Enstrom finding his game!!

[Mortimer Snerd]

Enstrom was so exploited by the Ducks that he came out with team average results in almost every single metric that series....

Obviously 4 games is not predictive, but I don't like this weird revisionist idea that Enstrom was so bad in the POs.

The team was bad, exploited, and chased around the Ducks thinking the playoffs were all about being physical and mean instead of playing the way that made them a top 5 EV team in the league that year...
Enstrom was just a defender who played slightly above the team's average.



The team on average was not deserving of winning that series, but Pavelec was definitely the largest anchor.

I think this is the key part of your post.

The team was bad, exploited, and chased around the Ducks thinking the playoffs were all about being physical and mean instead of playing the way that made them a top 5 EV team in the league that year...
Enstrom was just a defender who played slightly above the team's average.

 

[Ducky10]

Enstrom was so exploited by the Ducks that he came out with team average results in almost every single metric that series....

Obviously 4 games is not predictive, but I don't like this weird revisionist idea that Enstrom was so bad in the POs.

The team was bad, exploited, and chased around the Ducks thinking the playoffs were all about being physical and mean instead of playing the way that made them a top 5 EV team in the league that year...
Enstrom was just a defender who played slightly above the team's average.



The team on average was not deserving of winning that series, but Pavelec was definitely the largest anchor.

Ugh, thank you. That whole narrative has driven me bonkers ever since that series. Clinincal observer bias in how people viewed Enstrom against the Ducks.

 

[Jets2point0]

Enstrom was so exploited by the Ducks that he came out with team average results in almost every single metric that series....

Obviously 4 games is not predictive, but I don't like this weird revisionist idea that Enstrom was so bad in the POs.

The team was bad, exploited, and chased around the Ducks thinking the playoffs were all about being physical and mean instead of playing the way that made them a top 5 EV team in the league that year...
Enstrom was just a defender who played slightly above the team's average.



The team on average was not deserving of winning that series, but Pavelec was definitely the largest anchor.

Being average out of a bunch of bad players makes you good now? Enstrom played poorly, as did the rest of them team. Just because everyone else got exploited doesn’t mean Enstrom didnt either

When someone says Enstrom had a bad playoffs, instead of trying to show BUT SO DID EVERYONE ELSE, you can just agree

 

[Jets2point0]

Ugh, thank you. That whole narrative has driven me bonkers ever since that series. Clinincal observer bias in how people viewed Enstrom against the Ducks.

According to these stats, we should have built our team around Pardy, Burmistrov and now Hendricks

 

[Aavco Cup]

The team on average was not deserving of winning that series, but Pavelec was definitely the largest anchor.

Yeah I wasn't implying we should have won the series, only that with better goaltending we likely hold on and win a couple of those games

 

[Ducky10]

Being average out of a bunch of bad players makes you good now? Enstrom played poorly, as did the rest of them team. Just because everyone else got exploited doesn’t mean Enstrom didnt either

When someone says Enstrom had a bad playoffs, instead of trying to show BUT SO DID EVERYONE ELSE, you can just agree

Except the narrative has been Enstrom was largely to blame for being bullied by the Ducks. It's already been said and agreed upon by many the Jets didn't play well enough to win that series as a whole.

 

[Ducky10]

According to these stats, we should have built our team around Pardy, Burmistrov and now Hendricks

It does? Not quite sure I see that but I'll take your word for it.

 

[Jets2point0]

Except the narrative has been Enstrom was largely to blame for being bullied by the Ducks. It's already been said and agreed upon by many the Jets didn't play well enough to win that series as a whole.

Okay well I didn’t bring it up, I just agreed with another post that said Enstrom struggled. To which I received stats showing that everyone struggled

 

[garret9]

Being average out of a bunch of bad players makes you good now? Enstrom played poorly, as did the rest of them team. Just because everyone else got exploited doesn’t mean Enstrom didnt either

When someone says Enstrom had a bad playoffs, instead of trying to show BUT SO DID EVERYONE ELSE, you can just agree

I guess we should also trade Trouba, Lowry, Wheeler, and Scheifele because they got it worse than Enstrom in those 4 games. Those four games showed we cannot have those players in the play offs.

 

[Jets2point0]

I guess we should also trade Trouba, Lowry, Wheeler, and Scheifele because they got it worse than Enstrom in those 4 games. Those four games showed we cannot have those players in the play offs.

The difference maybe being that they are all clearly trending upwards in performance, except Enstrom? Or will you argue that as well

And yes, all of the players mentioned had poor playoff performances, including Enstrom. Why is this a sore spot for you?

 

[garret9]

According to these stats, we should have built our team around Pardy, Burmistrov and now Hendricks

Predictive vs descriptive.

The stats are not to show how Enstrom will be. Anyone using those four games as predictive of how Enstrom will be this playoffs, whether by eye test or numbers, are relying on something with a lot more noise than signal.

What the stats are to show is direct contrast to the idea that "Enstrom was bad" in that playoffs in a manner different than we saw with Lowry, Scheifele, Wheeler, or Trouba -- players we are going to be heavily reliant and have high expectations for this coming playoffs.

 

[garret9]

The difference maybe being that they are all clearly trending upwards in performance, except Enstrom? Or will you argue that as well

And yes, all of the players mentioned had poor playoff performances, including Enstrom. Why is this a sore spot for you?

Because no one is making an argument based on those four games for anyone else.

I have always disliked poor logic being used in arguments.

 

[Jets2point0]

Predictive vs descriptive.

The stats are not to show how Enstrom will be. Anyone using those four games as predictive of how Enstrom will be this playoffs, whether by eye test or numbers, are relying on something with a lot more noise than signal.

What the stats are to show is direct contrast to the idea that "Enstrom was bad" in that playoffs in a manner different than we saw with Lowry, Scheifele, Wheeler, or Trouba -- players we are going to be heavily reliant and have high expectations for this coming playoffs.

Okay so if you’re arguing so bad that that Enstrom was bad in the playoffs, you must be saying that he was good?

We had a lot of poor performances in the playoffs. If you backtrack, you’ll see that at no point did I say we should get rid of Enstrom, you actually brought that up. Good for you for showing corsi and fenwick that we had players worse than Enstrom, but I jumped into the conversation because we were ON THE TOPIC of Enstrom

 

[Jets2point0]

Because no one is making an argument based on those four games for anyone else.

I have always disliked poor logic being used in arguments.

Okay here you go - Lowry sucked in the playoffs and Scheif took some dumb penalties that arguably cost us a game

 

[garret9]

Okay so if you’re arguing so bad that that Enstrom was bad in the playoffs, you must be saying that he was good?

We had a lot of poor performances in the playoffs. If you backtrack, you’ll see that at no point did I say we should get rid of Enstrom, you actually brought that up. Good for you for showing corsi and fenwick that we had players worse than Enstrom, but I jumped into the conversation because we were ON THE TOPIC of Enstrom

Some people have been making the arguments against Enstrom based on the four games and claiming he was a weakpoint for the Jets.

I have simply countered it as being poor to base an argument on a four game sample and that the data does not reflect Enstrom as being a lowlight for the team.

Carry on.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Jets2point0]

Okay here you go - Lowry sucked in the playoffs and Scheif took some dumb penalties that arguably cost us a game

Because no one is making an argument based on those four games for anyone else.

I have always disliked poor logic being used in arguments.

Also re: logic, my argument was that Enstrom was exploited in the playoffs due to his size. You can have multiple players exploited in a game as you know.

You turned my argument into Enstrom was the worst player on the team, hes the reason we lost the series and we should get rid of him - I never said any of those things.

So I’m pretty sure the logic that Enstrom was exploited in our playoff series is sound. I get you’re probably tired of the narrative from other posters that he ruined our season but please don’t confuse that with what I said

 

[Jets2point0]

Some people have been making the arguments against Enstrom based on the four games and claiming he was a weakpoint for the Jets.

I have simply countered it as being poor to base an argument on a four game sample and that the data does not reflect Enstrom as being a lowlight for the team.

Carry on.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But he WAS a weakpoint, along with other players, regardless of sample size

 

[garret9]

But he WAS a weakpoint, along with other players, regardless of sample size

A weakpoint is relative to the overall structure.
I chose that word specifically.
This is why things like relative metrics matter.
This is why a player changing teams is likely to retain their relative Corsi slightly more so than raw.

Of course, if we're getting to semantics, raw metrics also matter as well, but all of this really matters more in the 20-25 game sample than 4.

 

[Jets2point0]

A weakpoint is relative to the overall structure.
I chose that word specifically.
This is why things like relative metrics matter.

I’m just stating what he was in those 4 games, and I think you’re confusing that with me saying ‘what hes going to be’ this year.

Enstrom had a shitty 4 games. So did other players. Period.

 

[Jets2point0]

A weakpoint is relative to the overall structure.
I chose that word specifically.
This is why things like relative metrics matter.
This is why a player changing teams is likely to retain their relative Corsi slightly more so than raw.

Of course, if we're getting to semantics, raw metrics also matter as well, but all of this really matters more in the 20-25 game sample than 4.

That’s great, noted.

You’re defending that Enstrom wasn’t the worst player on the ice when thats not even the argument at all

 

[ps241]

That’s great, noted.

You’re defending that Enstrom wasn’t the worst player on the ice when thats not even the argument at all

So what is the argument?

 

[Jets2point0]

So what is the argument?

I said that Enstrom was exploited in the playoffs (its well known that the ducks intentionally dumped into his corner and matched up larger players against him in front of the net)

That got twisted into he was the worst player on the team, he cost us the series, and that we don’t need him this year

 

[buggs]

I said that Enstrom was exploited in the playoffs (its well known that the ducks intentionally dumped into his corner and matched up larger players against him in front of the net)

That got twisted into he was the worst player on the team, he cost us the series, and that we don’t need him this year

That argument existed long before you may or may not have hinted or implied as much (and has been bandied about these parts long before you registered). Garret9 isn't so much speaking against you but against a long standing narrative. You just happen to be the active conversant at the moment.

 

[Jets2point0]

A weakpoint is relative to the overall structure.
I chose that word specifically.
This is why things like relative metrics matter.
This is why a player changing teams is likely to retain their relative Corsi slightly more so than raw.

Of course, if we're getting to semantics, raw metrics also matter as well, but all of this really matters more in the 20-25 game sample than 4.

What’s a fair definition of ‘enstrom was bad in the playoffs’?

Relative to the Ducks defense, relative to the Jets defense, or relative to Enstrom’s career average?

You showed relative to the Jets team, but more accurate would be relative to his career average - if he performed below this than I feel like its fair to say he was ‘bad’

 

[ps241]

I said that Enstrom was exploited in the playoffs (its well known that the ducks intentionally dumped into his corner and matched up larger players against him in front of the net)

That got twisted into he was the worst player on the team, he cost us the series, and that we don’t need him this year

Got it.

Not blaming you but I remember Enstrom was one of the scapegoats at the time. Not sure he deserved to be singled out since the team lost and he was no worse than the other D men. I remember the Ducks employing a similar tactic against the Hawks and trying to run Keith, Hammer, and the little Hawks out of the series but it ended up the Hawks had Crawford and despite the pounding they took physically they got the goaltending and hung in and won. Ducks were very physical especially early in the series but they couldn’t keep up the pace over seven games.