Top 20 Leagues?

[Namejs]

So you took the AHLe of EBEL players and then applied the NHLe of the given value? Does that sound even to you like great analysis? The NHLe is designed for one thing. It's designed to predict prospect performance in the NHL. It's tailored to that end. Take the OHL NHLe for example. It's about .3. An OHL player who scored 30 points in 60 games should score 13 points in the NHL. We both know that wouldn't happen. Ever. But the number takes into account players like say Kirby Dach, who go straight from the CHL to the NHL, so it's skewed towards the improvement curves of these higher end prospects. A 19 year old with .5 PPG would not even get 13 points in the NHL, the body of evidence suggests they likely wouldn't even get that many points in the AHL. But that's fine. Because that highlights the purpose of NHLe. NHLe is meant to project NHL prospects and their performance in the NHL. NHLe is a model meant to predict the performance of a guy like Kirby Dach, or a guy like Pierre Luc Dubois. It's not meant to predict the performance of just any 19 year old in the CHL. Furthermore, you're not doing principled statistical work. You haven't, to this point, mentioned the EBEL NHLe value. You haven't mentioned the ECHL NHLe value, and you haven't mentioned any of the NHLe values of the various D1 Conferences. Now you say you took the AHLe (more like the EBELe actually) of 65 players, with year skipping, with zero regards for the modalities surrounding such statistics, and you came up with a number that you're not providing. Neither have you mentioned the ECHL AHLe or the NCAA AHLe. So you say you're using statistics but the one thing you haven't provided is statistics. That's not principled application of statistics.


Actually, it's extremely pertinent and has many of the relevant modalities. Your only argument against is basically assertion, which can be dismissed by hitchen's razor. A 19 year old is more likely to receive prominent usage, as is a paid import who is both a financial asset and takes up points in the point cap system. A 16 year old is less likely to receive prominent usage, as is a rookie in say the ECHL, or an unpaid NCAA player who isn't an asset. Individuals exceptions may exist but with large numbers these truths will bear themselves out. The 19 year old and the paid asset will have more player time over a large sample than the 16 year old and the rookie. The same is true of improvement. You have to realize that no one comes straight from the NCAA to the EBEL. You obviously don't care because you have no problems with year skipping. The ones who come are selected by their drastic improvements. Players who have comes straight from the NCAA to the EBEL have typically not done well. The players who are in the NCAA at some point and eventually make it to the EBEL are those who show drastic improvements in the ECHL and/or the AHL or other European leagues such that they are hired as imports. That's a systematic bias. So even if it was the case that the improvement level for a player in the AHL or ECHL at a certain age was generally not very high, we are selecting in this case specifically players who did improve a lot, such that they went from having X stats in the NCAA to dominating the ECHL or doing well enough in the AHL. So this situation is actually far more like a 16 year old and a 19 year old in the OHL than even say a 26 year old and a 27 year old going from the KHL to the NHL, a more typical NHLe context.


Again, you just assert things, no evidence offered or required. The difference even between a 20 year old and a 23 year old is huge, much less a 25 year old. Even an excellent 20 year old will likely do better at 21, and then at 22, etc, until they reach a scoring plateau. So you could run the exact same experiment and find that the AHL was a stronger league when a kid is 20 than when he is 22. Again, exceptions exist. Some players regress. But over a large sample, the older versions of the same players will score more, and by your "model", the league will be proven weaker. And again, as with any import hiring, there is an intentional selection factor built in hiring players who improve the most. Just like KHL imports but to a lower scale, the players are hired most who show the most improvement to the point that they are strong candidates for hire. It would be so incredibly disingenuous if I took a player like Brian O'Neill and referenced his 2012-13 totals in the AHL and his KHL totals and said "the difference between a 20 year old, a 25 year old, and a 30 year old is negligible, so the AHL is stronger than the KHL." No it's not. Precisely because KHL teams hired him BECAUSE he improved. They hired him BECAUSE he was not the same player at 20 that he was at 25 or 30. If he had remained the same player that he was in 2012, they never would have hired him. The same is true of the EBEL. The EBEL hires NCAA players who played pro and improved in professional play such that they proved that they were capable of being valuable assets in the EBEL. So even if the general body of 20-25-30 year olds do not improve, which is not the case, but even if we granted this non-truth, it is not true of the sample size in question. Which is why we do not skip years. And by the way, NHLe statisticians do not skip years either. No NHL statistician is going over their team's prospect's NHLes from 3 years ago. They're crunching the recent numbers. Because only the most recent numbers reflect the improvement that has or has not taken place over time.

In talking about peak age and age related drop in productivity, I assumed it was general knowledge. Or that you are capable of looking things up online.

This is not a peer reviewed scientific journal. This isn't scientific research at all. It's a quick statistical comparison using the best tool available for us in cross-league comparison.

If usage rate for EBEL players is so skewed, it logically follows that they were so poor in ECHL/AHL, that they couldn't even land meaningful minutes or PP time. You're shooting yourself in the foot by using that as an argument. If they were so underused in North America and improved so much in EBEL, there should be droves of EBEL players in NHL and AHL. Where are they?

You claimed that EBEL imports improved drastically, but the truth is that they joined EBEL because they couldn't make it in North America. They weren't very good, so they went overseas. It's not the other way around.

NHLe is generally used in assessing prospects but it's a great tool in cross-league comparisons.

And I provided the evidence. The NHLes, the average production rate, number of players involved.

Your claim that EBEL imports somehow tend to magically improve in their mid-20s is absolute hogwash.

 

[kudla]

This season, there have been 10 canadians in Tipsport Liga who came right from ECHL. I found interviews with 2 players who were asked to compare the leagues. One stated, that the quality was really similar and the second stated that Tipsport Liga was better. Since according to hfboards, EBEL is better than Tipsport liga, I wouldn't say that ECHL is better than EBEL. It's close though.

 

[SoundAndFury]

Money plays no role in this. 0. ECHL has way more higher caliber players.

Again, you choose to ignore how real life works.

Any good ECHL player moves to Europe. For money. As soon as someone is willing to pay them. And yet you maintain this ridiculous stance of yours how "ECHL has way more higher caliber players". If they are truly high caliber, they don't play in the ECHL after 1-2 years. Some stick around a little longer if they have NHL dream and are given some AHL opportunities. The older players who dominate the ECHL stat sheets mostly couldn't cut it in Europe and decided to come back:

Jesse Schultz (league's leading scorer last year) - bounced around few European leagues, cut from Nove Zamky, Slovakia
David Pacan - back to ECHL after meh season with Kosice, Slovakia
Zach O'Brien - cut from Ravensburg, DEL2
David Vallorani - cut from Almtuna, Allsvenskan
Ryan Rupert - cut from Sheffield, EIHL. Still elected to play in Romania this year despite being the leading scorer on his team last season
Josh Shalla - Rupert's (^that guy) linemate last 2 years, cut from Nottingham previously, EIHL
Tanner Sorenson - cut from Winterthur, NLB
Shawn Szydlowski - cut from Frisk Asker, Norway
Dante Salituro - cut from Saipa, Liiga
Wacey Rabbit - the guy with a very interesting career, last cut from Corona Brasov, Erste League

They are all in top-30 of scoring last year, those are the high profile players you talk about.

Money in Europe, be it EBEL or any other league, makes the selection process competitive. If you don't cut it the other "high caliber player" from ECHL will be there to take your place. Those guys I've listed have been proven to not cut it, most in the lower-profile league than EBEL. Yet, you maintain the ECHL level is very good and they are what makes it great. That's just not the case. Just like you ignored the average guy in NCAA, you keep ignoring the ECHL guys who moved to Erste Liga, to AlpsHL, EIHL, wherever and never approach the level of EBEL or leagues alike.

You quite clearly ignore all the guys (at very least two dozens of them) in the EBEL who are 2 steps above the ECHL level I have talked before.
You say money doesn't matter. Because reasons.
You clearly ignore the players who are below the EBEL [impact player] level yet very successful in the ECHL.
Beating other European teams is meaningless to you.

So you know, at the end of the day, this floor you have given doesn't do much good. Because like I've said, you ignore every metric you do not agree with in favor of that one you do.

You claimed that EBEL imports improved drastically, but the truth is that they joined EBEL because they couldn't make it in North America. They weren't very good, so they went overseas. It's not the other way around.

This sentence just illustrates perfectly how misinformed you are. To most ECHL players, getting a job in Europe is making it because that's where the money is. Most of the guys in the ECHL know full well they aren't NHL material and European leagues pay better than any other minor league in NA. It is exactly the other way around. I just provided the list of guys who came back just because they were forced to come back. Because they didn't make it in Europe. And some of them still rather try 2nd time and go to Romania than stay in the ECHL.

Because they are under pressure from guys like Brent Regner, who was #1 D on the Calder Cup finals team, but decided to go to Europe after Salzburg threw a contract, likely ~200k p/y, to play in the EBEL. Because that's the reality you refuse to acknowledge. Almost any upper echelon EBEL team will be able to sign a solid AHL guy. Look at the years Bolzano won the cup. And they are far from the richest team.

 

[kabidjan18]

In talking about peak age and age related drop in productivity, I assumed it was general knowledge. Or that you are capable of looking things up online.

It's quite well recognized that between 25 and 30, player performance tends to plateau or stabilize. Your theory that it starts at 20, while necessary to your claim, I think is held by no one in the industry of hockey. The ironic thing is that NCAA hockey usually runs 19-23. You would literally be arguing that NCAA players don't improve year to year so you don't see statistical increases from year to year and that's just factually incorrect. No one but you and me is reading this far, but if someone did, they'd think you were pretty silly.

This is not a peer reviewed scientific journal. This isn't scientific research at all. It's a quick statistical comparison using the best tool available for us in cross-league comparison.

You say it's a statistical comparison. You've offered no statistics. There have been no numbers in your statements. If you don't have any plans to use numbers, don't use the word "statistics", full stop.

If usage rate for EBEL players is so skewed, it logically follows that they were so poor in ECHL/AHL, that they couldn't even land meaningful minutes or PP time. You're shooting yourself in the foot by using that as an argument. If they were so underused in North America and improved so much in EBEL, there should be droves of EBEL players in NHL and AHL. Where are they?

You're working pretty hard to misconstrue the original argument. I was using this in 3 respects right. The first was what I outlined. It doesn't matter if someone in the EBEL had low usage in the AHL because we weren't discussing the EBEL vs. AHL. We were discussing NCAA vs. EBEL. So we were talking about NCAA usage rates, in which I'm pretty sure I had an exact statement "no one comes straight from the NCAA to the EBEL", that's why I'm also pretty sure I mentioned that NCAA players aren't financial assets, they don't count differently towards an import cap. So that's a demonstration that there is a systemic bias that causes import ice times to be higher than average NCAA final-year athletes. An NCAA senior may get a lot of playing time, but unlike an EBEL hire it's not in his job description, so he may or he may not, and many do not, many develop in the pros in NA, in the ECHL or the AHL. Because again, re-centering the discussion, the discussion was about comparing the stats of 22 year old NCAA players to their 26 year old EBEL selves.

Also, in the cases where you're allowed to use year-skipping, what I'm doing is I'm barring year-picking. You can't, like with the Lebler case, take his year in the AHL/ECHL, and then his second year in Linz, and ignore the first. Similarly, you can't pick a first year of an ECHL guy who either went on to have a better ECHL season, or moved up to the AHL for the remained of the intervening period, or had some statistical progression in a European league, I'm barring that. By saying "obviously, this guy when he first came into the ECHL had only 15 minutes a game, but by the time he was an AHL regular, that wouldn't have been the case, and it wasn't the case when he moved to the EBEL."

Finally. You don't know much about the EBEL but EBEL clubs are notorious for stacking the most playing time on their top lines in order to avoid usage of lower lines. So even compared to normal hockey clubs, EBEL teams will give their imports higher usage rates. Not that you'd care, but it's true.

You claimed that EBEL imports improved drastically, but the truth is that they joined EBEL because they couldn't make it in North America. They weren't very good, so they went overseas. It's not the other way around.

@SoundAndFury put it as well as anyone could. But I'm just going to develop further on that. "North America" is not a league. "North America" is a continent. EBEL players are usually either lower-level AHL players or the very top ECHL players. Some better teams hire AHL/NHL players. It used to be almost exclusively AHL players, but recently (I mean like past 5 years) it's been discovered that top ECHL players can also been really good, and an elite ECHL player may be more used to playing heavy EBEL-like minutes and playing in key situations than a middling AHL player. But to say they couldn't make it in "North America", that's just nonsensical because it's a continent not a league. EBEL players are those who failed to make the NHL. Occasionally, for poorer clubs, they are high-level ECHL players who never really broke it into the AHL.

In addition to the guys Soundandfury mentioned, you can look it up too. Caleb Herbert, #4 scorer in the ECHL last year, went to HC Innsbruck, which is actually one of the poorer clubs in the EBEL. The #11 Chris Collins scorer went to VSV, which is one of the 3 poorest teams in the league, where he's roughly a 2-3 C. Last year's top ECHL defenseman in PPG, Kevin Spinozzi, went to Bolzano for the start of the year but got cut. Most good ECHL players at some point try to make a paycheck overseas, because it pays better. Some do not. Some prefer to stay close to home and family, and pursue an education on the side, that's respectable as well. Also, there is a no-hire stigma against older ECHL players. One of the scouts in the Austrian community (a former NHL scout) released a statement like a year ago warning clubs against hiring top-scoring ECHL players who are near 30 or perhaps even older because they aren't EBEL quality. So again, what league is "North America"? It's not a league. EBEL players certainly failed to make it in the NHL, though quite a few have some NHL experience, none of them failed to make it in the ECHL...

NHLe is generally used in assessing prospects but it's a great tool in cross-league comparisons.

And I provided the evidence. The NHLes, the average production rate, number of players involved.

Your claim that EBEL imports somehow tend to magically improve in their mid-20s is absolute hogwash.

I've lost interest in the NHLe discussion because you haven't provided any. You reference anecdotes like Brian Lebler. That's it. You've referenced no numbers. So stop teasing numbers. You have numbers or you don't have numbers. And it looks like you don't have numbers.

 

[Namejs]

Again, you choose to ignore how real life works.

You choose to ignore how statistical analysis works.

You claim the good ones come over. OK, fine.

Once they do come over, they systematically produce more in some leagues and systematically produce less points in some other leagues.

That is my entire point. They tend to produce MORE points in EBEL than in ECHL.

Somehow they produce fewer points in other leagues, be it DEL or Allsvenskan or some other league.

That difference in production rates shows us how easy or tough the opposition is in each respective league. Ergo, DEL is a better league than EBEL, because it is harder to score and rack up points.

EBEL is a worse league than ECHL not because it pays more or has some real good players or any other reason. That would be absurd.

It is worse, because it clearly is easier to score there than in ECHL.

That's it. You keep discarding this point as irrelevant, but in that case any and all statistics are meaningless and it is impossible to rank anything.

 

[Namejs]

This season, there have been 10 canadians in Tipsport Liga who came right from ECHL. I found interviews with 2 players who were asked to compare the leagues. One stated, that the quality was really similar and the second stated that Tipsport Liga was better. Since according to hfboards, EBEL is better than Tipsport liga, I wouldn't say that ECHL is better than EBEL. It's close though.

There are 41 players with ECHL experience (Min 10 GP in both leagues) in Tippsport league this season.

Their average rate of production in ECHL is 0.56 PPG.

Their average rate of production in Slovakia is 0.64 PPG.

ECHL is a better league. But the difference is smaller than I expected and the Slovakian league should probably move 1 or 2 places up in my rankings. It looks like the level has increased recently.

 

[Namejs]

Again, you choose to ignore how real life works.

Any good ECHL player moves to Europe. For money. As soon as someone is willing to pay them. And yet you maintain this ridiculous stance of yours how "ECHL has way more higher caliber players". If they are truly high caliber, they don't play in the ECHL after 1-2 years. Some stick around a little longer if they have NHL dream and are given some AHL opportunities. The older players who dominate the ECHL stat sheets mostly couldn't cut it in Europe and decided to come back:

Jesse Schultz (league's leading scorer last year) - bounced around few European leagues, cut from Nove Zamky, Slovakia
David Pacan - back to ECHL after meh season with Kosice, Slovakia
Zach O'Brien - cut from Ravensburg, DEL2
David Vallorani - cut from Almtuna, Allsvenskan
Ryan Rupert - cut from Sheffield, EIHL. Still elected to play in Romania this year despite being the leading scorer on his team last season
Josh Shalla - Rupert's (^that guy) linemate last 2 years, cut from Nottingham previously, EIHL
Tanner Sorenson - cut from Winterthur, NLB
Shawn Szydlowski - cut from Frisk Asker, Norway
Dante Salituro - cut from Saipa, Liiga
Wacey Rabbit - the guy with a very interesting career, last cut from Corona Brasov, Erste League

They are all in top-30 of scoring last year, those are the high profile players you talk about.

Money in Europe, be it EBEL or any other league, makes the selection process competitive. If you don't cut it the other "high caliber player" from ECHL will be there to take your place. Those guys I've listed have been proven to not cut it, most in the lower-profile league than EBEL. Yet, you maintain the ECHL level is very good and they are what makes it great. That's just not the case. Just like you ignored the average guy in NCAA, you keep ignoring the ECHL guys who moved to Erste Liga, to AlpsHL, EIHL, wherever and never approach the level of EBEL or leagues alike.

You quite clearly ignore all the guys (at very least two dozens of them) in the EBEL who are 2 steps above the ECHL level I have talked before.
You say money doesn't matter. Because reasons.
You clearly ignore the players who are below the EBEL [impact player] level yet very successful in the ECHL.
Beating other European teams is meaningless to you.

So you know, at the end of the day, this floor you have given doesn't do much good. Because like I've said, you ignore every metric you do not agree with in favor of that one you do.



This sentence just illustrates perfectly how misinformed you are. To most ECHL players, getting a job in Europe is making it because that's where the money is. Most of the guys in the ECHL know full well they aren't NHL material and European leagues pay better than any other minor league in NA. It is exactly the other way around. I just provided the list of guys who came back just because they were forced to come back. Because they didn't make it in Europe. And some of them still rather try 2nd time and go to Romania than stay in the ECHL.

Because they are under pressure from guys like Brent Regner, who was #1 D on the Calder Cup finals team, but decided to go to Europe after Salzburg threw a contract, likely ~200k p/y, to play in the EBEL. Because that's the reality you refuse to acknowledge. Almost any upper echelon EBEL team will be able to sign a solid AHL guy. Look at the years Bolzano won the cup. And they are far from the richest team.

Once again, salary budget and the ability to sign AHL players is only indicative of just that - their ability to sign AHL vets.

If their production in ECHL was lower than in EBEL, EBEL is a weaker league, even if they receive 1M€ a year.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

I don’t quite get how several posters would rank Liiga above the SHL. In the European club tournament CHL, the SHL has been represented in the finals each time, and only lost once. Seven SHL finals appearances and five championships out of six possible, to Liiga’s two appearances and one championship. In this year’s tournament, three out of four teams in the semifinals were from the SHL.

The Euro Hockey Tour and the World Championships can’t actually be the way of measuring the quality of the leagues now, or can it?

Here’s how the CHL ranks the leagues, by the way. This ranking is based on performance in the tournament.

 

[kabidjan18]

That is my entire point. They tend to produce MORE points in EBEL than in ECHL.

The funny thing is that I was perusing player pages yesterday of all the imports and I'm pretty sure this is a false statement even if we grant your ridiculous premise. So I put it to the test and compiled the numbers myself. This is all the current season EBEL players who are veterans of the ECHL, excluding players with 10 games or less in either league for the typical sampling size concerns.

Players who scored higher PPGs in the EBEL: (From Innsbruck) Michael Boivin. (From Dornbirn) Olivier Magnan, Mikko Vainoinen. (From Szekesfehervar) None. (From Znaim) None. (From Linz) Brian Lebler, Troy Rutkowski. (From Villach) Kevin Schmidt, Jerry Pollastrone. (From Bozen) Brett Flemming, Sebastian Sylvestre. (From Graz) Charlie Dodero, Dwight King (yes, the LA Kings Dwight King, played poorly in the ECHL in 2009 as a 20 year old), Colton Yellow Horn. (From Klagenfurt) None. (From Vienna) Mark Flood, Ty Loney. (From Salzburg) None.

Total: 14

Players who scored higher PPGs in the ECHL: (From Innsbruck) Caleb Herbert, Tyler Spurgeon, John Lammers, Joel Broda, Sacha Guimond. (From Dornbirn) William Rapuzzi, Evan Trupp. (From Szekesfehervar) Michael Caruso, Andrew Yogan. (From Znaim) Kevin Tansey, Rob Flick. (From Linz) Matt Finn, Dan DaSilva, Hunter Fejes. (From Villach) Jamie Fraser, Chris Collins. (From Bozen) Tim Daly, Domenic Alberga, Stefano Giliati, Dante Hannoun, Angelo Miceli, Kevin Spinozzi. (From Graz) Trevor Hamilton, Matt Garbowsky. (From Klagenfurt) Adam Comrie, David Fischer, Matthew Neal, Nick Peterson. (From Vienna) Alex Wall, Taylor Vause. (From Salzburg) Bud Holloway.

Total: 31

So. Even if we were to be extremely generous. And, for the sake of argument, grant you every single condition that you desire. Player usages are all the same. Players do not improve. And on and on. And we just play your game. No variables, no extra considerations, just your game as you wanted it. We give you everything you want and how do the actual numbers come out? Very decisively. 31 players had higher PPG totals in the ECHL, to only 14 in the EBEL. This is probably why I kept prodding for numbers and you never actually produced numbers. You knew that you were wrong. You knew that the numbers didn't tell the story you wanted them to tell. Almost 70% of players who played in both leagues scored more in the ECHL than in the EBEL. By your own rules, your own standards, not mine, that should indicate that your conclusion was flawed, even if your reasoning was presumed to be correct.

That's it. You keep discarding this point as irrelevant, but in that case any and all statistics are meaningless and it is impossible to rank anything.

Again, you say the word "statistics." But you never mentioned a single number. You never provided a statistic. So there is nothing to discard. You have said nothing. And it is impossible to rank anything if no statistics are provided.

 

[Namejs]

The funny thing is that I was perusing player pages yesterday of all the imports and I'm pretty sure this is a false statement even if we grant your ridiculous premise. So I put it to the test and compiled the numbers myself. This is all the current season EBEL players who are veterans of the ECHL, excluding players with 10 games or less in either league for the typical sampling size concerns.

Players who scored higher PPGs in the EBEL: (From Innsbruck) Michael Boivin. (From Dornbirn) Olivier Magnan, Mikko Vainoinen. (From Szekesfehervar) None. (From Znaim) None. (From Linz) Brian Lebler, Troy Rutkowski. (From Villach) Kevin Schmidt, Jerry Pollastrone. (From Bozen) Brett Flemming, Sebastian Sylvestre. (From Graz) Charlie Dodero, Dwight King (yes, the LA Kings Dwight King, played poorly in the ECHL in 2009 as a 20 year old), Colton Yellow Horn. (From Klagenfurt) None. (From Vienna) Mark Flood, Ty Loney. (From Salzburg) None.

Total: 14

Players who scored higher PPGs in the ECHL: (From Innsbruck) Caleb Herbert, Tyler Spurgeon, John Lammers, Joel Broda, Sacha Guimond. (From Dornbirn) William Rapuzzi, Evan Trupp. (From Szekesfehervar) Michael Caruso, Andrew Yogan. (From Znaim) Kevin Tansey, Rob Flick. (From Linz) Matt Finn, Dan DaSilva, Hunter Fejes. (From Villach) Jamie Fraser, Chris Collins. (From Bozen) Tim Daly, Domenic Alberga, Stefano Giliati, Dante Hannoun, Angelo Miceli, Kevin Spinozzi. (From Graz) Trevor Hamilton, Matt Garbowsky. (From Klagenfurt) Adam Comrie, David Fischer, Matthew Neal, Nick Peterson. (From Vienna) Alex Wall, Taylor Vause. (From Salzburg) Bud Holloway.

Total: 31

So. Even if we were to be extremely generous. And, for the sake of argument, grant you every single condition that you desire. Player usages are all the same. Players do not improve. And on and on. And we just play your game. No variables, no extra considerations, just your game as you wanted it. We give you everything you want and how do the actual numbers come out? Very decisively. 31 players had higher PPG totals in the ECHL, to only 14 in the EBEL. This is probably why I kept prodding for numbers and you never actually produced numbers. You knew that you were wrong. You knew that the numbers didn't tell the story you wanted them to tell. Almost 70% of players who played in both leagues scored more in the ECHL than in the EBEL. By your own rules, your own standards, not mine, that should indicate that your conclusion was flawed, even if your reasoning was presumed to be correct.


Again, you say the word "statistics." But you never mentioned a single number. You never provided a statistic. So there is nothing to discard. You have said nothing. And it is impossible to rank anything if no statistics are provided.

What is their average PPG in ECHL and EBEL?

Counting the number of players is meaningless, you need to compile their production rates.

I just double-controlled the number of players qualifying, it was 51. I will go through them during the day.

The analysis that I did before was on *AHL* *imports*, reread my posts.

 

[kabidjan18]

What is their average PPG in ECHL and EBEL?

Counting the number of players is meaningless, you need to compile their production rates.

Again, this is made merely by assertion. You have to start doing more than asserting things at some point.

I just double-controlled the number of players qualifying, it was 51. I will go through them during the day.

Interesting. Perhaps there are some midseason transfers unaccounted for. You'll have to give specific names that I'm missing. Also, did you eliminate goalies?

Edit: Add Ales Sova.

The analysis that I did before was on *AHL* *imports*, reread my posts.

I read that. And you know the problem? Still no numbers. You didn't provide these purported AHL numbers either. So it doesn't matter if you claim to have done analysis on American Hockey League imports or Alien Hockey League Imports. No numbers is no numbers, period.

 

[kabidjan18]

What is their average PPG in ECHL and EBEL?.

I ran a pool of 46. Make sure you're not including goalies, or potential playoff results.

EBEL: .635
ECHL: .716

 

[Bernie Marners]

SHL has gone way beyond Liiga, and DEL, NLA and the Czechs may have done that too.

(SM)-liiga was at one point the best in Europe, but those days are long past. That's why the scouts recommend young Finnish players to leave their home country at a very early age, to get into more competitive environment.

 

[Eye of Ra]

I don’t quite get how several posters would rank Liiga above the SHL. In the European club tournament CHL, the SHL has been represented in the finals each time, and only lost once. Seven SHL finals appearances and five championships out of six possible, to Liiga’s two appearances and one championship. In this year’s tournament, three out of four teams in the semifinals were from the SHL.

The Euro Hockey Tour and the World Championships can’t actually be the way of measuring the quality of the leagues now, or can it?

Here’s how the CHL ranks the leagues, by the way. This ranking is based on performance in the tournament.

but nobody really takes chl serious.

eht is serious thought, and finland is much better than sweden in eht for many years. finland mostly uses players from liiga in eht.

 

[SoundAndFury]

It is worse, because it clearly is easier to score there than in ECHL.

That's it.

On its own, what an absolutely ridiculous assessment. So VHL or even KHL must be the best league in the world because half of the teams score an average of 2 goals per game and secondary assists don't count half of the time in Russia.

And we circle back to what kabidjan said at the start of this discussion. It doesn't take into account usage, league-wide scoring, their roles, etc. It doesn't take into account anything other than, again, that one thing you consider to be the ultimate truth.

Not to mention that, evidently, even your NHLe numbers theory seems to be crumbling.

 

[Eye of Ra]

SHL has gone way beyond Liiga, and DEL, NLA and the Czechs may have done that too.

(SM)-liiga was at one point the best in Europe, but those days are long past. That's why the scouts recommend young Finnish players to leave their home country at a very early age, to get into more competitive environment.

swedish team with khlers/nhlers hardly beat team germany /team swiss/team Czechs in wch every year (also og 2 years ago) even thought those national teams is mostly filled with players from their leagues. common sense says that if our whc teams even thought its filled with khlers/nhlers still struggle against players from del, liiga, nla, Czechs league then a swedish team with shlers would for sure lose against those teams.

btw look up eht/chl results from 90s , 2000 - 2010....sweden was worse than Czechs, ruskies, finns at that time too..so its nothing new.

 

[Exarz]

but nobody really takes chl serious.

eht is serious thought, and finland is much better than sweden in eht for many years. finland mostly uses players from liiga in eht.

And Swedish players stuck in between HockeyAllsvenskan and the SHL uses Liiga as a bridge to develop their game. If you look at all the teams in Liiga, the overall skill is not close to the SHL. The SHL exports more quality players than Liiga and several Liiga players decide to move to Sweden. I really don't see in any way how the Finnish league would in any way be better than the SHL overall. Especially not considering the TV and sponsorship revenue Swedish teams get.

And stating that the EHT plays a more important role than the CHL is quite interesting, considering that EHT rosters fluctuate depending on the host nation and in which stage of the season the tournament is played.

 

[Eye of Ra]

And Swedish players stuck in between HockeyAllsvenskan and the SHL uses Liiga as a bridge to develop their game. If you look at all the teams in Liiga, the overall skill is not close to the SHL. The SHL exports more quality players than Liiga and several Liiga players decide to move to Sweden. I really don't see in any way how the Finnish league would in any way be better than the SHL overall. Especially not considering the TV and sponsorship revenue Swedish teams get.

And stating that the EHT plays a more important role than the CHL is quite interesting, considering that EHT rosters fluctuate depending on the host nation and in which stage of the season the tournament is played.

Do you even watch Liiga? I seen plenty of liiga games and players are just as skilled as in shl but more gritty, better defensivly, faster pace.

nobody takes chl very serious, but players take eht serious. yes rosters change in eht, but no matter tournament finland wins nine of ten.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

SHL has gone way beyond Liiga, and DEL, NLA and the Czechs may have done that too.

(SM)-liiga was at one point the best in Europe, but those days are long past. That's why the scouts recommend young Finnish players to leave their home country at a very early age, to get into more competitive environment.

Brad Lambert is already playing in Liiga. Would he get that level of competitiveness anywhere else?

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

Come on, this is the first time I’ve heard anyone placing any regard in the EHT whatsoever. For most people, it’s basically a series of annoying breaks in the league schedule. Maybe Finns care, and of course they’re known for running a tight ship in international competition and getting the best out of underdog rosters, and it’s likely that it starts with actually giving a damn about Karjala Cup.

It’s unlikely, however, that even the Team Sweden coaches care about winning the EHT, as much as they care about testing out new guys and patting them on their backs for having had a decent season with their clubs, establishing positive contacts for the future, etc.
Those who play in the EHT are either guys who wants to seize the opportunity to play with the national team however meaningless a tournament, because they know they’re unlikely to get another chance, and kids who sees it as a learning experience, and then guys thinking that they are on the fringe of making a World Championships roster, trying to increase their stock. Many of the more established players, who’ve played for Team Sweden and in the World Championships before, decline thusly. Case in point, I like Emil Sylvegård, his ass is epic, but he has no business playing for Tre Kronor even if they built two rosters out of the 50 best players in the SHL, but there he made the roster.

As a way of measuring quality of leagues, it’s an absolute joke of an argument to name Karjala Cup and Beijer Hockey Games as indicators, and also disregarding the existing European club tournament.

I know many fans in particular, and many teams as well, aren’t as invested in it as the domestic championship, but the CHL is the only place where European club teams are squaring off against each other in a competitive tournament, and if you’re comparing European leagues then that is the arena. Also, Finland’s top club team isn’t even in the Liiga, that can’t help the case either that there’s a KHL exclave vacuuming much of the best talent in the country.

It’s just baffling to me that someone’s bringing up the EHT and last year’s world championships as proof of Liiga greatness. 2019 was a major upset! The Miracle on Ice wasn’t the United States establishing hockey superiority, the Red Army continued to dominate international hockey afterwards!

I don’t mean to piss on Liiga or Finland, I love Finland and being a fan of Luleå in the SHL, many of my favorite players over the years have been Finns, but I can’t see how Liiga could conceivably be a better league.

 

[Lambo]

Come on, this is the first time I’ve heard anyone placing any regard in the EHT whatsoever. For most people, it’s basically a series of annoying breaks in the league schedule. Maybe Finns care, and of course they’re known for running a tight ship in international competition and getting the best out of underdog rosters, and it’s likely that it starts with actually giving a damn about Karjala Cup.

It’s unlikely, however, that even the Team Sweden coaches care about winning the EHT, as much as they care about testing out new guys and patting them on their backs for having had a decent season with their clubs, establishing positive contacts for the future, etc.
Those who play in the EHT are either guys who wants to seize the opportunity to play with the national team however meaningless a tournament, because they know they’re unlikely to get another chance, and kids who sees it as a learning experience, and then guys thinking that they are on the fringe of making a World Championships roster, trying to increase their stock. Many of the more established players, who’ve played for Team Sweden and in the World Championships before, decline thusly. Case in point, I like Emil Sylvegård, his ass is epic, but he has no business playing for Tre Kronor even if they built two rosters out of the 50 best players in the SHL, but there he made the roster.

As a way of measuring quality of leagues, it’s an absolute joke of an argument to name Karjala Cup and Beijer Hockey Games as indicators, and also disregarding the existing European club tournament.

I know many fans in particular, and many teams as well, aren’t as invested in it as the domestic championship, but the CHL is the only place where European club teams are squaring off against each other in a competitive tournament, and if you’re comparing European leagues then that is the arena. Also, Finland’s top club team isn’t even in the Liiga, that can’t help the case either that there’s a KHL exclave vacuuming much of the best talent in the country.

It’s just baffling to me that someone’s bringing up the EHT and last year’s world championships as proof of Liiga greatness. 2019 was a major upset! The Miracle on Ice wasn’t the United States establishing hockey superiority, the Red Army continued to dominate international hockey afterwards!

I don’t mean to piss on Liiga or Finland, I love Finland and being a fan of Luleå in the SHL, many of my favorite players over the years have been Finns, but I can’t see how Liiga could conceivably be a better league.

But it is not ths first time that Liiga-Players are very competitive in tournaments like WC.And much Liiga-Players has no problems to acclimate in KHL.

 

[Lambo]

SHL has gone way beyond Liiga, and DEL, NLA and the Czechs may have done that too.

(SM)-liiga was at one point the best in Europe, but those days are long past. That's why the scouts recommend young Finnish players to leave their home country at a very early age, to get into more competitive environment.

You mean more money enviroment?

 

[Exarz]

Do you even watch Liiga? I seen plenty of liiga games and players are just as skilled as in shl but more gritty, better defensivly, faster pace.

nobody takes chl very serious, but players take eht serious. yes rosters change in eht, but no matter tournament finland wins nine of ten.

Yes I watch Liiga quite frequently and catch some live games from time to time. The pace and skill is not as good as the SHL, I don't understand how you can claim that they are just as skilled and better defensively, especially with the SHL's style of play of a more defensively structured gameplay.

And interesting to claim that Finland wins 90% of the EHT tournaments held when Finland has won 2 out of the latest 10 seasonal EHT tournaments. Below are the winners of each individual tournament as well

Czech Hockey Games:

Sweden Hockey Games:

Channel One Cup:

Karjala Cup

 

[Namejs]

On its own, what an absolutely ridiculous assessment. So VHL or even KHL must be the best league in the world because half of the teams score an average of 2 goals per game and secondary assists don't count half of the time in Russia.

And we circle back to what kabidjan said at the start of this discussion. It doesn't take into account usage, league-wide scoring, their roles, etc. It doesn't take into account anything other than, again, that one thing you consider to be the ultimate truth.

Not to mention that, evidently, even your NHLe numbers theory seems to be crumbling.

What I'm trying to do is to use fact-based methods and actual research before making any judgments by either reading up on what others have done or doing some of my own analysis.

There is no ultimate truth, if I'm proven wrong, I will change my views accordingly. That's why I'm sort of provoking a response here. Back up your claims and all of us will gain some more insight and we will push the boundaries of what can be found out using data and statistics.

I'm in day 2 of aggregating ECHL-EBEL stats and I will account for scoring rates and age-related changes in productivity. Usage rate stats are not available for minor pro leagues, unfortunately.

Right now I've done the last 1.5 seasons or so and the productivity rates are very close (+/- 3%), so I might end up eating crow here (sort of).

In hindsight, after reading up on NCAA NHLe, it was wrong of me to use the average NHLe for the entire league, the variance between the conferences is way bigger than I thought, the margin of error is huge for my previous calculations. For ECAC the NHLe is at the level of QMJHL or even lower, which is sort of mind-blowing, while the top conferences are close to AHL. And that also means you have to account for each player's intra-conference point production first, which is way too much work.

One getaway from this is that despite NHLe being the most prominent equivalency tool with the most research done and the most data points, it's not good at predicting productivity at the minor pro level. So you have to use lower tier leagues as a satellite/reference point, if you want to compare these 2 leagues and not the chances of the respective players becoming NHL players, which are close to 0 anyway.

It would be cool to work on ECHLe and AHLe for European leagues, there should be enough players, I think.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

But it is not ths first time that Liiga-Players are very competitive in tournaments like WC.And much Liiga-Players has no problems to acclimate in KHL.

No, of course not, but Sweden as well as Switzerland, Germany and others have also had great tournaments from underdog positions, however, I admire the way Finland quite regularly punch above its weight class in major tournaments. Sweden will always have players taking games off in the WHCs. Finns play their system to a T, grinds it out and always makes it very hard on the opposition, while many Swedish players seem prone to arrogance. When Sweden was eliminated by Finland last year, the way some of the players conducted themselves when they were up by one goal would have had them benched on their NHL teams. They were absolutely coasting.

I think that one might argue that Finnish hockey education produces many gritty, team-first, hard working, well-conditioned players, and in tournaments they all seem to comply under a tight defensive system of boxing out their opponents, but I still don’t think that it is the same thing as saying that the Liiga is the best league in Europe. It’s a very competitive league, and obviously produces great players, but I’m not convinced it’s better than the SHL.