Player Discussion What's wrong with Petey ?

What is wrong with elias pettersson ?


  • Total voters
    152
  • Poll closed .

canuckking1

Registered User
Feb 8, 2015
12,717
13,684
Pettersson switching agent makes me think he's a bit worried about how much his slow start is going to affect his payday. Any bum agent can get you a good deal if you have good stats, as Petey has had for most of his career, but a slump and bad 3rd year and you might need some expertise.
 

Chimpradamus

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
16,634
5,249
Northern Sweden
This is blowing out of proportion so much it's ridiculous. This is only emphasized so much because the team is getting toasted out there. It's a very unusual season, starting in such a weird time, no pre-season and Vancouver has played to many games in such a short while. Also, there's no crowd to energize the players.

I especially think missing the pre-season is a big reason why Pettersson is struggling. This is the first time in maybe 3 years that Pettersson has caught a rut. It's a learning experience for him. That the media is heckling him isn't helping and it's simply put ridiculous that they do. He should start getting angry and focus on proving the journalists what a waste of space they are.

There are alot of negative factors for the Canucks coming out of this season. I think the biggest one is losing Markström. He was the backbone of this team.
 

Snatcher Demko

High-End Intangibles
Oct 8, 2006
5,938
1,336
I think it's mostly a standard slump but he had come out physical in the first EDM game and then he took a hit later in the game and then played quite tentatively in the 2nd EDM game. Perhaps I'm seeing something that's not there but I figured maybe he bruised a shoulder or something.

He is playing way too tentatively out there, not moving his feet and creating space, and also holding onto pucks too long. It's also that he's been out of sync with his line.
 

Sleepinghorse

Registered User
Dec 7, 2014
54
15
Petey and Quinn have leverage now.

Brisson and Berry don't f*** around.

Money is good and all but what's the point in being the highest paid player on a team full of age gappers and plumbers?

RFA negotiations are gonna be really interesting. Especially considering the stealth tank they're currently on right now.

:popcorn:

Where's the leverage? Pettersson is producing like he wants to get paid like a 4th liner, and in a contract year that will see him become a RESTRICTED free agent. If he continues his current trajectory he's on pace for 16 points (23 on an 82 game season). Even if he improves marginally and finishes the season at less 0.5 points per game he doesn't earn himself much money or leverage. The kid literally needs to score at a 0.92 point per game pace just to crack 45 points this year. That's his career scoring pace by the way. If he does that he will end with 47 points, good for 0.84 per game. That's a decent step back.

Also consider that he's starting off the year with a healthy Brock Boeser for the first time since Pettersson arrived here, and he already has last season and playoffs of chemistry building with Miller. Makes the step back seem a bit more puzzling.

So where's the leverage? He sits out? He gets bitter? Sign an offer sheet? Well that won't work, the Canucks can simply tender him a QO of $875k and protect their rights to him regardless of whether he accepts it or not (obviously he wouldn't). So what then? His agent negotiates on track record and tries to project it forward with potential? Aren't you one of the guys who hates Benning's free agent signings and abysmal rewarding/recognition of talent? Eriksson was a terrific signing at $6m as an UFA after a career average of 60 point seasons - he was an immediate bust 3 months later as a Canuck.

Hughes, on the other hand, is a dynamic puck rushing defenseman whose skating draws comparisons to some of the big names like Paul Coffey. He defends about as successfully as Keith Ballard, which means that he's not all that great at half of his position. Hughes is also coming of an entry level contract, so he's not eligible for arbitration, and he also hasn't played enough to land in group 2 status, so no offer sheet is coming his way. Now what? He sits out?

I don't for a second think that Benning will try and put the screws to these kids. Nor would ownership let him. But right now there's absolutely no real leverage here for these two.
 

Sleepinghorse

Registered User
Dec 7, 2014
54
15
Oh good. The chicken littles are out in force.

Some people on these boards seem to be genuine masochists, so obsessed with sticking with their old takes that they want things to go badly. We have one of the best young centers in the league, "I hope he goes somewhere else bcuz were bad lol". So...go be a fan of another team then. If an Oiler fan said this I wouldn't bat an eye. You're not a Canucks fan.


Look, the truth is that the rebuild sputtered for a couple of years and Benning completely misread the league. The 2016 world cup was a zeitgeist shift, the speed and skill ramped up exponentially with the success of the young North American team with McDavid, Matthews, etc. Benning misread this, he signed Eriksson, Gudbranson, traded for Sutter. It was bad.

So then, he brought in some vets to just hold the line psychologically. Beagle would have been okayish at 3 years and 2.5, I liked the Roussel deal and think it would have been fine if he hadn't had his knee obliterated.

Gagner and Del Zotta were rubbish signings. But this was all just to maintain some sort of veteran accountability. You can't just 'let the kids play' or you end up with a toxic culture of entitlement like Buffalo or Edmonton have had for the last decade.

Then, suddenly, we hit on some picks and the rebuild was over before it was supposed to be (not from the perspective one would have had in 2014 of course, but the perspective that one would have had in 2017 in May).

So then we felt an impetus to do something while Petey and Hughes were on entry level deals, but it wasn't technically our window and it still isn't. Our real window starts in 2 years. I hope we are successful before then, but the detritus contracts, the Spooner buy-out, the punitive Luongo bullshit all is over by then.

Letting Markstrom and Tanev go was a difficult decision but it was the right one for financial/age reasons.

But it cut a huge swath through our dressing room. Suddenly the kids are being leaned on.

Hughes is a small, offensive defence man. He's really really good defensively all things considered (given his size, and offensive pedigree), but he's still a young kid trying to defend against the best and biggest forwards in the league. Guess what suddenly he's our number 1 Dman. And not just in terms of play, like the expectation is that he has to be one of our top 3 players every night, while shutting down the other team's best players, or we won't win.

A lot of people on these boards have never played hockey at any competitive level. They tell themselves that it doesn't matter in terms of the quality of their takes, but it does. A hockey team is different than a basketball team, you are as good as your capabilities versus the position you are slotted into. If Hughes was on Colorado or Tampa, there would be no slump.

This is true for Petey too, it's one thing to be a slick player that other teams haven't seen before, hidden on a bad team that nobody gets up for. It's different when you're the superstar forward on a team that fired a shot over the bows of the rest of the teams last playoffs. A team that has lost depth, lost leadership, lost identity.

What a lot of people don't seem to really realize, is that NHL teams values range from 1.7 Billion or so, to about 350 million.
This means that if you are an established star on a team, there are 30 other giant corporations that are using all of their resources to figure out how to shut you down. They have some of the best 700 people at this sport on the planet, they have video guys analyzing frame by frame looking for tendencies, they have analytics guys looking for patterns, trying to find an edge.

These are kids. 21 and 22. It's a lot to take on and there will be hiccups. It's okay, they'll figure it out.

It's possible that this year will be a lost one, I still won't be worried about our overall outlook. Our window opens in earnest in 22-23.

Well said.

Not sure I'm sold on your opinion of Hughes defending capability. It's more a size thing than a smarts or talent thing. He's got some growing to do still in terms of his game, and like you said, he's young. I don't know that he's ever going to be that stud #1 defender that everyone wants to pay $9m to anchor their blueline, right now I see him as an upgraded Tyson Barrie. Better offensively and similar defensively, but still with the potential to improve at both ends.

I don't think this rebuild is over. I think last year was the year that we got to see where the core was going (finally), but the support pieces are a couple years and (probably) a new coach away still. I just hope that ownership can continue to be patient. I worry that they will panic and demand something drastic and stupid in order to keep the growing excitement around this team so that fans are amped up to come back when the pandemic measures are finally rescinded (if they ever will be).
 

mathonwy

Positively #toxic
Jan 21, 2008
19,077
10,003
Where's the leverage? Pettersson is producing like he wants to get paid like a 4th liner, and in a contract year that will see him become a RESTRICTED free agent. If he continues his current trajectory he's on pace for 16 points (23 on an 82 game season). Even if he improves marginally and finishes the season at less 0.5 points per game he doesn't earn himself much money or leverage. The kid literally needs to score at a 0.92 point per game pace just to crack 45 points this year. That's his career scoring pace by the way. If he does that he will end with 47 points, good for 0.84 per game. That's a decent step back.

Also consider that he's starting off the year with a healthy Brock Boeser for the first time since Pettersson arrived here, and he already has last season and playoffs of chemistry building with Miller. Makes the step back seem a bit more puzzling.

So where's the leverage? He sits out? He gets bitter? Sign an offer sheet? Well that won't work, the Canucks can simply tender him a QO of $875k and protect their rights to him regardless of whether he accepts it or not (obviously he wouldn't). So what then? His agent negotiates on track record and tries to project it forward with potential? Aren't you one of the guys who hates Benning's free agent signings and abysmal rewarding/recognition of talent? Eriksson was a terrific signing at $6m as an UFA after a career average of 60 point seasons - he was an immediate bust 3 months later as a Canuck.

Hughes, on the other hand, is a dynamic puck rushing defenseman whose skating draws comparisons to some of the big names like Paul Coffey. He defends about as successfully as Keith Ballard, which means that he's not all that great at half of his position. Hughes is also coming of an entry level contract, so he's not eligible for arbitration, and he also hasn't played enough to land in group 2 status, so no offer sheet is coming his way. Now what? He sits out?

I don't for a second think that Benning will try and put the screws to these kids. Nor would ownership let him. But right now there's absolutely no real leverage here for these two.

Yep. In a traditional player representation and contract negotiation, I agree with everything you said.

But I don't see this situation as being traditional at all.

Management pulled the rug out from everyone this off season when they let T&M go to Calgary and the team stinks right now with our 1C being the most prolific player in stankiness department.

The team gets their lunch handed to them by a team that we should be completely equal to and then this happens.

Like I mentioned before. What's the point in being the highest paid player on a team of garbage?

EP40 and QH43 have to look out for themselves and now with the same agent, they have a much bigger voice to do so with.

Maybe... maybe not. I don't know.

There's a lot of stuff that goes on behind the scenes in this organization.
 

Zippgunn

Registered User
May 15, 2011
3,950
1,648
Lhuntshi
?? Really?

A highly skilled player who all of a sudden loses it vs a player who fans unanimously agree is a poor player, playing a bit more poor?

The injury "excuse" is saved for players who out of nowhere "lose it".. "temporarily", whose injuries are actually worth noting

As was the case with Boeser and Horvat from a season or two ago. Beagle and Sutter do play through injuries. However the difference isn't stark because they don't have a high ceiling and are not finesse players

I jest of course but I have a long memory and distinctly remember whenever Naslund or Burrows going into a slump and this board filling up with "he must be nursing a secret injury" posts. Only the favoured ever get this consideration here...
 

Sneezy

Registered User
Oct 25, 2019
533
340
If EP is upset because of off season deals then move him, we do not need any weak minded players on the team.

But it is not that, it is a small/short period of time in his potentially long career where he is in a rut. No more, no less.

But thanks to some posters here who is blaming this on JB, I do enjoy the morning comics when I drink my coffee and eat my double chocolate scone.
 

Sleepinghorse

Registered User
Dec 7, 2014
54
15
Yep. In a traditional player representation and contract negotiation, I agree with everything you said.

But I don't see this situation as being traditional at all.

Management pulled the rug out from everyone this off season when they let T&M go to Calgary and the team stinks right now with our 1C being the most prolific player in stankiness department.

Seeing this through lenses tinted towards management "letting them go to Calgary" is the only way that works.

Markstrom chose Calgary because Benning couldn't justify giving him 6 years AND trade protection. Rightly so on both parts. Markstrom had earned a payday and protection, Benning could not give him both under the current Covid climate coupled with the age and development of the team.

Tanev? Same story from what I've heard regarding term.

Even Toffoli was in the mix of negotiations but again, term was the factor.

Does it factor into the remaining players thoughts that their buddies all left because of Benning's payroll commitments to guys like Eriksson? I doubt it. Players know how the league works. They know that plenty of their brethren sign contracts all over the place that include trade protection and then fail to live up to the value of said contracts which results in other players moving on due working in a salary cap world. IF they are bitter with the situation, well it's directed at the player who (in Eriksson's case) can't be traded because of either a contractual clause or because no other team will take them. Benning has tried to trade Baertschi and Eriksson, but no takers anywhere (go figure).

The team gets their lunch handed to them by a team that we should be completely equal to and then this happens.

Which team are you talking about? The only one that we should be completely equal to on paper is Montreal. We should be better than Edmonton and are not as deep as Calgary. But all 3 have fed us our lunch at least once.

Like I mentioned before. What's the point in being the highest paid player on a team of garbage?

EP40 and QH43 have to look out for themselves and now with the same agent, they have a much bigger voice to do so with.

Well lots of young stars end up in this boat where guys have to leave at this stage of a rebuild as the team transitions to a new core and management. They can do two things, be pissed and grumpy that their buddies had (chose) to leave because of the financial situation, or they can be flattered that part of the reason management wouldn't pay the money to their departed pals is because they have some of that money ear marked for their own upcoming new contracts.

Every player always has to look out for themselves. Some do, some take less to play or help build a better overall roster. Having the same agent doesn't give them a bigger voice in this situation at this time. Only their on-ice play can do that until they are eligible for arbitration, or better still, unrestricted free agency.

Maybe... maybe not. I don't know.

There's a lot of stuff that goes on behind the scenes in this organization.


Yeah. That's the most accurate right there. So why get all knotted up and angry over it when you only have a small piece of the picture, and even that isn't totally clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NuxFan09

Gaunce4gm

Trusted Hockey Man
Dec 5, 2015
1,976
781
Victoria B.C.
Anyone know how many posts he's hit? I know he hit at least 1 post and 1 crossbar, and then that awful Loui Eriksson esque whiff on the 2 on 0 with Boeser. Let's say with better "luck", and the PP not starting off as badly as it did, he has 3 more goals and a couple more assists. Then he's at what? 7gp 4g 3a 7pts and he's PPG. We would still be ripping him for his brutal giveaways etc but his statline is only a couple bounces here or there away from being a non issue.
 

Grumbler

Registered User
Oct 25, 2012
2,995
747
he feels depressed with the current state of the team. The team they had was a contender but we couldn't keep all the key pieces due to incompetence, so he sees the wasted potential and down about it which is affecting his play.
 

Siludin

Registered User
Dec 9, 2010
7,337
5,253
I was going to make another joke about him being lovesick or having COVID but I will leave it at this:
Setbacks pave the road for comebacks
 

mathonwy

Positively #toxic
Jan 21, 2008
19,077
10,003
Seeing this through lenses tinted towards management "letting them go to Calgary" is the only way that works.

Markstrom chose Calgary because Benning couldn't justify giving him 6 years AND trade protection. Rightly so on both parts. Markstrom had earned a payday and protection, Benning could not give him both under the current Covid climate coupled with the age and development of the team.

Tanev? Same story from what I've heard regarding term.

Even Toffoli was in the mix of negotiations but again, term was the factor.

Does it factor into the remaining players thoughts that their buddies all left because of Benning's payroll commitments to guys like Eriksson? I doubt it. Players know how the league works. They know that plenty of their brethren sign contracts all over the place that include trade protection and then fail to live up to the value of said contracts which results in other players moving on due working in a salary cap world. IF they are bitter with the situation, well it's directed at the player who (in Eriksson's case) can't be traded because of either a contractual clause or because no other team will take them. Benning has tried to trade Baertschi and Eriksson, but no takers anywhere (go figure).



Which team are you talking about? The only one that we should be completely equal to on paper is Montreal. We should be better than Edmonton and are not as deep as Calgary. But all 3 have fed us our lunch at least once.



Well lots of young stars end up in this boat where guys have to leave at this stage of a rebuild as the team transitions to a new core and management. They can do two things, be pissed and grumpy that their buddies had (chose) to leave because of the financial situation, or they can be flattered that part of the reason management wouldn't pay the money to their departed pals is because they have some of that money ear marked for their own upcoming new contracts.

Every player always has to look out for themselves. Some do, some take less to play or help build a better overall roster. Having the same agent doesn't give them a bigger voice in this situation at this time. Only their on-ice play can do that until they are eligible for arbitration, or better still, unrestricted free agency.




Yeah. That's the most accurate right there. So why get all knotted up and angry over it when you only have a small piece of the picture, and even that isn't totally clear.
I’m not angry or knotted up.

I’m toxic.

Welcome to HFCanucks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: platotld

NuxFan09

Registered User
Jun 8, 2008
21,649
2,631
Merritt, BC
Seeing this through lenses tinted towards management "letting them go to Calgary" is the only way that works.

Markstrom chose Calgary because Benning couldn't justify giving him 6 years AND trade protection. Rightly so on both parts. Markstrom had earned a payday and protection, Benning could not give him both under the current Covid climate coupled with the age and development of the team.

Tanev? Same story from what I've heard regarding term.

Even Toffoli was in the mix of negotiations but again, term was the factor.

Does it factor into the remaining players thoughts that their buddies all left because of Benning's payroll commitments to guys like Eriksson? I doubt it. Players know how the league works. They know that plenty of their brethren sign contracts all over the place that include trade protection and then fail to live up to the value of said contracts which results in other players moving on due working in a salary cap world. IF they are bitter with the situation, well it's directed at the player who (in Eriksson's case) can't be traded because of either a contractual clause or because no other team will take them. Benning has tried to trade Baertschi and Eriksson, but no takers anywhere (go figure).



Which team are you talking about? The only one that we should be completely equal to on paper is Montreal. We should be better than Edmonton and are not as deep as Calgary. But all 3 have fed us our lunch at least once.



Well lots of young stars end up in this boat where guys have to leave at this stage of a rebuild as the team transitions to a new core and management. They can do two things, be pissed and grumpy that their buddies had (chose) to leave because of the financial situation, or they can be flattered that part of the reason management wouldn't pay the money to their departed pals is because they have some of that money ear marked for their own upcoming new contracts.

Every player always has to look out for themselves. Some do, some take less to play or help build a better overall roster. Having the same agent doesn't give them a bigger voice in this situation at this time. Only their on-ice play can do that until they are eligible for arbitration, or better still, unrestricted free agency.




Yeah. That's the most accurate right there. So why get all knotted up and angry over it when you only have a small piece of the picture, and even that isn't totally clear.
Finally, a sensible, mature take on the matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stampedingviking

ZEBROA

Registered User
Dec 21, 2017
3,622
2,175
He will soon get a couple of 4-5 point games and all is forgotten. One thing is sure , he cares a lot and will do all in is power to turn this around.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,714
5,952
I bet Petey gets inspired by Sutter's foundational performance and has a breakout game next game. Can't be happy being the 3rd best (offensive producing) C on the team.
 

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
JT Miller looks equally aggravated by his own play just displays it differently.

Pettersson’s all around game looks better in the past 1.5 games. Wish he’d get a shooters mentality again.
 

DonnyNucker

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
4,002
2,896
he feels depressed with the current state of the team. The team they had was a contender but we couldn't keep all the key pieces due to incompetence, so he sees the wasted potential and down about it which is affecting his play.
If this is in fact true we missed a chance to trade him for PLD
 

WTG

December 5th
Jan 11, 2015
23,830
7,841
West Coast
he feels depressed with the current state of the team. The team they had was a contender but we couldn't keep all the key pieces due to incompetence, so he sees the wasted potential and down about it which is affecting his play.
This team last year was nowhere near a contender.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad