Why Vegas won

[Jetfaninflorida]

Zero? You definitely haven't been paying attention. Luck played a part but I've mostly been taling about goaltending, like the rest of the hockey world....other than you and Kevin Weekes that is.

You said 'not luck'. That is zero luck. You need to pay attention to your own posts. If you made a mistake, just go edit it. You definitely haven't been paying attention to your own posts.

There are a lot more people that me and Kevin Weekes talking about how Vegas is keeping the net front clear and doing a good job of limiting dangerous chances. If you were paying attention even to this thread you would see that. Just go read the thread and the posts. You definitely haven't been paying attention.

 

[tbcwpg]

There are a lot more people that me and Kevin Weekes talking about how Vegas is keeping the net front clear and doing a good job of limiting dangerous chances. If you were paying attention even to this thread you would see that. Just go read the thread and the posts. You definitely haven't been paying attention.

That's brilliant coaching strategy was exactly what the Jets did to Nashville.

 

[Ducky10]

You said 'not luck'. That is zero luck. You need to pay attention to your own posts. If you made a mistake, just go edit it. You definitely haven't been paying attention to your own posts.

There are a lot more people that me and Kevin Weekes talking about how Vegas is keeping the net front clear and doing a good job of limiting dangerous chances. If you were paying attention even to this thread you would see that. Just go read the thread and the posts. You definitely haven't been paying attention.

This is what you're hanging your hat on now? Please.

Try to follow along with context would you?

There are a hell of a lot of people talking about a lot of things that happened in that series, including Vegas playing well. Fact remains the Jets dominated pretty much everywhere but on the acoreboard and between the pipes. The biggest story and most talked about aspect of that series, across the hockey world, was the performance of MAF, AINEC.

Continue in your zeal to fry Maurice for it, it's not a very widely held viewpoint by most knowledgeable hockey people.

See ya.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

This is what you're hanging your hat on now? Please.

Try to follow along with context would you?

There are a hell of a lot of people talking about a lot of things that happened in that series, including Vegas playing well. Fact remains the Jets dominated pretty much everywhere but on the acoreboard and between the pipes. The biggest story and most talked about aspect of that series, across the hockey world, was the performance of MAF, AINEC.

Continue in your zeal to fry Maurice for it, it's not a very widely held viewpoint by most knowledgeable hockey people.

See ya.

Dude, you are all over the map. I give up on trying to understand which of your own words is your actual opinion - zero luck, some luck or full on luck. Whichever it is, that's some very insightful analysis. See ya.

 

[kelsier]

The level of intellectual honesty would have to be pretty damn high to claim that your team lost a potential seven game series due to bad luck. Of course I understand whenever I see a player hit the post, the first thing is "geez, not this again" or "f*** this luck", but no, luck has no part in that and it's just an excuse next to another. When a player hits the post it usually means his shot was accurate, but not accurate enough. I think Fleury was nothing short of outstanding, but there are better goalkeepeers in this league and while he was able to provide that much needed last resort when other things failed, it was Vegas' entire game plan all the way from offensive to defensive strategy that outsmarted the Jets. They didn't need a vast number of high-end scoring chances but just enough to capitalize a few goals and keep their own net (and of course net front) clean. I don't feel as if the Jets dominated on the ice either although without checking any stats it seemed like the team was better at applying pressure and keeping possession. Still, when a team like Vegas (which some might argue doesn't even have any superstars) beats a team like the Jets (that has tons of firepower and no real severe flaws in the back end) it comes down to strategy and in that regard one might make a good argument for Gallant just sending Maurice spiraling down the hill. We lost despite of having more than enough tools to win, but not really knowing what to do with those tools.

It's not like the Vegas is having the most insane luck streak in the history of the game either. First of all they made it to the playoffs, which obviously means that they won majority of the 82 games in the regular season. Then at the playoffs they just keep on going executing their game plan perfectly from one game to another by shutting down their opponent without suffocating their own offensive game in the process. Basically just dropping other great teams out of the competition one after another. I'm not denying that I wouldn't be surprised, but at the same time, you can't really but applaud to how well structured this team really is and how well they are capable of executing their strategy no matter who they face. Takes a heck of a coach and of course the support cast behind him to to be able to do this and no matter what happens, at the end of the day, that's one heck of success story.

 

[Eyeseeing]

The level of intellectual honesty would have to be pretty damn high to claim that your team lost a potential seven game series due to bad luck. Of course I understand whenever I see a player hit the post, the first thing is "geez, not this again" or "f*** this luck", but no, luck has no part in that and it's just an excuse next to another. When a player hits the post it usually means his shot was accurate, but not accurate enough. I think Fleury was nothing short of outstanding, but there are better goalkeepeers in this league and while he was able to provide that much needed last resort when other things failed, it was Vegas' entire game plan all the way from offensive to defensive strategy that outsmarted the Jets. They didn't need a vast number of high-end scoring chances but just enough to capitalize a few goals and keep their own net (and of course net front) clean. I don't feel as if the Jets dominated on the ice either although without checking any stats it seemed like the team was better at applying pressure and keeping possession. Still, when a team like Vegas (which some might argue doesn't even have any superstars) beats a team like the Jets (that has tons of firepower and no real severe flaws in the back end) it comes down to strategy and in that regard one might make a good argument for Gallant just sending Maurice spiraling down the hill. We lost despite of having more than enough tools to win, but not really knowing what to do with those tools.

It's not like the Vegas is having the most insane luck streak in the history of the game either. First of all they made it to the playoffs, which obviously means that they won majority of the 82 games in the regular season. Then at the playoffs they just keep on going executing their game plan perfectly from one game to another by shutting down their opponent without suffocating their own offensive game in the process. Basically just dropping other great teams out of the competition one after another. I'm not denying that I wouldn't be surprised, but at the same time, you can't really but applaud to how well structured this team really is and how well they are capable of executing their strategy no matter who they face. Takes a heck of a coach and of course the support cast behind him to to be able to do this and no matter what happens, at the end of the day, that's one heck of success story.

This so ..:much this.
Advanced stats be damned who gives a rats ass we lost..... in 5 games
They stole our lunch money and kicked our dog.
Why can’t we give Vegas a tip of the cap!

 

[Mbraunm]

MAF is on pace to prevent the highest number of goals than expected in recorded history (our shot qual model only goes back to 2007-08 season).
That might be a factor.

Agreed-this is the answer. If the goalies were switched in the series the Jets would have easily won.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

I wouldn't say the Jets choked. One coach got more out of his lineup than the other coach who actually had a better lineup. Did MAF play lights out, or did the Jets not get the extra 1/2 second needed to create more of those grade A scoring chances? - Hellebuyck and I agree - that Vegas took that 1/2 second away. Vegas has been lauded for keeping the puck out of key scoring areas which helps MAF greatly. That is a sign of great coaching, system and player buy in and execution. That's great coaching - to be able to get players to play in a way that largely neutralizes the opponent's strengths while still executing on yours. The Jets were not able neutralize the strengths of Vegas.

If you watched the games, you would easily conclude MAF played lights out, like he did the previous 2 series.

The fact you failed to see that explains your simplistic one dimensional analysis of the game, that everything bad is tied to the coach, and everything great is tied to the players.

When you try to paint everything with this brush, your message becomes a joke.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

We needed to finish Nashville in game six, which would have gave us 3 days rest over 1. That was the starting issue, a very hard physical 7 games series with a days rest while Vegas had 5 days rest after a lighter series against the Sharks, and Kings.

We were chasing almost from the get go, we looked tired at times, tenative, out of rhythm even in the first game we won. 4 extra days rest would have given us some time to recharge, get some bruises healed and possibly find that step we were always behind on, throughout the entire series.

Vegas did their part as well. They backed off us low in our zone, pushed hard at center to their zone, cause turnovers then hit us with speed going the other way. When we tried countering with dump ins, their D had the jump on our forwards, and could fish pucks out successfully most of the times.

When we did get zone time and pressure, then Fleury stood tall making key saves at key times. Flip side was Helly looked a bit fatigued, seemed to fight the puck and just lacked the sharpness at key times, like he had in the Preds series.

You add it up, tired team, rested team, solid goaltending suspect goaltending. The Knights were relentless on the forecheck, high paced all series, and they knew we were fighting it, they smelled blood and took advantage.

Lebrun said that immediately after the game a couple of Knight players came up to him stating that they thought the Preds series took a chunk out of the Jets, something they didn’t need to state. Our teams game is so heavily reliant on pace, and we just couldn’t get it to the level we needed to play a team that was playing at a very high pace.

Lesson for next season, finish teams as quickly as you can, regular Scotty Bowman here!

 

[sipowicz]

Still spewing this nonsense. If you watched the games, you would easily conclude MAF played lights out, like he did the previous 2 series.

The fact you failed to see that explains your simplistic one dimensional analysis of the game, that everything bad is tied to the coach, and everything great is tied to the players.

When you try to paint everything with this brush, your message becomes a joke.

MAF didn’t play lights out (he played well) he didn’t have to, MAF barely had to work up a sweat with the Jets flawed offensive system used against them, on the other hand the Vegas D and forwards turned the switch to off on the Jets having good scoring chances! Some of the stats. guys paraded out fancy stats, shot diagrams and MRI’s of I don’t know what but the bottom line is that the Jets didn’t mount enough grade A scoring chances and shots, and I’m sticking to that!

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

MAF didn’t play lights out (he played well) he didn’t have to, MAF barely had to work up a sweat with the Jets flawed offensive system used against them, on the other hand the Vegas D and forwards turned the switch to off on the Jets having good scoring chances! Some of the stats. guys paraded out fancy stats, shot diagrams and MRI’s of I don’t know what but the bottom line is that the Jets didn’t mount enough grade A scoring chances and shots, and I’m sticking to that!

Thats your narrative. Most media types disagree, many thought goaltending was a big difference in the series.

He won them 2 of their 4 games. Played well in the other 2. He made timely big saves, momentum type saves. He played very very well.

Our offense is far from flawed. You dont finish second in the league in goals for, with a flawed offense. The execution of it was off, which was due to our lost pace, due to fatigue. We had no where close the pace that they had in the Preds series, it limited us.

 

[Ducky10]

This so ..:much this.
Advanced stats be damned who gives a rats ass we lost..... in 5 games
They stole our lunch money and kicked our dog.
Why can’t we give Vegas a tip of the cap!

I actually think that's been done. I personally said, as have many others that Vegas played well in many aspects. The overriding point to me is, so did the Jets for very large portions of the series, but MAF was clearly the biggest difference.........and some luck, don't forget lady luck .

People can put whatever spin they want on it, a goaltender playing over .950 is a difference maker every time..

 

[Ducky10]

MAF didn’t play lights out (he played well) he didn’t have to, MAF barely had to work up a sweat with the Jets flawed offensive system used against them, on the other hand the Vegas D and forwards turned the switch to off on the Jets having good scoring chances! Some of the stats. guys paraded out fancy stats, shot diagrams and MRI’s of I don’t know what but the bottom line is that the Jets didn’t mount enough grade A scoring chances and shots, and I’m sticking to that!

Lol, the bottom line is what you saw.

I love your belief, if nothing else Sip.

 

[KingBogo]

MAF didn’t play lights out (he played well) he didn’t have to, MAF barely had to work up a sweat with the Jets flawed offensive system used against them, on the other hand the Vegas D and forwards turned the switch to off on the Jets having good scoring chances! Some of the stats. guys paraded out fancy stats, shot diagrams and MRI’s of I don’t know what but the bottom line is that the Jets didn’t mount enough grade A scoring chances and shots, and I’m sticking to that!

Sip you get my vote for the guy most likely to complain after we win the cup. If we win in 6, it was because we were out coached and blew game 5 etc. After never even winning a playoff game previously we win 2 series and get to the conference finals and lose to a piping hot team with an even hotter goaltender. All underlying stats indicate a pretty even series with a slight advantage to the Jets. Those are the breaks, we lost. So did the Bruins, Pens, Lightning, Preds. All great teams. Were they all out coached, no killer instinct, chocked and on and on? Only one team wins the cup. You should try enjoying this young upstart team we have, because when more of the kids start hitting their primes we just might steam roll through a few playoff runs.

 

[sipowicz]

I actually think that's been done. I personally said, as have many others that Vegas played well in many aspects. The overriding point to me is, so did the Jets for very large portions of the series, but MAF was clearly the biggest difference.........and some luck, don't forget lady luck .

People can put whatever spin they want on it, a goaltender playing over .950 is a difference maker every time..

Sipism
Just because MAF played well didn’t make a difference, all he did was stop pucks and the Jets lost and Vegas won!

 

[sipowicz]

Sip you get my vote for the guy most likely to complain after we win the cup. If we win in 6, it was because we were out coached and blew game 5 etc. After never even winning a playoff game previously we win 2 series and get to the conference finals and lose to a piping hot team with an even hotter goaltender. All underlying stats indicate a pretty even series with a slight advantage to the Jets. Those are the breaks, we lost. So did the Bruins, Pens, Lightning, Preds. All great teams. Were they all out coached, no killer instinct, chocked and on and on? Only one team wins the cup. You should try enjoying this young upstart team we have, because when more of the kids start hitting their primes we just might steam roll through a few playoff runs.

Lousy Jets will probably win three straight Stanley Cups, lose one and then win another! A truly good team would win four straight, then i’d Be impressed!

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

Still spewing this nonsense. If you watched the games, you would easily conclude MAF played lights out, like he did the previous 2 series.

The fact you failed to see that explains your simplistic one dimensional analysis of the game, that everything bad is tied to the coach, and everything great is tied to the players.

When you try to paint everything with this brush, your message becomes a joke.

If you take your hate blinders off for a second you will see that the one dimensional analysis of the game is the luck/MAF analysis.

I know that you love Maurice so set that aside for a minute. I know that you disagree with most everything I say because I don't love Maurice - try to so set that aside for a minute.

Do you think that Hellebuyck might be on to something when he says that Vegas was successful at taking that 1/2 second away from our scorers which affected their ability to score? Do you think that NHL commentators like Kevin Weekes and Mike Rupp might know what they are talking about when they say that Vegas was able to limit dangerous scoring chances which helped MAF - backed up by Drew Doughty according to Kevin Weekes (Kevin stated this on the air - of course he didn't just make that up).

Saying luck/MAF is the only reason we lost may be comforting as a way to explain what is not understood by some. But I will give some credit to Vegas and I will give credence to what Stanley Cup winners and NHL players say were key factors.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

An example of why the MAF 'lights out' or 'luck' explanation against Winnipeg is too simplistic and one dimensional.

Recall the game where Frenchy was in close and had the puck on his forehand and MAF threw his right pad out. The whole top of the net open and Frenchy didn't elevate the puck over MAF's pad. Off his pad and out. Called a great /lucky save. MAF playing lights out, right?

Washington / Vegas game one - Backstrom was in close and had the puck in on his backhand and MAF threw his left pad out. The whole top of the net open but Backstrom on his backhand elevates the puck over MAF's pad to score.

So was MAF 'lucky' and 'lights out' against Frenchy and not so against Backstrom? I say no. This has nothing to do with luck. MAF did the same thing in both situations. Backstrom shot the puck to an unstoppable location. Frenchy didn't. Both Backstrom and Frenchy had a ton of net to shoot at. That's not MAF luck or being lights out, that is MAF throwing his leg out like any keeper would in that situation. What it is really is, is that Frenchy did not execute on his chance. If you want to use a one dimensional simplification brush and say MAF was lucky or lights out, well go to town. But for me, when Vegas is doing a good job of limiting those dangerous scoring chances and they are so few and far between, you need to capitalize. Vegas did more of that than us.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

If you take your hate blinders off for a second you will see that the one dimensional analysis of the game is the luck/MAF analysis.
I know that you love Maurice so set that aside for a minute. I know that you disagree with most everything I say because I don't love Maurice - try to so set that aside for a minute.
Do you think that Hellebuyck might be on to something when he says that Vegas was successful at taking that 1/2 second away from our scorers which affected their ability to score? Do you think that NHL commentators like Kevin Weekes and Mike Rupp might know what they are talking about when they say that Vegas was able to limit dangerous scoring chances which helped MAF - backed up by Drew Doughty according to Kevin Weekes (Kevin stated this on the air - of course he didn't just make that up).
Saying luck/MAF is the only reason we lost may be comforting as a way to explain what is not understood by some. But I will give some credit to Vegas and I will give credence to what Stanley Cup winners and NHL players say were key factors.

First off never said luck was involved.

Secondly, never said MAF was the only reason Vegas won.

Thirdly, absolutely Vegas had a ½ step on our players when we were trying to produce offense. They easily were the better team

Now, here is where you will be required to take off your Maurice hate goggles, and assess why that ½ second existed.

When one team rest for 5 days, while the other has 1 days rest, there will be an advantage to the rested team, that has absolutely nothing to do with coaching. Your analyses of the game is simplistic. Team lacked a step, Maurice didn’t have them motivated, didn’t have them charged and ready to go. Its an erroneous assessment that has zero logic to it.

Vegas didn’t take that half step away from us, we lost it as we progressed through 2 series, one being a hard fought 7 gamer. Maurice’s game plan, the same game plan that beat the best team in the league in 7, was the exact same game plan needed to beat Vegas. If executed properly, I have ZERO doubt in my mind that we win that series.

Coaching had squat to do with this. The execution by the players was not at the level we needed it at, and there is nothing a coach can do about it. A coach can’t coach the fatigue out of their bodies, cannot heal the bumps and bruises, coaching could not create 2 to 3 extra days rest.

Your analyses is completely one note, it ignores the factors that are player related, and ignorantly ties any one ice failure to the coach, or GM in your case as well.

There are reasons great teams fail to win cups, teams with great coaches fail all the time. Has nothing to do with the coach failing the team, and everything to do with factors related to fatigue, injuries and players failing to perform at the level and pace needed to execute the coach’s game plan.

I have played this game long enough to understand that when you are tired, when you are fatigued, your game can suck royally, and weaker teams can beat you. No coach can devise a plan that accounts for poorer player performance due to external factors like fatigue. Its playoffs, you cannot predict the amount of games you play, each series dictates the games, and teams performances can take hits the further to go, and the more games they accumulate in conjunction with the reduction in rest days.

When you factor in the road to the conference finals was nicely paved for Vegas, while we needed to knock out 2 harder teams to get there, you will understand why that ½ step existed, and why it has zilch to do with Maurice.

Not one of your media types you reference in your post above cited coaching as the issue. And I can guarantee you if they were asked why Vegas was so successful in limiting our scoring chances, most if not all would say Winnipeg’s performance issues were due to having a much harder road to the conference finals that Vegas did.

Your assessment is simplistic if it thinks coaching can coach a ½ step into the bodies of their players. FYI, players always try to play at the fastest pace possible, without a coach yelling, play faster. If they are behind by a step, it has diddly squat to do with coaching, and everything to do with human nature and the element of fatigue.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

An example of why the MAF 'lights out' or 'luck' explanation against Winnipeg is too simplistic and one dimensional.

This is such nonsense, when your assessment that its all coaching related, is even simpler and less dimensional.

We saw MAF make stellar timely big saves, so we know its true. While your assessment that Maurice's game plan was to play slower and be a half step behind, sounds as dumb and simplistic as it actually is.

 

[Ducky10]

Fleury sv% in his 4 wins vs Jets, .956.
Not the only reason the Jets lost, just the most influential one.

Goaltending
fatigue/rested team
Vegas largely keeping play tight
puck luck/no puck luck



​

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

This is such nonsense, when your assessment that its all coaching related, is even simpler and less dimensional.

We saw MAF make stellar timely big saves, so we know its true. While your assessment that Maurice's game plan was to play slower and be a half step behind, sounds as dumb and simplistic as it actually is.

My last post was specifically not about Maurice. I made the specific point about our differences on Maurice, to set that aside for a moment. Re-read it and make a comment on what I actually posted if you like.

MAF did make some timely saves, yes.

 

[robertocarlos]

I'll say it again, the Jets choked. Even worse, I don't believe they'll be back playing round 3 next year.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

I'll say it again, the Jets choked. Even worse, I don't believe they'll be back playing round 3 next year.

No need to say it again, it made zero sense the first time.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

My last post was specifically not about Maurice. I made the specific point about our differences on Maurice, to set that aside for a moment. Re-read it and make a comment on what I actually posted if you like.

MAF did make some timely saves, yes.

I think i addressed your post fully in my previous post.