Elias Pettersson | #40 | C

[appleboy]

3 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Here were the final NHL list of top draft pick prospects.   Clearly you were ahead of many "experts".   Canucks didn't go off the board at all.   Dal Colle was even a possible pick.   

 

Top prospects

 

Aaron Ekblad was selected first overall.

 

Sam Reinhart was selected second overall.

Source: NHL Central Scouting final ranking.

Ranking	North American skaters[6]	European skaters[7]
1	Sam Bennett (C)	Kasperi Kapanen (C)
2	Aaron Ekblad (D)	William Nylander (C/RW)
3	Sam Reinhart (C)	Kevin Fiala (LW)
4	Leon Draisaitl (C)	Jakub Vrana (LW/RW)
5	Michael Dal Colle (C/LW)	David Pastrnak (RW)
6	Jake Virtanen (RW)	Adrian Kempe (LW)
7	Nick Ritchie (LW)	Marcus Pettersson (D)
8	Brendan Perlini (LW)	Ondrej Kase (RW)
9	Haydn Fleury (D)	Sebastian Aho (D)
10	Jared McCann (C)	Dominik Masin (D)

There was quite a few mock drafts that had different break downs but the top 6 were quit consistent. I did not look at the top five because I didn't think we had a chance to pick there. I was focussed on 5 to 10.  That's who I wanted five to ten.

I expected Jake to be our selection but I read too much about his lack of hockey sense. Ehlers , Pelini and Larkin looked like can't miss nhl players. Maybe not stars. Virtanen looked like a high risk high reward pick. I didn't think we could risk a miss at 6th.

[73 Percent]

2 minutes ago, appleboy said:

There was quite a few mock drafts that had different break downs but the top 6 were quit consistent. I did not look at the top five because I didn't think we had a chance to pick there. I was focussed on 5 to 10.  That's who I wanted five to ten.

I expected Jake to be our selection but I read too much about his lack of hockey sense. Ehlers , Pelini and Larkin looked like can't miss nhl players. Maybe not stars. Virtanen looked like a high risk high reward pick. I didn't think we could risk a miss at 6th.

If you look back that top 10nis pretty much ass

[J-Dizzle]

3 hours ago, appleboy said:

There was quite a few mock drafts that had different break downs but the top 6 were quit consistent. I did not look at the top five because I didn't think we had a chance to pick there. I was focussed on 5 to 10.  That's who I wanted five to ten.

I expected Jake to be our selection but I read too much about his lack of hockey sense. Ehlers , Pelini and Larkin looked like can't miss nhl players. Maybe not stars. Virtanen looked like a high risk high reward pick. I didn't think we could risk a miss at 6th.

Nylander was also a boom or bust player... all of those guys had question marks.  Jake was probably the safest of all of them. 

[PCprincipal]

5 hours ago, J-Dizzle said:

like I asked in another thread... if MDC or 18 year old Sam Bennett were available at 6 would you have passed them up to take Nylander or Ehlers?

Bennett for sure, at the time

[Phat Fingers]

16 hours ago, J-Dizzle said:

like I asked in another thread... if MDC or 18 year old Sam Bennett were available at 6 would you have passed them up to take Nylander or Ehlers?

Not sure MDC was a good pick. I cannot see anyone at the time passing on the ‘18 y/o’ for Ehlers or Nylander. Really the two guys that we should have picked were Pasternak or Larkin. 

[Phat Fingers]

Well it took some time, and I am a part of it, but we have managed to turn the Elias Pettersson thread into another debate about the Virtannen pick. 

 

So so there is the guy called Elias, I hear he is a pretty good hockey player, maybe we should steer the convo back to him...

 

EmW

[SingleThorn]

16 minutes ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Not sure MDC was a good pick. I cannot see anyone at the time passing on the ‘18 y/o’ for Ehlers or Nylander. Really the two guys that we should have picked were Pasternak or Larkin. 

 I went back and looked up 7 mock drafts from that year. All except one had the top five as per the actual draft. One replaced Draisaitl with Ritchie.  As far as Larkin and Pastrnak went, Larkin moved between 12 and 25 and was not in the top 30 in one mock. Pastrnak moved between 20 and 28 and was not in the top 30 in two mocks. If Larkin and Pastrnak were your choices at the time, kudos, you're a great scout.

 

For the record, I was rooting for Glass in this draft. I was hoping that Vilardi would not come to us and I didn't even have Pettersson on my radar.

[Phat Fingers]

2 minutes ago, SingleThorn said:

 I went back and looked up 7 mock drafts from that year. All except one had the top five as per the actual draft. One replaced Draisaitl with Ritchie.  As far as Larkin and Pastrnak went, Larkin moved between 12 and 25 and was not in the top 30 in one mock. Pastrnak moved between 20 and 28 and was not in the top 30 in two mocks. If Larkin and Pastrnak were your choices at the time, kudos, you're a great scout.

 

For the record, I was rooting for Glass in this draft. I was hoping that Vilardi would not come to us and I didn't even have Pettersson on my radar.

I wasn’t that good and no I did not have either in my top ten. 

 

I was also all Glass at the draft. Him or Liljgren and Pettersson was a third choice. 

 

This is why I don’t get upset when my player choices aren’t picked, because I am a Paramedic, not a scout

god damn it Jim.  

 

Back to topic, any reports on Elias Pettersson, I hear he is a pretty good hockey player?  

 

 

[Deathrowe]

It is insane how off track this thread gets.

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

 

 

[cory40]

On ‎2018‎-‎01‎-‎21 at 1:55 PM, appleboy said:

There was quite a few mock drafts that had different break downs but the top 6 were quit consistent. I did not look at the top five because I didn't think we had a chance to pick there. I was focussed on 5 to 10.  That's who I wanted five to ten.

I expected Jake to be our selection but I read too much about his lack of hockey sense. Ehlers , Pelini and Larkin looked like can't miss nhl players. Maybe not stars. Virtanen looked like a high risk high reward pick. I didn't think we could risk a miss at 6th.

Until they give scouting a rating as a whole its a crap shoot. I would like to see how often a player ranked 4th turns out to be 4th. Like 60% or whatever. NHL central scouting if it is viable. Lets say 90 % of the time the top pick goes to be a top player. And by 9th or 10th its say 50%. The percent should be beside the rating for both North American and Euro players. I really think the NHL GM's feel the same. Their scouting is what they go by. 

 

[ForzaTikare]

Rumour sais that 1 of the 2 forward spots goes to Andre Petersson of Omsk

[PlanB]

8 hours ago, cory40 said:

Until they give scouting a rating as a whole its a crap shoot. I would like to see how often a player ranked 4th turns out to be 4th. Like 60% or whatever. NHL central scouting if it is viable. Lets say 90 % of the time the top pick goes to be a top player. And by 9th or 10th its say 50%. The percent should be beside the rating for both North American and Euro players. I really think the NHL GM's feel the same. Their scouting is what they go by. 

 

Recently  (since about 1990) the first overall has about an 80% chance of becoming a player for you.   This drops to about 54% once you get to 4th overall (numbers are relative to who/what is calculated and the metrics to define what a player really is but this is a reasonable ballpark figure).  Surprisingly  (or not ) it's really all over the board statistically when looking at which pics consistently produce quality NHL regulars but yes,  overall the higher pics pan out more often. As for how often a 4th ranked kid actually gets picked at 4 - I've never seen that analysis probably because there are too many different ranking agencies/supposed experts to get consistent consensus draft order rankings I'm guessing. 

 

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

[SingleThorn]

4 minutes ago, PlanB said:

Recently  (since about 1990) the first overall has about an 80% chance of becoming a player for you.   This drops to about 54% once you get to 4th overall (numbers are relative to who/what is calculated and the metrics to define what a player really is but this is a reasonable ballpark figure).  Surprisingly  (or not ) it's really all over the board statistically when looking at which pics consistently produce quality NHL regulars but yes,  overall the higher pics pan out more often. As for how often a 4th ranked kid actually gets picked at 4 - I've never seen that analysis probably because there are too many different ranking agencies/supposed experts to get consistent consensus draft order rankings I'm guessing. 

 

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

Still waiting for the statistics crowd to give us an 'analytics' mock draft. Come on J.D.Burke/ CanucksArmy/ Corsi lovers, tell us who will be the players to draft ! I have a feeling that they will probably wait a couple of years and then tell us who we should have drafted.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 hour ago, SingleThorn said:

Still waiting for the statistics crowd to give us an 'analytics' mock draft. Come on J.D.Burke/ CanucksArmy/ Corsi lovers, tell us who will be the players to draft ! I have a feeling that they will probably wait a couple of years and then tell us who we should have drafted.

Canucks Army generally does a preliminary, midterm, and final ranking every year.

 

They don’t do a pure “analytics” ranking any more, but rather they synthesize the data from a few analytics models, the consensus rankings, scouting reports, and the eye test info from their own viewings.

 

Here’s their most recent 2018 draft rankings (December):

https://canucksarmy.com/2017/12/22/2018-nhl-draft-winter-rankings/

 

And here are their final rankings from 2017 and 2016:

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2017/06/22/canucks-armys-final-top-100-2017-nhl-draft-rankings/

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2016/06/23/the-nation-network-top-60-draft-profile-overview-and-summaries/

 

EDIT: For a pure analytics ranking, we’ll have to wait until the final SEAL adjusted numbers come out.

 

Or maybe Jeremy Davis will post a pGPS ranking (but he doesn’t seem to do this as much anymore but rather chooses to list pGPS a just one column in the chart showing data for his rankings).

 

Worth noting that not even the most enthusiastic fancy stats geek would use any single model (on its own) to determine a final draft order.

 

Edited January 23, 2018 by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

[SingleThorn]

Thanks to SID for the links. Interesting. My two current favourites, assuming we draft at #7/#8 are ranked at 10 and 21. My drafting preferences have been mediocre at best, but it will be interesting to follow these predictions.

 

PS.....assuming that Quinton Hughes is taller than 5'1 !

Edited January 23, 2018 by SingleThorn

[Camel Toe Drag]

4 hours ago, SingleThorn said:

Thanks to SID for the links. Interesting. My two current favourites, assuming we draft at #7/#8 are ranked at 10 and 21. My drafting preferences have been mediocre at best, but it will be interesting to follow these predictions.

 

PS.....assuming that Quinton Hughes is taller than 5'1 !

Lots of good D-men to be had. By the way this season is going I'm confident we will walk away with a very very good piece when the draft is done. 

[messier's_elbow]

2 hours ago, Camel Toe Drag said:

Lots of good D-men to be had. By the way this season is going I'm confident we will walk away with a very very good piece when the draft is done. 

The luxury of being a bottom feeder. 

[NHL'er]

Hows EP been doing lately? 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]