Post-Game Talk: Can you say "anti-climatic?" Jets start strong then stumble to a 4-1 loss to the Sens

[garret9]

Hainsey is playing more minutes than he should be. Stuart was 9th in shot blocking last year and 10th in hits, for defensemen in the whole league. He's a warrior. Granted, he may be a bottom pairing defenseman but he's the only defender we have that defends. The only top 10 list Hainsey has ever made was in 09-10 when he was 4th in the league for Goals On Ice Against, with 104 and 7th in the league in Power Play Goals Against. Unless there is some advanced stat I'm unaware of that tracks not hitting guys? Losing coverage and then flopping around the crease trying to make saves with your glove? There is no such thing as sheltering someone with Hainsey.

This is really wrong...

Last season the person with the worst shots against and goals against for the team's defensemen was Stuart... Even though Hainsey was matched against way harder opponents and way more in the Dzone.

I already wrote this but both Stuart and Hainsey played bad. Both are being asked to do more than they can. Hainsey needs to be #4 not a #3 and Stuart needs to be a #5 (ideally #6) and not a #4. Basically we need Bogosian back.

 

[TCsmyth]

yup to that.the first 2 goals were brain cramps for sure. postma obviously on the first one and the second one all stuey there i thought.he had neil in front to cover and turned his back to him like he was scared or something(maybe from the earlier hit not sure).and stuey is generally an in your face kind of guy. buff was best player on ice.other than that not too much. ottawa looked a lot more disciplined as well. we still give away too many odd man rushes

That second goal can have Stu share the blame. The goal was created by a terrible Hainsey turnover.

 

[garret9]

That second goal can have Stu share the blame. The goal was created by a terrible Hainsey turnover.

Ya... Hainsey's good at being the steady man to someone else (BOGO!!!) being the puck carrier...

Stuart being the steady man and Hainsey being the puck carrier does not work at all...

 

[cocorico]

Just chiming in with some negativity here:

1. Hainsey was (and is) just awful. People blaming Stuart for the 2nd goal must have missed the part where Hainsey gave the puck away by trying to skate it through 2 Sens. After the give away, he falls on Pavelec and then tries to make the save himself by sticking his glove out to catch it. I suppose Stuart should have found the puck before Neil, but he probably wasn't counting on a) the turn over and b) his goalie being taken out by his partner. Hainsey is a lazy, soft multi-million dollar pylon.

2. The short term answer to our defensive woes can surely not be pairing Postma with Hainsey on the 2nd pairing. Postma was terrible defensively. 4 giveaways. I noticed that some were saying "Buff had 4 giveaways too"...umm, did you watch the game? How many of Buffs giveaways were in the offensive zone where he was quite literally the only player creating offence. The short term answer is that there is none until Bogo gets back. Hainsey and Stuart stay in the 2nd pairing until then.
I really wished the Jets would have picked up tough shot blocking shutdown guy like Bryan Allen, but sadly we didn't. Our 3rd pairing will always be bad if we think we can address our goals against through the waiver wire. We have 4 defensemen (Meech, Postma, Redmond, Clitsome) who would be 7th on any other team.

I agree with this insightful analysis.

Everyone agrees that we need a top 4 D (hopefully Bogo- but his effectiveness after wrist surgery remains to be seen).

But... We will need some goals from the forwards to win some games!
(Jaghr, Vanik, St. Louis etc. came through for their teams to start the season)

 

[JetsHomer]

1/6 on the pp has to improve.

 

[Romang67]

Ya... Hainsey's good at being the steady man to someone else (BOGO!!!) being the puck carrier...

Stuart being the steady man and Hainsey being the puck carrier does not work at all...

Then let's switch it up? With Hainsey being the steady man, and Stuart being the pu...

Nah, I'm kidding, we're in trouble.

 

[TCsmyth]

Ya... Hainsey's good at being the steady man to someone else (BOGO!!!) being the puck carrier...

Stuart being the steady man and Hainsey being the puck carrier does not work at all...

Agreed. Hainsey looked quite good with Bogo last year. I also think that Redmond would be worth a look with Hainsey, he is a high minute guy and an AHL all star

 

[Blue Shakehead]

This is really wrong...

Last season the person with the worst shots against and goals against for the team's defensemen was Stuart... Even though Hainsey was matched against way harder opponents and way more in the Dzone.

I already wrote this but both Stuart and Hainsey played bad. Both are being asked to do more than they can. Hainsey needs to be #4 not a #3 and Stuart needs to be a #5 (ideally #6) and not a #4. Basically we need Bogosian back.

I'm don't put as much weight into Corsi and Qualcom as you do but that doesn't make me wrong and you right. Case in point, Jim Slater is the worst defensive player in the NHL according to Corsi. Claude Noel and many of us think he's one of our best defensive forwards. Go figure. According to the Globe and Mail, 25 of 30 teams aren't even using advanced stats (beyond from a scouting tool) because hockey is a fast and situational team game, often decided by mistakes that don't show up in the stats. And when those mistakes do show up, they are applied evenly to all players on the ice. Not that there isn't value in advanced stats, just that they don't get to decide who is right and who is wrong. My contention isn't that Mark Stuart is a 2nd pair defenseman. Its that Ron Hainsey isn't.

 

[garret9]

Agreed. Hainsey looked quite good with Bogo last year. I also think that Redmond would be worth a look with Hainsey, he is a high minute guy and an AHL all star

definitely would be an downgrade on Hainsey-Bogosian but I think it would be probably the best out of the options:

Stuart-Hainsey
Hainsey-Postma
Hainsey-Redmond
Clitsome-Hainsey

I just don't see Noel trusting that to Redmond though... hrmmm, hmmm, hmmm...

 

[Warhead77]

What is the real issue here.

Is the current group of players? Is it the coaching?

 

[Lynk]

The real issue here is it has been 1 game and everyone has already jumped off the ledge.

In case you haven't noticed, the Red Wings, Canucks, Hurricanes and Kings all had pretty embarrassing first games as well. Winnipeg had the least amount of players (to my knowledge) actually playing during the lockout, so with new teammates and 6 days of training camp I'm actually not surprised or worried at this point.

 

[White Out 403*]

The real issue here is it has been 1 game and everyone has already jumped off the ledge.

Thank you. Jeebus.

I said it in the other thread, and I think it's worth repeating. This team looked great after 2 periods. Anderson was the difference, Pavelec couldn't match him. Skaters were 50/50 in the game in my opinion. Ottawa and Winnipeg tied the 1st, the 2nd was all Winnipeg, 3rd was mostly Ottawa. If Pavelec stands on his head and Anderson plays mediocre we're talking a win here people.

 

[garret9]

I'm don't put as much weight into Corsi and Qualcom as you do but that doesn't make me wrong and you right. Case in point, Jim Slater is the worst defensive player in the NHL according to Corsi. Claude Noel and many of us think he's one of our best defensive forwards. Go figure. According to the Globe and Mail, 25 of 30 teams aren't even using advanced stats (beyond from a scouting tool) because hockey is a fast and situational team game, often decided by mistakes that don't show up in the stats. And when those mistakes do show up, they are applied evenly to all players on the ice. Not that there isn't value in advanced stats, just that they don't get to decide who is right and who is wrong. My contention isn't that Mark Stuart is a 2nd pair defenseman. Its that Ron Hainsey isn't.

The G&M actually said we know 100% that 5 have admitted openly to using it. I know for a fact that more use it through being involved in that world and one of the guys interviewed for it Gabe is the founder of the site I write at... but it doesn't matter because no matter who is right it wouldn't prove that it works or doesn't work and this could go to circular argument fast.

I believe you are still wrong because of this:

1)Noel DID believe Hainsey>Bogosian... Noel gave more TOI/game to Hainsey and pushed Stuart to bottom pair and Hainsey to 2nd pair when everyone wasn't injured
2) Hainsey lined up against tougher players than Bogosian and you don't need Corsi or QoC to see that... You can look at what players each lined up against the most... How much time on ice each of their opponents averaged... ETC... All show the same story, Hainsey was given a harder job and that was mostly because Noel trusted Hainsey better... and that has been the story of Stuart's career
3) Noel even said in one interview that Stuart's usefulness becomes a liability when given too much minutes

My contention isn't that one is top4 and one isn't... mine is when it comes to the role of stopping goals against and shots against which is their job... Hainsey does a better job than Stuart

You are right about Corsi and such when discussing about micro (game-to-game or shift-to-shift stuff) because stats rely completely on sample size. That's why video replay reigns supreme for game reviews. When it comes to small sample things the problems you present do make Corsi and such useless. The problems you are discussing about is called sample bias in stats or in my world (science) white noise. In large samples though it does show on average stuff.

But anyways this is a huge tangent because I don't need Corsi or QoC to show that Hainsey worked a tougher job and still ended up with better results.
In the end all that matters is outscoring the opponent and only one of Stuart and Hainsey has EVER done that in their career in a top4 spot.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

The real issue here is it has been 1 game and everyone has already jumped off the ledge.

In case you haven't noticed, the Red Wings, Canucks, Hurricanes and Kings all had pretty embarrassing first games as well. Winnipeg had the least amount of players (to my knowledge) actually playing during the lockout, so with new teammates and 6 days of training camp I'm actually not surprised or worried at this point.

...and Philly had a bad 2nd game as well. If EDM is on fire tonight, the Canucks could also be down 2 very quickly.

As someone else said: if Pavs had stood on his head, and Anderson faltered, it would have been a different game. If ONE of those shots that hit the post went in, again, different game. Both teams, honestly, looked very rusty.

I'm personally not worried yet, just dissappointed about a single game. Time to get back on the horse and go after the Bruins.

 

[Hank Chinaski]

The real issue here is it has been 1 game and everyone has already jumped off the ledge.

In case you haven't noticed, the Red Wings, Canucks, Hurricanes and Kings all had pretty embarrassing first games as well. Winnipeg had the least amount of players (to my knowledge) actually playing during the lockout, so with new teammates and 6 days of training camp I'm actually not surprised or worried at this point.

Well said.

I'll reiterate, about the only conclusion you can draw from the Ottawa game yesterday is that the Jets are rusty and desperately need to play with some structure. Only minor adjustments (ie. have Redmond playing instead of Postma/Clitsome, give Scheifele some 2nd line minutes, try Wright/Peluso on the 4th line) are needed at this point. Let's wait until about 4-5 games in before we start talking about wholesale changes.

 

[Prot]

Nah I never jumped off any bridge. I just was disappointed in our lack of tactical adjustment against another trap team.

Is this a rust issue? I doubt it. I just don't want to see more of the same going forward. Two things you can count on: trap teams in Winnipeg, and guys scoring high on Pavs

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Agree it was only one game and we should not over-react... but they did not look good to me as a team and something has to change fast or we will end up with a start just like last year, which will kill off our slim playoff chances.
Much of this will not happen, but if I were coach...
1)I'd change the first line to Jokinen at centre, flanked by Little and Ladd. Kane's lack of familiarity with Jokinen was obvious last night (a sad reality that he could have easily changed if he'd gotten his ass here a bit earlier). We need a scoring line fast and the aforementioned 3 are talented, seasoned and have been skating together.
2)I'd put Scheif at C, flanked by Wheeler and Kane. Why not? Give Scheif his chance at top-6, with young wingers who can skate and score. If we're going to give him a tryout in the NHL, lets do it NOW, with proper line mates, in his natural position and with sufficient playing time. I still think he prob belongs in Barrie, but how can we even tell if we don't give him a chance!
3)Third line stays the same. Don't touch it!!
4)I'd recall Machacek and Meech ASAP. Machacek has proven his worth, deserves a chance and Meech is better and more consistent than Clitsome.
5)Put Redmond with Hainsey on the second pairing. He is a much more composed and safe pick from what (admittedly little) I have seen. Agree with giving Postma a little more time on the 3rd pairing as he looks fantastic... when he isn't looking terrible.
Enough said.

I'm ok with everything here except the Meech thing. Meech is at very best a #8-10 defenseman on any team, he is a career minor leaguer you call up in emergencies. Clitsome isn't much better, but he is a better skater, bigger hitter, more of an NHL skill set, IMO. Nothing more than a #7 or maybe #6 on a bad team, but still.

I thought Wellwood was one of the better and more creative forwards to be honest.

Against the Broons I`d scratch Thorbs and play Peluso. Let`s see what the kid can do.

I hate this attitude. Because the Bruins are big and strong we need to dress a fighter? Don't let the other team dictate how to use your roster. Make them adjust to you.

And personally, I couldn't care less if Peluso never puts on a Jets jersey for a real game. I like Wright though, he could be faster, better hitting version Thorburn that can play C and win faceoffs. That's who I'd go with, he has some toughness as well.

Wellwood, I never once agreed with bringing him back. He just does not fit with our group, IMO. Don't see a role for him. Putting him on the 4th line is the same as sticking Scheifele with Thorburn/Wright and Slater, it does nothing, those guys have nothing to contribute there. And I'd rather have Scheifele in the top 9 right now. If Scheifele can't handle it, then Wellwood will have a role.

 

[tacogeoff]

I dont see anything wrong with starting Peluso. We need some energy out there. The guy is young and has alot to prove to the organization. Dress him throw him on the forth line and have him out there hitting everything with the puck to show some energy, emotion and spark for our team. We dont need him to go out there and goon it up or anything but I found against ottawa we needed that big hit or some kind of spark to get the engine going. Wright would do as well....someone needs to jump start the team and bring some emotion to the game.

 

[Jet]

I'm ok with everything here except the Meech thing. Meech is at very best a #8-10 defenseman on any team, he is a career minor leaguer you call up in emergencies. Clitsome isn't much better, but he is a better skater, bigger hitter, more of an NHL skill set, IMO. Nothing more than a #7 or maybe #6 on a bad team, but still.



I hate this attitude. Because the Bruins are big and strong we need to dress a fighter? Don't let the other team dictate how to use your roster. Make them adjust to you.

And personally, I couldn't care less if Peluso never puts on a Jets jersey for a real game. I like Wright though, he could be faster, better hitting version Thorburn that can play C and win faceoffs. That's who I'd go with, he has some toughness as well.

Wellwood, I never once agreed with bringing him back. He just does not fit with our group, IMO. Don't see a role for him. Putting him on the 4th line is the same as sticking Scheifele with Thorburn/Wright and Slater, it does nothing, those guys have nothing to contribute there. And I'd rather have Scheifele in the top 9 right now. If Scheifele can't handle it, then Wellwood will have a role.

Unlike you, however, I haven't pigeonholed Peluso yet and sentenced him. I want to see him PLAY in the NHL for the JETS before I label him.

JMO.

Also, I don't get how you don't feel a guy like Wellwood fits in this lineup when he can play up and down the roster, but advocate for a guy like Machacek to be here, a guy who has NEVER proven he can play in the NHL and was in fact passed on by 29 teams on his way back to the minors.

 

[truck]

The real issue here is it has been 1 game and everyone has already jumped off the ledge.

In case you haven't noticed, the Red Wings, Canucks, Hurricanes and Kings all had pretty embarrassing first games as well. Winnipeg had the least amount of players (to my knowledge) actually playing during the lockout, so with new teammates and 6 days of training camp I'm actually not surprised or worried at this point.

The Wings only put 14 shots on net.

Holy crap do the Flyers look like a mess defensively though. Carle was a big loss. Still wouldn't write them off though.

Slight aside, could the Flyers be in the market for an offensive D man like Postma? If not them, who could?

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Unlike you, however, I haven't pigeonholed Peluso yet and sentenced him. I want to see him PLAY in the NHL for the JETS before I label him.

JMO.

Also, I don't get how you don't feel a guy like Wellwood fits in this lineup when he can play up and down the roster, but advocate for a guy like Machacek to be here, a guy who has NEVER proven he can play in the NHL and was in fact passed on by 29 teams on his way back to the minors.

Wellwood adds a lot by making passes to stone hands in Thorburn and Slater? Really? He is not good defensively, not physical, doesn't score goals, is not great at puck control, etc. I fail to see what his passes accomplish if no one can finish them. He needs to be playing with offensive players...but he is not good enough to hang with offensive players on good teams. He is the prototypical top 6 players for bad teams, IMO. Fine last year as we needed him, this year we should be better, no need for him.

If last year wasn't proving he could hang in NHL, no idea what is. But he adds energy, hitting, grit, toughness and can contribute in a much greater variety of roles than Wellwood. Which is why I advocate for him, he is a very flexible option that needs a chance to play. Danny Briere was passed over on waivers several times, Matt Moulson and Chris Kunitz were as well, I could go on and on and on

 

[Jet]

Wellwood adds a lot by making passes to stone hands in Thorburn and Slater? Really? He is not good defensively, not physical, doesn't score goals, is not great at puck control, etc. I fail to see what his passes accomplish if no one can finish them. He needs to be playing with offensive players...but he is not good enough to hang with offensive players on good teams. He is the prototypical top 6 players for bad teams, IMO. Fine last year as we needed him, this year we should be better, no need for him.

If last year wasn't proving he could hang in NHL, no idea what is. But he adds energy, hitting, grit, toughness and can contribute in a much greater variety of roles than Wellwood. Which is why I advocate for him, he is a very flexible option that needs a chance to play. Danny Briere was passed over on waivers several times, Matt Moulson and Chris Kunitz were as well, I could go on and on and on

That's your opinion, and you are welcome to it. I believe you are wrong. Wellwood provided us with a lot of important offense last year and he is in better shape this year. I saw him actually trying to create yesterday and taking punishment to do so, which is more than I can say about many other Jets forwards. I think, though not a physical guy, he can be an effective checker by cycling the puck in the offensive zone and eating up time.

I think Wellwood is a very useful and versatile player. Seeing the lack of anything useable on the farm at this time, I think his resigning was very important.

 

[truck]

definitely would be an downgrade on Hainsey-Bogosian but I think it would be probably the best out of the options:

Stuart-Hainsey
Hainsey-Postma
Hainsey-Redmond
Clitsome-Hainsey

I just don't see Noel trusting that to Redmond though... hrmmm, hmmm, hmmm...

We gotta remember, Ron has rust. He hasn't been on the ice in a while. This was probably his worst game as a Jet. Hopefully he can get back into the groove.

That said, I agree that juggling the pairings could be worth a shot. Doing that would probably require complete line matching overhaul though.

If I was going to fiddle I would probably try.

Clitsome - Hainsey
Stuart - Postma or Redmond

I wouldn't consider either pair great, but Clitsome, Redmond and Postma can make a nice breakout pass. Ron and Stu together was reminiscent of GST last year. It looked like they were walled into the defensive zone.

 

[MooseJets]

Goal Horn

Is it just me or did they change the Jets goal horn? doesnt sound much like the old train horn we had and its much louder now.

 

[tbcwpg]

The real issue here is it has been 1 game and everyone has already jumped off the ledge.

In case you haven't noticed, the Red Wings, Canucks, Hurricanes and Kings all had pretty embarrassing first games as well. Winnipeg had the least amount of players (to my knowledge) actually playing during the lockout, so with new teammates and 6 days of training camp I'm actually not surprised or worried at this point.

I'm not surprised or worried, despite how this season goes, as I feel we're still at least a season away from being legitimately competitive for the playoffs. I do think, however, that with the shorter schedule, if it takes the Jets longer to "click" than other teams do, they'll be outside looking very far in very quick.