I would agree with this. Even at the Moose level he is gradually tumbling down the depth chart. He now looks to have fallen behind Roslovic, Lemieux and Appleton.
Recalled/Assigned: Nic Petan assigned to the Moose.
- Thread starter CorgisPer60
- Start date
- Status
pictman
Registered User
My thoughts exactly. I think Lowry is another good example.The return of those 2 players changed the entire look of the bottom 6.
GJF
Beaver Jedi
He needs to be moved. The way he is falling in the depth charts, I'd be shocked if he comes back out of this and ends up a regular for the Jets. Move him until he has at least some value as a prospect - it's the best thing for him and the Jets.
For all the talk about Schief being the "anti corsi" because he scores goals in spite of having low corsi Petan may be the true "anti corsi". Last year with a CF% of 57.03 in 54 games he scored 1 goal. I suspect he has great corsi on the Moose this year as well. He could be the poster child for the flaw in the basic premise that when you throw a lot of shots towards the net it predicts that you will score goals regardless of your abilities. In Petan's case that isn't happenning and likely wont happen until he improves his shooting.
For me it is accepting the fact that he will probably go down in the history books as one of those guys that lit it up in junior but could not crack the show. In my opinion he has had his chances so far but but hasn't done anything to warrant keeping him with the big club. You'd like to see him make it but I am little bit doubtful at this point. I really want to eat my words on this one.
MrBoJangelz71
Registered User
- Jan 14, 2014
- 4,965
- 6,063
Right now for Nic to get into the lineup, he has to leap frog Dano and Matthias for 3rd line duties, Lemieux and Lipon for 4rth line duties and Roslovic for anything in the top 6. Further to that, players like Perrault, Copp and Armia would most likely be moved up the lines to cover a top 6 injury before Petan got a shot.
Add other players like Appleton, Foley, Vesalainen and Stallard that are creeping up on Petan as well. Nic needs to take a couple of solid steps in development if he is ever going to grab a top 6 job with this team, or he needs to carve out a role that he can provideconsistently, and learn to play in a bottom 6 role.
Montreal seems like a nice fit for Nic, think he would have a solid opportunity there.
Add other players like Appleton, Foley, Vesalainen and Stallard that are creeping up on Petan as well. Nic needs to take a couple of solid steps in development if he is ever going to grab a top 6 job with this team, or he needs to carve out a role that he can provideconsistently, and learn to play in a bottom 6 role.
Montreal seems like a nice fit for Nic, think he would have a solid opportunity there.
FFHockey
Registered User
I would agree here...Dale Derkatch was far more dynamic than Petan, and never cut it in the NHL.
Granted he was a bit smaller and it was a bit of a different game being played back then, but nonetheless he would have blown away Petan skillwise and probably analytically too. But his game didn’t translate to the NHL.
Nic might be too slow for the big European ice too, but he may have a better chance of using his skills there with a bit more room to dipsy doodle. I got to think he’s dropped from at one point being the first call-up to being the 4th or 5th. No way he can be in front of Roslovic, Lemieux, or Appleton at this point.
He’s a poster child for why analytics can’t be the sole reason for keeping a guy in the lineup.
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
Perreault doesn't prove anything false for Petan....
Maybe this helps...
1) Chemistry
2) Quality of Teammate
These are two distinct variables, and thus different arguments for Petan.
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
Maybe this will help if I super simplify and exaggerate things with a thought experiment... (I'm partially making up shit here to get the concepts through)
Let's say you have two bottom-six lines of equal TOI that each are missing a third player: Line A and Line B.
Line A consists of a play driver and a shooter with a combined WAR of 5.
Line B consists of two grinders with a combined WAR of 5.
Then lets say we have three players: Player X, Player Y, and Player Z.
Player X is an all-around player, and the best overall of the three.
Player Y is a playmaker, and equal to Player Z in quality.
Player Z is a grinder, and equal to Player Y in quality.
Player X is all around, and so he fits in chemistry wise equally so in each line. Let's pretend he improves each line by 10 WAR. Overall you could view him as a +10 WAR player.
Player Y lacks certain skills and fits better on Line A. He improves Line A by 5 WAR but hurts Line B by 2 WAR. Overall you could view him as a +3 WAR player. Keep him on line A though and he "looks" like a +5 WAR player. Keep him on line B though and he "looks" like a -2 WAR player.
Player Z lacks certain skills so he becomes more "just here for the ride" on Line A than Player Y was, and they improve by 2 WAR. He also adds 4 WAR if he's with the grinders. Overall you could view him as a +3 WAR player.
This is the conversation going on with Petan.
In your example MP is more like Player X. MP is better than Petan. He's also better than a lot of players than just Petan. He makes everyone better. Whether or not MP actually makes everyone better equally may not be exactly true. Maybe MP doesn't improve Hendricks and Tanev by the same extent due to chemistry... and maybe he does.
Petan *DOES* play better with better linemates, just like all players do. But the difference isn't just due to QoT. This isn't merely a belief, but one supported by the results.
What is a just belief/hypothesis is the overall tradeoffs. Some believe that if Petan were on a line with Copp, Dano, Armia, etc. and kept away from Tanev, Hendricks, and Thorburn in the bottom-six, he would have been worth keeping on the Jets line up.
Let's say you have two bottom-six lines of equal TOI that each are missing a third player: Line A and Line B.
Line A consists of a play driver and a shooter with a combined WAR of 5.
Line B consists of two grinders with a combined WAR of 5.
Then lets say we have three players: Player X, Player Y, and Player Z.
Player X is an all-around player, and the best overall of the three.
Player Y is a playmaker, and equal to Player Z in quality.
Player Z is a grinder, and equal to Player Y in quality.
Player X is all around, and so he fits in chemistry wise equally so in each line. Let's pretend he improves each line by 10 WAR. Overall you could view him as a +10 WAR player.
Player Y lacks certain skills and fits better on Line A. He improves Line A by 5 WAR but hurts Line B by 2 WAR. Overall you could view him as a +3 WAR player. Keep him on line A though and he "looks" like a +5 WAR player. Keep him on line B though and he "looks" like a -2 WAR player.
Player Z lacks certain skills so he becomes more "just here for the ride" on Line A than Player Y was, and they improve by 2 WAR. He also adds 4 WAR if he's with the grinders. Overall you could view him as a +3 WAR player.
This is the conversation going on with Petan.
In your example MP is more like Player X. MP is better than Petan. He's also better than a lot of players than just Petan. He makes everyone better. Whether or not MP actually makes everyone better equally may not be exactly true. Maybe MP doesn't improve Hendricks and Tanev by the same extent due to chemistry... and maybe he does.
Petan *DOES* play better with better linemates, just like all players do. But the difference isn't just due to QoT. This isn't merely a belief, but one supported by the results.
What is a just belief/hypothesis is the overall tradeoffs. Some believe that if Petan were on a line with Copp, Dano, Armia, etc. and kept away from Tanev, Hendricks, and Thorburn in the bottom-six, he would have been worth keeping on the Jets line up.
pucka lucka
Registered User
Wow. Petan has barely a full NHL season worth of games and you folk are comparing him to a 28 year old elite 5on5 performer with a 400+ nhl games. He’s ahead of Perrault at the same point in their career.
Nothing about the Maurices use of Petan has put him in a position to succeed. Why is that?
Nothing about the Maurices use of Petan has put him in a position to succeed. Why is that?
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
I'll separate all combinations where Petan has at least 15 minutes with those players into my five semi-arbitrary types:
"Top-Six Skill"
Wheeler, Connor, Petan: 59% Corsi, 7 games, 48 TOI
Wheeler, Scheifele, Petan: 68% Corsi, 12 games, 24 TOI
Wheeler, Ehlers, Petan: 62% Corsi, 22 games, 21 TOI
"Middle-Six Skill" (ie: half of the above and half of the below)
Wheeler, Dano, Petan: 70% Corsi, 16 games, 29 TOI
"Bottom-Six Skill"
Armia, Copp, Petan: 63% Corsi, 21 games, 54 TOI
Armia, Dano, Petan: 62% Corsi, 6 games, 10 TOI
"North/South or Grind"
Copp, Thorburn, Petan: 44% Corsi, 23 games, 81 TOI
Copp, Stafford, Petan: 49% Corsi, 20 games, 43 TOI
Thorburn, Tanev, Petan: 40% Corsi, 15 games, 57 TOI
Thorburn, Dano, Petan: 32% Corsi, 10 games, 19 TOI
"Other" (I don't know how to qualify this)
Burmistrov, Stafford Petan: 55% Corsi, 13 games, 23 TOI
Last edited:
The jets have better options right now in Lemieux and Roslovic. Many a player succeeded in worse situations.
lemieux is not a better option than petan lmao stop.
petan is a better hockey player than all of our current bottom 6 minus perreault (who shouldn't even be there right now).
Lemieux has more goals for the Moose. Lemieux is faster and someone just said the NHL is all about speed now. Lemieux is also tougher grittier and better at drawing penalties.
I wouldn't say he's ahead of Perreault at the same age at all. Petan is now in his draft +5 season and is a 0.62 PPG player on a very good AHL team and a 0.00 PPG player in the NHL, with the majority of those points being assists. Perreault was a 1.03 PPG player on a pretty average AHL team and 0.4 PPG player in the NHL in his draft +5. At this stage in their careers Perreault was the much better player. By the time he was in Washington he was far more than just a one dimensional playmaker like Petan currently is.
I'd say for any line other then a line that includes Scheif or Little, Lemieux is the much better option. He's a better skater, a better forechecker, harder on the puck, tougher, a better checker, a better two way player and a better scorer. The only thing Petan really has over Lemieux at this point is he scored more in junior and is a better playmaker. But without another aspect to his game he is unlikely to make it in the NHL. If we can only play him with our top centers that means we have to move someone else off those lines to play in a lesser role. Making them less effective. I'd rather not.
pucka lucka
Registered User
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
Yes great lets get Petan to penalty kill something he has never done in his career. Plus Hendricks has more goals than Petan. If we were going to bring up someone to replace Hendricks it would be Lemieux or Roslo. Petan is done deal with it.
Aavco Cup
"I can make you cry in this room"
- Sep 5, 2013
- 37,630
- 10,440
Aren't you talking hypothetically?
Practically speaking. The only real opening for Petan on this roster is RW (not his strong side) perhaps LW if they shift Copp back to C. He either replaces Tanev or Armia. Or do you see something else?
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
Aavco Cup
"I can make you cry in this room"
- Sep 5, 2013
- 37,630
- 10,440
Are you suggesting I'm unaware of who plays on this team? I follow this team as closely as anyone here and more closely than most
Petan is not going to have a future as a C on this team. He has to find a role as a winger IMO
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
GAME 3 - Drummondville Voltigeurs @ Victoriaville Tigres - Drummondville Voltigeurs leads series 2-0Wagers: 2Staked: $80.00Event closes- Updated:
-
