where does elias pettersson rank among nhl players

[Tad Mikowsky]

Right...I get that, I pointed this out, why not just say this first, instead of strawmaning me and telling me I'm taking it too seriously when I ask you not to? There's a difference between having fun and not taking things seriously and essentially trolling.

I’m glad the fun police is out. What does this have to do with EP?

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Before you fanboys get too excited you should ask JTR the million dollar question: if Pettersson is top 10 and ahead of Draisaitl and Kucherov why isn't he top 5? And he will tell you he's behind Sean Couturier and the NHL's current best overall player Mark Stone. Or who should win the Selke? Hint: it's Nichushkin.

@Dekes For Days has illustrated some pretty clear problems with this insane weighting of relative stats and I highly doubt you guys are on board with JTR's takes when it's not pumping your guy's tires. But anyway thanks for the great insight.

Dekes for Days literally uses one metric as being the superior, because he says so, but then stop using said metric when it doesn’t favor his player.

Dekes for Days doesn’t actually answer questions, he just Avoids them. When ask to provide proof, like his model of predicting contract value; he never does.

He literally dekes for days....around points.

 

[Dekes For Days]

were telling people one day that the accurate way of looking at the standings was to use points percentage, then not long after when it was convenient to your argument, you decided raw points were better.

This is false. Please stop misrepresenting past events. My position on points percentage was consistent; you're referring to one post months ago that I wrote quickly and just pulled the team's ranking from memory, and I addressed your immediate and over-the-top complaints about it at the time.

You have dedicated an entire account to telling people that P/60 is the only thing that matters, but when it came time to downplay Quinn Hughes’ rookie season suddenly you were using points per game because it ranked him lower.

This is false. Please stop misrepresenting what I have done. I did not post P/GP to downplay Hughes; it actually made him look better. I also didn't downplay Hughes at all. I said he had a great season, but he still had unknowns because of his small sample, and the player he was being compared to was being grossly underrated.

Ironically, in that thread you were arguing that Hughes was amazing, yet in the previous post in this thread, you suggested that Hughes' season was because of Pettersson, after representing the 4th overall pick as some scrawny long-shot. Hmm...

I have also never said that P/60 is "the only thing that matters". I have emphasized the importance of not ignoring the massive difference that TOI can have on production, especially on the PP, and I have substantiated it endlessly.

The most hilarious part is that you are accusing me of shifting arguments, when above you were discussing the importance of considering TOI in production, have used rate statistics countless times, and have consistently used stats that consider rate statistics, despite consistently harassing me in every thread for a year with no substantiation, for my substantiated use of rate statistics.

Now you’ve decided that the accurate way of using with or without you stats is to use a two-year sample where one player played over half of his games for a different team, or to use a one-year with or without you sample where the sample for the main player in question has a sample size of 72 minutes.

Ah, no acknowledgement of the fact that you changed this because you made a false claim above? I see you are still making the false claim that I used other team results, despite me repeatedly telling you differently, and it being easily verifiable. Make that false claim again, and you will be reported.

Also, once again, I have not decided that this with/without analysis is accurate for anything. I have only established that this is more accurate than your posted method. Considering the entire point was that your whole methodology is wrong, your conclusion here is quite the illogical leap.

You’d be calling this an awful method of analysis

I think this is where your confusion comes from. It is a bad method of analysis. I never said differently. That's why I called it out in the first place, when you started doing it to overrate Pettersson. Once again, this is not a good method of adjusting players. It is just a better method of adjusting players than your posted method. That should tell you something.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Dekes for Days literally uses one metric as being the superior, because he says so, but then stop using said metric when it doesn’t favor his player.
Dekes for Days doesn’t actually answer questions, he just Avoids them. When ask to provide proof, like his model of predicting contract value; he never does.

This is all false. Stop making false statements about me and what I do in every thread. I have been consistent, I have answered questions, I have substantiated my positions, and I have provided endless proof.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Another thread hijacked.
Let’s get back on topic folks.
Maybe we should have a separate thread to debate the merits of points per 60 minutes as the measuring stick for ranking players.
It feels like I’m watching Monty Python skit every time these threads get derailed with the same debate.

 

[Rowlet]

Went with top 20, this question is slightly unfair to Pettersson because so much of his value is based on his unbelievable potential.

 

[Addison Rae]

Let's look at the "top 30 NHL players", as this is what the original post asks about. Forget about EXACTLY who should be where......you people get so hung up on every single position. LOL. It's only "kind of" in order of ranking.

- McDavid
- McKinnon
- Draisaitl
- Pastarnak
- Kucherov
- Crosby
- Matthews
- Panarin
- Kane
- Ovechkin
- Eichel
- Marchand
- Herberdeau
- Carlson
- Vasilevsky
- Marner
- Aho
- Stamkos
- Bergeron
- Tavares
- Hellebyuk
- Barkov
- Hedman
- Scheifele
- Kopitar
- Rask
- Laine
- Malkin
- Binnington
- Josi

and THEN Pettersson, at 31.

There.

Happy?

This is the worst list in the history of sports. Paul Pierce could make a better list about hockey players. Honestly at this point Ryan Hollins could probably as well.

 

[Regal]

It is definitely possible, and I understand how Vancouver’s lineup may pump the tires of his relative stats. However, he still is the biggest factor in improving his teammates’ performance, and all of the regressions which account for favorable opportunities seem to suggest that Pettersson is still the driving force here.

The reason that I brought up the relative and on-ice stats is because the counter argument against Pettersson being top-10 or even top-20 seems to be that he doesn’t score enough points, and that advanced stats don’t matter when you’re not getting “results”. What I’m saying is that Pettersson is getting results - his team is basically the San Jose Sharks when he’s off the ice and the Tampa Bay Lightning when he’s on the ice.

Can, and should this kind of analysis of results be held to higher scrutiny? Yes, but the same should be done with points. People will bring up that Leon Draisaitl has 100 points in each of the two seasons and that therefore Pettersson can’t be better, but rarely will they hold Draisaitl’s raw results to the scrutiny of the fact that he has played over 100 minutes more than any other forward over that sample, that he is shooting over 20% over that sample, that he has scored a vast majority of those points with the best offensive player in the league, or that he has sacrificed playing defense on most nights - somehow points are completely valid on their own without any additional context, but noting a team’s performance with a guy on-ice/off-ice requires a thesis paper worth of context.

The reality is that both of these feats - Pettersson’s team playing at the level of the Tampa Bay Lightning when he is on the ice and the level of the Anaheim Ducks when is off the ice going on two years now, and Draisaitl scoring 100 points in two straight seasons - are both extremely impressive feats in and of themselves. (I also realize Draisaitl’s points actually get held to scrutiny more than most players and I’m not bringing him up to trash him, but in this thread his points aren’t being held to scrutiny at all.) I’m mainly using the raw and relative numbers to give the more analytics-averse people an idea of why heavy analytics users are so high on Pettersson; Pettersson has accomplished a raw feat that is extremely impressive.

Once you recognize that raw feat, it’s not so hard to reconcile that the results of the regression models, which do hold these raw results to higher scrutiny, would suggest that Pettersson’s isolated impact on making his team better is much higher than raw points would suggest.

Here’s a question: If we were to believe that Pettersson’s raw result of his team playing at the level of the Lightning with him and Ducks without him was all his doing, and we were to believe that Draisaitl’s back-to-back 100 point seasons were all his doing, and that both of these feats were sustainable for both players, would they not be at the very least comparable?

In general I agree. I wasn't really "siding" with Dekes for Days so much as just adding my own sense into the convo. I've always put a premium on players who drive possession and GF% when on the ice. It's one of the reasons I've always rejected the focus on points weighted toward goals and against secondary assists that is made in Ovechkin/Crosby threads. Because Crosby does so much more to affect the score when he's on the ice outside of points. It's also why I've valued Datsyuk, Toews and Bergeron very highly over the years, and think the Sedins were generally underrated outside of their Art Ross years. I definitely think Pettersson is a very good play driver and as such I would put him above a number of other "roughly PPG" level forwards. I suppose my question is whether Pettersson ability to improve the players around him so much is sustainable and completely attributable to him, and how high that discrepancy is. Because I don't see the player that the numbers suggest when I watch him (closer to top 30 than top 10), and I'm trying to reconcile that fact. It could be the limitations of the eye test, but I'm just trying to see what the numbers might not be telling us.

 

[Pucklington]

Wow... Who has him in top 5... Even top 10 is a stretch.

 

[Pucklington]

What makes you pick Petterson over Draisaitl?

Draisaitl is only league's leading scorer and presumptive Hart winner... Clearly Petterson is better.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Wow... Who has him in top 5... Even top 10 is a stretch.

i actually have him #1 but i knew id piss people off if i put that as an option

 

[Pucklington]

i actually have him #1 but i knew id piss people off if i put that as an option

In jest clearly .

 

[IPS]

Let's look at the "top 30 NHL players", as this is what the original post asks about. Forget about EXACTLY who should be where......you people get so hung up on every single position. LOL. It's only "kind of" in order of ranking.

- McDavid
- McKinnon
- Draisaitl
- Pastarnak
- Kucherov
- Crosby
- Matthews
- Panarin
- Kane
- Ovechkin
- Eichel
- Marchand
- Herberdeau
- Carlson
- Vasilevsky
- Marner
- Aho
- Stamkos
- Bergeron
- Tavares
- Hellebyuk
- Barkov
- Hedman
- Scheifele
- Kopitar
- Rask
- Laine
- Malkin
- Binnington
- Josi

and THEN Pettersson, at 31.

There.

Happy?

Still a lot of names you can throw in there ahead of him IMO

 

[Gavy]

He kind of is though.

There's nothing he's bad at, but there's nothing he really excels at besides goal-scoring.

He's certainly not terrible in his own zone like Draisaitl or Kane, I'll give him that.

Hes been very good defensively this year

 

[Halla]

one thing that hurts EP is he didnt really take much of a jump his 2nd year

28g/66pts to 27g/66pts.....

 

[Halla]

Oh my bad, from my understanding was the AINEC was for the EP is over Marner, Tavares, Aho, portion.
I misunderstood that post. My mistake.

EP would probably demolish Marner in a poll though because this is hfboards and they wont care that one guy hit 94pts and the other hit 66 because one is a leaf

 

[Hostile Offer]

EP would probably demolish Marner in a poll though because this is hfboards and they wont care that one guy hit 94pts and the other hit 66 because one is a leaf

Pettersson is also two years younger, has put up better numbers at the same age and plays centre. Marner is a tremendous player but downplaying Pettersson for what he's been able to do so far as the go-to guy in his team doesn't make your case better.

 

[Holymakinaw]

Still a lot of names you can throw in there ahead of him IMO

I know.

I'm TRYING to be nice to these people.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

This is all false. Stop making false statements about me and what I do in every thread. I have been consistent, I have answered questions, I have substantiated my positions, and I have provided endless proof.

This is all false. Please start providing back up to simple questions. You have consistently dodged them. You haven’t substantiated your positions, and you haven’t provided endless proof.

 

[Merrrlin]

Pettersson is also two years younger, has put up better numbers at the same age and plays centre. Marner is a tremendous player but downplaying Pettersson for what he's been able to do so far as the go-to guy in his team doesn't make your case better.

So this is what it's like to be on the other side of this argument.

So many times I had argued the same thing about Matthews (age, pace, position) and been laughed off with "production is the only thing that matters at the end of the day".

 

[keglu]

EP would probably demolish Marner in a poll though because this is hfboards and they wont care that one guy hit 94pts and the other hit 66 because one is a leaf

Matthews would also demolish Marner in poll with his career high 80pts and you cannot even use team excuse.

 

[Breakers]

Interesting

If Pettersson didnt improve from his rookie year to his sophomore year............. than either did marner.

 

[Holymakinaw]

Interesting

If Pettersson didnt improve from his rookie year to his sophomore year............. than either did marner.

LOL. What are you on about? Marner has literally shown improvement each & every year he's been in the league.

2016/17 - 61pts
2017/18 - 69pts
2018/19 - 94pts
2019/20 - 67pts in 59gms (paced for another 93pt season.....close enough!)

 

[Hierso]

I have him at 18-24, went with top 20 because i think he's closer to a top 20 than he is a top 30. Once he gets some mass i think he will reach top 10, it's not the skills or the hockey IQ that holds him back (for me), it's the fact that he is pretty skinny for a hockey player. Him and Eichel are both 188cm (6'2) but the difference is that Pettersson weighs 80kg (176lbs) while Eichel weighs 91kg (201lbs).

 

[Breakers]

LOL. What are you on about? Marner has literally shown improvement each & every year he's been in the league.

2016/17 - 61pts
2017/18 - 69pts
2018/19 - 94pts
2019/20 - 67pts in 59gms (paced for another 93pt season.....close enough!)

The guy said Pettersson hasn't improved from his rookie year to his sophomore year
rookie PPG = 0.93
Sophomore PPG = 0.98

Marner increased his Point per game by the same amount in PPG from rookie to sophomore.

Learn to keep up