Post-Game Talk: "Pity Pardy" In Here - Jets lose 5-3

[Robinson2187]

Despite many of the more thoughtful comments by posters on some of Coach`s shortcomings, those advocating for his quick dismissal are wasting their time- not going to happen.

Tthere is still the underlying issue of how, irrespective of lineup, the Jets prepare for; and generally motivate themselves for, the game.It is a massive understatement to say that the commitment is not there on a consistent basis.

Now of course one can only speculate, but it might serve Coach well to change his approach to the privacy, almost sanctity, given to `the room`!! I believe Coach indicated last year that he rarely entered the`room`either before or following the game and only very infrequently on a general basis. He bragged how the veteran leadership were self-starters and responsible for the team`s state of readiness and that he played no role. Perhaps he should actively try to find out just why things are different this year and actually play a direct role until such time as this is rectified?

 

[Robinson2187]

So is that a problem with coaching or the leadership?

I would say both 60/40.

 

[truck]

Despite many of the more thoughtful comments by posters on some of Coach`s shortcomings, those advocating for his quick dismissal are wasting their time- not going to happen.

Tthere is still the underlying issue of how, irrespective of lineup, the Jets prepare for; and generally motivate themselves for, the game.It is a massive understatement to say that the commitment is not there on a consistent basis.

Now of course one can only speculate, but it might serve Coach well to change his approach to the privacy, almost sanctity, given to `the room`!! I believe Coach indicated last year that he rarely entered the`room`either before or following the game and only very infrequently on a general basis. He bragged how the veteran leadership were self-starters and responsible for the team`s state of readiness and that he played no role. Perhaps he should actively try to find out just why things are different this year and actually play a direct role until such time as this is rectified?

I don't buy the commitment issues at all - not from the player side anyways. I do question whether or not management is committed to icing the best team possible.

Stu has gone from a mediocre #6 to asemi-regular top 4 D on this team. Thorburn was a bad 4th liner who now plays on the 3rd line and has for extended stretches in each of the last three seasons. Then there are the Peluso, Slater, Glass, Mason and Pavelec. All of whom were extended or the team at least tried.

The commitment to the bottom of a roster that has known depth issues - followed by the elevation of these same poor depth players - is very frustrating. The good players are receiving very little help. I suppose they are getting a character boost, but that clearly isn't enough to win games.

 

[veganhunter]

As far as I can tell, there isn't much difference between Peluso and Lowry. Thorburn is much better then Adam right now.

Maybe offensively, overall I strongly disagree. Lowry is much more positionally sounds and cerebral defensively than Peluso will dream about being.

Also, if Thorburn had any of those traits I actually think he'd be a pretty decent player. He's got pretty decent physical attributes.

 

[garret9]

I do think this is where the analytics fall short. Goalies are a unique position in the game; it's very, very easy to see whether they are performing well or not. A blind chimp should have noticed by now that Hutch has lost some confidence. For gods sakes, he flailed around and threw his goalie stick trying to make a routine blocker save. When the team sees that from their goalie they're like "wtf?". Not enough can be said about having a calm presence backing up the team.

Using Hutch's play 1 year ago to suggest that we should expect him to rebound is a bit misguided. I haven't felt comfortable watching him in net since 2014. It's almost 2016. It's not like he has a storied history of clutch performing like Henrik Lundquist, the reason why we are told to expect good things from him is a ridiculous entrance into the league in which he posted awesome numbers for about 1 - 2 months. Time to give the ball to someone else. This is the second time I can remember where Hutch was given the chance to take over the team and he hasn't.

/goaltending rant

I like the way the team played for the most part. Just the regular Stu Pardy mistakes, too bad they scored on them eh.

It's actually very hard to see how goaltenders perform. Thad why the goaltending market is the least efficient.

Fooled by randomness is a good book to check out.

 

[Aavco Cup]

I don't buy the commitment issues at all - not from the player side anyways. I do question whether or not management is committed to icing the best team possible.

Stu has gone from a mediocre #6 to asemi-regular top 4 D on this team. Thorburn was a bad 4th liner who now plays on the 3rd line and has for extended stretches in each of the last three seasons. Then there are the Peluso, Slater, Glass, Mason and Pavelec. All of whom were extended or the team at least tried.

The commitment to the bottom of a roster that has known depth issues - followed by the elevation of these same poor depth players - is very frustrating. The good players are receiving very little help. I suppose they are getting a character boost, but that clearly isn't enough to win games.

It's pretty much all goaltending. We just went .881 for the month of november. The team got .917 out of them last year. That's a goal a game more against and a recipe for failure.

 

[truck]

It's pretty much all goaltending. We just went .881 for the month of november. The team got .917 out of them last year. That's a goal a game more against and a recipe for failure.

Yep. The goalies have been really bad.

Variance or not - no team will win many at that rate.

 

[ecolad]

I don't buy the commitment issues at all - not from the player side anyways. I do question whether or not management is committed to icing the best team possible.

Stu has gone from a mediocre #6 to asemi-regular top 4 D on this team. Thorburn was a bad 4th liner who now plays on the 3rd line and has for extended stretches in each of the last three seasons. Then there are the Peluso, Slater, Glass, Mason and Pavelec. All of whom were extended or the team at least tried.

The commitment to the bottom of a roster that has known depth issues - followed by the elevation of these same poor depth players - is very frustrating. The good players are receiving very little help. I suppose they are getting a character boost, but that clearly isn't enough to win games.

You`ve elevated this to a different,higher level Truck; but in doing so have flagged one of the issues that may be festering in the`room`.Our veteran leadership may be as frustrated as you with what they see as managements shortcomings and are simply no longer self-motivating the team. If true,difficult to get out in the open and adress.

 

[ShooTer44]

LMAO Yeah , to be never heard from again.

 

[KingBogo]

I do think this is where the analytics fall short. Goalies are a unique position in the game; it's very, very easy to see whether they are performing well or not. A blind chimp should have noticed by now that Hutch has lost some confidence. For gods sakes, he flailed around and threw his goalie stick trying to make a routine blocker save. When the team sees that from their goalie they're like "wtf?". Not enough can be said about having a calm presence backing up the team.

Using Hutch's play 1 year ago to suggest that we should expect him to rebound is a bit misguided. I haven't felt comfortable watching him in net since 2014. It's almost 2016. It's not like he has a storied history of clutch performing like Henrik Lundquist, the reason why we are told to expect good things from him is a ridiculous entrance into the league in which he posted awesome numbers for about 1 - 2 months. Time to give the ball to someone else. This is the second time I can remember where Hutch was given the chance to take over the team and he hasn't.

/goaltending rant

I like the way the team played for the most part. Just the regular Stu Pardy mistakes, too bad they scored on them eh.

I would tend to agree on Hutch. If his highs and lows had some sort of distribution through all his games I could buy he is an average goalie. But his save% has been going in a straight downward arrow since the all-star break last season.

 

[garret9]

^his average has changed by less than .002 since the start of this season.

Not really.

Few pages back I showed the hills and valleys. Hutch's was pretty random just like Quick, Lundqvist, and Pavelec.

The last 10 coin flips tell you as much of the coins weighting as the first 10.

 

[ERYX]

Hutch has had bad spikes, but I think people are jumping too quick here to conclude what he is and isn't. Do not be fooled by randomness.

Goalies are by nature inconsistent:

Usually how low those curves fall has more to do with how long a coach will leave you in the net for in tire-fire games and the depth/trust in a back up.

Currently Hutchinson has 963 5v5 shots and has a 921 save percentage.
Essentially from this we can conclude with 90% confidence he is not replacement level or lower.

He is still very realistically any where between above average starter to average back up. Currently his highest probability sits right smack in the middle, as in below average starter and above average back up.

So a guy you can win with, but has to be on a run or behind a strong team (like Quick or Crawford).

I don't understand how that graph works. How does Hutch's line keep bouncing back up like that when he's been sub .900 for 10 games in a row now?

I don't buy that Hutch is = Quick or Crawford. He's been consistently bad since last year's All Star Break. If you take out his pre-ASB "run" he's ... well, I hesitate to say garbage because that may be a bit harsh, but he's been pretty solidly lacklustre during that time period.

Also I think Crawford tends to be underrated because of the quality of the team in front of him.

 

[Derfel*]

I don't understand how that graph works. How does Hutch's line keep bouncing back up like that when he's been sub .900 for 10 games in a row now?

Good point! Seems a bit off to me, but maybe I'm not understanding it.

 

[DanBert]

If the team was playing well and the goaltending was letting us down, then I'd harp on the goaltending...but let's ALL be honest with ourselves....

Regardless of who's in net.....Pavs, hutch or Helle.....heck even Price, it wouldn't much matter. They playing a terrible defensive game.

And dont' get hung up on save percentage either....because it doesn't give an accurate picture of how well or how poorly a goalie is playing.
there is no stat that I know off that actually gives you an acccurate mesurement of how a goalie is playing.
The Minny game was a PERFECT example of how when the team plays well....the goaltending will follow suit.

When you goaltending experts see Helle, strugle when the team is awful in front of him...then what will you say.
Should our goalies be playing better..(I'll always say yes, regardless), but in this case...the team is struging but it ISNT't because of goaltending...

Team Defence period.
If the Jets start playing a better deffensive game, the goalie stats will improve.

This team is a mess right now

 

[KingBogo]

^his average has changed by less than .002 since the start of this season.

Not really.

Few pages back I showed the hills and valleys. Hutch's was pretty random just like Quick, Lundqvist, and Pavelec.

The last 10 coin flips tell you as much of the coins weighting as the first 10.

This is going by the assumption Hutch's game performances are random outcomes. I'd argue that is not the case.

In 2013-14 he had a .943 in his 3 games. Pre all-star break in 2014-15 he had a .935. At that point his career save % was .939. Post all-star break he went .885 ending the season at .914. So far this season he is .901 dropping his career save % to .913. Interestingly he is following the same pattern as last season, just on a much shorter cycle. Initial good play followed by increasingly poor play. End result Hutch's career save % has dropped .026 since last the all-star game last season. This certainly would be a very minor difference and very possible if making making saves in an NHL game was a random event. I'd argue it doesn't come close to a random outcome.

 

[KingBogo]

I don't understand how that graph works. How does Hutch's line keep bouncing back up like that when he's been sub .900 for 10 games in a row now?

I don't buy that Hutch is = Quick or Crawford. He's been consistently bad since last year's All Star Break. If you take out his pre-ASB "run" he's ... well, I hesitate to say garbage because that may be a bit harsh, but he's been pretty solidly lacklustre during that time period.

Also I think Crawford tends to be underrated because of the quality of the team in front of him.

The graph is short term volatility. I'd argue Save % can mimic random outcomes. If I graph a night at the casino with you at a slot machine you will experience something similar to that graph. You will have wild fluctuation of luck "random outcomes". If I graph a year of play at the casino (assuming you are going often enough) you will still experience the same wild fluctuations per session but your graph will now be a steady downward arrow along the house advantage with a few bumps and drops. If I now charted a lifetime at the casino you would continue to experience wild fluctuations per session, but now the arrow would be straight down along the house advantage with every high and low smoothed out.

 

[garret9]

This is going by the assumption Hutch's game performances are random outcomes. I'd argue that is not the case.

In 2013-14 he had a .943 in his 3 games. Pre all-star break in 2014-15 he had a .935. At that point his career save % was .939. Post all-star break he went .885 ending the season at .914. So far this season he is .901 dropping his career save % to .913. Interestingly he is following the same pattern as last season, just on a much shorter cycle. Initial good play followed by increasingly poor play. End result Hutch's career save % has dropped .026 since last the all-star game last season. This certainly would be a very minor difference and very possible if making making saves in an NHL game was a random event. I'd argue it doesn't come close to a random outcome.

Not assumption that his sv% is random but that the day-to-day variance models closely to randomness, which it does

There's the human factor but it acts out similar to randomness due to he multiplicity of all he variables.

Your slots example later exemplifies this. It's not random that the house wins in the long run despite you having periods of good and bad. The smaller a sample is, the larger impact an outlier has on the average.

If played long enough, Hutch will have also good streaks that will bump up his average. What do you say then? All of a sudden his sv% is on an up swing.

Heck people were making this argument for Pavs.

Then add we already have a significant sample in the AHL where Hutch vastly outperformed Pavelec. Yea these are only hints of probability and not destiny, but they are what we have other than falling for recency bias.

 

[garret9]

I don't understand how that graph works. How does Hutch's line keep bouncing back up like that when he's been sub .900 for 10 games in a row now?

I don't buy that Hutch is = Quick or Crawford. He's been consistently bad since last year's All Star Break. If you take out his pre-ASB "run" he's ... well, I hesitate to say garbage because that may be a bit harsh, but he's been pretty solidly lacklustre during that time period.

Also I think Crawford tends to be underrated because of the quality of the team in front of him.

It's a rolling game average. Some sets of 5 these guys are good and sometimes they are bad. All of them.

I chose different players of different talent levels to show that they all experience ups and downs.

 

[winnipegger]

The Minny game was a PERFECT example of how when the team plays well....the goaltending will follow suit.

It was an example of a game where they probably could have won if I had dressed in net, yep. But that's the only one I can think of off the top of my head so far this year. In every other game, goaltending has mattered. It's 50% of the game, and 80% of the game when it's bad.

 

[leer2006]

Not assumption that his sv% is random but that the day-to-day variance models closely to randomness, which it does

There's the human factor but it acts out similar to randomness due to he multiplicity of all he variables.

Your slots example later exemplifies this. It's not random that the house wins in the long run despite you having periods of good and bad. The smaller a sample is, the larger impact an outlier has on the average.

If played long enough, Hutch will have also good streaks that will bump up his average. What do you say then? All of a sudden his sv% is on an up swing.

Heck people were making this argument for Pavs.

Then add we already have a significant sample in the AHL where Hutch vastly outperformed Pavelec. Yea these are only hints of probability and not destiny, but they are what we have other than falling for recency bias.

I'm wondering again if it is coaching in the goaltending situation again. Strong start at the begining of the season. After working in the off season with whoever are they're respected off season development coaches are. Come back start working with the jets goalie coach who see's what he percieves to be a flaw in their style and trys changing what perhaps makes Hutch sucsessfull. Making him play differently. Hutch cant adapt to changes asked of him and bad goals start happening.

 

[KingBogo]

Not assumption that his sv% is random but that the day-to-day variance models closely to randomness, which it does

There's the human factor but it acts out similar to randomness due to he multiplicity of all he variables.

Your slots example later exemplifies this. It's not random that the house wins in the long run despite you having periods of good and bad. The smaller a sample is, the larger impact an outlier has on the average.

If played long enough, Hutch will have also good streaks that will bump up his average. What do you say then? All of a sudden his sv% is on an up swing.

Heck people were making this argument for Pavs.

Then add we already have a significant sample in the AHL where Hutch vastly outperformed Pavelec. Yea these are only hints of probability and not destiny, but they are what we have other than falling for recency bias.

IMO there is a piece missing. Let's call goaltending skill "save frequency". As compared to hit frequency in a slot machine. And the payoff is always the same 1 saved puck. The best goalie may have a save frequency of 93% where the worst has 90%. And let's say for argument sake shots on net are random events. In the short term (any given game or even a short string of games) there will be a tremendous amount of volatility. But over the long term the top goalie will level out at a .930 sv% will the worst will level out at .900 sv%.

My argument with Hutch is a short period of stellar goaltending (volatility) at the beginning of his career is now being leveled out by goaltending skill (or lack of). Maybe It is recency bias. But every casino will pull a machine from the floor for a diagnostic if it is not in line with the theoretical hold over a long enough period of time. So if Hutch is theoretically an average starter level goalie he sure has gone a significant period of time playing considerably below that. How long does he need to go before you question the original expectation from the front end of his career?

 

[garret9]

He's had 17 10 game sets above 920.
He's had 20 10 game sets below Pavelec's career average.
Only 19 games ago Hutchinson had a 920 save percentage.
Hutchinson also vastly outperformed Pavelec at the AHL.

We ain't anywhere near there yet.

 

[KingBogo]

He's had 17 10 game sets above 920.
He's had 20 10 game sets below Pavelec's career average.
Only 19 games ago Hutchinson had a 920 save percentage.
Hutchinson also vastly outperformed Pavelec at the AHL.

We ain't anywhere near there yet.

I'm not really concerned about a comparison to Pavs, since he is way below a NHL caliber starter. IMO Hutch is starting to move into a range where his ability needs to come into question. Pro sports is not very forgiving (except apparently for Pavs), so I don't know how much longer of a trial he will get. If I had to guess, if his play continues along the same level we have seen for several months now, and Helly proves to be a better option to win games, Hutch will only be around until Pavs comes back from injury. He will then be competing with Comrie for time on the farm.

 

[garret9]

I'm not really concerned about a comparison to Pavs, since he is way below a NHL caliber starter. IMO Hutch is starting to move into a range where his ability needs to come into question. Pro sports is not very forgiving (except apparently for Pavs), so I don't know how much longer of a trial he will get. If I had to guess, if his play continues along the same level we have seen for several months now, and Helly proves to be a better option to win games, Hutch will only be around until Pavs comes back from injury. He will then be competing with Comrie for time on the farm.

Pro sports is also very bad with goaltending.

Simply said, your scenario is plausible and IMO the wrong choice.

 

[KingBogo]

Pro sports is also very bad with goaltending.

Simply said, your scenario is plausible and IMO the wrong choice.

Of course it is the wrong choice, but I don't see them moving Pavs. Much as I'm skeptical about Hutch being a legit starter I think he could become a decent backup. If Helly pushes his way in Hutch is a nice backup until Comrie is ready to challenge for NHL playing time.