.

Agreed on your Nylander assessment.

If we look at the 2014 draft objectively. 5 players out of 7 we drafted that year are NHL players. Virtanen, Mccann, Traymkin, Forsling and Demko. Although sadly three of them are no longer with the team, Benning was able to get 5 NHL players in that draft alone. Let me ask this: When was the last time we got 5 NHL players in one single draft? Would we have picked Bennett and Dal Colle if they had fallen to 6th? (They are looking like busts right now and were ranked higher than Nylander throughout the year).

5 out of 7 players are NHL players, let that sink in boys. Then Benning goes to 2015 by drafting Brock Boeser (Star Potential and already in the NHL at #23) and Adam Gaudette. He was able to get talent at later rounds.

Go to 2016 and he drafted Olli Juolevi and Lockwood who I believe will become NHL players as well. You can make the Thachuk comparison, but Juolevi has been trending upwards since going to the finnish league. If you look at our crappy defensemen core, Juolevi will be integral to our long term success. It's mind boggling that people are already calling Juolevi a bust at 19 years old because Thachuk is already playing in the NHL. Juolevi is also 6 months younger than Thachuk.

Finally on to 2017. We all did it, at least most of us did. When he picked Pettersson we all screamed "SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN VILARDI", "***", "Should have drafted Glass"!!! Well we ate a lot of crow as Petterson is currently leading the SEL in points and breaking records. Petterson is looking like the best player coming out of the 2017 draft. You also have Kole Lind and Gadjovich (team Canada) which are solid picks.

Where am I going with this? I am saying that Benning knows how to draft. People saying that they are worried about the rebuild... we are in good hands in terms of draft picks. Lets face it, we have not had the luxury to draft first overall like the Leafs when they got Matthews.

 

[Melvin]

Agreed on your Nylander assessment.

If we look at the 2014 draft objectively. 5 players out of 7 we drafted that year are NHL players. Virtanen, Mccann, Traymkin, Forsling and Demko. Although sadly three of them are no longer with the team, Benning was able to get 5 NHL players in that draft alone. Let me ask this: When was the last time we got 5 NHL players in one single draft? Would we have picked Bennett and Dal Colle if they had fallen to 6th? (They are looking like busts right now and were ranked higher than Nylander throughout the year).

5 out of 7 players are NHL players, let that sink in boys. Then Benning goes to 2015 by drafting Brock Boeser (Star Potential and already in the NHL at #23) and Adam Gaudette. He was able to get talent at later rounds.

Benning had been with the team for five minutes and it's ridiculous to assert he had that much influence over that draft. As vcl said, it takes time to figure out what scouts to trust with what opinions and so forth.

Our last great draft was probably the one that was Nonis first. Oddly, we seem to draft best when the gm is brand new and probably doesn't do much.

Finally on to 2017. We all did it, at least most of us did. When he picked Pettersson we all screamed "SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN VILARDI", "***", "Should have drafted Glass"!!! Well we ate a lot of crow as Petterson is currently leading the SEL in points and breaking records.

This is just dead wrong and an outright fabrication. Go read the thread. Most people didn't have Pettersson as their top choice because they don't follow tier 2 Swedish hockey and hadn't watched him as much as they'd watched Vilardi or glass, but most people were happy with the pick.

Where am I going with this? I am saying that Benning knows how to draft. People saying that they are worried about the rebuild... we are in good hands in terms of draft picks. Lets face it, we have not had the luxury to draft first overall like the Leafs when they got Matthews.

Boeser is the only important player on the nhl team who was drafted by Benning. It doesn't mean all that much.

 

[looseneditforyou]

Thank god the scouts won the battle of wills and got Pettersson. God knows who him was trying to trade up and grab, my guess is Makar.

There's no evidence whatsoever a battle of the wills took place between the scouts and Benning. All evidence suggests Benning targeted Petterson from day one:

"Benning was so impressed by Pettersson, whom he couldn’t help notice while watching Dahlen’s development, the GM brought the 18-year-old to Vancouver a month ago after the NHL scouting combine in Buffalo."

I'm not particularly a supporter of Benning. Most people here aren't. We don't react to the anti-Benning sentiment because we necessarily disagree but because it's so intellectually dishonest. You guys are like religious zealots. You have an idea in mind that you need to believe in, and therefore you characterize every event in a way that supports it. Any bad result is attributed Benning's incompetence. Any good result is evidence that someone overruled him, or luck. When this bothers people, you do this doublethink thing where it must be because they're closet Benning fans, and not because your circular reasoning makes you frustrating to talk to.

 

[M2Beezy]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/2017-nhl-draft.2360963/page-30


Some of the reactions in that thread is gold. I especially love the posters who flaunt their chest on every little ‘prediction’ they’ve made, but have been dead quiet on Elias this whole year

Glad I was wrong. Hella wrong

Pettersson arguably goes 2 or 3 in a redraft

 

[Zombotron]

He is here now.

 

[thepuckmonster]

I expect a 5 P/PG average or he’s the bustiest bust of bust times

 

[Blue and Green]

19YO Pettersson is like 19YO Henrik but with Daniel's shooting ability.

 

[me2]

We'll never know for sure but dropping into the five hole was probably a blessing in disguise.

It could end up being a blessing. Based on what we know Benning wanted one of the top 4 not that any of the are going badly.

* Hischier is doing well at NHL level
* Patrick is having a slow start but still in the NHL
* Heiskanen is doing very well in the Finnish league
* Makar (jury is out), U20s though he could blow everyone away.

My guess is Makar was the Canucks main target. Makar fit the biggest need and had the highest rated offensive of any Dman in the draft. For a team whose defensive was a giant black hole where production went to die it made the most sense.