Coach Discussion: Coaching Thread 3

[Jetfaninflorida]

I agree completely. This will be an interesting year. It's a big one for Maurice. We have the talent there now. If the team disappoints, is it possible we see Maurice and the Jets amicably part ways at the end of his contract? I would bet against it, but it will be fun to watch it all unfold.

The only way Maurice ever leaves the head coach position with the Jets is via a 'promotion' within the Jets or TNSE organization.

 

[KingBogo]

The record will always outweigh any analytics when it comes to any GM and coach's job security.

Agreed. Maurice also seems to be a big pull with a lot of players. It seems like every time I listen to a player interview they mention Maurice in a positive light. IMO people need to appreciate players like playing for him, and he appears to be a big positive in attracting players to the team. He isn't going anywhere unless they grossly underperform their talent level in the standings and that has yet to happen.

 

[surixon]

Agreed. Maurice also seems to be a big pull with a lot of players. It seems like every time I listen to a player interview they mention Maurice in a positive light. IMO people need to appreciate players like playing for him, and he appears to be a big positive in attracting players to the team. He isn't going anywhere unless they grossly underperform their talent level in the standings and that has yet to happen.

Yeah he seems very good at building and maintaining relationships which is important. I just wish he was more apt tactically.

 

[Gm0ney]

Hey if you prefer to use the Chayka method for evaluating an entire season who am I to say it’s wrong, clearly it worked out great for Arizona, not to mention the amazing success Florida had when they tried it.

because my memory is so bad I looked it up and the first 4ish months on the 18-19 season the Jets had a 49.79 xGF%

I'm not aware of Chayka's evaluation methods...but if you want to talk about fond recollections, there was a lot of speculation on this very message board about how the Jets' style had changed between the 17-18 season and the 18-19 season. Still basically the same lineup - minus Enstrom. There were injuries in 2017-18 that were just as significant (Scheifele, Lowry, Trouba and Enstrom) as 2018-19 (Buff, Morrissey and Ehlers) and that somehow didn't derail the team. And yet...the Jets were not playing the same forechecking style that got them so far the previous year.

I thought the team did much the same thing in 2015-16 after finally making the playoffs the year before. Backed away from the aggressive game and retreated into a shell. Maurice was talking about how the young guys had to learn to play defense. You can see the drop in the xG chart - though not as catastrophic as 17-18 to 18-19. Dropping 4.53 in xGF% in one season with basically the same lineup must be some kind of record. The time to fire Maurice was as plain as day, but they decided to extend him.

Oh, but Maurice - the players love him. Well the vets sure do. "You want a country club where you're never held accountable by the coach no matter how terrible you play? Come to Winnipeg!" - Stastny to Schmidt, probably...

 

[Al Camino]

I'm not aware of Chayka's evaluation methods...but if you want to talk about fond recollections, there was a lot of speculation on this very message board about how the Jets' style had changed between the 17-18 season and the 18-19 season. Still basically the same lineup - minus Enstrom. There were injuries in 2017-18 that were just as significant (Scheifele, Lowry, Trouba and Enstrom) as 2018-19 (Buff, Morrissey and Ehlers) and that somehow didn't derail the team. And yet...the Jets were not playing the same forechecking style that got them so far the previous year.

I thought the team did much the same thing in 2015-16 after finally making the playoffs the year before. Backed away from the aggressive game and retreated into a shell. Maurice was talking about how the young guys had to learn to play defense. You can see the drop in the xG chart - though not as catastrophic as 17-18 to 18-19. Dropping 4.53 in xGF% in one season with basically the same lineup must be some kind of record. The time to fire Maurice was as plain as day, but they decided to extend him.

Oh, but Maurice - the players love him. Well the vets sure do. "You want a country club where you're never held accountable by the coach no matter how terrible you play? Come to Winnipeg!" - Stastny to Schmidt, probably...

So true. Rememer when Gus made the team out of camp a few years ago and his parents came from Sweden and travelled with the team for the first 4 games only to see him scratched then play the next game after they left to go back home?

 

[KingBogo]

I'm not aware of Chayka's evaluation methods...but if you want to talk about fond recollections, there was a lot of speculation on this very message board about how the Jets' style had changed between the 17-18 season and the 18-19 season. Still basically the same lineup - minus Enstrom. There were injuries in 2017-18 that were just as significant (Scheifele, Lowry, Trouba and Enstrom) as 2018-19 (Buff, Morrissey and Ehlers) and that somehow didn't derail the team. And yet...the Jets were not playing the same forechecking style that got them so far the previous year.

I thought the team did much the same thing in 2015-16 after finally making the playoffs the year before. Backed away from the aggressive game and retreated into a shell. Maurice was talking about how the young guys had to learn to play defense. You can see the drop in the xG chart - though not as catastrophic as 17-18 to 18-19. Dropping 4.53 in xGF% in one season with basically the same lineup must be some kind of record. The time to fire Maurice was as plain as day, but they decided to extend him.

Oh, but Maurice - the players love him. Well the vets sure do. "You want a country club where you're never held accountable by the coach no matter how terrible you play? Come to Winnipeg!" - Stastny to Schmidt, probably...

You actual believe Stastny would believe that or would Schmidt? Really bad take if you do.

 

[Gm0ney]

You actual believe Stastny would believe that or would Schmidt? Really bad take if you do.

Well, Maurice never throws a vet under the bus...that's not really a matter of opinion. So I'm not sure what belief is required by Stastny here - he's seen it first hand! And if he tells Schmidt, and Schmidt tells two friends and they tell two friends...pretty soon all the veteran UFAs are going to want to come here!

 

[KingBogo]

Well, Maurice never throws a vet under the bus...that's not really a matter of opinion. So I'm not sure what belief is required by Stastny here - he's seen it first hand! And if he tells Schmidt, and Schmidt tells two friends and they tell two friends...pretty soon all the veteran UFAs are going to want to come here!

IMO that is a good thing. Stanley Cups are won by veteran heavy teams. Just look at all the most recent winners. They all have veteran heavy teams. Building teams push prospects into key roles and hope they grow into them. Cup winners don't worry about if their prospects are happy. They get called up if needed. I'd love to spend a few years acting like we want to win a cup rather than just develop prospects.

 

[Imcanadianeh]

IMO that is a good thing. Stanley Cups are won by veteran heavy teams. Just look at all the most recent winners. They all have veteran heavy teams. Building teams push prospects into key roles and hope they grow into them. Cup winners don't worry about if their prospects are happy. They get called up if needed. I'd love to spend a few years acting like we want to win a cup rather than just develop prospects.

You never got the HFJets memo

Vets=bad
Prospects=Gud

 

[surixon]

IMO that is a good thing. Stanley Cups are won by veteran heavy teams. Just look at all the most recent winners. They all have veteran heavy teams. Building teams push prospects into key roles and hope they grow into them. Cup winners don't worry about if their prospects are happy. They get called up if needed. I'd love to spend a few years acting like we want to win a cup rather than just develop prospects.

I mean Tampa's top two centers were prospects that were entered into the league at 20. Sergachev started at age 19. The best team had no issue integrating their elite young talent while trying to win. If you have elite talent that can help you compete then you integrate them.

 

[KingBogo]

I mean Tampa's top two centers were prospects that were entered into the league at 20. Sergachev started at age 19. The best team had no issue integrating their elite young talent while trying to win. If you have elite talent that can help you compete then you integrate them.

And we have done the exact same thing with all of our young core who all took on important roles on their ELCs. But at some point Cup winners transition from a priority of developing prospects to filling out rosters with established vets to make cup runs.

 

[Romang67]

And we have done the exact same thing with all of our young core who all took on important roles on their ELCs. But at some point Cup winners transition from a priority of developing prospects to filling out rosters with established vets to make cup runs.

But the choice isn't just developing prospects or filling in with vets. If a young player is good enough to make the team better than the veteran who would be in that position otherwise, the reason to play the young player would be the make cup runs.

 

[KingBogo]

But the choice isn't just developing prospects or filling in with vets. If a young player is good enough to make the team better than the veteran who would be in that position otherwise, the reason to play the young player would be the make cup runs.

Since when haven't we introduced young players? We probably have been more aggressive doing so than 90% of the teams in the league.

 

[snowkiddin]

But the choice isn't just developing prospects or filling in with vets. If a young player is good enough to make the team better than the veteran who would be in that position otherwise, the reason to play the young player would be the make cup runs.

I agree. I feel like, for example, Heinola would contribute more to our success than an established veteran like Beaulieu.

 

[surixon]

And we have done the exact same thing with all of our young core who all took on important roles on their ELCs. But at some point Cup winners transition from a priority of developing prospects to filling out rosters with established vets to make cup runs.

We haven't done the same thing, we integrated our youth during a retooling effort when we were not trying to win. We have gotten away from it since we went on our big run. Tampa integrated two of their key young players at a very young age within a couple of years from going to a cup and conference finals appearance. They didn't care that they were in the middle of the Headmon, Kuch, Stamkos window they still integrated elite young talent that have played integral roles in getting them over the hump. If Tampa can do it then so can we, no sense in holding our elite young talent back if they are ready to make the team and contribute.

Not saying Perfetti is there yet but imo he is close and it wouldn't surprise me if he gets a shot this season due to injury that he pulls a Conner and doesn't relinquish the spot.

 

[KingBogo]

We haven't done the same thing, we integrated our youth during a retooling effort when we were not trying to win. We have gotten away from it since we went on our big run. Tampa integrated two of their key young players at a very young age within a couple of years from going to a cup and conference finals appearance. They didn't care that they were in the middle of the Headmon, Kuch, Stamkos window they still integrated elite young talent that have played integral roles in getting them over the hump. If Tampa can do it then so can we, no sense in holding our elite young talent back if they are ready to make the team and contribute.

Not saying Perfetti is there yet but imo he is close and it wouldn't surprise me if he gets a shot this season due to injury that he pulls a Conner and doesn't relinquish the spot.

Tampa didn't integrate youth earlier than us, they actually did it later than us.

 

[Imcanadianeh]

Going into the 19-20 season the Jets had the 6th youngest roster in the NHL, clearly Pomo refuses to play young players and only Gud Vets.

 

[surixon]

Tampa didn't integrate youth earlier than us, they actually did it later than us.

I'm not following you at all now. They have essentially always been introducing youth under Cooper.

He was hired in 2012:

2012-13: Killorn, Palat, Panik Didn't qualify for playoffs
2013-14: Johnson, Kucherov Lost in first round
2014-15: Namestnikov, Drouin Lost in Stanley cup final
2015-16: Nesterov, Vasilevskiy, Marchessault Lost in Conference Final
2016-17: Gourde Did not qualify
2017-18: Point, Sergachev Lost in conference finals
2018-19: Cirelli, Cernak, Lost in first round

They have won back to back since then. Tampa never stopped adding high quality youth under Cooper despite being a big time playoff threat for most of his tenure and it paid off as the bolded players played massive roles in them winning the cup. I would rather follow their model where you integrate your high quality youth and fill out where needed with good veteran talent. You take a mixed approach.

 

[untouchable21]

Lest we forget that Noel was a good interview as well. Maybe we oughta try someone that's a bad interview but a good coach?

Torts

 

[JetsUK]

You never got the HFJets memo

Vets=bad
Prospects=Gud

I would rephrase:

Bad vets = bad (and you know they’re bad)

Good prospects = better (and they might get better still)

 

[LowLefty]

I agree. I feel like, for example, Heinola would contribute more to our success than an established veteran like Beaulieu.

How much of a difference would he have made LY - is it worth bringing in a physically undeveloped kid - as if was going to save the day on D.

He'll get his chances and he'll be better sheltered with the core we now have - IMO, this is the best way to develop young potential stars but it does require patience.

 

[snowkiddin]

How much of a difference would he have made LY - is it worth bringing in a physically undeveloped kid - as if was going to save the day on D.

He'll get his chances and he'll be better sheltered with the core we now have - IMO, this is the best way to develop young potential stars but it does require patience.

Sure, Heinola isn’t the best example of this, and letting his ELC slide could pay huge dividends.

But that’s not exactly my point. The theory in question that’s being proposed is the Jets are playing their vets because they’re key to winning championships.

I’m not saying Heinola was going to save the day on D. I’m just disputing that always playing the vets is more likely to lead us to a championship.

When veteran Beaulieu went down, young Stanley came in, and he was much better than Beaulieu. Not enough to save the D, but I think they’re closer with him than they are with veteran Beaulieu.

 

[LowLefty]

Sure, Heinola isn’t the best example of this, and letting his ELC slide could pay huge dividends.

But that’s not exactly my point. The theory in question that’s being proposed is the Jets are playing their vets because they’re key to winning championships.

I’m not saying Heinola was going to save the day on D. I’m just disputing that always playing the vets is more likely to lead us to a championship.

When veteran Beaulieu went down, young Stanley came in, and he was much better than Beaulieu. Not enough to save the D, but I think they’re closer with him than they are with veteran Beaulieu.

I wouldn't dispute that either - I don't think it's a factor in the agenda. IMO, the point or debate is moot when you consider how the Jets operate - they are going to develop their prospects and try to win championships that way. The Jets use vets to cover areas while they wait for the young guns to develop. Patience.

I wouldn't compare Ville and Stan in regard to who was ready - Stan paid his dues and worked is way in - he was ready and it really has nothing to do with how they have handled Ville (who IMO, is/was not ready). Ville's probably not far off though - I'd like to see him beef up a little (he is not effective at all without the puck in his zone, along the walls, behind or in front of the net). Again, IMO, D need to be able to handle themselves (to some extent) in those areas.

 

[snowkiddin]

I wouldn't dispute that either - I don't think it's a factor in the agenda. IMO, the point or debate is moot when you consider how the Jets operate - they are going to develop their prospects and try to win championships that way. The Jets use vets to cover areas while they wait for the young guns to develop. Patience.

I wouldn't compare Ville and Stan in regard to who was ready - Stan paid his dues and worked is way in - he was ready and it really has nothing to do with how they have handled Ville (who IMO, is/was not ready). Ville's probably not far off though - I'd like to see him beef up a little (he is not effective at all without the puck in his zone, along the walls, behind or in front of the net). Again, IMO, D need to be able to handle themselves (to some extent) in those areas.

I would agree with you, and given the circumstances last season I think it was also wise to gain that extra year on Heinola’s contract. From a developmental and roster management perspective, it makes sense to keep him down in the AHL. My point of contention is more in regard to earlier comments suggesting playing vets over prospects is what contending teams do. Not necessarily, IMO. I think if the prospects/young players provide a better chance at winning, you play them.

Also, I’m not comparing Stanley to Heinola in terms of readiness; rather, I’m comparing Stanley to Beaulieu.

Stanley is a young rookie, Beaulieu is an experienced vet. If playing vets=contending, then Beaulieu would play. What I’m saying is you don’t always need to play your vets, for example, Stanley is better than Beaulieu, despite Beaulieu being that vet. If the Jets are contending, I’d rather play the young Stanley because he’s better than Beaulieu, not the veteran Beaulieu because he’s more experience than Stanley.

 

[DRW204]

I'm not following you at all now. They have essentially always been introducing youth under Cooper.

He was hired in 2012:

2012-13: Killorn, Palat, Panik Didn't qualify for playoffs
2013-14: Johnson, Kucherov Lost in first round
2014-15: Namestnikov, Drouin Lost in Stanley cup final
2015-16: Nesterov, Vasilevskiy, Marchessault Lost in Conference Final
2016-17: Gourde Did not qualify
2017-18: Point, Sergachev Lost in conference finals
2018-19: Cirelli, Cernak, Lost in first round

They have won back to back since then. Tampa never stopped adding high quality youth under Cooper despite being a big time playoff threat for most of his tenure and it paid off as the bolded players played massive roles in them winning the cup. I would rather follow their model where you integrate your high quality youth and fill out where needed with good veteran talent. You take a mixed approach.

and wait till this year if Ross Colton and Alex Barre-Boulet being in the line-up full-time. Cal Foote too. & dont forget M. Joseph