Coach Discussion: Coaching Thread 3

[Whileee]

So, based on McCurdy's methodology, Maurice's coaching performance last season was pretty much "average" - actually, clustered fairly closely with Trotz and Cooper, FWIW.

 

[surixon]

So, based on McCurdy's methodology, Maurice's coaching performance last season was pretty much "average" - actually, clustered fairly closely with Trotz and Cooper, FWIW.



View attachment 462156

About where I'd expect him. He's an average coach but it's hard to read into those numbers given the unique circumstances of last year with only divisional play.

 

[KingBogo]

So, based on McCurdy's methodology, Maurice's coaching performance last season was pretty much "average" - actually, clustered fairly closely with Trotz and Cooper, FWIW.



View attachment 462156

So it is settled. Maurice is the most average coach in the NHL.

 

[nobody imp0rtant]

So it is settled. Maurice is the most average coach in the NHL.

If Maurice was a sandwich, he would be a slice of baloney and a slice of Kraft Singles cheese on white bread.

 

[KingBogo]

If Maurice was a sandwich, he would be a slice of baloney and a slice of Kraft Singles cheese on white bread.

With mustard of course.

 

[Howard Chuck]

With mustard of course.

But not Dijon.

 

[Whileee]

But not Dijon.

Sometimes, it absolutely has to be Dijon. Other times, regular mustard is tolerable.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

So, based on McCurdy's methodology, Maurice's coaching performance last season was pretty much "average" - actually, clustered fairly closely with Trotz and Cooper, FWIW.

Not sure you can break coaching down to a single spot on a graph like this. But if you can, he is a lot closer to Ruff in the graphic than to Trotz and Cooper. If you want to create a 'cluster of mediocrity of coaches', I would suggest an actual circle, rother than an oblong oval thingy going only up and to the right.

 

[Whileee]

An "actual" circle... same message. Negligible differences in that cluster of coaches around "average". I know it's a disappointing graphic for those who consider Maurice the NHL's worst coach (and Trotz the second coming of Scotty Bowman), but if you don't like the results then the rational alternative is to develop your own model.

 

[surixon]

Not sure you can break coaching down to a single spot on a graph like this. But if you can, he is a lot closer to Ruff in the graphic than to Trotz and Cooper. If you want to create a 'cluster of mediocrity of coaches', I would suggest an actual circle, rother than an oblong oval thingy going only up and to the right.

I mean Mauiroce is slightly in the bad quadriant while the other two are in the good quadrant.

I wish there was a quality of schedule factored into this as NYI were in the division of death last year and we had a fairly mediocre division by comparison.

I think I'd like to see these grafts for 19-20 and at the conclusion of next season for a better comparison.

 

[KingBogo]

I mean Mauiroce is slightly in the bad quadriant while the other two are in the good quadrant.

I wish there was a quality of schedule factored into this as NYI were in the division of death last year and we had a fairly mediocre division by comparison.

I think I'd like to see these grafts for 19-20 and at the conclusion of next season for a better comparison.

They are clustered pretty close to take much of a take away in terms of there being much of a difference.

 

[Whileee]

I mean Mauiroce is slightly in the bad quadriant while the other two are in the good quadrant.

I wish there was a quality of schedule factored into this as NYI were in the division of death last year and we had a fairly mediocre division by comparison.

I think I'd like to see these grafts for 19-20 and at the conclusion of next season for a better comparison.

Based on the McCurdy model, with the Jets Maurice has had 4 "good" seasons (2013/14, 2014/15, 2017/18, 2019/20), a couple of essentially "even" seasons (2015/16 and 2020/21), and a couple of mildly "bad" seasons (2016/17 and 2018/19).

Overall, his "good" seasons were much more positive than his "bad" seasons, so I would presume that an aggregate summary of his "coaching impact" (on shot metrics) over his tenure with the Jets has been positive.

Here are the graphs for his "good" seasons, and his "bad" seasons...

 

[JetsUK]

Based on the McCurdy model, with the Jets Maurice has had 4 "good" seasons (2013/14, 2014/15, 2017/18, 2019/20), a couple of essentially "even" seasons (2015/16 and 2020/21), and a couple of mildly "bad" seasons (2016/17 and 2018/19).

Overall, his "good" seasons were much more positive than his "bad" seasons, so I would presume that an aggregate summary of his "coaching impact" (on shot metrics) over his tenure with the Jets has been positive.

Here are the graphs for his "good" seasons, and his "bad" seasons...

View attachment 462198

View attachment 462199

View attachment 462200

View attachment 462201

View attachment 462202

Thanks for elaborating. I'm glad that someone outside of academia is paying attention to coaching impact at the NHL level, and I'm also glad that someone is M McCurdy, but absent a detailed explanation of the model's methodology, included and excluded factors and weighting and a helpful EILI5 step-by-step that makes sense of it all, I'm not sure how useful it is, although the "mildly bad," "roughly even" and "good" rubrics you introduce are helpful and appreciated, even if they can't be compared in a more granular way, apparently.

I also don't see many people here calling out Maurice hyperbolically as a league-worst coach, but rather as a more or less average one, who can be relatively inflexible and/or limited in his roster, deployment and tactical decisions and who excels in interpersonal aspects of the job with some player cohorts. I don't see anything in these graphs to suggest that those takes are anymore wrong than those that celebrate Mo as a player's coach who keeps the team engaged and is roughly as good a coach as most the Jets reasonably could hire, or even those takes that argue that coaching full stop has minimal positive or adverse impact on NHL team play.

So, interesting, but not really sure what light it casts on Maurice's impact during his Jets tenure or legacy. Looking forward to learning more.

 

[surixon]

Based on the McCurdy model, with the Jets Maurice has had 4 "good" seasons (2013/14, 2014/15, 2017/18, 2019/20), a couple of essentially "even" seasons (2015/16 and 2020/21), and a couple of mildly "bad" seasons (2016/17 and 2018/19).

Overall, his "good" seasons were much more positive than his "bad" seasons, so I would presume that an aggregate summary of his "coaching impact" (on shot metrics) over his tenure with the Jets has been positive.

Here are the graphs for his "good" seasons, and his "bad" seasons...

View attachment 462198

View attachment 462199

View attachment 462200

View attachment 462201

View attachment 462202

Seems to match how I'd view his results. I had him as good in 14-15 and 17-18. Average last year, and 15-16 and 16-17. Poor in 18-19 and 19-20.

 

[Whileee]

Seems to match how I'd view his results. I had him as good in 14-15 and 17-18. Average last year, and 15-16 and 16-17. Poor in 18-19 and 19-20.

According to the model, Maurice's performance was pretty good in 2019/20.

 

[Whileee]

Thanks for elaborating. I'm glad that someone outside of academia is paying attention to coaching impact at the NHL level, and I'm also glad that someone is M McCurdy, but absent a detailed explanation of the model's methodology, included and excluded factors and weighting and a helpful EILI5 step-by-step that makes sense of it all, I'm not sure how useful it is, although the "mildly bad," "roughly even" and "good" rubrics you introduce are helpful and appreciated, even if they can't be compared in a more granular way, apparently.

I also don't see many people here calling out Maurice hyperbolically as a league-worst coach, but rather as a more or less average one, who can be relatively inflexible and/or limited in his roster, deployment and tactical decisions and who excels in interpersonal aspects of the job with some player cohorts. I don't see anything in these graphs to suggest that those takes are anymore wrong than those that celebrate Mo as a player's coach who keeps the team engaged and is roughly as good a coach as most the Jets reasonably could hire, or even those takes that argue that coaching full stop has minimal positive or adverse impact on NHL team play.

So, interesting, but not really sure what light it casts on Maurice's impact during his Jets tenure or legacy. Looking forward to learning more.

It doesn't seem to fit with your opinion, but that's not a very objective way to assess the model. McCurdy has published the methods on his site, if anyone is interested in them.

Regardless, I think the general finding is that Maurice's impact on shot metrics has been generally pretty good, when considering his rosters. I think it's more informative about his performance than much of the discourse about Maurice on this Board.

 

[surixon]

According to the model, Maurice's performance was pretty good in 2019/20.

Yeah that is the one year where the model and my thoughts differ.

 

[JetsUK]

It doesn't seem to fit with your opinion, but that's not a very objective way to assess the model. McCurdy has published the methods on his site, if anyone is interested in them.

Regardless, I think the general finding is that Maurice's impact on shot metrics has been generally pretty good, when considering his rosters. I think it's more informative about his performance than much of the discourse about Maurice on this Board.

I don’t think I stated my own opinion, and I’m aware of differences between objective and subjective assessments, so-called,. I will definitely jog over to McCurdy’s site to learn more — and, as I noted, I’m grateful for your bringing this to the board’s attention.

I do think discourse on this board is substantially more varied and informed than it is sometimes credited for.

 

[Whileee]

For those interested in the methods for McCurdy's model, he's posted them here...

Model: Magnus 5 (EV)

 

[10Ducky10]

Say what you want about the past few years but this year he has a team that should go on a good run in the playoffs.
I'd like to see them finish in first place but I really don't care as long as they make the playoffs and are healthy.
I'd also like to see Scheifele make it to the end of the playoffs with the team this season.

 

[GumbyCan2]

Say what you want about the past few years but this year he has a team that should go on a good run in the playoffs.
I'd like to see them finish in first place but I really don't care as long as they make the playoffs and are healthy.
I'd also like to see Scheifele make it to the end of the playoffs with the team this season.

All comes down to deployment, finger on the "who's going tonight pulse button", chemistry building/ finding/ meshing and critical game-moment decisions by the H.C., with recognizing the "old-boys-club mantra" is quite stale now!

 

[WaveRaven]

Say what you want about the past few years but this year he has a team that should go on a good run in the playoffs.
I'd like to see them finish in first place but I really don't care as long as they make the playoffs and are healthy.
I'd also like to see Scheifele make it to the end of the playoffs with the team this season.

Well having a healthy rested #55 is unlikely if Pomo is going to play him in the top 10 minutes played in the league.

 

[DRW204]

Say what you want about the past few years but this year he has a team that should go on a good run in the playoffs.
I'd like to see them finish in first place but I really don't care as long as they make the playoffs and are healthy.
I'd also like to see Scheifele make it to the end of the playoffs with the team this season.

yup. this is the best line up top-to-bottom that maurice has had since 18-19. 8th year with the team it's time for him to get the cup or go.

 

[WolfHouse]

According to the model, Maurice's performance was pretty good in 2019/20.

I guess the massive end of season losing streak wasn't long enough...
Oh wait - that's 2019-20 they're talking about the year we didn't quite make the playoffs...

The model must really respect just how bad our D core was

 

[Whileee]

I guess the massive end of season losing streak wasn't long enough...
Oh wait - that's 2019-20 they're talking about the year we didn't quite make the playoffs...

The model must really respect just how bad our D core was

It seems rational to me to assess a coach in relation to the strength of his roster, which is how the McCurdy model is structured.