Player Discussion: Ehlers

[10Ducky10]

Chevy needs to trade for someone like Tarasenko or someone like him that can still put the puckin the net. Nino is being wasted on the 3rd line.

Perfetti Scheif Vilardi
Nino Names Ehlers
KFC Monahan XXX
Iafallo Lowry Apples

Larsson and Tarasenko would be nice.

JMo Larsson
Dillon Pionk
Sammy DeMelo

 

[Weezeric]

Chevy needs to trade for someone like Tarasenko or someone like him that can still put the puckin the net. Nino is being wasted on the 3rd line.

Perfetti Scheif Vilardi
Nino Names Ehlers
KFC Monahan XXX
Iafallo Lowry Apples

Larsson and Tarasenko would be nice.

JMo Larsson
Dillon Pionk
Sammy DeMelo

The Lowry line as constructed now is dominating possession while being heavily buried in the defensive zone. Lowry and Appleton are on pace for career highs in scoring and Nino will probably have the second best point totals of his career. He is not being wasted.

 

[Jet]

No, that's not what it means. But it means they need to use what he does instead of trying to change him. He's a great talent. Let him do what he is best at.

The numbers are beyond clear. Scheifele and the team are better off using Nik.

As has been stated a number of times lately, it is not 'fancy' or 'advanced' stats. It is just old fashioned counting stats. And it is also the more advanced stats in perfect agreement. How often do you see that to such a degree?

Of course Scheifele likes to have the puck on his stick. They all do.

That's a weak counter argument.

Again, in order to 'use Nik' the way you suggest, both the players you want to use him with and the coaches will have to modify their game/ strategy.

It's a team game. Either NIK has to modify his game to suit the team, or the team had to find a way to let him play his style in a way that doesn't negatively affect his line mates or team strategy.

Honestly I've never seen so much consternation over a 60 point player.

Nik is exciting and fun but he is but one player on the Jets

 

[Gm0ney]

Or.....Wheeler sucks.

At 5v5, Connor+Scheifele without Ehlers this year have played 447:46 minutes, are -1 in goals (GF 20 - GA 21) and outshot, outchanced, out-everything-elsed by the opposition. So the lacklustre results seem to have carried over without Wheels on the line.

 

[surixon]

That's a weak counter argument.

Again, in order to 'use Nik' the way you suggest, both the players you want to use him with and the coaches will have to modify their game/ strategy.

It's a team game. Either NIK has to modify his game to suit the team, or the team had to find a way to let him play his style in a way that doesn't negatively affect his line mates or team strategy.

Honestly I've never seen so much consternation over a 60 point player.

Nik is exciting and fun but he is but one player on the Jets

It's an interesting conversation. How much does Mark actually have to change his game to play with Nik? It seems the results would indicate a pretty seamless transition to playing with Nik.

Is it about changing games or about comfort vs. Discomfort. If it's juat about discomfort the I'd argue they should keep at it as discomfort is where a lot of growth can occur. I really don't want any players to get to comfortable.

 

[DRW204]

Stastny complemented Ehlers very well. So does Namestnikov. It's frustrating to see our coaches ignore measurable results because they "don't like" what they see. Ehlers-Namestnikov-Vilardi could be an incredibly effective line while letting Scheifele surround himself with whatever he wants.

The Ehlers Stastny Copp line was dynamite in the Canadian Division year. And pretty good the following year. Stastny is nowhere close to a burner and played really well with Ehlers.

 

[Gm0ney]

It's an interesting conversation. How much does Mark actually have to change his game to play with Nik? It seems the results would indicate a pretty seamless transition to playing with Nik.

Is it about changing games or about comfort vs. Discomfort. If it's juat about discomfort the I'd argue they should keep at it as discomfort is where a lot of growth can occur. I really don't want any players to get to comfortable.

I wonder if it's about ego. Ehlers is a puck hog. Scheifele's used to being the guy the offense flows through on his line.

Also, Scheif's a big fan for Don Cherry and the old school of hockey. He said he thinks analytics are "hogwash" - and if he's from the Don Cherry school of The Right Way To Play Hockey, he probably doesn't have much time for Ehlers Euro-hotdogging out there.

 

[surixon]

I wonder if it's about ego. Ehlers is a puck hog. Scheifele's used to being the guy the offense flows through on his line.

Also, Scheif's a big fan for Don Cherry and the old school of hockey. He said he thinks analytics are "hogwash" - and if he's from the Don Cherry school of The Right Way To Play Hockey, he probably doesn't have much time for Ehlers Euro-hotdogging out there.

Good point. It could be that as well. It would be fascinating to be in the room at times and see some of these interactions. Must be hard to manage all the egos.

 

[TS Quint]

I'd personally go back to Ehlers, Perfetti and Namestinkov and try to build another scoring line around Monohan. I wonder if he Nino and Iafallo would work well together.

You then move Barron to play with Lowry.

Monahan is one of the few players that has been working on the second line. You start with him and build.

Perfetti can't be on the 2nd line right now. He's fighting just to be in the line up. Until he pulls his head out of his ass there shouldn't be any talk of him on a scoring line.

 

[LowLefty]

It's an interesting conversation. How much does Mark actually have to change his game to play with Nik? It seems the results would indicate a pretty seamless transition to playing with Nik.

Is it about changing games or about comfort vs. Discomfort. If it's juat about discomfort the I'd argue they should keep at it as discomfort is where a lot of growth can occur. I really don't want any players to get to comfortable.

At the root of it all, you need to ask why Mark prefers to play with KC over Ehlers (if that is a thing).
The biggest change when you have Ehlers playing with 55 is Ehlers driving the line with 55 as more of a passenger.
You have to think Mark wants to drive that top line - which is why he want a guy like KC on his wing.
And that is also another reason why you separate your two line drivers - and hope that Ehlers can drive that second line to a 1b status.
Wouldn't that be nice.

I wonder if it's about ego. Ehlers is a puck hog. Scheifele's used to being the guy the offense flows through on his line.

Also, Scheif's a big fan for Don Cherry and the old school of hockey. He said he thinks analytics are "hogwash" - and if he's from the Don Cherry school of The Right Way To Play Hockey, he probably doesn't have much time for Ehlers Euro-hotdogging out there.

I agree - 55 wants to drive the line (which I just posted but a bit behind you)
Not necessarily because Ehlers is a puck hog - but he wants the puck and so does 55 - they do a lot of the same things.

 

[NA Hockey]

Monahan is one of the few players that has been working on the second line. You start with him and build.

Perfetti can't be on the 2nd line right now. He's fighting just to be in the line up. Until he pulls his head out of his ass there shouldn't be any talk of him on a scoring line.

They have won a lot of games this year with Perfetti in the top 6. He has struggled the last month but was very good the first half.

They should give him a few games after Bone’s reset with him to see if he has turned it around. It’s. the cheapest and best solution for the future as well.

If it works great, if not, there is plenty of time to continue to move lines around before setting them for the playoffs

 

[surixon]

Monahan is one of the few players that has been working on the second line. You start with him and build.

Perfetti can't be on the 2nd line right now. He's fighting just to be in the line up. Until he pulls his head out of his ass there shouldn't be any talk of him on a scoring line.

You didn't read what I wrote. I wasn't calling for Cole on line two, I was calling for three scoring lines. Monahan's could still be labeled line two for all I care. Also my suggestion was about also trying to build something around Monohan that works because what we have seen to date hasn't worked great 5 on 5. But yes, instead of going back to a line that was fantastic for us and trying come up with something that works for Sean we can't do it to continue to punish the kid.

 

[Gm0ney]

You didn't read what I wrote. I wasn't calling for Cole on line two, I was calling for three scoring lines. Monahan's could still be labeled line two for all I care. Also my suggestion was about also trying to build something around Monohan that works because what we have seen to date hasn't worked great 5 on 5. But yes, instead of going back to a line that was fantastic for us and trying come up with something that works for Sean we can't do it to continue to punish the kid.

The problem is that Bones wants to roll 3 checking lines and 1 scoring line...

 

[surixon]

The problem is that Bones wants to roll 3 checking lines and 1 scoring line...

Yeah I know. No different then in Dallas.

 

[Flair Hay]

At the root of it all, you need to ask why Mark prefers to play with KC over Ehlers (if that is a thing).
The biggest change when you have Ehlers playing with 55 is Ehlers driving the line with 55 as more of a passenger.
You have to think Mark wants to drive that top line - which is why he want a guy like KC on his wing.
And that is also another reason why you separate your two line drivers - and hope that Ehlers can drive that second line to a 1b status.
Wouldn't that be nice.


I agree - 55 wants to drive the line (which I just posted but a bit behind you)
Not necessarily because Ehlers is a puck hog - but he wants the puck and so does 55 - they do a lot of the same things.

The unfortunate reality if this is that if the Ehlers Monahan connection works and Ehlers is able to drive that line to really good results...

At that point Connor Scheifele Vilardi is still together. It likely isn't a good kind of 1A and 1B.

Results wise... 5v5 your 1A (CSV) is basically a 3rd line playing top line minutes and 1B (Ehlers and Monahan) is playing 3rd line minutes.

The hard part for so many here is how the Ehlers ice time debate is being discussed. There are two major parts:

Connor Scheifele Vilardi has been even in goals with indications it could be struggle mightily against top comp. Separating Connor and Scheifele has historically been good for both guys.

Ehlers Scheifele Vilardi has been near the top of the NHL in goal differential and indications are that could continue to a be a plus line.

We have:

a top line winger that is playing 3rd line minutes who consistently succeeds with the 1C on the top line.

a top line winger who doesn't fair well with the 1C historically on the top line.

It's such a seemingly simple solution, and there is lineup juggling everywhere except in the spot the dats says makes the most sense.

Sorry to rant in a quote tweet Low Lefty this is just me raving like a lunatic on vacation with some time on my hands haha

 

[Jet]

It's an interesting conversation. How much does Mark actually have to change his game to play with Nik? It seems the results would indicate a pretty seamless transition to playing with Nik.

Is it about changing games or about comfort vs. Discomfort. If it's juat about discomfort the I'd argue they should keep at it as discomfort is where a lot of growth can occur. I really don't want any players to get to comfortable.

I get what you are saying but when you see lines really clicking - the players really get a feel for where each other will be and when. This really helps with not only possession time, but setting up those lighting-quick plays that catch goalies and defense and end up in their net.

With Nik, the positive is, he's extremely hard to read - this is great because the opposition struggles to contain him. The downside is, his team also doesn't necessarily know where he is or what he is going to do, which leads to broken plays.

That's why I advocate for a triggerman type player who can get into spots, has a good release and shot. Nik will find that person, but success won't necessarily rely on him being predictable.

I think we might be trying to fit a round peg into a square hole, here. The best solution is to put all players in a position to succeed.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

That's a weak counter argument.

Again, in order to 'use Nik' the way you suggest, both the players you want to use him with and the coaches will have to modify their game/ strategy.

It's a team game. Either NIK has to modify his game to suit the team, or the team had to find a way to let him play his style in a way that doesn't negatively affect his line mates or team strategy.

Honestly I've never seen so much consternation over a 60 point player.

Nik is exciting and fun but he is but one player on the Jets

That's a weak counter argument.

Again, in order to 'use Nik' the way you suggest, both the players you want to use him with and the coaches will have to modify their game/ strategy.

It's a team game. Either NIK has to modify his game to suit the team, or the team had to find a way to let him play his style in a way that doesn't negatively affect his line mates or team strategy.

Honestly I've never seen so much consternation over a 60 point player.

Nik is exciting and fun but he is but one player on the Jets

I don't know how it can be a weak argument when the numbers speak so clearly. That in itself is rare. Usually the numbers allow a lot more for the other side to argue.

No. No one needs to modify anything other than their biases. We have enough experience with Ehlers and Scheifele together. Was Scheifele modifying his game? Were the coaches modifying their strategy while Nik was playing with Scheif?

Only insofar as the line was both scoring more and giving up less. Its like you are saying the coach should modify his strategy to more often outscore the opposition.

The consternation comes from our top line losing their matchups without Ehlers and winning them with Ehlers. That is not a minor thing.

Yes, it is a team game and it is high time Scheifele took one for the team and played with Ehlers.

 

[Jet]

I don't know how it can be a weak argument when the numbers speak so clearly. That in itself is rare. Usually the numbers allow a lot more for the other side to argue.

No. No one needs to modify anything other than their biases. We have enough experience with Ehlers and Scheifele together. Was Scheifele modifying his game? Were the coaches modifying their strategy while Nik was playing with Scheif?

Only insofar as the line was both scoring more and giving up less. Its like you are saying the coach should modify his strategy to more often outscore the opposition.

The consternation comes from our top line losing their matchups without Ehlers and winning them with Ehlers. That is not a minor thing.

Yes, it is a team game and it is high time Scheifele took one for the team and played with Ehlers.

I think that the primary reason for Ehlers success with Schiefele is mainly due to split focus of the defenders. That's what happens when you load up a line. However, it weakens the team overall as the other lines may not have the necessary drivers.

So you are advocating that our BEST forward, by a mile, change HIS game so that a secondary scorer gets to play his game? A game that is converse to the strategy of the entire team?

Thank god you aren't our coach.

 

[surixon]

I get what you are saying but when you see lines really clicking - the players really get a feel for where each other will be and when. This really helps with not only possession time, but setting up those lighting-quick plays that catch goalies and defense and end up in their net.

With Nik, the positive is, he's extremely hard to read - this is great because the opposition struggles to contain him. The downside is, his team also doesn't necessarily know where he is or what he is going to do, which leads to broken plays.

That's why I advocate for a triggerman type player who can get into spots, has a good release and shot. Nik will find that person, but success won't necessarily rely on him being predictable.

I think we might be trying to fit a round peg into a square hole, here. The best solution is to put all players in a position to succeed.

I understand that aspect as well. The issue is that reading off of KC better isn't leading to better on ice results. So if it's not leading to overwhelmingly positive results does the predictability really matter?

Shouldn't results be the overall driving factor?

 

[Jet]

I understand that aspect as well. The issue is that reading off of KC better isn't leading to better on ice results. So if it's not leading to overwhelmingly positive results does the predictability really matter?

Shouldn't results be the overall driving factor?

Defensively, no. Offensively, yes.

The main rub against our number 1 and number 2 leading scorers, like every year, is defensive. That's why I advocate for a guy who can do some of the heavy lifting there, a defensive workhorse who can help retrieve pucks in the offensive and defensive zone, and get it into the hands of 55 and 81.

I think that's the best solution. I think Niederrater should go back there. Barron can play on the 3rd.

 

[surixon]

Defensively, no. Offensively, yes.

The main rub against our number 1 and number 2 leading scorers, like every year, is defensive. That's why I advocate for a guy who can do some of the heavy lifting there, a defensive workhorse who can help retrieve pucks in the offensive and defensive zone, and get it into the hands of 55 and 81.

I think that's the best solution. I think Niederrater should go back there. Barron can play on the 3rd.

I'm not sure I agree. That was what Vilardi was for and the line posted awful results.

I think that line needs a nz driver more then anything. During its hay day they had a prime Wheeler doing that.

Scheifele and KC are great once they get the puck in the ozone but neither is an amazing nz driver which is where I think the issues come from.

 

[Flair Hay]

I think that the primary reason for Ehlers success with Schiefele is mainly due to split focus of the defenders. That's what happens when you load up a line. However, it weakens the team overall as the other lines may not have the necessary drivers.

So you are advocating that our BEST forward, by a mile, change HIS game so that a secondary scorer gets to play his game? A game that is converse to the strategy of the entire team?

Thank god you aren't our coach.

I don't think there is any reason to suggest that loading up the line with Ehlers overall weakens the team overall.

I think it is fair to call Ehlers a 60 point player, because that's what he has been.

Also, part of the issue is people here strongly believe the reason he is a 60 point player and not an 80 point player (when healthy) is usage. Top line mins, top PP and EN points is basically the difference.

Scheif switching up his style hasn't hurt him one bit when he has been with Ehlers. Scheif hasn't just done better, he has flourished with Ehlers compared to with Connor. It's been the difference between a top 10 line in the NHL and an average at best 2nd line by the numbers. That's pretty significant.

There are some peripheral factors and context involved in this beyond just pts/60, I totally get that. They are part of the solution, too.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I think that the primary reason for Ehlers success with Schiefele is mainly due to split focus of the defenders. That's what happens when you load up a line. However, it weakens the team overall as the other lines may not have the necessary drivers.

So you are advocating that our BEST forward, by a mile, change HIS game so that a secondary scorer gets to play his game? A game that is converse to the strategy of the entire team?

Thank god you aren't our coach.

Yeah, no. That is just in no way descriptive of what I am suggesting.

I am advocating that our best C play with our best winger in order that the team score more goals and give up fewer. What team strategy aims for fewer GF and more GA?

Does Scheifele play that differently when he plays with Ehlers? If so, maybe he should play that way when not with Ehlers because his line is more effective when he does.

There is an argument for tasking Ehlers with driving the 2nd line but that is not working. Has not worked all year. What might work, but has never been tried, is Perfetti as playmaker with Connor as finisher. Who would centre that line is a good question. It might turn out that that combination lacks size and physicality and loses out on possession. But it might work.

Your whole argument seems to be based on getting 2 top 6 lines working. Ehlers there hasn't been a solution though. The second line has been a problem all season. We don't have a good 2C. Maybe Monahan gets better after a little more time with linemates. But he hasn't had any consistent linemates so far so no chance to develop familiarity. He is better at FO but otherwise, I think Names was better.

I could be quite happy with Ehlers NOT with Scheifele if we had an effective alternative. But with 1 of them on each top 6 line both lines are sub-optimal. I hear yabbut we are 2nd in the league this way. True - but is it because of an effective top 6? Or is it more about depth and goaltending? Especially goaltending?

 

[Gm0ney]

I get what you are saying but when you see lines really clicking - the players really get a feel for where each other will be and when. This really helps with not only possession time, but setting up those lighting-quick plays that catch goalies and defense and end up in their net.

With Nik, the positive is, he's extremely hard to read - this is great because the opposition struggles to contain him. The downside is, his team also doesn't necessarily know where he is or what he is going to do, which leads to broken plays.

That's why I advocate for a triggerman type player who can get into spots, has a good release and shot. Nik will find that person, but success won't necessarily rely on him being predictable.

I think we might be trying to fit a round peg into a square hole, here. The best solution is to put all players in a position to succeed.

I don't think there's a Jets duo that scores higher than Ehlers-Scheifele together. They're outscoring the opposition 20-7 (74%). 171-114 (60%) over their careers together. Over the last 3 years, in 829:18 minutes, their GF/60 is 3.69. Ehlers without Scheifele is 3.18 and Scheif without Ehlers is 2.60.

McDavid-Draisaitl are 272-202 (57.4%) since 2015-16...and they're like a cheat code. Over their last 3 years in 1117:46 minutes, their GF/60 is 4.08. McDavid without Draisaitl is 3.39 and Drai without McD is 3.08.

I don't know how much more "clicking" we need to see. Don't worry about where Ehlers is going to be - he'll dismantle the opposition's defensive structure and figure out where you're going to be and the Jets will come out ahead way more often than not...

 

[JetsFan815]

At 5v5, Connor+Scheifele without Ehlers this year have played 447:46 minutes, are -1 in goals (GF 20 - GA 21) and outshot, outchanced, out-everything-elsed by the opposition. So the lacklustre results seem to have carried over without Wheels on the line.

If anything these results show that Wheeler was never the problem on that line (atleast not until maybe the last year where he was not a top line player). This year we have had a good long sample of 81-55 with Iafallo and Vilardi and in both cases the results have been mediocre at best (Iafallo) or "horror bad" at worst (with Vilardi).

It's an interesting conversation. How much does Mark actually have to change his game to play with Nik? It seems the results would indicate a pretty seamless transition to playing with Nik.

Is it about changing games or about comfort vs. Discomfort. If it's juat about discomfort the I'd argue they should keep at it as discomfort is where a lot of growth can occur. I really don't want any players to get to comfortable.

I think this conversation about Mark's preference is overblown. Scheifele didn't go up to Bowness on the bench during the middle of the 3rd period in the Sharks game and asked for that line to be changed, he didn't go to Bowness in the middle of the 2nd and asked that line to be changed in the Buffalo game. It is pretty clear to me that there are certain things Bones doesn't like and for some reason thinks KC can't be taken off the top line and is making decisions based on that.

At the end of the day the buck stops with Rick. 55 is signed for 7 years, he is going to play with whom the coach wants him to play and like it if he wants to win a cup. Bringing up this stuff about player preference is letting the coach's responsibility off the hook.