Evaluate Chevy - Part III (mod warning post #104, #122)

[Gm0ney]

I know we're throwing around speculation, but do you mean, not spend money on the team until they pay off the loan?

Not spending money unnecessarily until they've got the load paid off, yes.

Easier to do that by getting 2+ playoff home games per year.

Sure, but there are no guarantees that spending more money will get you into the playoffs (or buying out Pavelec and spending the same amount of money with some different tandem in net).

As it is, the Jets are guaranteed their regular season gate either way. $5 million extra on another C, or say, $1 million more on a Pavelec buyout/different goalie signing is just money down the drain if they miss the playoffs. 2 home games might be worth $5 million...but is it worth the risk before the financial situation is settled?

 

[meedle]

nobody has suggested chevy is the only GM who hasn't used a buy-out...why is there such a need to cast everything to the furthest end of the spectrum. None of us have stated that Pav can't possibly improve. None of us has said that Chevy hasn't done anything right. None of us has said we could FOR CERTAIN have gotten into the play-offs with better goaltending the past three seasons. Nothing about what we are talking about is the black or white.

As it stands, we're going to have to wait and see how it plays out. I hope for the sake of both Pavelec and Chevy that he does pull off a miracle (which would really just be an avg NHL season sadly) because if he doesn't I think things are going to get pretty unpleasant this year...

The miracle is tanking and winning the lottery for McDavid.

 

[SensibleGuy]

The miracle is tanking and winning the lottery for McDavid.

yeah, that would be an acceptable result, but I still think that getting 20 or 30 games into the season with Pavelec rolling a .905 sv% and floundering things will get testy...

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

13 teams have not yet used a single buy-out. I invite folks to take a look at the list of teams and players. (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=675349) It is relevant that Chevy has not had any cap concerns that would force him to use a buy-out as yet, either. Suggesting that Chevy is alone in this regard is pretty far from reality.



Montoya has a career save percentage of .910 as a backup. The one season where he was got substantial usage (31 games) he had a save percentage of .893. I could see why Chevy and Maurice might not want to turn over the reins to Montoya. A lot of other GMs agreed - he signed for $1 million per to be a back-up.

That was his concussion season. Not really a fair data set to base your judgement on. It is possible that Monty can't handle the heavier workload. He did have B2B seasons of 48 and 45 games in the AHL but he has not proven he could handle 55-60 NHL games. Neither has he proven he cannot. He did 28 games last year and had a .920 sv%. Do you really think those 3 additional games broke his stamina?

 

[meedle]

yeah, that would be an acceptable result, but I still think that getting 20 or 30 games into the season with Pavelec rolling a .905 sv% and floundering things will get testy...

All I ask this season is that management lets it play out this season. Let pavs play his 60+ games and make sure we suck

None of this bringing in another goalie or that kind of BS to get a few more points in the standings that will do absolutely nothing.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

See my post above. There are plenty of GMs that haven't used a single compliance buy-out. Suggesting that Chevy is alone in this is just false.[/QUOTE

Yes, my "absolutely" was aimed at the last sentence.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Posts that discuss Pavs with no reference to Chevy will be deleted. We moved 32 posts yesterday to the other thread because they were OT.


My evaluation of Chevy will rise immensely if he can figure out a way for the season to start sooner so we have something else to discuss.

 

[EpicGingy]

Saw the mods post, nevermind.

 

[Howard Chuck]

Not spending money unnecessarily until they've got the load paid off, yes.



Sure, but there are no guarantees that spending more money will get you into the playoffs (or buying out Pavelec and spending the same amount of money with some different tandem in net).

As it is, the Jets are guaranteed their regular season gate either way. $5 million extra on another C, or say, $1 million more on a Pavelec buyout/different goalie signing is just money down the drain if they miss the playoffs. 2 home games might be worth $5 million...but is it worth the risk before the financial situation is settled?

I'm still with you on this and I know I started this conversation, but to play devils advocate, I wonder in this situation why they wouldn't have been sellers when we were out of the playoffs last year? Not spend money, but get some draft picks.

Answering myself: Because they would have to replace anyone sold? Maybe they are happy with the status quo financially for now?

Just my inkling.....

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Not spending money unnecessarily until they've got the load paid off, yes.



Sure, but there are no guarantees that spending more money will get you into the playoffs (or buying out Pavelec and spending the same amount of money with some different tandem in net).

As it is, the Jets are guaranteed their regular season gate either way. $5 million extra on another C, or say, $1 million more on a Pavelec buyout/different goalie signing is just money down the drain if they miss the playoffs. 2 home games might be worth $5 million...but is it worth the risk before the financial situation is settled?

Now there is a question that will get a wide separation among opinions. There is risk no matter what path is chosen. Some people consistently handle risk one way, some handle it other ways. To me the chances of getting a better goalie look pretty good. The chances of that better goalie getting us into the playoffs also appear pretty good. The chances of both of those things happening is somewhat less. I think even our best analysts would be hard pressed to come up with a reliable number to attach to that chance. My intuitive estimate says that the odds would still be favourable but even if I am right there is no guarantee. What would happen if we set off on that course, successfully found our goalie and Brian Little had a season ending injury 5 games in? Probably no playoffs.

Shooting for the playoffs for financial reasons is risky. The owners of TNSE took a risk building the MTSC. They took another risk buying the Jets. Both were much bigger risks than buying out Pavelec and probably with no better odds of working out favourably. I think our owners are pretty bold risk takers and also pretty successful ones.

 

[cbcwpg]

And sorry, the not buying out Pavs prevents us from netting top tier players, or retaining our own players is plain silly. See Wheeler, Ladd, Little, Bogo, Stuart ect….. Fact is it has not hurt us one bit.

We signed our main core of players while Pavelec still put up close to decent numbers, so the last 2 seasons has had no affect on those players. Guys like Schief and Trouba sign because they are rookies and they sign with the team that drafted them. Guys like Stuart and Thorburn re-sign because they know their options are limited and they take what they can get.

As far as the not netting FAs... we have no idea. We don't know if anyone Chevy approached this summer said no thanks because they don't see this team improving at all with Pavs in net or that the team is just not a winner right now.

The speculation on Kane wanting out could be because he wants to win now and doesn't see that happening either with Pavs. Again we don't know.

No one can say having Pavs here hasn't hurt this team in the signing department. Has having him here helped in player signings?

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

It's been proven on this board before that at this level of hockey the team in front has a minimal impact on the goalies numbers. Good goalies do well on bad teams, bad goalies do bad on good teams.

You could cherrypick a few goals and individual games where yes, Pavelec was let down by his team, or when he did keep us in the game. But those sample sizes are too small to be admissable in any sort of legitimate discussion on his entire skill. For every goal that was the fault of a player, you'll find more where it was directly Pavelec's fault due to his terrible positioning, rebound control, and a lack of puck tracking ability.

Pavelec would do minimally better on a great team like LA. The Leafs have a far worse defensive core than us but Bernier still managed to drag them far closer to a playoff spot than they should've been.

Minimal effect?

I guess lets see how this year plays out, at least a quarter of the games in. I believe that the move of Buff up to forward, along with Troubs taking the next step and Bogo [mod] earning his contract and a well developed Maurice game plan, we will be a better defensive team this season, and I believe that we will see an improvement in Pavs save %.

And if not, then so be it. Lets not worry about the sailed ship of the non buyout, and look forward to the influx of young prospect net minders that are going to be our true solution between the pipes for the next several years

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

Chevy chose not to sign a backup to replace Monty. My concern is that we might find ourselves with an even worse goaltending tandem than last year. There is enough data on Pavs to predict with confidence what his performance will be - at or near the bottom of the league for NHL starting goal tenders. With Monty, we knew that we had a capable backup that would give us a chance to win every time he was in the net. I kind of agree that Hutch has earned the chance to be the backup with his short but impressive performance last year. I say kind of because it was only - I think - three games at the NHL level. He has a very short NHL resume. Yes, he looks like the kind of keeper who will make the successful transition, but we don't know yet.

And Chevy's track record on our goal tenders has been to stay the course no matter what - Pavs is our starter even though he is the worst starter in the league and worst than most backups. I do believe that Hutch will have a good first year. But if he struggles to adjust to the NHL, I just hope that Chevy actually does something about our goal tending.

Actually, that could be the trigger that would force Chevy's hand. If Pavs is Pavs, and Hutch has first year struggles, he might just have to shake things up between the pipes. Hmm. Interesting thought.

 

[Jet]

This is a thread regarding Chevy, and it seems more to be a thread about Pavs’ contract. No?

Where did I say do not replace the painter? No where

Sure go ahead and replace him, but don’t try to tell your wife that its saving you $$ and erasing your initial mistake, when we both know there is no savings to be had.

I was at the 1st of the back to backs against Washington, and to pin that on Pavs is comical. There were many many many many more issues on that ice than Pavs. It is such a simplistic interpretation to pin that all on Pavs.

What demonstration are you talking about? I saw Montoya look good in select starts, but when we relied on him to carry a load, he proved to be injury prone, and therefor hard to rely upon.

And let’s talk about his longest consecutive starts, 9 games in March of this year. His save % was a whopping .903. How is that any different than Pav’s save %?????

Lets talk about Mason’s numbers during his 2 years with the club, whopping .892 and .898

Yet Pavs managed .906, .905 and .901 and we act as though these #’s are a direct result of his skill, nothing to do with the players in front of him, pure ignorance.

So, this magical replacement you speak of a 1.5 mill is going to give us different results than 3 other goalies could? Ya, its all PAVs fault.

The reason we are discussing Pav in this thread is that his contract, and subsequent retention instead of being a compliance buyout, is, in many posters minds, the biggest black mark on Cheveldayoff's resume to date. If you are EVALUATING CHEVY, you need to discuss his player moves.

As for the save percentages argument, you are going to take a gigantic body of Pavelec work, and compare it to an extremely narrow 9 game slice of Montoya. Yup, that seems fair. Then you try and bring in a goalie (Mason) who has proven he sucks elsewhere. Comparing a bad goalie with another bad goalie sure doesn't help your argument.

Really, though, if you are trying to convince me that Pavelec is a good goalie, we might as well stop the debate between us right here. You'd be better off trying to tell me that the sky is orange.

I supported Chevy for most of his time here, even through some head scratching decisions. I will not support him through the Pav debacle though.

 

[tbcwpg]

The reason we are discussing Pav in this thread is that his contract, and subsequent retention instead of being a compliance buyout, is, in many posters minds, the biggest black mark on Cheveldayoff's resume to date. If you are EVALUATING CHEVY, you need to discuss his player moves.

As for the save percentages argument, you are going to take a gigantic body of Pavelec work, and compare it to an extremely narrow 9 game slice of Montoya. Yup, that seems fair. Then you try and bring in a goalie (Mason) who has proven he sucks elsewhere. Comparing a bad goalie with another bad goalie sure doesn't help your argument.

One sentence in regards to Montoya: that 9 game slice is actually quite similar in numbers to his larger body of work. I understand your concern about Pavelec but I think it's a stretch to say Montoya is miles ahead here.

Chevy's player management has been up and down for me. It averages out to "average". Pavelec, bad. Thorburn, bad. Stuart, not good. Little and Wheeler, great. He also likes to pluck off the waiver wire, but the prospect pool was so bare that I don't really care about that. He's throwing a bunch of guys at the spot to see who sticks. None of them really have, and players like O'Dell are ready to play a role with the main club.

 

[Gm0ney]

Chevy chose not to sign a backup to replace Monty. My concern is that we might find ourselves with an even worse goaltending tandem than last year. There is enough data on Pavs to predict with confidence what his performance will be - at or near the bottom of the league for NHL starting goal tenders. With Monty, we knew that we had a capable backup that would give us a chance to win every time he was in the net. I kind of agree that Hutch has earned the chance to be the backup with his short but impressive performance last year. I say kind of because it was only - I think - three games at the NHL level. He has a very short NHL resume. Yes, he looks like the kind of keeper who will make the successful transition, but we don't know yet.

And Chevy's track record on our goal tenders has been to stay the course no matter what - Pavs is our starter even though he is the worst starter in the league and worst than most backups. I do believe that Hutch will have a good first year. But if he struggles to adjust to the NHL, I just hope that Chevy actually does something about our goal tending.

Actually, that could be the trigger that would force Chevy's hand. If Pavs is Pavs, and Hutch has first year struggles, he might just have to shake things up between the pipes. Hmm. Interesting thought.

I can't see Chevy not bringing in another goalie for camp to battle it out with Hutch for Jets backup / Ice Caps starter. After Pavelec, the rest of the Jets goalies under contract have 3 games of NHL experience between them (Hutch's games at the end of last season). Hellebuyck's never played a pro game and Olkinoura wasn't a standout in his first AHL season. We're one groin pull away from Hellebuyck being the backup here...

But I don't see anyone decent on the UFA goalie market that would be interested in battling it out for an NHL backup/AHL starter role. Of course if Chevy sold it as a chance to battle it out with Pavelec for the starter role then maybe...

Still, it's a strange and precarious position for the Jets to be in.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

Can you think of one who would hand over the duties to Ondrej Pavelec? That is clearly and demonstrably worse. The only conclussion I can draw from that statement is that you suspect Chevy is not in his "right mind". In that case I disagree. I question his handling of the goaltending but not his sanity.

Actually teams do that all the time because they are stuck in a situation or they don't have any alternatives or they think a guy might step up. Oilers did that with Dubnyk last year, Philly went with Mason last year, Colorado put their faith in Varlamov. Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't.

 

[Jet]

One sentence in regards to Montoya: that 9 game slice is actually quite similar in numbers to his larger body of work. I understand your concern about Pavelec but I think it's a stretch to say Montoya is miles ahead here.

Chevy's player management has been up and down for me. It averages out to "average". Pavelec, bad. Thorburn, bad. Stuart, not good. Little and Wheeler, great. He also likes to pluck off the waiver wire, but the prospect pool was so bare that I don't really care about that. He's throwing a bunch of guys at the spot to see who sticks. None of them really have, and players like O'Dell are ready to play a role with the main club.

I feel like people are fixating on the Montoya thing. That really wasn't my point. My point was that the Pavelec contract and subsequent handling of his performance is what pushed me to give Cheveldayoff to a failing grade.

Contrary to some assumptions, I don't think that Chevy is a monster or some terrible GM. He's done some good things, and some bad things.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

One sentence in regards to Montoya: that 9 game slice is actually quite similar in numbers to his larger body of work. I understand your concern about Pavelec but I think it's a stretch to say Montoya is miles ahead here.

Chevy's player management has been up and down for me. It averages out to "average". Pavelec, bad. Thorburn, bad. Stuart, not good. Little and Wheeler, great. He also likes to pluck off the waiver wire, but the prospect pool was so bare that I don't really care about that. He's throwing a bunch of guys at the spot to see who sticks. None of them really have, and players like O'Dell are ready to play a role with the main club.

In fairness (also wisdom I think) it is better to compare the 2 on career numbers. Pavelec .906, Monty .910. Monty is CLEARLY better but not miles ahead. If we had kept Monty as backup the best forecast would probably be that each plays his career avg. The sum would be about the same as last year.

If Pavs does .906 this year and Hutch manages an unspectacular .912 we might be slightly better than last year. Just guessing at those combined numbers. I haven't done the math. I don't think those numbers lead to Hutch taking over as the starter though.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Actually teams do that all the time because they are stuck in a situation or they don't have any alternatives or they think a guy might step up. Oilers did that with Dubnyk last year, Philly went with Mason last year, Colorado put their faith in Varlamov. Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't.

Right, but giving Monty the chance or, if you prefer taking a chance on Monty would require a GM to be not "in his right mind". Please!

 

[surixon]

Right, but giving Monty the chance or, if you prefer taking a chance on Monty would require a GM to be not "in his right mind". Please!

At age 30 and given his overall track record both in the NHL and AHL I am not surprised that Monty hasn't been given a shot. Outside of last year he really hasn't shown to have deserved it. Not that I wouldn't have minded seeing him play more but it's not like his great play earned him a starting opportunity elsewhere so Chevy is not alone in his assessment of Monty. Granted Pavelec hasn't earned another shot either, which is why I hope he'srelegated to the bench asap.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

At age 30 and given his overall track record both in the NHL and AHL I am not surprised that Monty hasn't been given a shot. Outside of last year he really hasn't shown to have deserved it. Not that I wouldn't have minded seeing him play more but it's not like his great play earned him a starting opportunity elsewhere so Chevy is not alone in his assessment of Monty. Granted Pavelec hasn't earned another shot either, which is why I hope he'srelegated to the bench asap.

Debating whether or not Montoya has had enough opportunity or whether or not he would have been a better option for the Jets is one thing. Joe said that a GM would have to be out of his mind to give Monty a starting opportunity. Keep in mind we are discussing this in the context of a GM who is going with Pavelec ..... AGAIN! That is a massive overstatement at best and an insult to all those here who have supported that idea.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

I stand by my statement that no GM would give Monty the reins to a team unless they wanted to try for the 1st overall pick. We have better,younger goalies to do that with.

The guy is a career backup and will finish his career as a backup

Teams get stuck with players that they don't want all the time. Some choose to buy them out and some get lucky and are able to move them and some have to keep the guy. We are in that latter category and it isn't like Pavs is pushing 35 either.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

We signed our main core of players while Pavelec still put up close to decent numbers, so the last 2 seasons has had no affect on those players. Guys like Schief and Trouba sign because they are rookies and they sign with the team that drafted them. Guys like Stuart and Thorburn re-sign because they know their options are limited and they take what they can get.

As far as the not netting FAs... we have no idea. We don't know if anyone Chevy approached this summer said no thanks because they don't see this team improving at all with Pavs in net or that the team is just not a winner right now.

The speculation on Kane wanting out could be because he wants to win now and doesn't see that happening either with Pavs. Again we don't know.

No one can say having Pavs here hasn't hurt this team in the signing department. Has having him here helped in player signings?

Bogo, Little, Wheeler, Ladd all played years with Pavs prior to moving to Winnipeg, and a year to 2 in Winnipeg. They know the book on Pavs, and they choose to hitch their wagons to him for the long haul

It was documented Stuart had options, and I can recall an interview with Thorbs as well, were he said he had to mull over options.

Joker had options.

Perreault had options.

Kane has played coy with this franchise from day 1, so not sure how you can read into that. He also inked a 5 year deal, so not a great example of players being swayed away from this team because of Pavs.

Sorry it has no traction that Pavs hurts our ability to attract and retain players, its a silly narrative used to paint a silly picture.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I stand by my statement that no GM would give Monty the reins to a team unless they wanted to try for the 1st overall pick. We have better,younger goalies to do that with.

The guy is a career backup and will finish his career as a backup

Teams get stuck with players that they don't want all the time. Some choose to buy them out and some get lucky and are able to move them and some have to keep the guy. We are in that latter category and it isn't like Pavs is pushing 35 either.

That is not the statement that you made. To say that, in your opinion he is a career backup is very different than saying that a GM would have to be out of his mind to go with him. [mod]

I would argue that a little bad luck and circumstances have kept Monty from ever getting the chance to prove whether he could do it or not. That said my guess is that he is NOT a long term solution as a starter. That doesn't mean he isn't better in that role than Pavelec though because Pavs HAS been given the opportunity. In spades. And he HAS proven himself to be inadequate for the task. The GM who has Pavs has absolutely nothing to lose by going with Montoya instead. What's the worst that could happen?