I am honestly unsure as to how much sway Chevy holds in these decisions. Chipman is all in on Maurice, org seems to be run as an owner/GM/HC team, with joint input in things like personnel, but perhaps not so much joint input on roster deployment, systems and incorporation of analytics into play style, since as we know it is PoMo who runs the bench and holds the keys to the car.
Chevy has made his mistakes for sure, but he seems like a smart guy who is open to new ideas and aware of trends in the game. Is he really onboard with the "little guy/big guy" defence pairing brainwave? Or the "no activating the D unless we're chasing the game" brand of reactive hockey?
In a way, it's the reactive systems I find the most baffling, with a team as talented as the Jets, who should be able to keep up with pretty much anyone in terms of sheer scoring talent and goaltending. We saw it with Vegas in 2018, and we've seen it ever since, though never as egregiously as last year, IMO. We should be using our speed and creativity to maximum effect off the rush, forechecking in waves, using a staggered D to cut off passes and rushes the other way and looking for quick retrieval and counters. Instead, we dump 'er in, send in a lone forechecker who ambles in and never gets or quickly loses possession, and spend forever screwing around in our own zone before doing it all over again. It's painful to watch and I imagine more painful to play. Is this Chevy's idea of good hockey?
I agree the team has talent but they have a gapping hole in that talent on the blue line.
Chevy made that clear going into and coming out of the deadline - he wanted to add support on the blue line and was unable to get it done for a number of reasons - the primary one being the assets where not available (or he wasn't willing to pay the price - who knows).
We discuss systems a lot on this board - we also talk about our issues with personnel.
Scoring talent and goaltending will take you so far - but if you can't defend, you spend too much time in your end.
Some will claim it's the "systems" we use - others will look at what we have to work with.
We spend too much time in our end - that's the base of the problem.
Our D are not "talented" - even when they have the puck, they are slow in making decisions and that includes JoMo and Pionk. Both would rather use a slow rush while everyone crawls into the neutral zone. Once that zone is completely congested, they hand it off to a forward who has nowhere to go. This is where the dump / chase starts and ends - and to add to that, this play usually happens after we have spent the first half of the shift trying to retrieve the puck - there's nothing left in the tank at that point.
We are unable to get things rolling in our zone with
quick retrieval and outlet passes - while everyone is still able to drive the play the other way.
Expectations are that a system approach will fix this - if only it were that easy - most teams would be a contender by simply applying a system that works regardless of d depth / talent. I'll admit to some hyperbole in that statement - only trying to make a point.
IMO, it's wishful thinking but gives the fans something to work through as a solution. If you spend the night in your end and are unwilling to put in the work required to offset the imbalance on the roster, you will not generate much in the way of offence regardless of how offensively talented your players are. In fact, the more offensively talented your players are, the less chance you will have in convincing them to play hard enough to out weigh the D shortfall. You'd likely be more successful with average players who will play hard at both ends - we have a few of those.
Chevy knows this - he simply was unable to do anything about it.
I think he would also agree that it's painful to watch.