Player Point Projections '19-'20

[Gniwder]

If Hronek hits 45, Green won’t. If Hronek and Green hit 45, Dekeyser won’t even get close to 35.

There’s only so much PP time to go around. At least 1 of those is going to be way off, and more than likely 2 out of 3. We have been running 1 D per PP unit for awhile and I’ve seen no report that is going to change.

Then you also have Cholowski pacing for 35...

Everyone seems to be double counting.

If Svech, Zadina, and Raz get any significant number of games, that means DLR and Ehn will be waived or someone else is injured. On every list I see more than 12 forwards and 6 defensemen getting 82 games. Hard to take points projection seriously from people who can't do math.

That being said, most of the projections for the top 6 forwards and top D (Hronek) seem reasonable. Green will probably be on pace for 40 points but he'll either get injured or traded. I think it's Green and Hronek on the PP, I'd lean on Hronek for PP1 because Green is gone after this year anyways.

 

[izlez]

If Svech, Zadina, and Raz get any significant number of games, that means DLR and Ehn will be waived or someone else is injured. On every list I see more than 12 forwards and 6 defensemen getting 82 games. Hard to take points projection seriously from people who can't do math.

Hard to take criticisms from people who can't read.

The thread asks you to base projections on playing 82 games. You could list every single player in the organization and give them a projection based on 82 games, that doesn't you mean you expect them all to play or don't understand how hockey works. Just answering the question.

 

[Henkka]

I didn't project them all for 82 games.

My point ranges have also hidden game range involved.

Some of players are projected to 82 games, but not all.

 

[scallionjj11]

 

[Gniwder]

Hard to take criticisms from people who can't read.

The thread asks you to base projections on playing 82 games. You could list every single player in the organization and give them a projection based on 82 games, that doesn't you mean you expect them all to play or don't understand how hockey works. Just answering the question.

Maybe that's what you did, but obviously Henkka didn't based on his response.

I didn't project them all for 82 games.

My point ranges have also hidden game range involved.

Some of players are projected to 82 games, but not all.

If some of the players are projected to 82 and others are not what's the actual total then?


There's obviously an issue with consistency in method, but even if everyone's projected at 82 game pace, the total team points will depend on how many games each player actually plays. Regardless, I still stand by my statement that the numbers are way too optimistic for everyone outside the top 6 forwards and top 2 D (if Greens numbers are based on 82 game pace. Like I said, I'm sure he's either injured or traded.)

 

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

Hard to take criticisms from people who can't read.

The thread asks you to base projections on playing 82 games. You could list every single player in the organization and give them a projection based on 82 games, that doesn't you mean you expect them all to play or don't understand how hockey works. Just answering the question.

^^Exactly This^^

We can establish a projection baseline & ceiling, +/- pts. Since all 23 DRW players + some GR callups will play at some point. What a few posters are missing in this thread is they want to add all the points+callups and say that is our Team GF/Team Pts...It clearly doesn't work that way, which is clear as day to me. However, when they're all based on 82gp, you take the top (or any) 18 skaters to establish GF, ... Look at it this way, you can only 18 skaters/gp, that's your data set.

 

[Hen Kolland]

^^Exactly This^^

We can establish a projection baseline & ceiling, +/- pts. Since all 23 DRW players + some GR callups will play at some point. What a few posters are missing in this thread is they want to add all the points+callups and say that is our Team GF/Team Pts...It clearly doesn't work that way, which is clear as day to me. However, when they're all based on 82gp, you take the top (or any) 18 skaters to establish GF, ... Look at it this way, you can only 18 skaters/gp, that's your data set.

You last point is exactly right, and that’s where you are losing people. But I don’t think people are struggling to understand the point you are making. 1476 is the number of man games required for a full 82 game season. Your personal data set consisted of over 1700 games because you’ve added in the prospects partial seasons.

If you want to say that players are going to be traded or benched, why not highlight that in your post? Why not build your projections based on the maximum number of possible man games?

After clarification, your original numbers make sense, but I don’t think people are having a hard time understanding them, they are just confused as to why the topic was framed the way that it was.

 

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

You last point is exactly right, and that’s where you are losing people. But I don’t think people are struggling to understand the point you are making. 1476 is the number of man games required for a full 82 game season. Your personal data set consisted of over 1700 games because you’ve added in the prospects partial seasons.

If you want to say that players are going to be traded or benched, why not highlight that in your post? Why not build your projections based on the maximum number of possible man games?

After clarification, your original numbers make sense, but I don’t think people are having a hard time understanding them, they are just confused as to why the topic was framed the way that it was.

It's because I wasn't trying to project Team GF, only wanted to get a consensus on individual pts. It's a given there will be injuries/trades/capdumps (hopefully) etc, which could go in a 1,000+ directions & combos, too many variables, so there is no need/desire/time to do the latter as it is pointless, at least for us armchair interweb GM's.

 

[ricky0034]

If true, this would have given us 3 defenseman in the top 40 scoring at that position last year.

We haven’t done this since we had Lidstrom, Rafalski, and Kronwall on the back end... and obviously this group is nowhere near that.

I am optimistic about Hronek, I’ll at least give you that much.

while that's true it's also kind of a silly comparison

there's a big difference between that group and "triple top 40 in scoring at the position" as well,there was a year where all three of them were in the top 11 for example which would be the equivalent of having a 72,62,54 point guy last year not 45/45/35

 

[Frk It]

while that's true it's also kind of a silly comparison

there's a big difference between that group and "triple top 40 in scoring at the position" as well,there was a year where all three of them were in the top 11 for example which would be the equivalent of having a 72,62,54 point guy last year not 45/45/35

Ok, but most years they weren’t all in the top 11. So it’s not “silly”.

Pick any year and try to find 3 guys from the same team in the top 40. Some years there aren’t any. In years where there are, you will see it’s usually 3 exceptional players and it’s probably one if, if not the best D units in the league.

That’s not what we’re working with. That was my point.

 

[Snuggs]

Larkin - 30-51-81
Mantha - 36-31-67
Bertuzzi - 24-31-55
Filppula - 15-29-44
Athanasiou - 30-25-55
Rasmussen - 15-23-38
Nielsen - 11-25-36
Hirose - 7-19-26
Svechnikov - 12-12-24
Glendening - 7-8-15
Abdelkader - 6-9-15
Helm - 5-15-20
De La Rose - 2-5-7
Ehn- 5-4-9


Hronek - 10-33-43
Dekeyser - 6-18-24
Green - 7-22-29
Nemeth - 1-10-11
Daley - 7-12-21
Bowey - 4-11-15
Ericsson - 1-6-7



Howard - .911 2.88
Bernier - .905 3.10

 

[CreamOfTheCrop]

I am sooo high on Hronek. He's gonna be a stud.

 

[ShelbyZ]

Joe Hicketts - 55

 

[turkleton85]

Larkin 33-39-72
Mantha 34-23-57
Bertuzzi 18-29-47
Athanasiou 28-20-48
Filppula 15-20-35
Nielsen 14-20-34
Svechnikov 18-14-32
Rasmussen 15-12-27
Hirose 7-19-26
Zadina 12-4-16

Hronek 13-34-47
Cholowski 7-26-33
Green 7-22-29
Dekeyser 2-21-23
Daley 5-11-16

 

[Konnan511]

Larkin will lead the forward group in points by a healthy margin (+15 points) and Hronek will lead the DMen in points by a healthy margin (+10).

 

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

Erne 7g 8a, 12 TOI

 

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

I hope this happens: (Big Bert vs. Little Bert)

 

[izlez]

I hope this happens: (Big Bert vs. Little Bert)

View attachment 251753

This is an accurate representation of what we can expect from Tyler Bertuzzi in the years to come.
I like this Zadinaberg guy.

 

[Konnan511]

I think Tyler beats Todd's age 25, but that's where it stop. Full stop.

 

[Gniwder]

I think Tyler beats Todd's age 25, but that's where it stop. Full stop.

I wouldn't call it a full stop because the team has more talent coming up the pipeline, so Bert might get easier matchups in a couple of years as a second line winger.

Todd's scoring dropped off considerably after those 2 years, I don't think the peak will be as high for Ty, but the dropoff won't be as severe either.

 

[Shaman464]

I wouldn't call it a full stop because the team has more talent coming up the pipeline, so Bert might get easier matchups in a couple of years as a second line winger.

Todd's scoring dropped off considerably after those 2 years, I don't think the peak will be as high for Ty, but the dropoff won't be as severe either.

The reason why Todd's went to that next level where Tyler's won't isn't a question of talent, but of the NHL at the time. The NHL gave players a ton of leeway for physicality around the net and boards that isn't allowed anymore. If they did, Tyler likely would be doing nearly as well as his uncle.

 

[ricky0034]

The reason why Todd's went to that next level where Tyler's won't isn't a question of talent, but of the NHL at the time. The NHL gave players a ton of leeway for physicality around the net and boards that isn't allowed anymore. If they did, Tyler likely would be doing nearly as well as his uncle.

yeah the only thing stopping Tyler Bertuzzi from putting up 90 points is he isn't allowed to be more physical around the net

peak Lucic would probably be challenging Gretzky's point records too am I right?

 

[Gniwder]

The reason why Todd's went to that next level where Tyler's won't isn't a question of talent, but of the NHL at the time. The NHL gave players a ton of leeway for physicality around the net and boards that isn't allowed anymore. If they did, Tyler likely would be doing nearly as well as his uncle.

Not sure what your argument has to do with anything I posted....

In any case, you're aware of the size difference between the two? Todd wasn't fast enough to play now, and Tyler isn't big enough to play power forward back then. It's all oranges and apples aside from the last name.

Todd's up and down also had to do with Morrisson and Naslund peaking as well, and then he got traded. If Mantha score 48 goals like Naslund did in 02-03, I'm sure Bert will get a lot of assists. Blash is probably gonna have to fix the chitty PP for that to happen.

 

[MBH]

Todd Bertuzzi was at one point the game's model power forward.
Tyler Bertuzzi is a good, scrappy player with underrated skill. He's not in Todd Bertuzzi's class.

 

[Shaman464]

yeah the only thing stopping Tyler Bertuzzi from putting up 90 points is he isn't allowed to be more physical around the net

peak Lucic would probably be challenging Gretzky's point records too am I right?

How old were you in 2002? Because, what made Big Bert so effective was his ability to dominate in front of the net in a way that wouldn't be tolerated today.