Player Discussion: Mark S Discussion

[tbcwpg]

For the same reasons that Chevy did that after trading Copp.

Copp is nowhere near the level of 55/37.

 

[Guffman]

Copp is nowhere near the level of 55/37.

Very true but it would be the right thing to do for the remaining players that were competing hard to get some sort of replacements rather than to totally white flag it.

 

[tbcwpg]

Very true but it would be the right thing to do for the remaining players that were competing hard to get some sort of replacements rather than to totally white flag it.

I'm not sure any player in there would see moving 55/37 and then trading for "lesser players" would see that as anything but white flagging it.

 

[Gil Fisher]

I don't like the term rebuild, or retool for that matter, but for the sake of argument, we can use it. The rebuild will be worse in 4-5 years if we've resigned 55 and 37, all for a few more home playoff dates. I'm not opposed to either to be fair, i love going to games win, lose or draw.

The better way to avoid rebuilds in my opinion is to trade 30 year-old assets for younger assets instead of extending them into unproductive contract years.

These are tough days to manage for Chevy. It's a lot easier for a team like Boston to have a couple of superstars and then just fill a roster with their available cap space and compete. The filling the roster part is tough for us. We end up with guys like Pionk and Schmidt whom take up a lot of cap space and don't provide much if any extra value.

 

[Whileee]

Micah at @hockeyviz has a new summary metric "synthetic goals" (sG) that summarizes several aspects of a players performance (including setting and finishing).

Scheifele, Ehlers and Connor cluster quite closely.

 

[nobody imp0rtant]

Micah at @hockeyviz has a new summary metric "synthetic goals" (sG) that summarizes several aspects of a players performance (including setting and finishing).

Scheifele, Ehlers and Connor cluster quite closely.

Cluster where? All I see is a jumbled mess. Is this like a Where's Waldo game for stats people?

 

[WolfHouse]

Micah at @hockeyviz has a new summary metric "synthetic goals" (sG) that summarizes several aspects of a players performance (including setting and finishing).

Scheifele, Ehlers and Connor cluster quite closely.

Very cool... Not sure I'm down with our 1C clustered with our wingers but not a bad rating.

Why exactly did we want Kuhlman again?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I don't like the term rebuild, or retool for that matter, but for the sake of argument, we can use it. The rebuild will be worse in 4-5 years if we've resigned 55 and 37, all for a few more home playoff dates. I'm not opposed to either to be fair, i love going to games win, lose or draw.

The better way to avoid rebuilds in my opinion is to trade 30 year-old assets for younger assets instead of extending them into unproductive contract years.

These are tough days to manage for Chevy. It's a lot easier for a team like Boston to have a couple of superstars and then just fill a roster with their available cap space and compete. The filling the roster part is tough for us. We end up with guys like Pionk and Schmidt whom take up a lot of cap space and don't provide much if any extra value.

I somewhat agree with this, but I think you are a little too black and white. If you look only at raw scoring data, a lot of players peak quite early in their careers and many more just a few years later. But by the 29-33 age bracket they are playing a smarter game that may have slightly fewer Gs & As but more Ws.

Add to that the differences between individuals and I don't think you can draw such a sharp line as just using the number 30, or any other specific number. I think the key is to either get them extended on a fair contract or traded for fair value.

That is getting into the areas where words like 'rebuild' or 'retool', etc, are being used. Would you prefer some other term, like 'reset', 'reallocation of assets'? It would be a 're' something. Depending on how many contracts expire within a 1 or 2 year span it could be a huge change in the roster. Jets will have up to 13 players reaching UFA status after the coming 2 seasons if none are extended or traded. 10 of those will be aged 30 or above. Many of them will be considered key players.

I don't mind using lesser players as own rentals any more than I mind acquiring the less expensive rentals. Though I don't think we should be doing either if we don't have the horses to compete. Even 3rd & 4th rd picks have some value. But top 6/4 players are assets that need to be managed with more respect for their value.

I think it has to be accepted that extending top players who will be 30+ when their new contracts kick in will quite often require too much term but that doesn't have to mean7-8 years. It can be 4-5-6 years.

JMO but I think agents and players will be able to see the fairness in teams building some protection for themselves into these late career contracts. What I am suggesting is catering to the players with trade protection, signing bonuses, etc in the early years of the contract. Protecting the teams by giving no signing bonuses and reducing or eliminating trade protection in the later years and serving both sides by front loading.

I think front loading is key here. It makes the later years easier to trade and more economical to buy-out. First reaction from players to that buy-out part would be pretty negative, but the fact is that they have already been paid the bulk of the money and will still get 2/3 of the smaller amount remaining. They get almost all of the initially guaranteed money and are free to play someplace else of their choice and recoup their financial loss. Or they can simply go to that sunspot they wished they had been playing in and relax on the beach, if that is what they want to do. So it is quite fair to both sides, unlike some of the immovable contracts we see too often.

This is all just me playing GM. I really can't say what players and agents would agree to. The point in the end is the same as yours though. Assets need to be carefully managed to maximize value, especially for a team that is handicapped by climate and market size, etc.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Micah at @hockeyviz has a new summary metric "synthetic goals" (sG) that summarizes several aspects of a players performance (including setting and finishing).

Scheifele, Ehlers and Connor cluster quite closely.

I would be interested in seeing how well it matches up with known actual performances historically. Not sure how you rate the historical performances though. Raw scoring numbers are not the complete picture. It needs to get down to producing wins in the end, so good players on bad teams would be underrated and vice versa.

Cluster where? All I see is a jumbled mess. Is this like a Where's Waldo game for stats people?

I found Ehlers but couldn't find the other 2.

 

[PhilJets]

Lets go Mark!!!
predicting 100 point season. 50/50

 

[nobody imp0rtant]

Lets go Mark!!!
predicting 100 point season. 50/50





View attachment 735834

... with the Bruins, hopefully. They just lost Krejci. Pressure's on. Tick tock, Sweeney.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

I feel he's most likely to sign an extension between him and helle.

 

[DRW204]

inspired by some analysis done on the sharks w/ and w/o of EK

this is scheifele's finishing compared to the rest of the team as the year progresses

if you were to filter it down o 10-game pockets:

it might not be fair to compare since scheifele is an elite finisher and the rest of the collectively aren't close to average. Nevertheless , doesn't that further showcase his importance in scoring? the guy was scoring above expected compared to the rest of the team all year except game61 through 70.

imo: the harping on his +/- should be looking at both the on-ice GF and on-ice GA side.

if using xGA as a basis, scheifele vs team [less scheifele] the difference in xGA/60 is 2.87 vs 2.61.... or 8 GA if the same goaltending (which ofc can change).

the bigger component is clearly the on-ice GF side. his linemates were around -11 to -12 in GF vs xGF.... so if you assume GF-xGF = 0 is roughly average finishing,. that's 11-12 GF missing.

seems to me scheifele is closer to team-average defensively, compared to his linemates being closer to average-finishing. ideally you want improvements in both. but the bigger significance was how many flubbed opportunities his linemates got.

thank you for coming to my ted talk

 

[surixon]

inspired by some analysis done on the sharks w/ and w/o of EK

this is scheifele's finishing compared to the rest of the team as the year progresses

View attachment 735973

if you were to filter it down o 10-game pockets:
View attachment 735974

it might not be fair to compare since scheifele is an elite finisher and the rest of the collectively aren't close to average. Nevertheless , doesn't that further showcase his importance in scoring? the guy was scoring above expected compared to the rest of the team all year except game61 through 70.

imo: the harping on his +/- should be looking at both the on-ice GF and on-ice GA side.

if using xGA as a basis, scheifele vs team [less scheifele] the difference in xGA/60 is 2.87 vs 2.61.... or 5 GA if the same goaltending (which ofc can change).

the bigger component is clearly the on-ice GF side. his linemates were around -11 to -12 in GF vs xGF.... so if you assume GF-xGF = 0 is roughly average finishing,. that's 11-12 GF missing.

seems to me scheifele is closer to team-average defensively, compared to his linemates being closer to average-finishing. ideally you want improvements in both. but the bigger significance was how many flubbed opportunities his linemates got.

thank you for coming to my ted talk

It would be interesting to do that graph split by top 6 vs bottom 6.

 

[Jets 31]

I feel he's most likely to sign an extension between him and helle.

To me if we didn't trade Dubois then Scheifele might have been traded but now that we traded Dubois the only way Chevy trades Scheifele is if we get a very good centerman back. That's a tough trade to do because unless the other teams center wants out they won't want to move the center they already have.

 

[DRW204]

inspired by some analysis done on the sharks w/ and w/o of EK

this is scheifele's finishing compared to the rest of the team as the year progresses

View attachment 735973

if you were to filter it down o 10-game pockets:
View attachment 735974

it might not be fair to compare since scheifele is an elite finisher and the rest of the collectively aren't close to average. Nevertheless , doesn't that further showcase his importance in scoring? the guy was scoring above expected compared to the rest of the team all year except game61 through 70.

imo: the harping on his +/- should be looking at both the on-ice GF and on-ice GA side.

if using xGA as a basis, scheifele vs team [less scheifele] the difference in xGA/60 is 2.87 vs 2.61.... or 5 GA if the same goaltending (which ofc can change).

the bigger component is clearly the on-ice GF side. his linemates were around -11 to -12 in GF vs xGF.... so if you assume GF-xGF = 0 is roughly average finishing,. that's 11-12 GF missing.

seems to me scheifele is closer to team-average defensively, compared to his linemates being closer to average-finishing. ideally you want improvements in both. but the bigger significance was how many flubbed opportunities his linemates got.

thank you for coming to my ted talk

just quoting for continuity

took J. Mccann from one of HFJets flavor du jour of this off-season (SEA). this is accounting the 79 games played from Mcann so excludes the 3-gp w/o him.

similarly the per-10 game totals

look at the difference in SEA finishing vs him against WPG vs scheifele. Mccann was an elite finisher this past year so i expect to his accumulate more than the team, but the delta b/w him and SEA is much smaller than ours w/ scheifele.

 

[Whileee]

To reiterate, the Jets have been an absolute mess in the playoffs without Scheifele.

Starting with the 2017/18 playoffs, here are the Jets' records and goals for/against (GF / GA) in games with and without Scheifele.

Record:

With Scheifele: 16W 16L
Without Scheifele: 1W 8L

Goals:

With Scheifele: 102 GF, 82 GA
Without Scheifele: 12 GF, 33 GA

So, in 9 playoff games without Scheifele the Jets averaged 1.33 goals for per game, and 3.67 goals against.

At an individual level, Scheifele's 5v5 on-ice xGF% in the playoffs has been 54.5%, tops among the high-minute forwards on the Jets (see table below).

 

[bumblebeeman]

To reiterate, the Jets have been an absolute mess in the playoffs without Scheifele.

Starting with the 2017/18 playoffs, here are the Jets' records and goals for/against (GF / GA) in games with and without Scheifele.

Record:

With Scheifele: 16W 16L
Without Scheifele: 1W 8L

Goals:

With Scheifele: 102 GF, 82 GA
Without Scheifele: 12 GF, 33 GA

So, in 9 playoff games without Scheifele the Jets averaged 1.33 goals for per game, and 3.67 goals against.

At an individual level, Scheifele's 5v5 on-ice xGF% in the playoffs has been 54.5%, tops among the high-minute forwards on the Jets (see table below).

View attachment 736004

Ya losing Scheif in the Calgary short series and against the Habs was super deflating for the team, and those were both really win-able series. Who knows what could have been

 

[bennylundholm]

Hopefully he's been practicing back checking and playing defence this summer.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

Hopefully he's been practicing back checking and playing defence this summer.

He's on ice to score goals tho

Do you want a team of Adam Lowry?

 

[bennylundholm]

He's on ice to score goals tho

Do you want a team of Adam Lowry?

The difference is players like Eichel, Stone, Marchesault are on the ice to score goals but also put in a solid effort defensively, unlike 55.
Do you see the problem?

 

[Gabe Kupari]

The difference is players like Eichel, Stone, Marchesault are on the ice to score goals but also put in a solid effort defensively, unlike 55.
Do you see the problem?

Sure but I don't think it's as big of a problem as you think. It's not just on scheifs. I mean I guess he's played his career with defensive gurus like Blake Wheeler and Kyle Connor but yes... scheif because at times he says frick it cuz he don't swear (I call bs there btw) but he says frick this and gives up, he's the bad guy? Maybe scheif isn't as good as those players you mentioned, maybe 55 had smoke blown up his ass for 8 9 years now... he did actually. I mean if nobody Is coaching you then how do you get better? 55 had free reign with 26 for years dude. It's not all on him, my question is, is he to far gone or do we see a change now that maybe Blake isn't

 

[10Ducky10]

scheif because at times he says frick it cuz he don't swear (I call bs there btw) but he says frick this and gives up, he's the bad guy? Maybe scheif isn't as good as those players you mentioned, maybe 55 had smoke blown up his ass for 8 9 years now... he did actually. I mean if nobody Is coaching you then how do you get better? 55 had free reign with 26 for years dude. It's not all on him, my question is, is he to far gone or do we see a change now that maybe Blake isn't

Lots of religious people don't swear.

 

[nobody imp0rtant]

Lots of religious people don't swear.

They'll lie, steal, cheat but yeah, it's that swearing thing that will keep them out of Heaven.

 

[Jet]

I’m giving you that blank stare right now.

Are you seriously comparing the defense of a centre and the F1 winger? The defense of the forward who has the most defensive responsibility Vs the forward who by design is the last man back?

The Connor has a defensive problem is about the most ridiculous narrative on these boards. Comparing Connor and Schiefele’s defense is lunacy.

We can start by some trying to compare the responsibilities of a C with a winger. Connor at least has some give a f*** in his zone - but his impact to D in our zone is far less than Schiefeles.

Honestly, I'd love to see 55 moved to the wing, if only we had a way to fill his C spot properly.