If you were hired to be the Jets GM (mod warning post #26)

[Jet]

I know it's the off-season but a lot of OT and natd stuff is starting to pop up in threads.

There is a place for pretty much every discussion. Please try to make sure you are in the right thread.

Also, if you don't want to participate in a thread in the OP's spirit, then just don't. Don't post on how you don't want to, or your opinion of it. Just move on.

Thank you.

 

[ps241]

I know it's the off-season but a lot of OT and natd stuff is starting to pop up in threads.

There is a place for pretty much every discussion. Please try to make sure you are in the right thread.

Also, if you don't want to participate in a thread in the OP's spirit, then just don't. Don't post on how you don't want to, or your opinion of it. Just move on.

Thank you.

Good post I shouldn't post unless its in the spirit of the thread and the thread does push people out bashing and into what they would do which makes sense.

 

[scelaton]

I'd get in and realise that the job is much easier when you're on the outside complaining about relative inactivity.
Fans make horrible GMs.

Good post I shouldn't post unless its in the spirit of the thread and the thread does push people out bashing and into what they would do which makes sense.

Yes, this is a much more constructive discussion than the Evaluate Chevy thread. Criticizing in retrospect is much easier than committing to a course of action going forward. And, let's face it, it's harder to point a finger and say 'fire the bum...', when you are looking in the mirror.

Montoya is a backup goalie that has had some really awful years, and also has not played more than like what...31 games a year. I think that the end result of Monty and untested Hutch would be a train wreck.
What I am not saying is Pavs is the answer, but I do not see (Monty) as a solution as a GM.
Kane trade, sure...but we have to get someone to pay the price for that. Let's face it, if I am the GM I am going to need something usable in return. Wingers who pot 30 do not grow on trees, and removing Kane is not addition by subtraction. As a GM I can ask for a top 6 guy in return and I would want 15 1st and a top prospect. The other GMs are going to really need to see some value in Kane and have a spot for him that they think he is going to excel and take his game to the next level.

Being a GM is being the head of a corporation. You want to get the best guys possible, for the best return possible. A GM forced into trade by a UFA player with a NMC is easier to deal with, but Kane is an RFA for 4 more years with no NMC, which means I hold all the power in the deal.
Other GM's are going to have to meet my demands and pay royally to acquire my asset (Kane) as he is stuck with us for 4 more years. If he wants a trade, then he is going to have to play his ass off for 200ft and pot 35+ goals to increase his stock. This will loosen the purse strings of other GM's as they know he still has more ceiling. Remember Kane wants to maximize his earnings as much as I do, and at the end of the day a successful team that makes a deep playoff run will create that opportunity for both the organization and the players involved.

I have dealt with specialized rare item sales over the years. If I have a rare item, I can ask whatever I want for it, however I still need someone who has the money (or sometimes various other interesting pieces) that sees enough value in the purchase or trade for them to commit. There will be thousands of lookers for every 1 person that has the capitol to make the transaction. Sure those other people that are interested would like to have it, but they are not in a position financially to make it happen and I am not going to move the item for under market value just for the sake of a sale.

So for better or worse, with all the dynamics that Chevy has to deal with, I fully appreciated that there are many things out of his control when it comes to making "deals". At the end of the day he still has a responsibility to ice the best team possible.

I like the analogy between dealing in rare item sales and GM-ing. Looking at the Evaluate Chevy thread it is pretty clear that many posters have not had to make these sorts of decisions in real life, where one needs brains AND balls to resist selling low when times are tough and the deal is wrong.
I have mostly avoided commenting on Pavs of late, but I'll just say that, having been an early supporter of Monty and despite his Save %, he is too injury prone and did not pass my 'eye test' as the season went on. Clearly, Chevy and PM felt the same way, based on what they saw in games and practice. Pav's experience, durability and--dare I say it--potential, make him a better backup to Hutch and/or a third goalie.

- Start talks with Ladd and Buff and figure out what there intentions might be. If either of them are thinking of testing the open market in 2 years, start looking to trade them.

- Keep the phone lines open on Kane, but hold firm to get the best return. But I would actually sit down with Kane to see what his issues are and if anything can be done to fix any problems he has so I don't have to trade him.

- fire the goalie coach. 3 seasons working with Pavs and all you have done is get him to play worse each year.

- get Frolik signed.

- Tell the world the Jets DO NOT have a number one goalie, invite every goalie we have in the organization to training camp, and tell them whomever performs the best, will start the season.

I agree with most of this.
I have long advocated that Kane and Pavs have 'life coaches', but I suspect Kane is not yet mature enough to benefit from one. Pavs is older and just might improve with the right guidance. (Wheeler could also benefit from a sports psychologist IMO; he has 'elite' potential but can get down on himself when slumping.)
Re the goaltending, I would not tell the world anything, lest it damage an already difficult situation. Actions speak louder than words and I would be quite content with having Pavs, Hutch and another goalie prospect at TC and telling them all QUIETLY that whoever performs best will get the most starts.

 

[Gm0ney]

It's a tough time to be thrust into the GM spot. Past the buyout window, most of the UFAs I'd want are gone, draft is done...

As of right now, I'd have Pavelec on a very short leash to start the year. Definitely going to be a 1A/1B platooning situation with Hutch from day 1...at a minimum.

I'd want to talk to all the players, but especially Evander Kane - find out what's going on, and either convince him that we're going to turn this ship around and he's a big part of that, or if he can't be reconciled, then move him out...because I can't imagine what training camp will be like if he and I are dancing around trade request rumours. Although I'd like to know what the others thought about Kane too...

I'd probably bring in Stempniak to shore up the Top-9 winger depth.

And let's get this Frolik deal done before it goes to arbitration (that's coming up in 2 weeks on July 31).

I might make a player-for-player trade this summer too...just to see if it can be done!

 

[JC Numminen]

I would of done what I feel would of been the obvious, and bought out Pavelec and really try and land a solid goaltender on a 2 year deal to push Hutch for the number 1 spot. By the time the 2 year is over, Comrie or Hellofagoalie would hopefully be ready.

I would make sure GM's knew that Byfuglien is on the market and we are listening to all offers on him.

Finally I would look for a player to fill the 3rd line LW hole, I like the idea of Stempniak in there.

 

[pucka lucka]

My first step would be to cancel all the season tickets agreements with my dissenters here. Pavelec would know that he is competing for a job. The media would know that we always compete for minutes, mostly as a change of tone. I would try my darndest to never speak is empty cliches, ya know's and ummms. I'd look to replace at least one of my 4th line with Klingberg, O'Dell. Best players make the team regardless of conventional wisdom or contract.

 

[garret9]

It's difficult to take steps forwards at this moment in time.
-compliance buyout period is over
-Thorburn has been re-signed
-Stuart has been re-signed

These three moves there hinder (but not block) a lot of the freedom and ability to make productive moves to the roster that could improve the team both short and long term at the same time.

It would be difficult at this point in the offseason to make any moves that you are both confident you could make reasonably and know the outcomes.

 

[JetFromFinland]

Oh, first: I'D GET RID OFF PAVELEC. Most important thing to do

 

[roosemoose]

I would try to make a deal to bring Colin Wilson here. Would fit with the jets style of play!

 

[fmrdh]

It's difficult to take steps forwards at this moment in time.
-compliance buyout period is over
-Thorburn has been re-signed
-Stuart has been re-signed

These three moves there hinder (but not block) a lot of the freedom and ability to make productive moves to the roster that could improve the team both short and long term at the same time.

It would be difficult at this point in the offseason to make any moves that you are both confident you could make reasonably and know the outcomes.

The Thorburn signing is pretty puzzling to me. Seemed almost like a forgone conclusion that he was history but no.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

It's a tough time to be thrust into the GM spot. Past the buyout window, most of the UFAs I'd want are gone, draft is done...

As of right now, I'd have Pavelec on a very short leash to start the year. Definitely going to be a 1A/1B platooning situation with Hutch from day 1...at a minimum.

I'd want to talk to all the players, but especially Evander Kane - find out what's going on, and either convince him that we're going to turn this ship around and he's a big part of that, or if he can't be reconciled, then move him out...because I can't imagine what training camp will be like if he and I are dancing around trade request rumours. Although I'd like to know what the others thought about Kane too...

I'd probably bring in Stempniak to shore up the Top-9 winger depth.

And let's get this Frolik deal done before it goes to arbitration (that's coming up in 2 weeks on July 31).

I might make a player-for-player trade this summer too...just to see if it can be done!

I'd pretty much agree with all of that. The 1A/1B goalie thing I think is more up to the coach. I would talk to the coach about that though. If I could acquire a goalie with decent NHL experience before camp I would take the opportunity. Then tell the 3 goalies that the best 2 are getting the jobs. If Pavs isn't one of the 2 I've got to do something with him. I'd hate to be paying him 3.5 mil to play in the AHL but that is better than having him hurting the NHL team. So if that is the best I can manage then so be it. Then buy him out as soon as possible. If he is 2nd then we have a very expensive backup. He only starts as long as he is outplaying the next best guy we have.

This is an interesting thread at this time because all the easy options that we all wanted have come and gone. If EK can't be reconciled then yes trade him but make sure he understands that you won't be rushed.

 

[razorsedge]

I would of bought out pavs but probably would have been denied by the ownership group .

I'd look to trade Buff for reasons that he's a liability at defense and wont be happy playing forward.

I'd create a social media do and do not seminar as part of training camp.

I'd request along with ownership to have a sit down face to face meeting with Burmistrov (nwxt off season) about his future intentions as to what would take for him to return to the NHL.

 

[sully1410]

The Thorburn signing is pretty puzzling to me. Seemed almost like a forgone conclusion that he was history but no.

he has tenure.

 

[NBjet]

It's difficult to take steps forwards at this moment in time.
-compliance buyout period is over
-Thorburn has been re-signed
-Stuart has been re-signed

These three moves there hinder (but not block) a lot of the freedom and ability to make productive moves to the roster that could improve the team both short and long term at the same time.

It would be difficult at this point in the offseason to make any moves that you are both confident you could make reasonably and know the outcomes.

I'm wondering if Thorburn and Stuart are really so bad, if, Thorburn stays primarily on the 4th line, and Stuart on the bottom pair where they belong? Sure, there may be legitimate locker room intangibles, but those aside, are they really stanky enough on the ice to lose us games on a regular basis if the rest of the roster are holding their own? Just curious...

 

[AlphaLackey]

If I'm hired today, in the here and now, the first thing I do is lower the price of beer at the MTS Center to $1.99, with $1 from every beer going towards the Pavelec Buyout Fund.

Vote AlphaLackey for GM!

Seriously though: Give notice to O'Dell, Albert, Klingberg and other prospects of that caliber and let them know that they will get a fair shot at training camp, and the jobs are theirs for the taking if they can get them. I'd then make it a point to hire a number of the most competent statistical advisors that could be found to assist the coaching staff.

 

[AlphaLackey]

I'd create a social media do and do not seminar as part of training camp.

That'd be a quick seminar. One PowerPoint Slide:

"Social Media Do's and Don'ts

* Are you anyone besides Evander Kane? DO!
* Are you Evander Kane? DON'T!"

 

[garret9]

I'm wondering if Thorburn and Stuart are really so bad, if, Thorburn stays primarily on the 4th line, and Stuart on the bottom pair where they belong? Sure, there may be legitimate locker room intangibles, but those aside, are they really stanky enough on the ice to lose us games on a regular basis if the rest of the roster are holding their own? Just curious...

Sorry in advance... I got carried away (I've had a few drinks)...

Long story short version:
Stuart isn't that bad in the right role, but he was unnecessary as we already had a 3rd pair LHD signed for a while in Clitsome who has out performed him in all areas except grit and leadership.
Thorburn is bad. Very bad. We also have guys from the farm who would likely be better at half the cost and no term.



From the numbers I run:

For a 5-7 d-man Stuart is:
* Below average PK -but not much- and with no PP value
* Average Corsi defender*1
* Below average for point production
* IMO, above average for leadership (as a stat guy I will actually give him this... apparently his off-ice conditioning regime is 2nd to none on the Jets and he tries to motivate others to do likely)


For a 10-13 forward Thorburn is:
* No special teams value
* Bottom 10% of Corsi (gross)
* Near average for point production
* Good in the room


*1 => yes... for a 5-7 Stuart is average in Corsi... we **** on him because he's our worst Corsi d-man (of the regulars, not depth guys: Jones, Ellerby, Flood, Meech, etc.) and there are misconceptions about him, but he's actually not terrible... Just replaceable.


I don't actually think Stuart as terrible. That's like a guy like Douglas Murray and some others...

I do however think he wasn't necessary. Jets don't need to have more than one of Clitsome and Stuart... Clitsome was signed for more seasons so Stuart should have been dropped IMO. Clitsome is less gritty but overall slightly better. He's performed better on 5v5, 5v4, 4v5 and point production. Also, I don't think Stuart was not worth either his term, nor his salary. And if he's such a good guy and wants to be here, why are we overpaying his worth?

Looking at Corsi, he's 152/228 defensemen to have 1000+ mins since 2011. That puts him in the "solid #6 range" for D-men.

For 5-6 (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only worth about 0.9 goals below average for goal differential. Very meh. That's little enough that his leadership value can make up for. It's only about 1/10th the spread between top 10% of 3rd pair d-men to bottom 10%. Pavelec is a bout 15x worse than that in damage.



I do actually think Thorburn is terrible. He is useless in that -unlike Stuart- he's not even competent for his depth. He offers no special teams value and the only thing he brings to the table is his "intangibles" and willingness to be beaten up (which has some value but I confidently doubt enough to offset the rest).

I like grit. I like leadership. I like to have good character players and a well oiled room... but not at the expense of on-ice results. Unlike Stuart, Thorburn is worse than most of the depth players we bring up. What I also hate is he was constantly the Noel's choice to pull up to the top lines with injuries!

Looking at Corsi, he's 351/365 forwards to have 1000+ mins since 2011, and some of those guys behind him are worse because they are faceoff defensive zone specialists who do a job where it's impossible to get a good Corsi% (ex: Malholtra and Slater). That puts him in "one of the worst in the NHL" range. For 4th line players (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only about 3.8 goals below average for goal differential and over a win. The spread between top 10% to bottom 10% of fourth liners in talent is worth about 6 goals.... Very impressively bad.


In the long run, depth players don't cost you much when they stay in depth roles. A Stuart who sits all season in a #6 role is only hurting your team by about a goal (about 1/3 of a win on average). A Thorburn who sits all season in a #12 role is only hurting your team by about 4 goals (just under 2 wins on average). They essentially combine for a cost of two wins per a season, or 4 points in the standings... not the worst, but not the best. Especially given how it's such a tight league where every point counts so much.

However, there are opportunity costs at stake. Jets are drafting and developing. They have players who can fit in those roles and be a +value instead of -value there, at cheaper dollar which allows the Jets to improve higher up with more money to spend, while also allowing the lower spots to be places to slowly introduce rookies.

Sorry again...

 

[surixon]

Sorry in advance... I got carried away (I've had a few drinks)...

Long story short version:
Stuart isn't that bad in the right role, but he was unnecessary as we already had a 3rd pair LHD signed for a while in Clitsome who has out performed him in all areas except grit and leadership.
Thorburn is bad. Very bad. We also have guys from the farm who would likely be better at half the cost and no term.



From the numbers I run:

For a 5-7 d-man Stuart is:
* Below average PK -but not much- and with no PP value
* Average Corsi defender*1
* Below average for point production
* IMO, above average for leadership (as a stat guy I will actually give him this... apparently his off-ice conditioning regime is 2nd to none on the Jets and he tries to motivate others to do likely)


For a 10-13 forward Thorburn is:
* No special teams value
* Bottom 10% of Corsi (gross)
* Near average for point production
* Good in the room


*1 => yes... for a 5-7 Stuart is average in Corsi... we **** on him because he's our worst Corsi d-man (of the regulars, not depth guys: Jones, Ellerby, Flood, Meech, etc.) and there are misconceptions about him, but he's actually not terrible... Just replaceable.


I don't actually think Stuart as terrible. That's like a guy like Douglas Murray and some others...

I do however think he wasn't necessary. Jets don't need to have more than one of Clitsome and Stuart... Clitsome was signed for more seasons so Stuart should have been dropped IMO. Clitsome is less gritty but overall slightly better. He's performed better on 5v5, 5v4, 4v5 and point production. Also, I don't think Stuart was not worth either his term, nor his salary. And if he's such a good guy and wants to be here, why are we overpaying his worth?

Looking at Corsi, he's 152/228 defensemen to have 1000+ mins since 2011. That puts him in the "solid #6 range" for D-men.

For 5-6 (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only worth about 0.9 goals below average for goal differential. Very meh. That's little enough that his leadership value can make up for. It's only about 1/10th the spread between top 10% of 3rd pair d-men to bottom 10%. Pavelec is a bout 15x worse than that in damage.



I do actually think Thorburn is terrible. He is useless in that -unlike Stuart- he's not even competent for his depth. He offers no special teams value and the only thing he brings to the table is his "intangibles" and willingness to be beaten up (which has some value but I confidently doubt enough to offset the rest).

I like grit. I like leadership. I like to have good character players and a well oiled room... but not at the expense of on-ice results. Unlike Stuart, Thorburn is worse than most of the depth players we bring up. What I also hate is he was constantly the Noel's choice to pull up to the top lines with injuries!

Looking at Corsi, he's 351/365 forwards to have 1000+ mins since 2011, and some of those guys behind him are worse because they are faceoff defensive zone specialists who do a job where it's impossible to get a good Corsi% (ex: Malholtra and Slater). That puts him in "one of the worst in the NHL" range. For 4th line players (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only about 3.8 goals below average for goal differential and over a win. The spread between top 10% to bottom 10% of fourth liners in talent is worth about 6 goals.... Very impressively bad.


In the long run, depth players don't cost you much when they stay in depth roles. A Stuart who sits all season in a #6 role is only hurting your team by about a goal (about 1/3 of a win on average). A Thorburn who sits all season in a #12 role is only hurting your team by about 4 goals (just under 2 wins on average). They essentially combine for a cost of two wins per a season, or 4 points in the standings... not the worst, but not the best. Especially given how it's such a tight league where every point counts so much.

However, there are opportunity costs at stake. Jets are drafting and developing. They have players who can fit in those roles and be a +value instead of -value there, at cheaper dollar which allows the Jets to improve higher up with more money to spend, while also allowing the lower spots to be places to slowly introduce rookies.

Sorry again...

I agree with you with regards to Thorbourn. Not so much with regards to Stuart. O don't think Stuart prevents other young players playing time. For instance we only have one LHD close to making the jump in Morrissey. If Morrissey's readyhe likely plays ahead of Stuart. If he's not Clitsome fills in for a year in the top 4. If he's ready you have options; you can deal Clitsome for something or you can play him on the bottom pairing on his offside if hr proves to be better than Postma.

 

[garret9]

I agree with you with regards to Thorbourn. Not so much with regards to Stuart. O don't think Stuart prevents other young players playing time. For instance we only have one LHD close to making the jump in Morrissey. If Morrissey's readyhe likely plays ahead of Stuart. If he's not Clitsome fills in for a year in the top 4. If he's ready you have options; you can deal Clitsome for something or you can play him on the bottom pairing on his offside if hr proves to be better than Postma.

With Stuart it's less the young LHD we have and more the young LHD we should be trying to acquire.

 

[AngelicAssassin*]

If I were hired to be the Jets GM I would follow the model set out by Kyle Walters along with Head Coach Mike O'Shea of the Bombers but from a hockey perspective:

1) Identify team needs(better production from bottom six and better goaltending)

2) Identify those players on the team who truly do not want to be members of the Winnipeg Jets(Kane, maybe Byfuglien.)

When Mike O'Shea was hired to the Bombers you could sense the culture was going to CHANGE. Your name means nothing to them, your production on the field and your attitude off it is everything. How many whiners, malcontents and players who read their own positive press clippings have the Bombers gotten rid of. Even a guy like Will Ford is gone-because he was out performed.

It's hard in hockey with the guaranteed contracts and no movement clauses and changing people mindsets takes time. Gone are the old days where players were just happy to be in the NHL. Now it's more about money and winning(nothing wrong with wanting to win but how about the pride of going to a team that less might be expected of and being a part of that team taking the next step). Put the onus on players to earn their spot, contracts be damned. My favorite Sun columnist Tom Brodbeck had an article a couple weeks back I believe regarding city council-all of their mug shots on the cover of the paper with the headline "Fire them all". My tenure as GM might not make me popular but might bring results finally as I believe we have the right coach now.

Stuart and Thorburn while less talented are definitely character guys. Jokinen IMO was a character guy. Scheifele and Trouba both give it their all. Many other just turn it off whenever they feel like it.

I don't understand Chevy's reason with Pavelec. Based on stats alone he has no business being the Jets starter. And he seems to be a bit fragile from an emotional standpoint. I like Hutchinson but no one else in the system is ready. Montoya should have probably been retained with the 3 battling it out for 2 spots. If Hutchinson wins the job then one of the other two is moved. Same if he's deemed the backup. If not then he starts in St. Johns. I also agree with a previous poster and would hire a new Goaltending coach.

I have a preference to Ellerby over Pardy and I would not have let Redmond get away. I would have at worst signed him and then used him as a trade piece if necessary. Our D seems to get hurt quite a bit so quantity counts. I think with having Maurice from the start of the year the D will be a slightly more cohesive bunch but Pavelec or whoever needs to stop the puck.

We have problems winning faceoffs. I'm not sure how much it is worked on in practice but I would hire a former player(doing this on the fly so no one in mind yet) who was good in the dot to work with our team in training camp. I would have been looking in FA for the best faceoff man I could find who would fit on the 3rd or 4th line. If this isn't Perreault then I would find one to challenge for Slater's spot.

Now the elephant in the room. IMO Kane needs to go and I would take the best of what's offered and run with it. Not exactly sure what's being offered what with the constant talk that he wants out but someone would make an acceptable offer.

Day one of training camp I along with coach Maurice would walk into the dressing room and tell the players flat out about the pride they should feel wearing the Jets jersey and if they don't intend to embrace the concept of being a Winnipeg Jet then they should get up and walk out of the room or never utter another word to anyone on the subject. In front of their peers no one will get up and walk out.

Anyone does and you've identified the location of the cancer so you get it out.

 

[NBjet]

Sorry in advance... I got carried away (I've had a few drinks)...

Long story short version:
Stuart isn't that bad in the right role, but he was unnecessary as we already had a 3rd pair LHD signed for a while in Clitsome who has out performed him in all areas except grit and leadership.
Thorburn is bad. Very bad. We also have guys from the farm who would likely be better at half the cost and no term.



From the numbers I run:

For a 5-7 d-man Stuart is:
* Below average PK -but not much- and with no PP value
* Average Corsi defender*1
* Below average for point production
* IMO, above average for leadership (as a stat guy I will actually give him this... apparently his off-ice conditioning regime is 2nd to none on the Jets and he tries to motivate others to do likely)


For a 10-13 forward Thorburn is:
* No special teams value
* Bottom 10% of Corsi (gross)
* Near average for point production
* Good in the room


*1 => yes... for a 5-7 Stuart is average in Corsi... we **** on him because he's our worst Corsi d-man (of the regulars, not depth guys: Jones, Ellerby, Flood, Meech, etc.) and there are misconceptions about him, but he's actually not terrible... Just replaceable.


I don't actually think Stuart as terrible. That's like a guy like Douglas Murray and some others...

I do however think he wasn't necessary. Jets don't need to have more than one of Clitsome and Stuart... Clitsome was signed for more seasons so Stuart should have been dropped IMO. Clitsome is less gritty but overall slightly better. He's performed better on 5v5, 5v4, 4v5 and point production. Also, I don't think Stuart was not worth either his term, nor his salary. And if he's such a good guy and wants to be here, why are we overpaying his worth?

Looking at Corsi, he's 152/228 defensemen to have 1000+ mins since 2011. That puts him in the "solid #6 range" for D-men.

For 5-6 (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only worth about 0.9 goals below average for goal differential. Very meh. That's little enough that his leadership value can make up for. It's only about 1/10th the spread between top 10% of 3rd pair d-men to bottom 10%. Pavelec is a bout 15x worse than that in damage.



I do actually think Thorburn is terrible. He is useless in that -unlike Stuart- he's not even competent for his depth. He offers no special teams value and the only thing he brings to the table is his "intangibles" and willingness to be beaten up (which has some value but I confidently doubt enough to offset the rest).

I like grit. I like leadership. I like to have good character players and a well oiled room... but not at the expense of on-ice results. Unlike Stuart, Thorburn is worse than most of the depth players we bring up. What I also hate is he was constantly the Noel's choice to pull up to the top lines with injuries!

Looking at Corsi, he's 351/365 forwards to have 1000+ mins since 2011, and some of those guys behind him are worse because they are faceoff defensive zone specialists who do a job where it's impossible to get a good Corsi% (ex: Malholtra and Slater). That puts him in "one of the worst in the NHL" range. For 4th line players (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only about 3.8 goals below average for goal differential and over a win. The spread between top 10% to bottom 10% of fourth liners in talent is worth about 6 goals.... Very impressively bad.


In the long run, depth players don't cost you much when they stay in depth roles. A Stuart who sits all season in a #6 role is only hurting your team by about a goal (about 1/3 of a win on average). A Thorburn who sits all season in a #12 role is only hurting your team by about 4 goals (just under 2 wins on average). They essentially combine for a cost of two wins per a season, or 4 points in the standings... not the worst, but not the best. Especially given how it's such a tight league where every point counts so much.

However, there are opportunity costs at stake. Jets are drafting and developing. They have players who can fit in those roles and be a +value instead of -value there, at cheaper dollar which allows the Jets to improve higher up with more money to spend, while also allowing the lower spots to be places to slowly introduce rookies.

Sorry again...

That's a great response... My take away is that there's really limited damage done with Stuart, especially because I really do think that Morrissey is going to stay with the big club right out of camp, in fact I'm sure that he's in the squat rack as we speak!
And as far as Thorburn goes, PoMo is not Noel, and I would hope that his plans to roll 3 lines works out and that Thorburn gets limited usage on a presumably better 4th line. Even just having Slater healthy should help in that regard, in that he can at least win his share of faceoffs!
And I do believe that, although not measurable, there is something to be said for having a few vets that are willing to lay it all out there, even if they don't have the skill-set that directly shows up on the scoreboard. I think of it like the coxswain in a crew of scullers... He really doesn't do any of the actual work, but he still can affect the outcome (maybe the the two plus goals Thorbs costs us are made up by a couple induced by his bench banter). Plus there could even be a culture thing that they are trying to build into the organization where certain kinds of effort and sacrifice are rewarded with loyalty...?
And lastly, if it becomes obvious that we are going to be better served by some of our prospects, both Stuart and Thorburn probably wouldn't be difficult to deal at trade deadline for teams looking for a little extra playoff grit. Who knows, maybe they were just signed to get us a couple of extra picks for the 2015 draft! Onward...

 

[PaperRockChamp]

Sorry in advance... I got carried away (I've had a few drinks)...

Long story short version:
Stuart isn't that bad in the right role, but he was unnecessary as we already had a 3rd pair LHD signed for a while in Clitsome who has out performed him in all areas except grit and leadership.
Thorburn is bad. Very bad. We also have guys from the farm who would likely be better at half the cost and no term.



From the numbers I run:

For a 5-7 d-man Stuart is:
* Below average PK -but not much- and with no PP value
* Average Corsi defender*1
* Below average for point production
* IMO, above average for leadership (as a stat guy I will actually give him this... apparently his off-ice conditioning regime is 2nd to none on the Jets and he tries to motivate others to do likely)


For a 10-13 forward Thorburn is:
* No special teams value
* Bottom 10% of Corsi (gross)
* Near average for point production
* Good in the room


*1 => yes... for a 5-7 Stuart is average in Corsi... we **** on him because he's our worst Corsi d-man (of the regulars, not depth guys: Jones, Ellerby, Flood, Meech, etc.) and there are misconceptions about him, but he's actually not terrible... Just replaceable.


I don't actually think Stuart as terrible. That's like a guy like Douglas Murray and some others...

I do however think he wasn't necessary. Jets don't need to have more than one of Clitsome and Stuart... Clitsome was signed for more seasons so Stuart should have been dropped IMO. Clitsome is less gritty but overall slightly better. He's performed better on 5v5, 5v4, 4v5 and point production. Also, I don't think Stuart was not worth either his term, nor his salary. And if he's such a good guy and wants to be here, why are we overpaying his worth?

Looking at Corsi, he's 152/228 defensemen to have 1000+ mins since 2011. That puts him in the "solid #6 range" for D-men.

For 5-6 (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only worth about 0.9 goals below average for goal differential. Very meh. That's little enough that his leadership value can make up for. It's only about 1/10th the spread between top 10% of 3rd pair d-men to bottom 10%. Pavelec is a bout 15x worse than that in damage.



I do actually think Thorburn is terrible. He is useless in that -unlike Stuart- he's not even competent for his depth. He offers no special teams value and the only thing he brings to the table is his "intangibles" and willingness to be beaten up (which has some value but I confidently doubt enough to offset the rest).

I like grit. I like leadership. I like to have good character players and a well oiled room... but not at the expense of on-ice results. Unlike Stuart, Thorburn is worse than most of the depth players we bring up. What I also hate is he was constantly the Noel's choice to pull up to the top lines with injuries!

Looking at Corsi, he's 351/365 forwards to have 1000+ mins since 2011, and some of those guys behind him are worse because they are faceoff defensive zone specialists who do a job where it's impossible to get a good Corsi% (ex: Malholtra and Slater). That puts him in "one of the worst in the NHL" range. For 4th line players (so removing depth players) a Corsi% of that level is only about 3.8 goals below average for goal differential and over a win. The spread between top 10% to bottom 10% of fourth liners in talent is worth about 6 goals.... Very impressively bad.


In the long run, depth players don't cost you much when they stay in depth roles. A Stuart who sits all season in a #6 role is only hurting your team by about a goal (about 1/3 of a win on average). A Thorburn who sits all season in a #12 role is only hurting your team by about 4 goals (just under 2 wins on average). They essentially combine for a cost of two wins per a season, or 4 points in the standings... not the worst, but not the best. Especially given how it's such a tight league where every point counts so much.

However, there are opportunity costs at stake. Jets are drafting and developing. They have players who can fit in those roles and be a +value instead of -value there, at cheaper dollar which allows the Jets to improve higher up with more money to spend, while also allowing the lower spots to be places to slowly introduce rookies.

Sorry again...

Nice post, garret.

 

[PSGJ]

1) If I was actually for real hired as GM I would definitely hire a few guys to help me. An experienced former GM to start with. Then a team of advanced stat guys. I want lots of different ideas in the room. I'd also make sure to listen to them and be very humble about my complete lack of experience.

2) Trade for Reimer. Seems like a very low risk move. He should be cheap to trade for and if he is good then he might sign cheaply due to him being from Manitoba.

3) New third jerseys. Maybe throwbacks. Baffling that they haven't done this already.