View Single Post
Old
08-31-2011, 06:22 PM
  #47
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
I believe it was you guys that said you wanted to get Pivonka to center your 3rd line, so you must think fairly high of him.
We wanted Pivonka because we wanted a big two-way center in case we matched up against a team with lots of size down the middle in the playoffs. We ended up getting a good backup plan, Jeff Carter, who has had a much better peak than Pivonka, but without the career value. Since Philadelphia does not have much size up the middle, Carter stays on the bench when everyone is healthy.

Quote:
Sullivan has a better career adjusted PPG(.828 to .679). Both were primary playmakers, here are a breakdown of assist and point finishes and percentages.

Pivonka

Assists: 13, 16, 24, 38
Points: 28, 32, 40

Vs2 Assists: 74***, 66, 56*, 56
Vs2 Points: 65, 54**, 53

*2nd place Oates was 15 assists ahead of 3rd place
**2nd place Jagr was 29 points ahead of 3rd place
***there was a tie for 1st, so that's a vs3

Sullivan

Assists: 9, 23, 44
Points: 16, 33, 38

Vs2 Assists: 89***, 77, 60**
Vs2 Points: 84, 69, 64*

*2nd place Sakic was 22 points ahead of 3rd place Elias
**tie for 1st place between Oates and Jagr, so it's a Vs3
***tie for 1st place between St. Louis and Gomez, so it's a Vs3

It's important to note era here, Sullivan played in an era where everyone was much closer together, while Pivonka played in a very high scoring era where it was more difficult to achieve good numbers. Vs2 numbers in the dead puck era can be very deceiving. It's difficult to call these, I'll see what my opponents and the peanut gallery think.
Let me get this straight - Sullivan has a much career career adjusted points per game, and much higher percentage scores, yet it's "difficult to call?"

Why are Vs2 numbers in the dead puck era "deceiving" - because they illustrate how good your opponent's player actually is?

Is the reason you used a three season cutoff because Pivonka only has 3 seasons that meet the 50% standard? I have Sullivan with 7 such seasons:

84, 78*, 69, 67, 64**, 59, 53

*: Vs3, Sakic was 2 and outscored 3rd by 22 points
**: Vs3, Jagr was 2 and outscored 3rd by 17 points

Sullivan is a better offensive player than Pivonka and it isn't particularly close. Both have similar defensive reputations of "very good for scorers," but neither was elite. Both were hard workers, but Pivonka was much larger than Sullivan and therefore better at protecting the puck, so that's definitely a plus for him.

Quote:
That takes us to Anders Kallur and Ronald Pettersson, two Swedes. Pettersson looks like a guy that does a lot of things pretty well, but isn't elite at anything.
Basically. Pettersson is a kind of jack-of-all trades. Big, fast, hard worker, decent offensively and defensively.

Quote:
What was his competition like? 60s Sweden isn't really known as being the strongest league, and I really don't know much about his competition. His skill set looks like it would be fit for a PKer, but is there anything that actually says he was a PKer? There are things that hint at it like being a team player and hard working, but I don't see anything that says he actually killed penalties.
If there is information on Team Sweden's penalty killing units in the 50s and 60s, I have no idea where it is. Last I checked, there is no comprehensive statistical database for the World Championships, unfortunately, so we can't even check for SHGs.

Quote:
Kallur was an elite PKer and shorthanded threat on the Islanders dynasty teams.
Are we comparing PK units now or even strength third lines? Kallur is on your top PK pair and should be compared against Tippett when it comes to PK ability, not Pettersson.
Quote:
Did Pettersson ever lead his league in goals or win the Swedish Player of the Year Award? Kallur did. I don't know which league was better, but I would tend to think that late 70s Sweden was better than late 50s, early 60s Sweden.
Pettersson won the Guldpucken award for the best player in the Swedish Elite League in 1960 and Kallur won it in 1979. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guldpucken

I wouldn't be so swift to assume that the SEL was better in the late 70s. By that point, Sweden's best player, Salming, was in the NHL and not competing for the award.

It should be noted that Sweden won Gold at the World Championships in 1953, 1955, and 1962, a major reason why I think the 50s Soviets are so overrated in the ATD (and the Swedes of the period likely underrated). Between 1963 and 1986, only the USSR and CSSR won the Worlds.

Quote:
Kallur also has a 7th and 10th in Selke voting to add to his resume. I think Kallur is the more effective player overall.
Kallur is definitely the better defensive player between the two. I think he's the best defensive player on either third line. Eden Hall's best defensive guys are on our 4th line. I really don't care to spend the time going through their SEL finishes to try to figure out who was better offensively there, so we'll just say the major difference between them is that Kallur is better defensively.

The one advantage Pettersson has over Kallur is that he's much larger - especially when you take era into account. This is good, as it helps offset the fact that Sullivan is a midget.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote