Elias Pettersson | #40 | C

[Canorth]

1 hour ago, Green Building said:

With a name like "NHL equivalency points" my guess would be yes.

Indeed

[Canorth]

1 hour ago, baumerman77 said:

The numbers try to capture what would be the equivalent production in the NHL. So based on the the .58 figure quoted above. Pettersson so far would have 28 points (SHL) x .58 = 16.24 NHL points in 21 NHL games. 

 

It should be noted that NHLe tends to improve in accuracy greatly over larger sample sizes. So it might be better to wait until the end of the SHL season to really look at it. At that point more accurate translation factors should also be available. I would say the value in NHLe isn't its able to predict NHL production but rather it does a decent job in comparing prospects from across non-NHL leagues. It's a decent tool to look at when considering draft prospects. 

Maybe, but Patrick Kane also played in the NLA, a lesser league than the SHL (according to that chart), during the lockout. He scored 23 points in 20 games.

 

This formula estimates him at .43 x 23 = 9.89 projected NHL points at about .49 ppg. Thats an established cup winning star player that we know is at least a 1.0 ppg career player in the NHL. Thats quite the gap.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Canorth

[J-Dizzle]

6 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

I haven't said anything negative about the team in months, because our team is doing well and we seem to now have a plethera of prospects who are doing very well and some D-bag had to quote me from June, not to mention he got the wrong idea from my post.  Even when I am positive I get dragged in to this garbage.  What the hell am I" supposed to do to make you people happy?  

Well that's not very nice.

 

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

When people keep quoting him, the ignore function fails...

A little diversity in opinion is nice once in a while isn't it?  Even if it was (although apparently is no longer) incessant complaining about Virtanen :D 

 

 

@The 5th Line ..... I'll forgive the D-bag comment considering you did such an incredible job of using plethora in a sentence.  Well done my friend, well done.  

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:

A little diversity in opinion is nice once in a while isn't it? 

I have no problem with diversity. That's not why he's in ignore. 

[hammertime]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Elias is an elite goalie prospect!

[Rob_Zepp]

1 minute ago, hammertime said:

Elias is an elite goalie prospect!

Yup, and he only covers 2.1% of the net at his current weight.   Wait until he adds a few pounds.

[coastal.view]

12 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Yup, and he only covers 2.1% of the net at his current weight.   Wait until he adds a few pounds.

i bet you are are using the markstrom/nilsson swedish equivalency quotient there to reach your conclusion?

[Rob_Zepp]

7 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

i bet you are are using the markstrom/nilsson swedish equivalency quotient there to reach your conclusion?

LOL.   Absolutely.   I would take approximately 9.8 Elias Petterson's to equate to one Nilsson.   As Nilsson is the evolved form of Markstrom but plays fewer games due to the "Green-Time-Continuum", you simply divide the weight differential by the respective save percentages, consider gravitation pull of Jupiter whist dividing by Avogadro's number before rounding back to the Corsi normalized size of Horvat's Head.    All pretty straightforward when you sit down and think about it.

[Derp...]

1 hour ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

So 21 x 3.9 = 81.963 (roughly 82)

Meaning that Pettersson's 16.24 points multiplied by 3.9 would be his current NHL projection this year.

 

So if Pettersson were in the NHL this year, and his current numbers were extrapolated over an 82 game season, his total points would be 63.336, so let's say 63. 63 points in 82 games.

 

Yay math!

 

1 hour ago, baumerman77 said:

The numbers try to capture what would be the equivalent production in the NHL. So based on the the .58 figure quoted above. Pettersson so far would have 28 points (SHL) x .58 = 16.24 NHL points in 21 NHL games. 

 

It should be noted that NHLe tends to improve in accuracy greatly over larger sample sizes. So it might be better to wait until the end of the SHL season to really look at it. At that point more accurate translation factors should also be available. I would say the value in NHLe isn't its able to predict NHL production but rather it does a decent job in comparing prospects from across non-NHL leagues. It's a decent tool to look at when considering draft prospects. 

I would have to say that the NHLe for the SHL is a little closer to 0.70 at the moment. At least with 19-20 year old players that would seem to be a better number.

The older they get the lower the translation, the younger the higher it is.

Rasmus Dahlin for example would only project as a 22 point D man with the 0.58 NHLe. Nylander would have projected as a 15 point guy in his draft year, and 45 point guy in his D+1. William Karlsson projected as a 26 point player at age 20 in the SHL and now looks like he could score 50 points this year.

Elias Lindholm in his u19 (Draft) SHL season had 30/48, you would need a 0.75 NHLe to get to his NHL numbers with Carolina.

In fact Lindholm and Nylander have performed at almost identical rates in the NHL as the SHL. Their individual NHLe is 90% or better.

William Karlsson has a SHL point production of 0.63 which would be 50 points in the NHL. He's on pace for 78 points this year and his PDO is only 99.4.

Kevin Fiala is another example, currently scoring at a 0.62 point per game clip in the NHL, and in the SHL he scored at 0.68

It's getting to the point where I might even say u19 SHL players have a 1:1 NHLe

Since Pettersson just turned 19 he is in theory going to be able to produce at a similar rate in the NHL to the SHL this season. Forsberg did it, Backstrom, Sedins, Naslund, and many more top players.

[Canuck_In_Paradise]

On 10/31/2017 at 4:58 PM, canuckpuckluck15 said:

Homebrew you are definitely in the wrong place....this is CDC. Stop showing off and start some ridiculous thread about trading Eriksson and a bag of pucks for Stamkos otherwise you may just get banned. 

Hawai'i island (the big island) is one of the places that would be perfect for geothermal energy extraction due to the Volcano located right in the heart of the island. However, there are obviously the environmental concerns with dealing with geothermal fracking and other such procedures, in addition to the cultural issues facing the scientists/businessmen. The Hawaiians believe the mother of the island Pele's being and soul is located in all parts of the island (rock, trees, etc.) so desecrating those by fracking would cause quite a big hoorah. 

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

32 minutes ago, Derp... said:

 

I would have to say that the NHLe for the SHL is a little closer to 0.70 at the moment. At least with 19-20 year old players that would seem to be a better number.

The older they get the lower the translation, the younger the higher it is.

Rasmus Dahlin for example would only project as a 22 point D man with the 0.58 NHLe. Nylander would have projected as a 15 point guy in his draft year, and 45 point guy in his D+1. William Karlsson projected as a 26 point player at age 20 in the SHL and now looks like he could score 50 points this year.

Elias Lindholm in his u19 (Draft) SHL season had 30/48, you would need a 0.75 NHLe to get to his NHL numbers with Carolina.

In fact Lindholm and Nylander have performed at almost identical rates in the NHL as the SHL. Their individual NHLe is 90% or better.

William Karlsson has a SHL point production of 0.63 which would be 50 points in the NHL. He's on pace for 78 points this year and his PDO is only 99.4.

Kevin Fiala is another example, currently scoring at a 0.62 point per game clip in the NHL, and in the SHL he scored at 0.68

It's getting to the point where I might even say u19 SHL players have a 1:1 NHLe

Since Pettersson just turned 19 he is in theory going to be able to produce at a similar rate in the NHL to the SHL this season. Forsberg did it, Backstrom, Sedins, Naslund, and many more top players.

When it comes to prospects, I like to think of NHLe as what they’d be scoring if they were to walk onto the Canucks (or another NHL team) right now.

 

So maybe a 17 year old Dahlin would only score 22 points (if he someone managed to play in the NHL this year—but he’d need a really good fake ID ).

 

Or Pettersson, based on 0.58 (which I agree is low and I prefer “Wilson” NHLe that’s closer to 0.70), would be on a 63 point pace if he was currently playing with Brock, Bo, and the boys on the 2017-18 Canucks.

 

But as these are developing prospects, the equivalencies only have transient value, and will almost assuredly be higher next year. They will improve, whether in the SHL, AHL, or NHL, so their equivalencies will go up as they develop. They are not projections (in terms of prime career numbers). Merely indications of the equivalent value of their points production today.

 

For a fully developed player, NHLe has more projective value. Take a Dadanov, whose recent KHL production suggested he could be as much as a 75 point per season NHL player in his remaining prime years (before he hits age related decline). And so far this year, he’s on something like a 68 point pace, so NHLe is proving fairly accurate in his case.

[Horvats_Big_Head]

On 11/23/2017 at 11:02 AM, Rob_Zepp said:

You think you can block my stoyle, and yet you cannot. HAHA...

[Derp...]

1 hour ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

When it comes to prospects, I like to think of NHLe as what they’d be scoring if they were to walk onto the Canucks (or another NHL team) right now.

 

So maybe a 17 year old Dahlin would only score 22 points (if he someone managed to play in the NHL this year—but he’d need a really good fake ID ).

 

Or Pettersson, based on 0.58 (which I agree is low and I prefer “Wilson” NHLe that’s closer to 0.70), would be on a 63 point pace if he was currently playing with Brock, Bo, and the boys on the 2017-18 Canucks.

 

But as these are developing prospects, the equivalencies only have transient value, and will almost assuredly be higher next year. They will improve, whether in the SHL, AHL, or NHL, so their equivalencies will go up as they develop. They are not projections (in terms of prime career numbers). Merely indications of the equivalent value of their points production today.

 

For a fully developed player, NHLe has more projective value. Take a Dadanov, whose recent KHL production suggested he could be as much as a 75 point per season NHL player in his remaining prime years (before he hits age related decline). And so far this year, he’s on something like a 68 point pace, so NHLe is proving fairly accurate in his case.

NHLe is kind of useless then in this case if it isnt helping predict what a prospects contribution will be once they make the NHL. 

 

I dont really want to know what Pettersson would be scoring in the NHL this year because he wont be in the NHL this year. 

 

Now if we can forecast what his progress should be next year based on this year then I wanna know. 

 

For example if we could say the first year after a prospect comes to the NHL from SHL they score 50% of their SHL production, but by year 3 they reach 100%. Then I have something to hang my hat on.

[Tre Mac]

Elitias Perfecttersson

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

57 minutes ago, Derp... said:

NHLe is kind of useless then in this case if it isnt helping predict what a prospects contribution will be once they make the NHL. 

 

I dont really want to know what Pettersson would be scoring in the NHL this year because he wont be in the NHL this year. 

 

Now if we can forecast what his progress should be next year based on this year then I wanna know. 

 

For example if we could say the first year after a prospect comes to the NHL from SHL they score 50% of their SHL production, but by year 3 they reach 100%. Then I have something to hang my hat on.

Yeah, that’s why those other models (PCS, pGPS, etc) that look at the cohort of closest comparable players tend to give a better indication of what a prospect’s career might eventually look like. They identify a historical group of statistically similar players, and then give you the percentage of those players that went on to NHL success and the average production they enjoyed during their careers. These models still have their flaws, but they do provide better predictive value.

 

Although I wouldn’t say NHLe is useless. You can probably get a pretty good idea of what a prospect might accomplish from year-to-year, and from league-to-league, but the predictive value is very short term.

 

Maybe a more sensitive NHLe model that looked at players of specific ages and offered separate equivalencies for 18, 19, 20, etc year olds would be an idea. But lumping 18-year-olds in with every player of every age who moves between leagues definitely has its flaws, in terms of predicting future production. You have the young group, who should improve, prime age players, who should stay roughly the same, and older guys, who will decline. And the whole group’s results get used to create the equivalency factor (at least as I understand it), which has some obvious flaws when it comes to applying those factors to a developing player (at least when it comes to long term predictions).

 

EDIT: Actually the SEAL (situational, era, age, and league adjusted scoring) model does a lot of what I’m suggesting, as it creates an equivalency that accounts for several factors, including age. But it’s still just about predicting results for the next season, and doesn’t look any further than that.

Edited November 26, 2017 by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

[Derp...]

36 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, that’s why those other models (PCS, pGPS, etc) that look at the cohort of closest comparable players tend to give a better indication of what a prospect’s career might eventually look like. They identify a historical group of statistically similar players, and then give you the percentage of those players that went on to NHL success and the average production they enjoyed during their careers. These models still have their flaws, but they do provide better predictive value.

 

Although I wouldn’t say NHLe is useless. You can probably get a pretty good idea of what a prospect might accomplish from year-to-year, and from league-to-league, but the predictive value is very short term.

 

Maybe a more sensitive NHLe model that looked at players of specific ages and offered separate equivalencies for 18, 19, 20, etc year olds would be an idea. But lumping 18-year-olds in with every player of every age who moves between leagues definitely has its flaws, in terms of predicting future production. You have the young group, who should improve, prime age players, who should stay roughly the same, and older guys, who will decline. And the whole group’s results get used to create the equivalency factor (at least as I understand it), which has some obvious flaws when it comes to applying those factors to a developing player (at least when it comes to long term predictions).

 

EDIT: Actually the SEAL (situational, era, age, and league adjusted scoring) model does a lot of what I’m suggesting, as it creates an equivalency that accounts for several factors, including age. But it’s still just about predicting results for the next season, and doesn’t look any further than that.

I recall Pettersson's SEAL adjusted scoring was top in the draft class. 

 

Depending on how well the metric works it could be a good indicator of future success in prospects. 

 

At least with Pettersson it seems to be on point. 

 

Thanks for the info

[Chronic.Canuck]

3 hours ago, Derp... said:

It's getting to the point where I might even say u19 SHL players have a 1:1 NHLe

How dare you 

[RetroCanuck]

1 hour ago, Tre Mac said:

Elitias Perfecttersson

thats just sad

 

[canuckistani]

On 11/24/2017 at 11:46 PM, higgyfan said:

Have you forgotten Gaudette?

Gaudette has a long, long, long way to go to be considered elite centre-man prospect. Bo is not elite and he is like 10x more developed than Adam.

 

[48MPHSlapShot]

1 hour ago, canuckistani said:

Gaudette has a long, long, long way to go to be considered elite centre-man prospect. Bo is not elite and he is like 10x more developed than Adam.

 

You didn't say "elite" though. You said "solid", and I think it's pretty safe to say that Gaudette is a pretty damn "solid" center prospect.

 

On 11/24/2017 at 10:33 PM, canuckistani said:

You are not getting my point. 

I will say this one last time : having 5-6 top flight wingers and 1 solid centre between them, is a bad idea. Which means if Peterson doesnt pan out at C, we are most likely trading one of Peterson,Dahlen,Baertschi or Lind to get a centreman.