The Edmonton Oilers liked Jeff Petry’s game enough to send away Tom Gilbert when young Petry was 89 games into his NHL career. Since then, Petry (now 25) has been facing the best opposition available.

Jeff Petry 10-11

  • 5×5 points per 60: 0.21 (8th among Oil D)
  • 5×4 points per 60: 1.67 (5th among Oil D)
  • Qual Comp: 5th toughest among D
  • Qual Team: 7th best available among D
  • Corsi Rel: 2.0 (tied for 4th best among D)
  • Zone Start: 49.1% (3rd toughest among D)
  • Zone Finish: 50.5% (5th best among D)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 41 shots/1 goal 2.4% (7th among Oil D)
  • Boxcars: 35gp, 1-4-5
  • Plus Minus: -12 on a team that was -52

Jeff Petry 11-12

  • 5×5 points per 60: 0.91 (1st among Oil D)
  • 5×4 points per 60: 3.25 (3rd among Oil D)
  • Qual Comp: 2nd toughest among D
  • Qual Team: best available among D
  • Corsi Rel: 2.0 (tied for 4th best among D)
  • Zone Start: 49.1% (5th toughest among D)
  • Zone Finish: 51.3% (2nd best among D)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 111 shots/1.8% (6th among Oil D)
  • Boxcars: 73gp, 2-23-25
  • Plus Minus: -7 on a team that was -26

Jeff Petry 12-13

  • 5×5 points per 60: 0.72 (4th among regular Oil D)
  • 5×4 points per 60: nil
  • Qual Comp: toughest among regular D
  • Qual Team: 6th best available among regular D
  • Corsi Rel: -1.7 (5th best among regular D) (-12.49 Corsi ON)
  • Zone Start: 48.9% (easiest among regular D)
  • Zone Finish: 50.8% (2nd best among D)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 66 shots/4.55% (4th among Oil D>30 shots)
  • Boxcars: 48gp, 3-9-12
  • Plus Minus: +1 on a team that was -15

2012-13 vollman oilers d

  1. What do these numbers tell us? The numbers (and the Vollman Sledgehammer) tell us Petry (and Smid) are the shutdown pair for this Oiler team. All things considered, they’ve done a pretty good job since Tom Gilbert was sent away, but they could use some help.
  2. How could these numbers be better? Petry’s been facing toughs for over a year now, if the Oilers can ease the load he should thrive.
  3. WHY did the Oilers trade Gilbert so quickly? Well, Smid-Petry were beginning to handle the load pretty well–this was before the lockout–and I do think that will be a good tandem for next season.
  4. But not a top pairing? Well, I think they could handle a top 4D role, if the other “top” pairing could handle a little more of the load than the Schultz twins did this past season. The Oilers badly needed some relief because the third pairing contained an unmitigated disaster.
  5. Did he play a lot? Led the team in EV TOI (17:57 per game), SH TOI (3:21 per game) and overall TOI per game (21:54).
  6. Was he rusty from the layoff? Funny you mention it, I believe that had a lot to do with the difficulty this tandem had during the year. Petry just didn’t seem as sharp. Then again, Smid played in Czech and he didn’t look ready, either.
  7. What do you like about him? Well, he’s an actual live, breathing NHL player for one. Remember the Al Arbour line about ‘get good players’? That’s Petry. We can argue over where he should be placed on the depth chart, but he can play. He’s healthy, has good size, can make that breakout pass very well, carry the puck and fly a sortie when the opportunity arises.
  8. Is this where you say ‘wide range of skills’? Yes, actually. Petry has a complete player’s skill set, with the only complaints now being things like ‘he needs to be more physical’ and ‘he takes too many chances’; I prefer a player like Petry, whose positioning takes precedent over going for the big hit, and who will engage offensively at times.
  9. Does MacT like him? I’m sure he does. MacT talked at his press conference about having defensemen getting to the puck and then moving it in a good direction quickly. That’s Petry. He’s a quick thinker, mobile defender and has the skills to make that pass, carry it out, or pause until the forechecker fades from the moment.
  10. Was he Prendergast’s best draft pick? Hmmm. No. I think Hemsky, Jarret Stoll and Sam Gagner were better selections, but Petry is the best defenseman and certainly has a chance to move up the list.
  11. Prendergast’s best pick outside the first round? No, I’d say Stoll. KP’s best second round picks were Brad Winchester, Stoll, Matt Greene, Petry. I think Petry is behind Stoll but ahead of the rest.
  12. When are you doing the 2002/2009 installment of KP Vs MBS? It’ll be up later today.
  13. Yay! This is the one where Prendergast kicks MacGregor’s ass! You’ll have to read it and find out.
  14. You’re such a dink. Ask me about the song.
  15. Why this song? It’s a great song for Petry right where he is, because despite having all kinds of talent he could be down on himself if listening to the wrong people. In life you have to believe in yourself, believe a better day is out there for you, and ‘keep pushing until it’s understood, and these badlands start treating us good.’
  16. What’s ahead for Petry? Same part of the graph, same size bubble but a better color. I think he’s one guy we can count on, and his contract is a beauty.

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

21 Responses to "JEFF PETRY RE 12-13: BADLANDS"

  1. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    “Baby, I’ve got my facts learned real good”

    Petry. A beauty.

    I could watch him and Smid on the 2nd pairing for a very pleasurable run through this decade.

  2. Lowetide says:

    Petry down in the corner for team USA, stick in face.

  3. TheOtherJohn says:


    Guy asking Q’s is a dick. Canucks fan? Really like Petry. Enough to challenge Stoll. Just solid at everything. Can we trade Nic Schultz back to Minny for Gilbert? KP will end up with some nice 2nd round picks. Oilers could use a few Matt Greene, Stollie, Perry types.

    LAK is in trouble if Quick suspended for a game

  4. supernova says:


    Do you know if there is a study on draft success out there on D men.

    My thoughts are it seems they tend to flourish when they go to college and play 3 or more years there, and then play a season or two in the minors.

    Seems the junior kids unless outstanding players have a much lower success rate.

  5. Lowetide says:

    Supernova: No, sorry. I do know that picking D high–very high, like lottery–rarely works out. Doughty is a good example of a good result, but Hickey and even Schenn didn’t cover their number. It’s pretty clear that across the board defenseman don’t show their true value during the 17-year old season.

    Better to grab them in the second and third rounds imo.

  6. Romulus Apotheosis says:



    Shoehorning in here, but…

    I think Supernova’s subtending question is pretty interesting and not really addressed…

    SN seems to be suggesting that part of the problem with D is the way separate paths of development open up depending on draft position, i.e., roughly speaking high draft picks (top 10-15) end up getting the big pro push and all it entails (deep water; media exposure and pressure; etc), whereas later picks get set upon a different path (stay in Jr., Europe or go to college/AHL and develop slow and outside of various pressures).

    The suggestion seems to rely on the premise that “development PATH has a non-trivial impact on actual player development”, which seems fairly obvious until we take it further to suggest that perhaps:

    regardless of the true talent of a 17 year old D, all (with rare exception) will benefit from a particular development path and be inversely harmed by an alternative.

    Or, perhaps those failing to cover the bet in the top 10-15 picks were non-trivially harmed by the development path they were placed upon.

    Basically… the point being that in the aggregate later round picks perform better, in part, because of the unique environmental conditions they are placed in, a luxury not granted to the top picks.

    Of course, we can’t rule out “perception” here, i.e., the expectations created by draft position.

  7. Hammers says:

    The thing with Petry is like to many players for the Oilers he was put in a position he really wasn’t ready for . He isn’t a 1st pairing “D” right now and neither is Smid . That in itself can and did lead to problems . Really the best those two are are 3-4 . Petry may turn into a #2 but not yet . I’m afraid they will do to both J.Schultz & Klefbom the same type of thing . . For me more than any big forward its at least 1 top “D” we need and that isn’t A Weber . Actually we need two established “D” and for me Tyutin & Streit would fill the bill .. If we loose N.Schultz its acceptable .Better defence gives us better goaltending and a different pressur on our forwards . I also feel we have at least 2-3 future “D” in the system . Maracin ++ for sure .

  8. Lowetide says:

    Rom: It would be interesting to look at, and if we take one example (2003) Braydon Coburn and Dion Phaneuf were high picks who came quickly and Shea Weber was down the line a little. But he came along pretty quickly, too. Interesting question, suspect we’d need to do about 10 years as a window.

  9. FastOil says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Or maybe the abilities that make a player an effective NHL defenceman aren’t usually apparent at 17 YO and for forwards it is. The mental side for D is more difficult and complex IMO.


    I’m not sure Streit is top pairing on the Isle even. Seems to be 4 guys playing similar minutes and his would incude PP. Maybe Tyutin but with him I’m not sure he’s reliably defensively oriented from what the CBJ media has said that I’ve heard.

  10. gd says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    I think you have summed up the development issues with Dmen extremely well. My feeling is Tambo’s and Stu’s best potential legacy is the gathering of Klefbom, Marancin, Musil, Gernat, Simpson, Davidson, Fedun and Teubert having used the right draft picks and resources to have lots of potential Dmen. Now the test of the organization is to make sure they do the right job of developing at least three top 6 NHL Dmen in the next two or three years. This will be a major way I will judge the MacT regime. The stressful part of being a fan is we won’t know if they did a good job until three years from now. While I am concerned with what seems to have gone wrong with Teubert and that they will rush Klefbom, I am very happy with how Marancin, Fedun and Davidson have been utilized this year.

    I actually would be okay with them only getting one top 4 veteren Dman this offseason and accept that we will have two 2nd pairs. I would want the guy to be Nikitin or better, and that is mainly because I am okay with them missing the playoffs next year as long as I see a lot more progress than I saw this year.

  11. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Hammers: If we loose N.Schultz its acceptable

    The more I think about this, the more I think he’s the one that’s got to go at some point one way or another to get the other pieces (if not as a trade bait, simply to free up the cash and roster spot)…

    but… I think the Gilbert trade combined with stepping over Smid (once Whitney was de-frocked) for the “A” signal that the team is much higher on him than I am (not that he’s in my doghouse or anything)…. then again MacT wasn’t involved in the Gilbert trade or the A… so… who knows?

  12. Lowetide says:

    Petry and USA win bronze. Good for him.

  13. Woodguy says:

    Its interesting that Petry went from the “best” team mates to essentially the “worst” when looking at 11/12 to 12/13, and yet he posted a -7/-25 in 11/12 and a +1/-15 in 12/13

    It could be due to the fact that he had a “lucky” year this year.

    11/12 997
    12/13 1024

    When looking at Shot Attempt Ratio, it tells a different story.

    11/12 49.2%
    12/13 44.3%

    Tyler is still digging up exactly what caused that number, the results are very interesting.

    Back to the team mate thing…..

    Petry’s top 6 F team mates and top 3 D team mates:

    11/12 – Petry played 1242:45:00 of 5v5 time when he had “Best Team mates”

    SMID, LADISLAV 589:03:00
    PECKHAM, THEO 180:41:00
    WHITNEY, RYAN 171:44:00

    SMYTH, RYAN 383:08:00
    HORCOFF, SHAWN 360:48:00
    GAGNER, SAM 343:06:00
    EBERLE, JORDAN 341:39:00
    JONES, RYAN 341:36:00
    HEMSKY, ALES 332:00:00

    12/13 – Petry played 816:53:00 of 5v5 time when he had “worst team mates”

    SMID, LADISLAV 639:23:00
    FISTRIC, MARK 61:18:00
    SCHULTZ, NICK 58:27:00

    GAGNER, SAM 247:22:00
    EBERLE, JORDAN 246:32:00
    HALL, TAYLOR 242:32:00
    YAKUPOV, NAIL 202:57:00
    SMYTH, RYAN 198:11:00
    NUGENT-HOPKINS, RYAN 195:41:00

    Looking at those names and “6st best team mates doesn’t immediately spring to mind unless Smid is severely skewing the whole thing.

    TOI% w/ Smid in 11/12 = 47.4%
    TOI% w/ Smid in 12/13 = 78.3%

    Might also be highlighting how poorly these players rank in BTN’s relative +/- system of ranking.

    Not really coming to any conclusions here, just throwing out some more info and what was a very weird season for what I consider a good player. Not very good, but good.

    Good enough for full time 2nd pairing in the NHL on many teams for sure.

  14. Romulus Apotheosis says:




    I think there is a lot here to play with and the explosion of caveats for this kind of thing is more useful than it probably appears at first glance, i.e., narrowing a question’s parameters tends to make its answers more useful and evocative.

    10 years is probably about right. Afterall, we are talking about “development” here.

    “Case studies” like Phaneuf, Weber, etc. would work best as “examples” of trends recorded in the aggregate than as evidence in their own right. And, they would probably work best as “counter examples” pushing the hypothesis harder.

    “nascent” talent is a good question, i.e., how would be account for hidden “true talent” that emerges later (i.e., especially the kids very young in their draft year), regardless of development path.

    There is simply so much contingency (as GD notes, with all those D in the Oiler system, who knows who will work out) in the development of players that trying to isolate on a single variable like development path might be impossible….

    Ideally, what you’d want is to track players (and a very large quantity at that) of equivalent (ideally perfectly so) true talent through different development paths and try to determine what percentage of the variance is explained by the path of development taken.

    Beyond the fact that we don’t have such an ideal situation to run our test, we’ve got to be aware that certainly one of the advantages of the later round picks is simply numbers… there are so many of them competing for jobs, whereas the top picks are really isolated.

    At any rate, it is interesting to imagine the counter-factual whereby an underperforming top pick emerges from an alternative development path a much better player.

  15. FastOil says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    I agree that mentoring has a lot to do with a person’s success, Gladwell’s Oultiers etc.

    Every player, with perhaps the exception of fighters, that rises high enough to be drafted is an exceptional hockey player. I think that the mentoring aspect happens earlier than draft age. Getting enough ice time, a good enough coach, parents with enough money and interest, etc. Gagner and Tavares played shinny together on Gagner’s back yard rink. They both practiced enough to get very skilled and both made the bigs.

    A player can run into bad luck later on, like being a LD in the Oilers system and being blocked, where a RH guy has a clear path to the third pairing. Or being a centre in the Pens system. Not gonna be a top 6 player for a few years.

    I am not sure the development path has as much to do post draft as personal drive does. Strudwick has mentioned this in his blog. These are all good players, the difference is who will work hard enough, do what is necessary to improve weak areas. Who will learn how to live the life of a professional player, sleeping and eating right, training enough off season, staying healthy. Of course there is always the supremely gifted, but they are rare.

    This might be why a later round D has as much chance it seems as a first. It is a very hard position, and talent alone is not enough, there is a lot of work to be done. For forwards the elite skill is enough to get them a lot further down the path, and they have less to ‘develop’. If they can put the puck in the net they’re golden even with major flaws. Not so much with D.

    First round, especially high picks can often I believe sport a pretty healthy sense of entitlement. These guys have been courted and indulged all through their hockey years, but when they get to the level of competition that is the NHL often their innate ability is not enough, and they don’t have the drive to work hard enough or to listen and adjust.

    Gernat is an Oiler player to watch in this regard. He has the tools to be an exceptional NHL player. He’s huge, skates well, seems to have ‘hockey sense’, and has offense. He is in a good system so there will be nothing harming his development.

    However he already seems to be heading to the margins because he is not seemingly cooperative with the team. HIs surgery deal was odd, they have complained he isn’t learning English, etc. We’ll see what he’s made of next year, there is nothing stopping him but his attitude and effort.

  16. Lois Lowe says:

    I think it’ll be interesting to see who has the better career out of Dillon Simpson and David Musil. I must admit to having a preference for the defence prospects that come out of college more than those from the CHL. Fedun looked excellent in camp before his femur injury and is playing 1st pairing minutes in the AHL playoffs currently; both Petry and Gilbert were able to make the transition to pro; and Schultz was sublime in the AHL to start his career.

  17. Kitchener says:

    Petry is good enough for a championship team. He’s not a one-man wrecking crew, but a top-4 with Petry is at least 25% set.

  18. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Hammers: Petry may turn into a #2 but not yet

    I knew it was a mistake when they went and turned Petry from a #58 to a #2 in one mammoth step.

  19. supernova says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Fast oil,

    Romulus you read through my question perfectly.
    Fast oil I am a big believer in the Malcolm Gladwell Outlier’s.

    After watching professional sports I began to be intrigued greatly with prospects of all major sports and while I love the Oilers and the NHL I believe their system for advancing prospects is really set up to fail.

    1) junior age draft is far to young for a collision sport
    2) NHL teams love to advance their players before they are physically ready.
    3) the current NHL/ AHL/ junior system puts teams in a awfully tough place on player progression
    4) teams need to concentrate on making players “experts” at their craft (I.e 10,000 hours)

    These are few of my thoughts, can write more but would love to know your feelings on these issues

  20. Romulus Apotheosis says:


    If I’m not mistaken Baseball drafts at 16… a year younger than hockey.

    Obviously, in any sport, drafting at say 20 would be a huge advantage…

    I gather the rise of wunderkinds pushes the draft age earlier… that and teams wanting the rights to players early.

    I also wouldn’t discount the drama involved in risk… draft older and the risk isn’t nearly as high and therefore not nearly as entertaining.

  21. supernova says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Baseball rules are different
    1) High school graduation and never having played at college or
    2) Elgible after junior year

    Granted I think it would be slim-to-none they would change the age even 1 season, I wish they would institute some sort of a rule that forced them to send all the players back to their teams for at least one season after the draft.

    If they did this it would naturally push the non-wunderkids back another year allowing for a longer, more patient development cycle. I am not sure why in CBA talks the players don’t push for something along these lines as it would add a year to the careers of veterans.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright -