Defence defence defence

[garret9]

Team defense != defensemen capabilities exclusively.

Our penchant for penalties, penalty killing capabilities, and goaltending lends holds a large share of that GA performance.

I mean, our team is about average in 5v5 goals against per minute...
We were a top 10 team last year in 5v5 goals against per minute last year with Byfuglien, Enstrom, Trouba, Myers/Bogosian still as our core.

 

[Daximus]

Which is funny, since we can never protect a lead. We're 8th worst in Goals Against, and 6th Goals Against/ Game.

We don't have a good defense. I don't know why people think we do.

Well, I do. People think a good offense is the best defense which might be true, but not when you have the lead. We need more defensemen that can actually play defense.

I think people do underestimate more defensive guys. And I don't mean guys like Stu who are just labelled as defensive defencemen because they aren't really very good at anything.
A good defensive guy can play true possession hockey killing time off the clock, good along the boards, knows how to use his stick to break up plays, wins puck battles and can be physical when needed and I don't mean jumping up to make a bonehead hit I mean being physical along the boards and using their body to push guys off the puck.
Guys like these are crucial when trying to play conservative hockey in the dying minutes of a game when ahead. Doughty is the shining example of this kind of player. He also has some offensive upside which makes him extremely valuable.

 

[Daximus]

Where is this blind fairth comment coming from? The Jets have made plaenty of mistakes drafting. I Think they draft well, above average, but I certainly don't think it's anything special. I just don't believe in drafting position specific. Obviously you think that is something this team should do. I don't. I believe that it all evens out over time. I also think it's too soon to fall in hate with a prospect less than a year after he was drafted.

I was a little ticked that they took Roslovic over a number of the defencemen on the board. I don't believe it always evens out over time if you draft BPA. There are 3 forward positions and 2 sides of handed defencemen as well as goaltenders. Teams also carry a lot more forwards than any other position so there are likely an over abundance of forwards in every draft.
If you always draft BPA you're more likely to stockpile forwards over any other positions and when you do that you are likely to be weak in both D and Goalies. I think going into this draft with the aim of taking at least 3 defencemen I wouldn't mind if a forward that is slightly higher rated slipped by us to grab a defencemen outside of the obvious guys (Matthews, Laine)

 

[garret9]

I think people do underestimate more defensive guys. And I don't mean guys like Stu who are just labelled as defensive defencemen because they aren't really very good at anything.
A good defensive guy can play true possession hockey killing time off the clock, good along the boards, knows how to use his stick to break up plays, wins puck battles and can be physical when needed and I don't mean jumping up to make a bonehead hit I mean being physical along the boards and using their body to push guys off the puck.
Guys like these are crucial when trying to play conservative hockey in the dying minutes of a game when ahead. Doughty is the shining example of this kind of player. He also has some offensive upside which makes him extremely valuable.

To me:

Defensive play = someone who plays well in defensive zone
Defensive impact = someone that decreases goals against

The two are not always synonymous.

There's a lot to a team's defensive performance that has to do with forwards and systems too.

 

[Daximus]

To me:

Defensive play = someone who plays well in defensive zone
Defensive impact = someone that decreases goals against

The two are not always synonymous.

There's a lot to a team's defensive performance that has to do with forwards and systems too.

This is true. It's all intertwined. We seem to be horrible at keeping leads though and that comes back to our defensive play. We can score 5 goals a game but if we make horrible plays in the defensive zone and a team makes us pay for it and we lose 6-5 then that becomes a problem. Penalty killing falls under that category as well.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Where is this blind fairth comment coming from? The Jets have made plaenty of mistakes drafting. I Think they draft well, above average, but I certainly don't think it's anything special. I just don't believe in drafting position specific. Obviously you think that is something this team should do. I don't. I believe that it all evens out over time. I also think it's too soon to fall in hate with a prospect less than a year after he was drafted.

Your post #45. Chevy and the scouts picked Roslovic. You are implying they shouldn't be questioned or that is the appearance.

Do you believe in bending over backwards to avoid drafting someone needed? All I've said is that, all things being equal draft what we need. Is there some reason to believe that Roslovic was significantly superior to Larsson? I don't believe there was. So why did we take a winger over an equal D? I think someone made a poor decision and for no apparent reason.

I have no hate on for Roslovic. AFAIK he is still a good prospect. He may be a mid 6 RW for us in 2-3 years. He will have to compete with Wheeler, Ehlers, Stafford, Armia and Dano among others for a position on the Jets.

 

[Ducky10]

This is true. It's all intertwined. We seem to be horrible at keeping leads though and that comes back to our defensive play. We can score 5 goals a game but if we make horrible plays in the defensive zone and a team makes us pay for it and we lose 6-5 then that becomes a problem. Penalty killing falls under that category as well.

Comes back to our defensive play, not necessarily our defensemen, which a lot of people like to conveniently blame.

 

[Skidooboy]

I don't know about you, but I think championships are won by being the better team, which requires a combination of defense and offense.

I should also note Colorado 12th lowest team in goals per minute of ice time...

The highest scoring teams per minute are:
Dallas
Washington
Boston
San Jose
Chicago

Agree.
I also would add that Scitty Bowman once said that if you add up the rank of your power play and your PK, if it was around ten or less, you were in good shape to win the cup.

 

[heilongjetsfan]

If we ended up with a top 3 pick and traded down to 8ish, what kind of return could we expect.

If it were high enough, I'm very interested in Juolevi and Sergachaev. I've only seen bits and pieces of their play, but Juo in particular looks like he could have more than a snowball's chance of playing in the nhl next season.

Could we shelter him and Morrissey at the same time?

Something like:
Toby - Buff
Morrissey - Trouba
Juolevi - Myers
Postma
We could run with 7 D so we can put Trouba on the left on the fly if we feel we need to keep both of the kids playing shorter mins

 

[Snot Rocket]

Best thread in a long time. If Chiarot and Stuart are a part of our top 6 our progress will be quite limited.

I would shop Wheeler for a top 4 defenceamn and a left handed shooting defence prospect in the off-season. Then not worry about d for 10 years. Draft one of the finns and they grow into Wheeler's role, joining Ehlers and Conner as our elite forwards.

Drafting a defenceman and expecting an 18 year old to fill a hole will be a slow frustrating wait.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Your post #45. Chevy and the scouts picked Roslovic. You are implying they shouldn't be questioned or that is the appearance.

.

I am implying nothing. It is just a fact. I think they are a better judge of talent than you or me. That's all nothing more, nothing less.

I have never seen Larsson play and Roslovic only during the summer USA evaluation camp. I personally have no opinion who is a better prospect.

I don't believe in position specific drafting. You won't change my mind on that.

 

[Grind]

This is true. It's all intertwined. We seem to be horrible at keeping leads though and that comes back to our defensive play. We can score 5 goals a game but if we make horrible plays in the defensive zone and a team makes us pay for it and we lose 6-5 then that becomes a problem. Penalty killing falls under that category as well.

Are we though?

Do we lose leads at a higher rate then most teams?

It's easy to "notice" things like this but are they accurate?

Furthermore, are we losing the possession battle in the games where we lose the leads (most importantly, are we losing the possession battle even before we get the lead in these games?)

Personally I feel too much is put on "situational" performance (scoring in the last 40 seconds of the game, scoring at the start of a period, scoring when your ahead, etc etc etc)

If we're losing the posession battle handidly, but score on our first shot on net, did they come back because "we're bad at defending when we lead" or did they come back because they were playing better hockey (even before we got the lead) and we just got lucky?

 

[Grind]

On the Roslovic/Larrson debate.

The most favorable projection numbers I had, had Larson at a 33% success rate with an extremely small sample (3 guys)

With a 20 player sample (sort of my minimum) he was at 20%.

Roslovic on the otherhand was at over 70% success rate in a similar sized sample.

His lowest cohort % I got was 45% (due to having to widen the parameters due to very few players scoring at his rate in the USHL)

His closest comparables across NHLE's, Height, and Birthdate were Matt Duchene, Mike Richards and Claude Giroux.

His closest comp across height and league scoring was Paul Statsny.

There was a lot of evidence to say Roslovic was easily a superior pick.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I am implying nothing. It is just a fact. I think they are a better judge of talent than you or me. That's all nothing more, nothing less.

I have never seen Larsson play and Roslovic only during the summer USA evaluation camp. I personally have no opinion who is a better prospect.

I don't believe in position specific drafting. You won't change my mind on that.

I've never seen them play either. That isn't necessary. We know from multiple expert evaluations that they are close enough to one another as to equal no difference. Any overall difference is within tbe error bars on evaluation. So they can be considered equal for this purpose. I haven't suggested position specific drafting, at least not in this conversation. I've only said that when all else is equal then you go by position.

 

[Aavco Cup]

I've never seen them play either. That isn't necessary. We know from multiple expert evaluations that they are close enough to one another as to equal no difference. Any overall difference is within tbe error bars on evaluation. So they can be considered equal for this purpose. I haven't suggested position specific drafting, at least not in this conversation. I've only said that when all else is equal then you go by position.

We go around in circles. They were not equal on draft day on the list that counts. I doubt they are equal now on that list. I also disagree that we " know" what you claim we do. I don't know it. I trust the Jets evaluation of talent level more than yours. You are not going to convince me otherwise.

Everything you argue seems to be promoting positional drafting.

 

[Huffer]

If we ended up with a top 3 pick and traded down to 8ish, what kind of return could we expect.

If it were high enough, I'm very interested in Juolevi and Sergachaev. I've only seen bits and pieces of their play, but Juo in particular looks like he could have more than a snowball's chance of playing in the nhl next season.

Could we shelter him and Morrissey at the same time?

Something like:
Toby - Buff
Morrissey - Trouba
Juolevi - Myers
Postma
We could run with 7 D so we can put Trouba on the left on the fly if we feel we need to keep both of the kids playing shorter mins

If the Jets are in the top 3 and trade down, every member of the scouting staff and management needs to be fired. And that's in regards to any possible realistic return on that trade down. Of course if some team does something stupid and offers McDavid to move down it's a different story, but IMO, no team is going to offer enough to make moving out of the top 3 worth it.

 

[ecolad]

On the Roslovic/Larrson debate.

The most favorable projection numbers I had, had Larson at a 33% success rate with an extremely small sample (3 guys)

With a 20 player sample (sort of my minimum) he was at 20%.

Roslovic on the otherhand was at over 70% success rate in a similar sized sample.

His lowest cohort % I got was 45% (due to having to widen the parameters due to very few players scoring at his rate in the USHL)

His closest comparables across NHLE's, Height, and Birthdate were Matt Duchene, Mike Richards and Claude Giroux.

His closest comp across height and league scoring was Paul Statsny.

There was a lot of evidence to say Roslovic was easily a superior pick.

Very useful analysis Grind- nice job.

In addition to the pure "stats" you provided, it is my recollection that Roslovic was seen to be a relatively late, but strong "riser", with a very encouraging development curve. This type of player is typically coveted at the draft .

Although he may not be having an outstanding year with Miami (not a very good team), those on this board who are under-rating him in any player comparison/ player trade discussions are likely doing themselves a dis-service.

 

[garret9]

If we ended up with a top 3 pick and traded down to 8ish, what kind of return could we expect.

Giving everything a relative value compared to a 1st overall pick being set at 100, the average drop of 3rd to 8th gives an additional value of 18.8.

This would work out to some combinations like:
- 25th
- 35th + 45th
- 94 7th round picks

 

[garret9]

Are we though?

Do we lose leads at a higher rate then most teams?

It's easy to "notice" things like this but are they accurate?

Furthermore, are we losing the possession battle in the games where we lose the leads (most importantly, are we losing the possession battle even before we get the lead in these games?)

Personally I feel too much is put on "situational" performance (scoring in the last 40 seconds of the game, scoring at the start of a period, scoring when your ahead, etc etc etc)

If we're losing the posession battle handidly, but score on our first shot on net, did they come back because "we're bad at defending when we lead" or did they come back because they were playing better hockey (even before we got the lead) and we just got lucky?

Jets are 7th last in overall goal%.
Jets are 8th best in overall goal% when leading, just one place ahead of the Chicago Blackhawks.
Jets are 3rd best in overall goal% when leading in the third period.

Jets are actually have been one of the better teams when leading.

 

[Grind]

Jets are 7th last in overall goal%.
Jets are 8th best in overall goal% when leading, just one place ahead of the Chicago Blackhawks.
Jets are 3rd best in overall goal% when leading in the third period.

Jets are actually have been one of the better teams when leading.

Thanks Garret.

I figured this was possibly one of those situations where we might be misconstruing what we "remember" with an accurate picture of what actually happened.

And it looks like i was right!

Time to give myself the old pat on the back.

*pat pat*

 

[Aavco Cup]

Jets are 7th last in overall goal%.
Jets are 8th best in overall goal% when leading, just one place ahead of the Chicago Blackhawks.
Jets are 3rd best in overall goal% when leading in the third period.

Jets are actually have been one of the better teams when leading.

Yeah but recency bias counts right?

 

[Board Bard]

With a 20 player sample (sort of my minimum) [Larrson] was at 20%.

Roslovic on the otherhand was at over 70% success rate in a similar sized sample.

I snipped some of your post but your numbers do provide a compelling case for choosing Ros over Larsson. But if Larsson had been at like 68% I think it would have been better to go with him even if Ros was BPA by a hair. Of course, if ifs and buts were candies and nuts, my boss would be one of these:

 

[Jet]

I think people do underestimate more defensive guys. And I don't mean guys like Stu who are just labelled as defensive defencemen because they aren't really very good at anything.
A good defensive guy can play true possession hockey killing time off the clock, good along the boards, knows how to use his stick to break up plays, wins puck battles and can be physical when needed and I don't mean jumping up to make a bonehead hit I mean being physical along the boards and using their body to push guys off the puck.
Guys like these are crucial when trying to play conservative hockey in the dying minutes of a game when ahead. Doughty is the shining example of this kind of player. He also has some offensive upside which makes him extremely valuable.

Couldn't agree more, Dax. I think that the new school thinking is that a guy who doesn't produce offensively or push the play offensively is not playing defense well.

Of course you don't want to be Stuart who is just blocking shots and trying to hit, running around your zone. However, I feel that there are very effective defensemen who really don't contribute much from the offensive blueline in.

I feel like I am a very good defensive defenseman. I am not often on the ice for goals against. I am good at retrieving the puck in my zone, forcing turnovers on my side of centre. I get my stick in lanes, separate opponents from the puck when they attack my zone. I have good gap, especially at the blueline. I can settle down the play in my own zone, reset, and I make a really good first pass and can skate the puck out of my zone.

I don't think I'd be liked as a defenseman around here though. I am too low event. I also block shots which I know is somehow a bad thing here because it means you don't have the puck

 

[Grind]

Couldn't agree more, Dax. I think that the new school thinking is that a guy who doesn't produce offensively or push the play offensively is not playing defense well.

Of course you don't want to be Stuart who is just blocking shots and trying to hit, running around your zone. However, I feel that there are very effective defensemen who really don't contribute much from the offensive blueline in.

I feel like I am a very good defensive defenseman. I am not often on the ice for goals against. I am good at retrieving the puck in my zone, forcing turnovers on my side of centre. I get my stick in lanes, separate opponents from the puck when they attack my zone. I have good gap, especially at the blueline. I can settle down the play in my own zone, reset, and I make a really good first pass and can skate the puck out of my zone.

I don't think I'd be liked as a defenseman around here though. I am too low event. I also block shots which I know is somehow a bad thing here because it means you don't have the puck

I think all we care about is net posession

We don't "like" blocked shots because for every shot you block you need to be helping your team create a SA for.

I don't care if your an epically low event player, as long as your on the plus side of the ledger.

 

[Grind]

I should clarify, the ledger I speak of is not the plus/minus ledger