Coach Discussion: All Purpose Coaching Thread Part III

[Buffdog]

The underlying numbers suggest the Jets aren't as good as their record...i.e. this probably won't go on forever.

I think it may be counterproductive to win like this if it gives the coaches the impression that they're on the right track - it's papering over the fact that the team's play isn't fundamentally sound.

But if they're just banking points while they figure it out, that's a different story. That was the hope last year.

Based on the D that we are icing, I'd say that our record is better than our roster- which is (IMHO) a credit to the coaching staff.

I don't think our poor underlying numbers are due to bad coaching or bad systems. It's due to an AHL calibre blueline (jomo and pionk aside).

Hopefully this buff thing gets straightened out and we can add a top 4 RD somehow. So yes, banking points when we oughtta not be is a good thing. The fact that we're winning at all with this group of d is astonishing

 

[KingBogo]

Maybe ruffled feathers included Buf and a coaching change will motivate him to play for the Jets again this year.

Not that I advocate for a change now. I think the Jets should just ride out the year with Maurice. Fix the D over the summer and bring in new coaching for the 20-21 season.

If the Jets make the playoffs this season, Maurice would have to retire or take another job for him not to be the coach in the 20-21 season.

 

[Whileee]

His board play is poor when he is not moving. If he gets the puck on his side standing still there is very high chance that it is coming right back in.

That's exactly what happens, again and again. Connor gets caught watching the play, and then when the puck reaches him along the boards he is completely ineffective at making a play to exit the zone.

 

[KingBogo]

In case you are interested, here is the picture for the Jets defensively when Connor is not on the ice (5v5) - basically about the same as NHL average in terms of threat against. It's hard to overstate how much of a problem Connor's defense has been, considering his high ice-time.

View attachment 282429

I wonder how much of a drag Connor is on Scheifele's underlying numbers since he has been his primary center over the last couple of seasons?

 

[raideralex99]

In case you are interested, here is the picture for the Jets defensively when Connor is not on the ice (5v5) - basically about the same as NHL average in terms of threat against. It's hard to overstate how much of a problem Connor's defense has been, considering his high ice-time.

View attachment 282429

How many games has Connor lost for the Jets?
I know Connor has 3 GWGs and I am pretty he has not cost the Jets 4 games by his defensively play ... why the hate?
Instead of the hate you should give some credit to the opposing team's players playing against the other team's top lines is not easy.

 

[raideralex99]

Since the city is celebrating a great Grey Cup win (What a defense!) ... I will use a quote from the GOAT.
This is what Brady said about Gronk “He always looks at the bright spots in everything. When you have great attitudes like that, it is good to have."
Some of you on this forum need to take this advise.

 

[Gm0ney]

Based on the D that we are icing, I'd say that our record is better than our roster- which is (IMHO) a credit to the coaching staff.

I don't think our poor underlying numbers are due to bad coaching or bad systems. It's due to an AHL calibre blueline (jomo and pionk aside).

Hopefully this buff thing gets straightened out and we can add a top 4 RD somehow. So yes, banking points when we oughtta not be is a good thing. The fact that we're winning at all with this group of d is astonishing

Yeah the defense is a shambles. But the Jets were not their 2017-18 selves all of last year with a better line up. I think the poor underlying numbers are a result of the coaching staffs' desire to lock things down to the detriment of the team's offense. It's not just getting hemmed in a lot (as you'd expect with Sbisa-class defensemen in the lineup) - it's their "hump the boards in the offensive zone and hope for a point shot" strategy. I mean, granted, the D is bad, but how much worse would things be if Maurice let the big dogs eat?

 

[Gm0ney]

The Jets have only won one only 4 games when their goalie has put up less than a .930 SV% (and one of those 4 wins they got .929 goaltending).

This team has not played well, but they've played well enough as long as they're getting Vezina goaltending.

Last year's excuse was "they're saving it for the playoffs" or "Buff was hurt and Ehlers was hurt". Now we have a fresh set of excuses for Maurice. I guess we can't evaluate Maurice's coaching unless the roster's perfect? This sounds a lot like Chevy's bullshit about not being able to assess Pavelec's goaltending without fixing the D first.

 

[Duke749]

How many games has Connor lost for the Jets?
I know Connor has 3 GWGs and I am pretty he has not cost the Jets 4 games by his defensively play ... why the hate?
Instead of the hate you should give some credit to the opposing team's players playing against the other team's top lines is not easy.

Why is it hate? It’s the reality. Connor has been awful defensively this year. Doesn’t mean he hasn’t been good offensively though.

 

[JetsUK]

My eye test has been telling me the same thing both this year and most of last. It's not a popular opinion

It's also not PoMo's opinion, but it's interesting to see how decisively Murat questions this point in his recent piece (already quoted upthread):

Connor has the Jets’ worst defensive GAR according to Evolving Hockey. The only forwards who have been on the ice for more expected goals against per minute are CJ Suess and David Gustafsson — an AHL player who got into one game and a 19-year-old rookie. Paul Maurice has spoken highly of Connor’s defensive game in the past. If the things he sees — speed, an active stick, a high IQ — translate to positive D-zone results, Connor has every offensive tool in the game to step into the next tier.

Here's an excerpt from the linked PoMo interview that Murat's referring to:

And then — I mean, sure everybody wants to score goals and everybody wants points — but [KC] doesn’t short a backcheck. He doesn’t cheat on a play to get that point. So the defencemen like him too. He’s just darn effective. He’s going to be a real good player for a long time.

Seems clear that Murat is puzzled by PoMo's positive evaluation of KC as a strong defensive player. Still, I suspect it would take a lot to get him moved down the lineup solely on the basis of his defensive shortcomings.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

The Jets have only won one only 4 games when their goalie has put up less than a .930 SV% (and one of those 4 wins they got .929 goaltending).

This team has not played well, but they've played well enough as long as they're getting Vezina goaltending.

Last year's excuse was "they're saving it for the playoffs" or "Buff was hurt and Ehlers was hurt". Now we have a fresh set of excuses for Maurice. I guess we can't evaluate Maurice's coaching unless the roster's perfect? This sounds a lot like Chevy's bull**** about not being able to assess Pavelec's goaltending without fixing the D first.

Cute, we are now making excuses for a coach that has had his lineup decimated by injuries.

I think what you call excuses most consider reality.

Anyone that has a lick of insight would have looked at this roster in October and stated we would be lucky not to finish in the bottom 3 in the league.

And who is making excuses for Maurice and our 14-9-1 record?

Only excuses I am hearing are from the Maurice detractors trying to downplay the success he has achieved with a depleted roster

 

[Gm0ney]

No, that's just removing the Jets' 4th line (and Connor), and comparing to all other teams' full rosters. Obviously, many other teams would be better without their 4th line, but it shows how much of a drag the Jets 4th line has been in very limited minutes, and how much of a drag Connor is with his high minutes.

The Jets minus their worst 4 xGF% forwards still don't crack the Top 20 vs. other teams without the same consideration...if you pull the worst 4 xGF% players from every roster, we're still probably in the basement.

In case you are interested, here is the picture for the Jets defensively when Connor is not on the ice (5v5) - basically about the same as NHL average in terms of threat against. It's hard to overstate how much of a problem Connor's defense has been, considering his high ice-time.

The difference between Connor on-and-off the ice is glaring, but overall it's not a 21 point swing (it's 6%):

 

[Gm0ney]

Cute, we are now making excuses for a coach that has had his lineup decimated by injuries.

I think what you call excuses most consider reality.

Anyone that has a lick of insight would have looked at this roster in October and stated we would be lucky not to finish in the bottom 3 in the league.

And who is making excuses for Maurice and our 14-9-1 record?

Only excuses I am hearing are from the Maurice detractors trying to downplay the success he has achieved with a depleted roster

My position is the Jets are bad even when taking their roster into account. They've been bad for over a year. They were barely a .500 team after Xmas last year. They weren't great before Xmas either but had a lethal powerplay to save their bacon. This year they're being buoyed by unsustainable goaltending and puck luck. To me, these things all point to poor utilization of the roster.

Now, this team probably isn't going anywhere with the current roster, but ignoring the team's problems and pointing the standings as proof of good coaching is just burying your head in the sand.

 

[Whileee]

How many games has Connor lost for the Jets?
I know Connor has 3 GWGs and I am pretty he has not cost the Jets 4 games by his defensively play ... why the hate?
Instead of the hate you should give some credit to the opposing team's players playing against the other team's top lines is not easy.

It's a difficult question. According to Evolving Wild's model, Connor's overall impact (at all strengths) is -0.3 wins, which is worst among Jets' players. That accounts for his impact at even-strength, on the PP, on the PK, etc. The point is that while he provides a lot of positive in scoring, he is a negative defensively. As a result, the Jets get outscored with him on the ice. As an example, over last season and this season at even-strength Connor has been on the ice for 10 more goals against than for. As one of the Jets most talented and highest-paid players I would want him to him to be a net positive contributor, not a negative. If he isn't capable of playing against other teams' top lines without giving up a lot in his own zone, then perhaps he should play on a different line.

My assessment is that his main problem is his defensive play, and that's what I've criticized. Over the past two seasons at 5v5 the Jets are scored at a higher rate when Connor is on the ice than any other regular player.

By the way, this isn't "hate", it's an analysis of player performance. If Connor wasn't such an important player (ranks 3rd among Jets forwards in ice-time) I wouldn't make much of an issue. But Connor's improvement in his own zone would have a considerable impact on the Jets' overall performance and results.

 

[Howard Chuck]

How many games has Connor lost for the Jets?
I know Connor has 3 GWGs and I am pretty he has not cost the Jets 4 games by his defensively play ... why the hate?
Instead of the hate you should give some credit to the opposing team's players playing against the other team's top lines is not easy.

Small thing, but I don't agree with people saying that someone "hates" a player because they are discussing their deficiencies. All players have them and our top players all have upsides as well.

I think most of us are just discussing the play of KC and how he optimally fits into the lineup.

No 'hate' on my part anyway.

 

[Whileee]

The Jets minus their worst 4 xGF% forwards still don't crack the Top 20 vs. other teams without the same consideration...if you pull the worst 4 xGF% players from every roster, we're still probably in the basement.


The difference between Connor on-and-off the ice is glaring, but overall it's not a 21 point swing (it's 6%):

Connor's on-ice results are a big contributor to the overall results, so it's more appropriate to compare "with and without", I think. The point is that whenever Connor isn't on the ice, the Jets are actually middle of the pack (-1% threat). Whenever he's on the ice they are caved in (+20% threat). Combining the two they are in the red (+5% threat).

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

My position is the Jets are bad even when taking their roster into account. They've been bad for over a year. They were barely a .500 team after Xmas last year. They weren't great before Xmas either but had a lethal powerplay to save their bacon. This year they're being buoyed by unsustainable goaltending and puck luck. To me, these things all point to poor utilization of the roster.

Now, this team probably isn't going anywhere with the current roster, but ignoring the team's problems and pointing the standings as proof of good coaching is just burying your head in the sand.

They are bad even taking their roster in to account?

That makes zero sense because if you are not blindly judging this team, you would be taking their roster in to account when analyzing them.

Your reasoning, that if a team is getting good goaltending, and some puck luck, that points to poor utilization of the roster, makes about as much sense as your entire take on coaching, which is it makes ZERO sense.

The best coaches in the world rely of good goaltending and puck luck. By your deductive reasoning, some of the greatest coaches in the history of the game hadn't a clue how to utilize their rosters.

Ya, sounds as silly as it reads.

You calling out reasonable posters that acknowledge the deficiencies this roster and what our coach has to deal with, as burying their heads in the sand, is as comical as it gets, cause you sound insanely hypocritical

 

[Gm0ney]

Connor's on-ice results are a big contributor to the overall results, so it's more appropriate to compare "with and without", I think. The point is that whenever Connor isn't on the ice, the Jets are actually middle of the pack (-1% threat). Whenever he's on the ice they are caved in (+20% threat). Combining the two they are in the red (+5% threat).

Well, I fully support giving him more defensively minded partners. And I do believe that Copp and Lowry often generate some decent scoring chances, so having a sniper on that line might really pay dividends...

 

[Gm0ney]

They are bad even taking their roster in to account?

That makes zero sense because if you are not blindly judging this team, you would be taking their roster in to account when analyzing them.

Your reasoning, that if a team is getting good goaltending, and some puck luck, that points to poor utilization of the roster, makes about as much sense as your entire take on coaching, which is it makes ZERO sense.

The best coaches in the world rely of good goaltending and puck luck. By your deductive reasoning, some of the greatest coaches in the history of the game hadn't a clue how to utilize their rosters.

Ya, sounds as silly as it reads.

Well, I'll let the jury decide who's making sense or not here...

 

[LowLefty]

Small thing, but I don't agree with people saying that someone "hates" a player because they are discussing their deficiencies. All players have them and our top players all have upsides as well.

I think most of us are just discussing the play of KC and how he optimally fits into the lineup.

No 'hate' on my part anyway.

Hate is a term used loosely around here - don't mistake it for the literal meaning of the word.
Sometimes it's used to reflect a surge in anti-player feedback - with the Jet's and most teams, there is always someone who gets pounded.
There is usually merit in the feedback and other times it's simply piling on or player preference to an extent.
Laine, Little, Wheeler, Roz, Ehlers - they have all taken a turn with the "hate".
Eventually, it moves to the next in line - one bad game has the potential to set the ball rolling

 

[DRW204]

48.15 CF%, 53.85 GF% (7GF, 6 GA), 44.05 xGF%

 

[Rheged]

I mean the lack of offense isn't unique to them haha


At the team level it looks so uniform that it feels like it almost must be by design. I'd be interested in seeing where the Jets rank in terms of rebound shots, I feel like they're a team that doesn't really go for second chances on offense.

 

[Whileee]

My position is the Jets are bad even when taking their roster into account. They've been bad for over a year. They were barely a .500 team after Xmas last year. They weren't great before Xmas either but had a lethal powerplay to save their bacon. This year they're being buoyed by unsustainable goaltending and puck luck. To me, these things all point to poor utilization of the roster.

Now, this team probably isn't going anywhere with the current roster, but ignoring the team's problems and pointing the standings as proof of good coaching is just burying your head in the sand.

What do you mean by "puck luck"? Jets rank #12 in 5v5 PDO (#20 in shooting % and #7 in save %). Jets' save % on the PK is #23 in the NHL, and the Jets' shooting % on the PP has been #26 in the NHL.

This NHL season so far there has been a low level of correlation between xGF% and GF% (5v5). So it's not so simple as saying that the Jets have been "lucky" in relation to their shot metrics, to this point. I think the larger issue is whether their current shot metrics are predictive of a future dive in performance. However, as yet there isn't much evidence that they are riding a PDO-luck wave. I think the situation is a bit more nuanced, and there is something to be said for the fact that they are keeping a lot of games close, and they have had a number of games where their top-end talent has shone through.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

Since the city is celebrating a great Grey Cup win (What a defense!) ... I will use a quote from the GOAT.
This is what Brady said about Gronk “He always looks at the bright spots in everything. When you have great attitudes like that, it is good to have."
Some of you on this forum need to take this advise.

I wonder if it is easier to only look at the bright spots when your team has such a continuously high level of success and has gone to the Superbowl so many times and has won it 6 times in the last 17 or 18 years?

 

[Buffdog]

Yeah the defense is a shambles. But the Jets were not their 2017-18 selves all of last year with a better line up. I think the poor underlying numbers are a result of the coaching staffs' desire to lock things down to the detriment of the team's offense. It's not just getting hemmed in a lot (as you'd expect with Sbisa-class defensemen in the lineup) - it's their "hump the boards in the offensive zone and hope for a point shot" strategy. I mean, granted, the D is bad, but how much worse would things be if Maurice let the big dogs eat?

Honest question.. how can maurice let those big dogs eat? What sort of systems should he be using to maximize the talent he has?

Pucks have to get out of our zone and into.the other teams zone. Then the puck has tonstat there and if possible, be stopped from entering our zone again altogether.

Lots of this relies on the d. I think we forget how we guys like buff and toby retrieved the puck and made outlet passes. Trouba (if I recall) was good at preventing