Quote:
Originally Posted by Pengwin7
It's a pretty bad comparison, dyz... to just look at 7 games for this season when there is a 30-game sample from last season in the AHL & NHL for each player.
Heck, Eric Staal started last season with 5pts in his first 16games... and it included a 7 game pointless streak. So?
re: Rundblad. I've discussed his SEL numbers previously. The guy put up nice numbers in a league where Byron Ritchie was the 5th highest scorer. Top Swedish talent is in the NHL these days. Back in the 80s & 90s, I would've given more cred to stats put up in the SEL and THAT is why the Lidstroms and Zetterbergs translated so well over to the NHL - because when THEY played in the SEL, it was more competitive and more talent was still there.
You've also got last year's NHL comparison:
Elliott,S.: 39gp, 4G, 9A, 13pts, +2, 84 SOG.
Rundblad: 30gp, 1G, 7A, 8pts, -12, 34 SOG.
The two guys played almost equivalent games last year in equivalent leagues and Elliott was clearly the better player (statistically).
From the NHL games I've watched, Elliott is the better player (skill-wise).
I really think pointing to this year's 7 game AHL sample is in pretty poor judgment.
(You better then that man!) |
I think you're missing a major point here, Pengwino.
We're talking about a guy who's spent his entire life playing on NHL-ice vs. a player who was playing on NHL-ice for the first time in his life last season. For that reason I don't really see why last years totals should be considered much more seriously than this years short samples. Both are flawed comparisons.
Elliott put up 81 points in 71 games as a 20 year old in the WHL. Let's compare that to another notable Avs prospect, Tyson Barrie.
As a
19 year old, he put up 58 points in 54 games (2 years after draft). As an 18 year old he put up 72 points in 63 games (post-draft year). And as a 17 year old draft eligible player he put up 52 points in 68 games (Draft year).
So.. draft year: 0.76 ppg
Post-draft: 1.14 ppg
2 years: 1.07 ppg
Elliott draft year: 0.77 ppg
Post-draft: 0.90 ppg
2 years: 1.14 ppg
What's the point? Barrie averaged more points, at a younger age (July vs. January birthday) over a 3-year span in the WHL than Elliott.
Yet for some reason, Elliott is considered a future 50+ point d-man while Barrie is projected as maybe a steady 40 point guy?
This may be getting off track... I'm just saying based on WHL stats, and given Elliott's age while producing them, it's not all that impressive.
Just for further comparison... let's look at Jon Blum.
Draft year: 0.71 ppg
Post-draft: 1 ppg
2 years: 1.29 ppg
First year AHL: 0.5 ppg
Elliotts first year AHL (much smaller sample size): 0.5 ppg and 0.33 ppg in the NHL.
Blum went on to 0.63 ppg in the AHL and 0.35 ppg in the NHL the following season.
So... point is I've outlined two WHL d-men with similiar (although in both cases, their production was better than Elliott in the WHL) who went on to post better numbers in the AHL than Elliott as well (significantly better actually IMO).
Toss Barrie or Blum's name into this vs. Rundblad thread and I feel like the voting would be different. Elliott gets a lot of hype.
