View Single Post
09-01-2011, 12:48 PM
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,249
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
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.
I cut it off at 3 years because I'd already calculated Pivonka's assist totals for those years. More laziness on my part than anything. Dead puck percentages are deceiving because the scoring was down, significantly, and everyone was lumped together. The elite players didn't have the ability to really set themselves apart from the rest of the talent pool because of the rules in place. For example, let's look at Sullivan's 4 best seasons, 99-00 to 02-03. Here are the differences in point totals from the guy in 1st to the guy in 25th: 25, 42(Jagr and Sakic were 1-2 and were both 20+ points ahead of number 3), 27, and 34. Here are the gaps from 1-25 in Pivonka's 4 best years: 81(Gretzky was way ahead in 1st, 2nd place Hull was 47 points ahead), 49, 63(Lemieux was 12 points ahead of 2nd place LaFontaine, who was 51 points ahead of 25th), and 76(Lemieux and Jagr were way ahead, 3rd place was still 35 points ahead of 25th). During the dead puck era, the elite players couldn't separate themselves from the pack in terms of point totals.

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.
We'll wait until comparing PK units then.

Pettersson won the Guldpucken award for the best player in the Swedish Elite League in 1960 and Kallur won it in 1979.
Indeed. I got crossed up looking at Pettersson's Wikipedia article because it said the Guldpucken was for the best player in the Swedish playoffs, and Kallur's LOH profile said he won the Swedish Player of the Year award for the SEL. I thought there was a sort of Hart Trophy/Conn Smythe thing, but I guess not.

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.
Kallur's best competition that I see is Mats Naslund and a young Anders Eldebrink. Did Pettersson compete against any guys of that caliber?

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.
Kapanen is also a midget.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote