What do we do with Maurice?

[Mortimer Snerd]

Suggest that the players, not the Coach, are at the root of the problem, IMO, Coach put in place a basic system which emphasized cutting down on shots against, but which somewhat stifled offensive creativity in the neutral and offensive zones. This worked very well last year BUT the players were still not doing things intuitively and they were frequently just a split second or more late. Recall Coach`s comment following the playoff loss to the effect that we needed to be quicker? I think what he meant is that we needed to be quicker in our reads and decision-making, not just in execution! (He also probably wanted to say we needed to make better reads and decisions but couldn`t for obvious reasons).

We did well last year because we had just enough TIME to mechanically go through our thought process and to execute. My eyes tell me that opponents have recognized the hesitant play in our zone and have game-planned especially for us. Counter elements are quick aggressive forecheck to cut down TIME, and marking both our defensemen to disrupt the attempted breakout when we gain possession (the infamous reversal behind our net),

Coach obviosly didn`t anticipate the problems that would emerge early this year and unfortunately tried to introduce change in offensive zone entries and tried to `activate the D` so as to create some type of five man attacking unit. The players, already in scramble mode, appear to have been totally overwhelmed by the additional challenge of executing this change- with all the odd man rushes, and even breakaways, that we`ve seen.


Net result of the above- desparately bad shot metrics; a very disjointed overall team appearance; and of course a poor won/ loss record.

Yeah, I've read your other posts on the subject. You make some interesting points but I don't entirely buy that last years systems were rudimentary or that they stifled offense and creativity. Perreault for instance had plenty of room for creativity. The addition of 1 more skilled player doesn't require going to more complex systems. It just gives us the advantage of more skill. If other teams have countered our game that is a little different and maybe some tweaking is needed. Maurice had talked all year about quickness. We did lose some of that in the PO. Partly due to playing several players who were injured badly enough they should not have been playing. Also, my theory, they over-emphasized the heavy, hitting game. Had they been playing a less physical team than Anaheim that might not have happened. That style has to be allowed to just come naturally because it is something a player is good at. When they start setting out to play extra heavy other aspects of their game suffers. Just my non-expert opinion.

 

[Hank Chinaski]

[snip]

Net result of the above- desparately bad shot metrics; a very disjointed overall team appearance; and of course a poor won/ loss record.

Not sure where you're getting the bolded. Jets are in the top half of the league for just about every even strength shot metric, and have been for about a month.

If you're talking shorthanded...yeah, that's in "desperately bad" territory for sure.

 

[Whileee]

I liked that Maurice got serious with his D and played Stuart about 14 min and Pardy less than 10. The "top 4" should be able to handle the 23-24 minutes. They sure looked good tonight.

 

[ecolad]

Yeah, I've read your other posts on the subject. You make some interesting points but I don't entirely buy that last years systems were rudimentary or that they stifled offense and creativity. Perreault for instance had plenty of room for creativity. The addition of 1 more skilled player doesn't require going to more complex systems. It just gives us the advantage of more skill. If other teams have countered our game that is a little different and maybe some tweaking is needed. Maurice had talked all year about quickness. We did lose some of that in the PO. Partly due to playing several players who were injured badly enough they should not have been playing. Also, my theory, they over-emphasized the heavy, hitting game. Had they been playing a less physical team than Anaheim that might not have happened. That style has to be allowed to just come naturally because it is something a player is good at. When they start setting out to play extra heavy other aspects of their game suffers. Just my non-expert opinion.

Could we agree Mort that the systems were designed, first and foremost, to reduce our goals against ? The players were schooled to `pressure`when the opponents had the puck but always from the defensive side of the puck.I think Coach even talked of that in todays post- game comments and acknowledged straight out that we would be satisfied with any offensive creativity that flowed thereafter as a secondary matter.

All my non-expert opinion as well

 

[ecolad]

Yeah, I've read your other posts on the subject. You make some interesting points but I don't entirely buy that last years systems were rudimentary or that they stifled offense and creativity. Perreault for instance had plenty of room for creativity. The addition of 1 more skilled player doesn't require going to more complex systems. It just gives us the advantage of more skill. If other teams have countered our game that is a little different and maybe some tweaking is needed. Maurice had talked all year about quickness. We did lose some of that in the PO. Partly due to playing several players who were injured badly enough they should not have been playing. Also, my theory, they over-emphasized the heavy, hitting game. Had they been playing a less physical team than Anaheim that might not have happened. That style has to be allowed to just come naturally because it is something a player is good at. When they start setting out to play extra heavy other aspects of their game suffers. Just my non-expert opinion.

It wasn`t the addition of `one more skilled player` that motivated Coach to make incremental change to last years systems.I believe it was a logical incremental step designed to give some initial structure and support to the attack in the neutral and offensive zones. As the skill level of the team changes with passage of time. so too will the offensive systems.(Once again, the ultimate is probably something like that used by Chicago, with complete five man units cycling through practiced attack patterns).

 

[Johnny HFBOARDS]

I liked that Maurice got serious with his D and played Stuart about 14 min and Pardy less than 10. The "top 4" should be able to handle the 23-24 minutes. They sure looked good tonight.

This devotion to vets better stop for real and not just one game. If he goes back to his old vet ways we will start to crap the bad again. Then it's clean house time for real.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Could we agree Mort that the systems were designed, first and foremost, to reduce our goals against ? The players were schooled to `pressure`when the opponents had the puck but always from the defensive side of the puck.I think Coach even talked of that in todays post- game comments and acknowledged straight out that we would be satisfied with any offensive creativity that flowed thereafter as a secondary matter.

All my non-expert opinion as well

Yup. I agree.

That was the emphasis last year. This year was supposed to get more offense in ADDITION to the good D. Worked today. If they can keep it up this whole thread dies.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

It wasn`t the addition of `one more skilled player` that motivated Coach to make incremental change to last years systems.I believe it was a logical incremental step designed to give some initial structure and support to the attack in the neutral and offensive zones. As the skill level of the team changes with passage of time. so too will the offensive systems.(Once again, the ultimate is probably something like that used by Chicago, with complete five man units cycling through practiced attack patterns).

Growth?

Certainly the intent. Wasn't working. At least in part because they simply were not playing a complete game. 30-40 minutes, then ... poof! Did they suddenly get it today?

 

[broinwhyteridge]

The coach can only work with what he's given by the GM.

 

[KingBogo]

It wasn`t the addition of `one more skilled player` that motivated Coach to make incremental change to last years systems.I believe it was a logical incremental step designed to give some initial structure and support to the attack in the neutral and offensive zones. As the skill level of the team changes with passage of time. so too will the offensive systems.(Once again, the ultimate is probably something like that used by Chicago, with complete five man units cycling through practiced attack patterns).

I thought Hnidy made an interesting comment (I think on the Big Show) about the Jets play between last season and this season. Wasn't so much about systems but that the constant physical pressure game they played takes a very demanding toll on players over time. And it is easy to still think you are playing that way even if you are playing a 1/2 step slower. According to the FP Maurice spent some time with the "veteran" group after Thursday's practice. By their play it seems to me Maurice got the results he was looking for. Post game Maurice also went out of the way to credit the vets for the type of game they played and for leading by example .

 

[Aavco Cup]

I thought Hnidy made an interesting comment (I think on the Big Show) about the Jets play between last season and this season. Wasn't so much about systems but that the constant physical pressure game they played takes a very demanding toll on players over time. And it is easy to still think you are playing that way even if you are playing a 1/2 step slower. According to the FP Maurice spent some time with the "veteran" group after Thursday's practice. By their play it seems to me Maurice got the results he was looking for. Post game Maurice also went out of the way to credit the vets for the type of game they played and for leading by example .

It's also possible the October results masked the problem, even though some of the underlying metrics were troubling.

 

[KingBogo]

It's also possible the October results masked the problem, even though some of the underlying metrics were troubling.

Agreed. When the goals are going in, it is easy to believe you are still on top of your game. When they stop going in all of a sudden you realize your defense has disappeared.

 

[CaptainChef]

This devotion to vets better stop for real and not just one game. If he goes back to his old vet ways we will start to crap the bad again. Then it's clean house time for real.

Can't believe this hasn't been bumped after last night's silliness. Really can't blame Maurice for using Hutch because it was a B2B but has he never heard of changing a goalie when they don't look to be on that night???

But what is killing us (and will eventually get Maurice fired) is again his overuse of certain vets he likes. His use of Thorburn has gone beyond ridiculous already. Stuart much the same, but at least there he might have fewer options.

And his sticking to net-minders who are off their game. We saw it last year with Pavs, now we're seeing it with Hutch.

If a coach was looking to get himself fired, they couldn't do too much better of a job than Maurice is doing right now. I love the way Maurice talks (makes a lot of sense) ,but unfortunately it seems to be just a bunch of hot air. Starting to think that TSN is the perfect place for Maurice

 

[Puckatron 3000]

Can't believe this hasn't been bumped after last night's silliness. Really can't blame Maurice for using Hutch because it was a B2B but has he never heard of changing a goalie when they don't look to be on that night???

But what is killing us (and will eventually get Maurice fired) is again his overuse of certain vets he likes. His use of Thorburn has gone beyond ridiculous already. Stuart much the same, but at least there he might have fewer options.

And his sticking to net-minders who are off their game. We saw it last year with Pavs, now we're seeing it with Hutch.

If a coach was looking to get himself fired, they couldn't do too much better of a job than Maurice is doing right now. I love the way Maurice talks (makes a lot of sense) ,but unfortunately it seems to be just a bunch of hot air. Starting to think that TSN is the perfect place for Maurice

I doubt Maurice will be fired for playing the guys Chevy signed, especially when he doesn't have much other depth to draw from.

 

[BigZ65]

I feel like some of our D are just too dumb to play the system Maurice appears insistent on, more of a man system where they follow a winger/puckcarrier around the zone. Myers, Stuart and Trouba are especially prone to bad reads leaving huge gaps in the middle of the ice, leading to the open chances at our net and breakaways. All our RHDs cheat like crazy too.

I look forward to seeing the results of having some practice time this week. Time for Maurice to adjust tactics.

 

[Whileee]

I doubt Maurice will be fired for playing the guys Chevy signed, especially when he doesn't have much other depth to draw from.

He could replace them with guys that Chevy drafted, signed or traded for.

 

[veganhunter]

I doubt Maurice will be fired for playing the guys Chevy signed, especially when he doesn't have much other depth to draw from.

True, but he may be fired for the results accrued from playing them.

 

[Say What]

Is Paul getting soft? Does he feel emotionally tied to some of them now?

Remember when he arrived and called the group out as 'slackers' basically. The players responded because Maurice had coached 'a million' games and knew what he was talking about.

If you didn't want to listen.....'bag' skate time. He was hard on the group to prove a point about being a professional. About respecting the fact that you're in the best league in the world.

Now, I don't think it's about effort. The players work hard. However, he should 'crack the whip' because of a lack of execution. Sit some repeat offenders and "make some people cry" in that locker room.

Time to conjure up some good ol fashion.....FEAR. They don't need a 'friend', they need a leader.

Where's 'Iron Mike' Keenan when you need him.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Is Paul getting soft? Does he feel emotionally tied to some of them now?

Remember when he arrived and called the group out as 'slackers' basically. The players responded because Maurice had coached 'a million' games and knew what he was talking about.

If you didn't want to listen.....'bag' skate time. He was hard on the group to prove a point about being a professional. About respecting the fact that you're in the best league in the world.

Now, I don't think it's about effort. The players work hard. However, he should 'crack the whip' because of a lack of execution. Sit some repeat offenders and "make some people cry" in that locker room.

Time to conjure up some good ol fashion.....FEAR. They don't need a 'friend', they need a leader.

Where's 'Iron Mike' Keenan when you need him.

I don't recall that at all actually.

 

[Say What]

I don't recall that at all actually.

He did in fact question their work ethic and attention to detail. They cheated for results, and were the easiest team to play against because of it. No structure what so ever. I don't think he threw anyone under the bus, but he was showing us the bus schedule.

He used phrases like: The players want to do the right things, These are some of the most committed players I've coached, etc. etc.. BUT......

 

[truck]

He did in fact question their work ethic and attention to detail. They cheated for results, and were the easiest team to play against because of it. No structure what so ever. I don't think he threw anyone under the bus, but he was showing us the bus schedule.

I don't remember any of that.

I recall him praising theor efforts from the start.

 

[Aavco Cup]

He did in fact question their work ethic and attention to detail. They cheated for results, and were the easiest team to play against because of it. No structure what so ever. I don't think he threw anyone under the bus, but he was showing us the bus schedule.

I recall him saying they always worked hard but didn't play smart (paraphrasing) i don't ever remember him saying this was a team of "slackers"

 

[Say What]

I recall him saying they always worked hard but didn't play smart (paraphrasing) i don't ever remember him saying this was a team of "slackers"

Well that's why I ended my statement with basically. He didn't like their conditioning (guys like Kane were the exception) and made a point of telling many to show up for camp in much better shape (NHL shape). He was still talking about their testing results at this most recent camp.

He kinda 'skirted' the issue of what the previous coach was doing also. Noel left him a lot of building blocks and a nice message, congratulating him. All media friendly stuff of a 'new' coach.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Well that's why I ended my statement with basically. He didn't like their conditioning (guys like Kane were the exception) and made a point of telling many to show up for camp in much better shape (NHL shape). He was still talking about their testing results at this most recent camp.

He kinda 'skirted' the issue of what the previous coach was doing also. Noel left him a lot of building blocks and a nice message, congratulating him. All media friendly stuff of a 'new' coach.

Well working hard at the wrong things is a lot different than being lazy. To me a slacker is lazy. I never ever took what Maurice has said to mean that. He did challenge them to get better in the conditioning area in part because of the style he wanted to play. But to be fair the fitness retooling had already begun with this group with Buff coming to Noel's last camp 40 lbs lighter among others who improved.

 

[Say What]

Well working hard at the wrong things is a lot different than being lazy. To me a slacker is lazy. I never ever took what Maurice has said to mean that. He did challenge them to get better in the conditioning area in part because of the style he wanted to play. But to be fair the fitness retooling had already begun with this group with Buff coming to Noel's last camp 40 lbs lighter among others who improved.

I'll concede to your point, as I was paraphrasing what Paul had said, and probably misrepresented it. He has always backed this group.

I think his main point was; that even though they worked hard (on the ice), their off-ice commitment was below what you'd expect of NHL players wanting to compete against the best in the world.

For what it's worth, I like Maurice as a coach. However, his deployment of the troops thus far.......terrible. Sit some of these 'clowns'.