Post-Game Talk: Jets lose 5-2

[pucka lucka]

Are you trying to change my opinion that people are piling on prematurely?

Or are you trying to change my opinion that it's just not worth whining about our current coach because he's not going to be fired with a 3-3 record?

Hint: either way it won't work.

When you start seeing me post about firing Maurice it's likely just about to happen. Right now he will be given time to right the ship.

[mod]

PoMo never should have been hired. He was always a bad hire.

 

[Gm0ney]

This numbers on this chart seem to be off...the Jets have never had a CA/60 of less than 44 (2014-15 was 47.58 5v5 adjusted)...the scale seems exaggerated. But the trend looks about right.

For 4 straight years the Jets were a very consistent team in terms of shot-attempts-for. Their shot-attempts-against were pretty consistent in 3 of those years - and then suddenly dropped from a (5v5 score+venue adjusted) CA/60 of about 57 to 50.

Ever since the playoff year, shot-attempts for and against are both heading in the wrong direction.

The team definitely doesn't play the same style of game they played with such success in 2014-15. The change in personnel - well, the talent is higher across the board. So why are the numbers getting worse?

 

[winnipegger]

If you doubt how much a coaching change really affects things; consider that the Penguins went (with the exact same roster) from playing mediocre hockey to back2back cup champions by bringing in a guy that got the most out of their squad.

 

[Aavco Cup]

If you doubt how much a coaching change really affects things; consider that the Penguins went (with the exact same roster) from playing mediocre hockey to back2back cup champions by bringing in a guy that got the most out of their squad.

There is usually a coaching change bump that lasts a few weeks. It's normal. It doesn't always happen though.

There may very well be a coaching change mid season for this team but they aren't going to do it now. The team is 3-3. They'll give Maurice a chance to try and fix things. Maybe they'll even try and change personnel first (trade) before firing the coach. Just watch the standings. That will tell you all you need to know. Right now the standings tell me Maurice us not being fired tomorrow.

 

[JetsFan815]

It might be the correct answer though. Ever since the team started the rebuild after the playoff year Maurice has steered the team towards playing low event hockey

Garret wrote a nice article on it last year. https://jetsnation.ca/2016/12/29/by-the-numbers-winnipeg-jets-should-not-be-playing-so-low-event/

Now concentrating on defense is fine but one quick look at our roster composition should tell you that it likely is not close to the optimal philosophy for this group.

I think case can be made with one player that Maurice rides very hard In Buff. Buff is about the furthest thing from a low event player. He's about as high event as it gets. Maurice runs him hard. Sometimes half the game. Right here is the biggest exhibit of trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

Let's move on to the other dmen Moe likes. Myers gets substantial minutes but like Buff is also offense first. He doesn't have the defensive acunum to play solid low event positional defense He's at his best when the play os moving the other way.

Morrissey and Trouba can play both ways but if argue Trouba is still more offensively inclined and likes pushing the play up up the ice quickly.

Just looking at the composition of the defense already raises red flags with regards to the organizational philosophy. It should be no surprise that Buff looked like a beast in the playoff year a year that coincided with Maurice running a very high event system As it meshed with his strengths as a player.

Moving onto the forwards and it shouldn't be hard to see that they aren't a great fit for low event hockey either.

I don't have any issue with teaching good defensive positioning and awareness but I feel that Maurice has moved the needle far too much in that direction especially given the composition of the team. This teams systems should be designed around our players strengths while the coaching staff continues to work with the individual players on improving there defensive play. It shouldn't be designed to act as a crutch against there weaknesses especially at the expense of their strengths.

I agree with your point in general but I think all this talk about "low event" and "high event" hockey is somewhat missing the forest for the trees. I am not sure of there is any kind of plan going on to specifically play low event or high event hockey as far as the Jets are concerned. I think there has been a steady and sustained decline in BOTH the offensive and the defensive games of the Jets since 2015. The following uses 2014-2015 as a baseline examines year over year delta in CF/60 and CA/60 for the Jets since that season:

Season	Year over Year CF/60 Change	Year over Year CA/60 Change
2015-2016	-1.01	2.61
2016-2017	-2.2	1.49
2017-2018	-1.38	5.24

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

The Jets are getting less and less and less shot attempts each season since 14-15 and allowing more and more shot attempts against each season. If there was a plan at work to run a "low event" system one would expect the shots attempts against to go down or atleast to hold steady. However this is not the case, the shots against have gone up. Infact shots against have gone up at a much higher rate than shots for have declined! Both needles are pointing in the opposite direction of where they should and thus compounding the suckage

It just looks like that the Jets are trying to be low event because their base in 2015 was that of a median shot generation team and a top-5 shot suppression team. Based on the numbers above the team has seen a general decline in both offensive and defensive play. The defensive game was just starting off from a much higher point (the Jets went from being a top-5 team in shot suppression in 2015 to being an median team in shot suppression last season. And they went from being a median team in shot generation to being 8th worst).

So I have to disagree with this "low event" theory I keep reading about. The Jets have seen a general decline in their overall game but based on shot data it is hard to credit trying to play "low event" as a cause for that.

 

[Peggy]

Scheifele/laine x player
Wheeler/little x player
Mp x player x player

I think laine and scheifele + anyone in the top 9 has potential. Play someone who's not ehlers or connor
And figure out the rest
That would help spread out the talent

 

[JetsFan815]

This numbers on this chart seem to be off...the Jets have never had a CA/60 of less than 44 (2014-15 was 47.58 5v5 adjusted)...the scale seems exaggerated. But the trend looks about right.

The data in those graphs is from Corsica. As per Corsica the score adjusted corsiagainst/60 for the Jets during the 14-15 season was 43.34 http://corsica.hockey/team-stats/?s...ion=Regular&venue=Any&report=Summary&tab=Main

This is only looking at the regular season data. Perhaps the numbers you are looking at include the playoff run as well?

 

[Aavco Cup]

What I remember about the playoff season was how often the team seemed to score first. We would lose some of those games but in the first half of the season we rarely trailed.

The mentality of playing tied or leading is very different than if you are behind.

In the first half last season it seemed our goaltending was allowing an early goal. We were almost always trailing. Fighting to get back in the game.

This year has been a bit of everything so far

 

[Gm0ney]

The data in those graphs is from Corsica. As per Corsica the score adjusted corsiagainst/60 for the Jets during the 14-15 season was 43.34 http://corsica.hockey/team-stats/?s...ion=Regular&venue=Any&report=Summary&tab=Main

This is only looking at the regular season data. Perhaps the numbers you are looking at include the playoff run as well?

Wow you can get Corsica to work?! It hardly ever works for me.

Looking at the numbers on Corsica vs. Natural Stat Trick, there are some discrepancies. Corsica seems to have a higher TOI for the Jets at 5v5 and lower CA. Anyway, the trend is the same either way - everything's been going downhill since 2014-15.

 

[Asiantuntija]

Did you watch the 3 games he played? I concede he gave up some softies but only after having been a shooting gallery duck for quite a while.

I'm not so much defending his performance as criticizing that of the team in front of him. I'd like to see him get a game where they play just up to a 'normal' standard. If he still gives up a couple of softies I won't be defending him.

Yes and it was terrible to watch. He gave up way too many easy rebounds, which lead to the bad thinks. It was huge mistake at first place to buy a goalie who gives huge amount of rebounds per game. Leaderboard should know better that our defense ain't able/fast enough to save his ass from easy rebounds. Even Pavelec was way better option than this guy as a 2nd goalie. Mason style doesn't fit our team. We should trade him soon as possible.

Should be absolutely amazing to surpass Buck Buck after his Vezina level performances at last 3 games. I think he doesn't deserve shot until there comes a day Buck Buck gives 5 goals.

 

[grieves]

There is usually a coaching change bump that lasts a few weeks. It's normal. It doesn't always happen though.

There may very well be a coaching change mid season for this team but they aren't going to do it now. The team is 3-3. They'll give Maurice a chance to try and fix things. Maybe they'll even try and change personnel first (trade) before firing the coach. Just watch the standings. That will tell you all you need to know. Right now the standings tell me Maurice us not being fired tomorrow.

I really hope the incompetence is not at those kinds of levels where the organization is seriously looking at empty wins instead of the actual compete level of the team. They can't be so stupid...

 

[ijuka]

Scheifele/laine x player
Wheeler/little x player
Mp x player x player

I think laine and scheifele + anyone in the top 9 has potential. Play someone who's not ehlers or connor
And figure out the rest
That would help spread out the talent

For sure. But it's still a little tough. It almost feels like MP would need to play as 3C even though he has a poor history there. Or perhaps Petan as the 3C with MP as the LW. But that still leaves the spot of the 3rd line RW open as I'm not sure if someone like Armia is good enough for an offensive line at this point.

Regardless, having 3 scoring lines in that manner would be far better than the current 0+0 bottom 6.

 

[KingBogo]

For sure. But it's still a little tough. It almost feels like MP would need to play as 3C even though he has a poor history there. Or perhaps Petan as the 3C with MP as the LW. But that still leaves the spot of the 3rd line RW open as I'm not sure if someone like Armia is good enough for an offensive line at this point.

Regardless, having 3 scoring lines in that manner would be far better than the current 0+0 bottom 6.

You've just described the problem of why we don't have 3 scoring lines. As much as everyone likes to blame Mo, IMO we just don't have the personnel for it. MP would be a great LW, Armia would be a usable RW but would have to pick up his game, but there is no center. Maybe Roslovic one day but no one currently. People like to put Petan in that spot but when has he ever produced? The guy has 3 goals and 16 assists in 85 career games, with a good chunk of that coming on the PP. Lowry won't put up big offensive numbers and should be the #4 center. Copp is an even worse option. Get a true #3 center and I think you see this team take a big jump forward.

 

[Jimby]

You are conveniently ignoring perhaps the biggest factor in the Penguins trunaround. That being the addition of Phil Kessel. Montreal brought in one of the most sought after coaches and a Stanley Cup winner. How is that working out for them?

If you doubt how much a coaching change really affects things; consider that the Penguins went (with the exact same roster) from playing mediocre hockey to back2back cup champions by bringing in a guy that got the most out of their squad.

 

[mcpw]

You are conveniently ignoring perhaps the biggest factor in the Penguins trunaround. That being the addition of Phil Kessel. Montreal brought in one of the most sought after coaches and a Stanley Cup winner. How is that working out for them?

2015-16 Penguins with Phil Kessel and Mike Johnston (until 12/12/15):
15-12-3 record (90 point pace), 66-65 goals (+1), 48.4 CF%, 15.6 PP%, 84.2 PK%, 0.940 5v5 sv%

2015-16 Penguins with Phil Kessel and Mike Sullivan (regular season only):
33-16-5 record (108 point pace), 175-134 goals (+41), 54.9 CF%, 20.0 PP%, 84.6 PK%, 0.925 5v5 sv%

The biggest factor was the coaching change.

 

[Jimby]

There is always a settling in period early in the season when you bring in new players. It just took some time for the players to build some chemistry.

2015-16 Penguins with Phil Kessel and Mike Johnston (until 12/12/15):
15-12-3 record (90 point pace), 66-65 goals (+1), 48.4 CF%, 15.6 PP%, 84.2 PK%, 0.940 5v5 sv%

2015-16 Penguins with Phil Kessel and Mike Sullivan (regular season only):
33-16-5 record (108 point pace), 175-134 goals (+41), 54.9 CF%, 20.0 PP%, 84.6 PK%, 0.925 5v5 sv%

The biggest factor was the coaching change.

 

[Duke749]

It took 3 months? Really?

 

[lomiller1]

Easy answer with lots of denial. Blame Maurice. Perhaps we've all overrated the likes of Petan Dano Armia Myers and others

If lack of talent is the real problem after this long it means we need a new GM as well. Head and assistant coaches still need to be shown the door so the new GM can bring in his own people so it's not an argument for keeping this coaching staff.

 

[Dayofthedogs]

If you doubt how much a coaching change really affects things; consider that the Penguins went (with the exact same roster) from playing mediocre hockey to back2back cup champions by bringing in a guy that got the most out of their squad.

How about the change in Montreal with Claude? He was a guy some wanted around here. How are the Habs playing?

The penguins we are not.

 

[Jimby]

Before the coaching change the Penguins had 33 points in 28 games. After the change they had 33 points in the next 28 games. Seems the coaching change made zero difference to me.

It took 3 months? Really?

 

[Duke749]

Before the coaching change the Penguins had 33 points in 28 games. After the change they had 33 points in the next 28 games. Seems the coaching change made zero difference to me.

If you want to think that then fine. But that team doesn’t win back2back Cups without Sullivan. Ask Pens fans what they think if you’re dead set on Kessel being the reason.

 

[leer2006]

How about the change in Montreal with Claude? He was a guy some wanted around here. How are the Habs playing?

The penguins we are not.

The Hab's are a poorly built team. Putting that on the coach when that is not his fault is funny.
The Habs gm will not survive the season due to this.

 

[lomiller1]

You've just described the problem of why we don't have 3 scoring lines. As much as everyone likes to blame Mo, IMO we just don't have the personnel for it. MP would be a great LW, Armia would be a usable RW but would have to pick up his game, but there is no center.

Teams that run 3 and 4 lines don’t have 10 star calibre players on their rosters, they use their complementary players on their top lines which allows them to put play drivers on every line. The Jets are running all their top players together on 2 lines and dumping all the complementary players together on a "checking" line. Without anyone who’s actually capable of driving that lines play these guys don’t get much done while diminishing returns wastes your top end talent.

Maybe Roslovic one day but no one currently. People like to put Petan in that spot but when has he ever produced? The guy has 3 goals and 16 assists in 85 career games, with a good chunk of that coming on the PP. Lowry won't put up big offensive numbers and should be the #4 center. Copp is an even worse option. Get a true #3 center and I think you see this team take a big jump forward.

Lowry drives play a little better than Bozak on Tor, but scores a little less. If you put him with 4th line players you'll get 4th line caliber play. What you need to do is put him with skilled offensive players than can take advantage of the zone time he creates. IMO he should be used with a couple smaller, offensively skilled wingers. With Perreault healthy I'd actually put him between Ehlers and Laine. They can handle the offence and all Lowry needs to do is concentrate on defence, puck retrieval and getting to the front of the net, all of which he does well.

 

[Whileee]

Teams that run 3 and 4 lines don’t have 10 star calibre players on their rosters, they use their complementary players on their top lines which allows them to put play drivers on every line. The Jets are running all their top players together on 2 lines and dumping all the complementary players together on a "checking" line. Without anyone who’s actually capable of driving that lines play these guys don’t get much done while diminishing returns wastes your top end talent.



Lowry drives play a little better than Bozak on Tor, but scores a little less. If you put him with 4th line players you'll get 4th line caliber play. What you need to do is put him with skilled offensive players than can take advantage of the zone time he creates. IMO he should be used with a couple smaller, offensively skilled wingers. With Perreault healthy I'd actually put him between Ehlers and Laine. They can handle the offence and all Lowry needs to do is concentrate on defence, puck retrieval and getting to the front of the net, all of which he does well.

I like your general analysis, but not the idea of having Perreault at C in the top 6. He's outstanding at puck retrieval and driving the play on LW, but contributes neither of those at C.

I looked at his line-based stats for 2016/17, while playing C (i.e. with two pure wingers), with one or more of those wingers being a "top 6" (Ehlers, Wheeler, Laine). It wasn't good...

5v5:

CF 134 CA 159 (CF% 45.7)
GF 2 GA 10 (GF% crappy)

The only combination that had a positive CF% with Perreault at C was with Wheeler and Ehlers, who are two other very good shot drivers.

But Perreault is so effective on LW, I'm not sure why moving him to C will improve things a lot. Instead, move him down to 3rd line to spread the wealth.

Ehlers-Scheifele-Laine
Connor-Little-Wheeler
Perreault-Roslovic-Armia
Copp-Lowry-Dano

You could flip Armia and Dano if the Jets want to match Lowry up against tough competition.

It's time to move Matthias out and get a bit more quickness / skill in the line-up.

 

[Ducky10]

I agree with your point in general but I think all this talk about "low event" and "high event" hockey is somewhat missing the forest for the trees. I am not sure of there is any kind of plan going on to specifically play low event or high event hockey as far as the Jets are concerned. I think there has been a steady and sustained decline in BOTH the offensive and the defensive games of the Jets since 2015. The following uses 2014-2015 as a baseline examines year over year delta in CF/60 and CA/60 for the Jets since that season:

Season	Year over Year CF/60 Change	Year over Year CA/60 Change
2015-2016	-1.01	2.61
2016-2017	-2.2	1.49
2017-2018	-1.38	5.24

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

The Jets are getting less and less and less shot attempts each season since 14-15 and allowing more and more shot attempts against each season. If there was a plan at work to run a "low event" system one would expect the shots attempts against to go down or atleast to hold steady. However this is not the case, the shots against have gone up. Infact shots against have gone up at a much higher rate than shots for have declined! Both needles are pointing in the opposite direction of where they should and thus compounding the suckage

It just looks like that the Jets are trying to be low event because their base in 2015 was that of a median shot generation team and a top-5 shot suppression team. Based on the numbers above the team has seen a general decline in both offensive and defensive play. The defensive game was just starting off from a much higher point (the Jets went from being a top-5 team in shot suppression in 2015 to being an median team in shot suppression last season. And they went from being a median team in shot generation to being 8th worst).

So I have to disagree with this "low event" theory I keep reading about. The Jets have seen a general decline in their overall game but based on shot data it is hard to credit trying to play "low event" as a cause for that.[/QUOTE

I agree with your point in general but I think all this talk about "low event" and "high event" hockey is somewhat missing the forest for the trees. I am not sure of there is any kind of plan going on to specifically play low event or high event hockey as far as the Jets are concerned. I think there has been a steady and sustained decline in BOTH the offensive and the defensive games of the Jets since 2015. The following uses 2014-2015 as a baseline examines year over year delta in CF/60 and CA/60 for the Jets since that season:

Season	Year over Year CF/60 Change	Year over Year CA/60 Change
2015-2016	-1.01	2.61
2016-2017	-2.2	1.49
2017-2018	-1.38	5.24

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

The Jets are getting less and less and less shot attempts each season since 14-15 and allowing more and more shot attempts against each season. If there was a plan at work to run a "low event" system one would expect the shots attempts against to go down or atleast to hold steady. However this is not the case, the shots against have gone up. Infact shots against have gone up at a much higher rate than shots for have declined! Both needles are pointing in the opposite direction of where they should and thus compounding the suckage

It just looks like that the Jets are trying to be low event because their base in 2015 was that of a median shot generation team and a top-5 shot suppression team. Based on the numbers above the team has seen a general decline in both offensive and defensive play. The defensive game was just starting off from a much higher point (the Jets went from being a top-5 team in shot suppression in 2015 to being an median team in shot suppression last season. And they went from being a median team in shot generation to being 8th worst).

So I have to disagree with this "low event" theory I keep reading about. The Jets have seen a general decline in their overall game but based on shot data it is hard to credit trying to play "low event" as a cause for that.

All of this can simply indicate they are trying to run a low event game and failing miserably at it.

I don't believe Maurice is intentionally trying to be low event either, but when your plan erodes your play at both ends of the rink it's time to rethink the plan. That doesn't just include system play, it also includes roster decisions and player usage, which is a large part of the results. Whatever he's trying to accomplish and who's he's trying to do it with isn't working too well.

He's not getting the most out of his roster, perhaps it's the players but that's an awful lot of talent to all be underachieving collectively.