Is there argument to be made that the Jets(On Paper) have a Top 10 Defence?

[garret9]

First, I think that is a hypothesis about why Buff played the way he did. Is there evidence to support it? I'm not saying it's wrong, but would like to see the evidence.

Even if he did, I don't think that's a good excuse. The best response to falling behind early is to continue to play a steady defensive game and not to exacerbate the situation by giving up chances that put the team further in the hole. He needed to be more disciplined, if your hypothesis is correct.

Yes. Huge evidence.

One of the largest differences of impacts was post-offensive zone face offs. Byfuglien was on the ice for eight goals against after OZW this year on 59 shots. Four of the goals were breakaways. It was an unusually high amount for him.

Also, completely disagree and all evidence points out to this being exactly the opposite of truth. The offensive pressure is MUCH higher when trailing than when leading. Using an expected points model, you lose more expected standing points going from 0-1 to 0-2 than you cause to gain when tying it up from 0-1 to 1-1.

Now of course, the pressure is also time dependent. The later you get in the game, the greater the discrepancy. This is why you pull the goalie late, the offensive pressure is higher than the defensive pressure. This is why score effects exist as soon as you start trailing, and it exponentially grows as you get later in the game.

It's not discipline, it's a matter of fact that when trailing, you need to make a goal more so than prevent, so you take risks. Those risks resulted in more offense and less defense.

 

[heilongjetsfan]

The Jets can probably sustain through a couple of key injuries better than the majority of teams, too.

I'm not sure I agree with this idea. The quality of the guys who will come up from the Moose is pretty low.

I think we're top 10, maybe approaching top 5 when healthy, but things could get ugly if we're needing to shelter AHL players and double-shift our top guys.

 

[Whileee]

Yes. Huge evidence.

One of the largest differences of impacts was post-offensive zone face offs. Byfuglien was on the ice for eight goals against after OZW this year on 59 shots. Four of the goals were breakaways. It was an unusually high amount for him.

Also, completely disagree and all evidence points out to this being exactly the opposite of truth. The offensive pressure is MUCH higher when trailing than when leading. Using an expected points model, you lose more expected standing points going from 0-1 to 0-2 than you cause to gain when tying it up from 0-1 to 1-1.

Now of course, the pressure is also time dependent. The later you get in the game, the greater the discrepancy. This is why you pull the goalie late, the offensive pressure is higher than the defensive pressure. This is why score effects exist as soon as you start trailing, and it exponentially grows as you get later in the game.

It's not discipline, it's a matter of fact that when trailing, you need to make a goal more so than prevent, so you take risks. Those risks resulted in more offense and less defense.

You might be right, but haven't presented enough data to convince me. For one, that is a very small sample size and certainly not statistically significant. The 95% confidence interval for 4 events (Poisson distribution) includes 0. Also, you are using goals as the metric, whereas the chart is based on shot attempts. A breakaway goal is only one shot attempt.

To justify your argument you need to add game context. How many of these events happened after the Jets fell behind early?

 

[Whileee]

I'm not sure I agree with this idea. The quality of the guys who will come up from the Moose is pretty low.

I think we're top 10, maybe approaching top 5 when healthy, but things could get ugly if we're needing to shelter AHL players and double-shift our top guys.

Injury replacements...

Chiarot
Poolman
Niku
Melchiori
Nogier

I like that better than previous seasons for the most part, though I'll miss Postma.

 

[Jet]

It's comical to suggest that the early goals against were somehow the goalies fault and then Buff had to play a firewagon style of hockey to try to get us back in games.

Not buying it. I know, bias bias bias but I recollect plenty of Buff's brain fart play putting us in holes, and then he goes all rogue trying to fix his **** ups.

Just play better in the first place.

Then we say that Buff drives the offensive engine for the Jets. That may be true but it's no longer necessary. We have plenty of guys who can create and not kill us in our zone: Little and Brighteyes immediately jump to mind. Morrissey, though he has a ways to go already creates without crippling us in our zone.

Just because Buff has driven the Jets offense for 5 years doesn't mean we need him do do that. We need defense that can prevent goals so that our very talented forwards can score enough for us to win. Furthermore, that is how you win games in the playoffs, not by trading chances.

Hopefully Mason will correct some of this by doing something most Jets goalies haven't been able to do consistently - bail out Byfuglien.

 

[Mud Turtle]

Sure, it makes sense. I think that might be right, but I don't think that's all I saw last year. I think the excessive ice-time was a factor. I also saw a lot more "casual" play in his own zone last season, for some reason. I don't think it was all about him rushing up ice and getting caught. I really thought his play in the D zone when they didn't have the puck was also a bit lackadaisical.

Yes, this exactly! Everyone focuses on Buff's bad pinches etc but they forget about the multitude of, dare I say it, lazy plays - or non plays.
So many opportunities for a simple stick lift in front of the net, or an occasional slide to block a pass. Far too many lazy plays and it's also on the coach for not disciplining him.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I don't have a problem with him going all out if they are trailing by a couple, but how often don't we see Buff taking those crazy ill-advised romps into the offensive zone when we are up in a game. Buff needs to be reminded what his primary job is out there & that isn't happening OR he isn't paying attention to the coaches. If its the latter, you'd expect him to be reprimanded or benched occasionally. Nah

That was always part of his normal game, including in the good years. It is just about when and how often he does them. His primary job is still just outscoring the opposition, as Garrett likes to point out. He drives fans crazy but it is the net result that matters.

 

[Jeti]

It depends too much on Enstrom and (especially) Myers. I think we're deluding ourselves if we think Myers has had bad luck with injuries - he's an injury prone player at this point and we can't count him as a full member of the d-core until he plays 70+ games. I think Enstrom's drop off will continue. It's been years since he's scored >20 points. It's possible the bottom pairing still manages to drag the Jets down.

We're extremely lucky to have Morrissey step in last year like he did. Otherwise we'd be having a very different conversation.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I don't have a problem with him going all out if they are trailing by a couple, but how often don't we see Buff taking those crazy ill-advised romps into the offensive zone when we are up in a game. Buff needs to be reminded what his primary job is out there & that isn't happening OR he isn't paying attention to the coaches. If its the latter, you'd expect him to be reprimanded or benched occasionally. Nah

That was always part of his normal game, including in the good years. It is just about when and how often he does them. His primary job is still just outscoring the opposition, as Garrett likes to point out. He drives fans crazy but it is the net result that matters.

 

[Ducky10]

I certainly believe Buff's defensive impact will normalize this season. Slim chance the team loses as many man games to injury as last season, that combined with an upgrade in personnel are enough to make it realistic. Throw in a change in scheme that better suits him and those around him and we'll see Buff's net results even greater.

 

[garret9]

You might be right, but haven't presented enough data to convince me. For one, that is a very small sample size and certainly not statistically significant. The 95% confidence interval for 4 events (Poisson distribution) includes 0. Also, you are using goals as the metric, whereas the chart is based on shot attempts. A breakaway goal is only one shot attempt.

To justify your argument you need to add game context. How many of these events happened after the Jets fell behind early?

Chart is actually expected goal based and 59 shots against are not goals.

It was just one example I was using to illustrate my point; I'm not suggesting that was the whole bottle. It's a hypothesis that has a mechanism (score effects), that is founded through common knowledge, and has the symptoms we expect.

It's no guarantee or proved, but I'm confident enough of it until someone says something better than "I remember him doing this a lot" or other merely anecdotal situations and subjective preferences of style over substance. Besides, we're talking about Byfuglien being replacement level defense vs sub replacement level. No one's talking about him being good defensively. Replacement level isn't even average, so of course people are going to notice bad things he's done.

Anyways, the model I used to predict next year's performance is heavily weighted for last year vs previous seasons, so if anything I'm undervaluing his defensive impact if he were to turn similar to norm:

 

[garret9]

By the way Whileee, since we're talking about pressure, you may like this:

^ shows the difference in offensive vs defensive pressure depending on score state and time in the game.

We already knew about score effects, but this helped us model the incentive reasoning behind it.

The most interesting discovery though was how when the score is tied there is more defensive pressure than offensive pressure. The NHL incentivizes teams to play to a tie, and now we have a scalable model showing that incentivize effect.

When you are tied 1-1 very late in the third, the expected standings point of a tie is ~1.5 (slightly above for home and below for away). One point for making it into OT and then the other point split between the two teams (slightly more than half to the home team since slightly better odds of winning if all other variables are equal).

So, by scoring another goal and making it 2-1, you increase by about 0.5 expected standing points, from 1.5 to 2 (not a full 2 as the other team still has a chance to tie it). The offensive pressure is slightly below 0.5 expected standing points.

Being scored on though and making it 1-2, you decrease by about 1.5 expected standing points, from 1.5 to 0 (not a full 0 as you still have a chance of tying it back up). The defensive pressure is slightly below 1.5 expected standing points.


By the way, this is not just an excuse made up for Byfuglien. It's a team wide thing. We noticed not just with Byfuglien but the team carried very weak EV Offense overall, one of the worst in the league. Most of the Jets players had career worsts in this area. Little was just as bad as Buff!

 

[heilongjetsfan]

Chart is actually expected goal based and 59 shots against are not goals.

It was just one example I was using to illustrate my point; I'm not suggesting that was the whole bottle. It's a hypothesis that has a mechanism (score effects), that is founded through common knowledge, and has the symptoms we expect.

It's no guarantee or proved, but I'm confident enough of it until someone says something better than "I remember him doing this a lot" or other merely anecdotal situations and subjective preferences of style over substance. Besides, we're talking about Byfuglien being replacement level defense vs sub replacement level. No one's talking about him being good defensively. Replacement level isn't even average, so of course people are going to notice bad things he's done.

Anyways, the model I used to predict next year's performance is heavily weighted for last year vs previous seasons, so if anything I'm undervaluing his defensive impact if he were to turn similar to norm:

I feel like the bolded is something we don't hear often enough from the advanced stats community. The actual analysts come with some humility most of the time, but a lot of the followers of it seem to be in denial of the fact that it's a work in progress.
I think the "science of hockey" is well on its way, I'm glad to hear from the horse's mouth that it still needs refinement.

 

[heilongjetsfan]

Injury replacements...

Chiarot
Poolman
Niku
Melchiori
Nogier

I like that better than previous seasons for the most part, though I'll miss Postma.

I'll miss him, too. I'd have been OK with trading or exposing Myers and giving PP the 3rhd spot, and a healthy (but cheap) extension. I really think we under-utilized him and maybe even damaged his career.
Our call-ups look a lot better than in the past, but I still have some apprehension about them playing at the NHL level.

 

[Eyeseeing]

It's comical to suggest that the early goals against were somehow the goalies fault and then Buff had to play a firewagon style of hockey to try to get us back in games.

Not buying it. I know, bias bias bias but I recollect plenty of Buff's brain fart play putting us in holes, and then he goes all rogue trying to fix his **** ups.

Just play better in the first place.

Then we say that Buff drives the offensive engine for the Jets. That may be true but it's no longer necessary. We have plenty of guys who can create and not kill us in our zone: Little and Brighteyes immediately jump to mind. Morrissey, though he has a ways to go already creates without crippling us in our zone.

Just because Buff has driven the Jets offense for 5 years doesn't mean we need him do do that. We need defense that can prevent goals so that our very talented forwards can score enough for us to win. Furthermore, that is how you win games in the playoffs, not by trading chances.

Hopefully Mason will correct some of this by doing something most Jets goalies haven't been able to do consistently - bail out Byfuglien.

I think Buff is one of those guys whose talents wouldn't be fully appreciated until he was playing elsewhere.
Personally I'm glad we kept him in spite of how he played last year.
Regardless of his stat lines he is among the most entertaining players in the league at times.

 

[Whileee]

Chart is actually expected goal based and 59 shots against are not goals.

It was just one example I was using to illustrate my point; I'm not suggesting that was the whole bottle. It's a hypothesis that has a mechanism (score effects), that is founded through common knowledge, and has the symptoms we expect.

It's no guarantee or proved, but I'm confident enough of it until someone says something better than "I remember him doing this a lot" or other merely anecdotal situations and subjective preferences of style over substance. Besides, we're talking about Byfuglien being replacement level defense vs sub replacement level. No one's talking about him being good defensively. Replacement level isn't even average, so of course people are going to notice bad things he's done.

Anyways, the model I used to predict next year's performance is heavily weighted for last year vs previous seasons, so if anything I'm undervaluing his defensive impact if he were to turn similar to norm:

Still very small sample sizes, and though I don't dispute the general impact of score effects I don't see any analysis that looks on Buff's play in relation to the game situation (score), which is directly related to your hypothesis.

Until you show a direct correlation between the game situation (score) and Buff's defensive performance, I don't see how this evidence rises to being very persuasive.

I think we agree on Buff's defensive and overall impact, and I agree that he is likely to bounce back this season. I also think that your hypothesis makes sense, and the data are suggestive. I just haven't seen you analyze alternative hypotheses or directly test your own.

 

[Whileee]

By the way Whileee, since we're talking about pressure, you may like this:

^ shows the difference in offensive vs defensive pressure depending on score state and time in the game.

We already knew about score effects, but this helped us model the incentive reasoning behind it.

The most interesting discovery though was how when the score is tied there is more defensive pressure than offensive pressure. The NHL incentivizes teams to play to a tie, and now we have a scalable model showing that incentivize effect.

When you are tied 1-1 very late in the third, the expected standings point of a tie is ~1.5 (slightly above for home and below for away). One point for making it into OT and then the other point split between the two teams (slightly more than half to the home team since slightly better odds of winning if all other variables are equal).

So, by scoring another goal and making it 2-1, you increase by about 0.5 expected standing points, from 1.5 to 2 (not a full 2 as the other team still has a chance to tie it). The offensive pressure is slightly below 0.5 expected standing points.

Being scored on though and making it 1-2, you decrease by about 1.5 expected standing points, from 1.5 to 0 (not a full 0 as you still have a chance of tying it back up). The defensive pressure is slightly below 1.5 expected standing points.


By the way, this is not just an excuse made up for Byfuglien. It's a team wide thing. We noticed not just with Byfuglien but the team carried very weak EV Offense overall, one of the worst in the league. Most of the Jets players had career worsts in this area. Little was just as bad as Buff!

Yes, I do like this.

I hope that Maurice and the coaches are able to re-orient their overall style and game situation approaches to better match their personnel.

And, as you've noted, it would help if they got some saves more often...

 

[garret9]

Still very small sample sizes, and though I don't dispute the general impact of score effects I don't see any analysis that looks on Buff's play in relation to the game situation (score), which is directly related to your hypothesis.

Until you show a direct correlation between the game situation (score) and Buff's defensive performance, I don't see how this evidence rises to being very persuasive.

I think we agree on Buff's defensive and overall impact, and I agree that he is likely to bounce back this season. I also think that your hypothesis makes sense, and the data are suggestive. I just haven't seen you analyze alternative hypotheses or directly test your own.

There hasn't been any real alternative hypotheses presented though... other than "he's bad".

 

[Whileee]

There hasn't been any real alternative hypotheses presented though... other than "he's bad".

Not really. Other hypotheses have included that he played less effectively in part due to excessive ice time. Another is that his poor play wasn't just related to taking chances on offense, but also due to less effective play in his own zone.

 

[garret9]

Not really. Other hypotheses have included that he played less effectively in part due to excessive ice time. Another is that his poor play wasn't just related to taking chances on offense, but also due to less effective play in his own zone.

Well, I always have said the first one was probably a part to play. Although, when I look at Byfuglien's performance relative to TOI/GP in chunks of games there is actually a positive correlation, not negative. My guess though is probably confounding variable of when he plays well, Maurice plays him more.

The second isn't an alternative hypothesis, as there is no real reason being given. Is it because he didn't care as much? Is it because he was out of shape? Is it age regression/deterioration? Playing worse in his own zone isn't a hypothesis to why he played worse.

 

[surixon]

By the way Whileee, since we're talking about pressure, you may like this:

^ shows the difference in offensive vs defensive pressure depending on score state and time in the game.

We already knew about score effects, but this helped us model the incentive reasoning behind it.

The most interesting discovery though was how when the score is tied there is more defensive pressure than offensive pressure. The NHL incentivizes teams to play to a tie, and now we have a scalable model showing that incentivize effect.

When you are tied 1-1 very late in the third, the expected standings point of a tie is ~1.5 (slightly above for home and below for away). One point for making it into OT and then the other point split between the two teams (slightly more than half to the home team since slightly better odds of winning if all other variables are equal).

So, by scoring another goal and making it 2-1, you increase by about 0.5 expected standing points, from 1.5 to 2 (not a full 2 as the other team still has a chance to tie it). The offensive pressure is slightly below 0.5 expected standing points.

Being scored on though and making it 1-2, you decrease by about 1.5 expected standing points, from 1.5 to 0 (not a full 0 as you still have a chance of tying it back up). The defensive pressure is slightly below 1.5 expected standing points.


By the way, this is not just an excuse made up for Byfuglien. It's a team wide thing. We noticed not just with Byfuglien but the team carried very weak EV Offense overall, one of the worst in the league. Most of the Jets players had career worsts in this area. Little was just as bad as Buff!

This is neat. More evidence that Maurice absolutely botched things last year. I still can't fathom what he was thinking running the schemes he was given the roster make up.

 

[Whileee]

Well, I always have said the first one was probably a part to play. Although, when I look at Byfuglien's performance relative to TOI/GP in chunks of games there is actually a positive correlation, not negative. My guess though is probably confounding variable of when he plays well, Maurice plays him more.

The second isn't an alternative hypothesis, as there is no real reason being given. Is it because he didn't care as much? Is it because he was out of shape? Is it age regression/deterioration? Playing worse in his own zone isn't a hypothesis to why he played worse.

Playing worse in his own zone when his team didn't have the puck is an alternate to the hypothesis that his poor results were driven by his actions on offense. It's probably testable.

 

[wildandwoolly]

How has Myers been for you guys? In Buffalo he was literally collapsing under the pressure, so hopefully he's been doing a lot better lately not being relied on as #1.

He always seemed a little slow - mentally. And it seemed like he didn't know how to use his body so as a result he was always slow physically too, to react, push people, etc. Incredibly frustrating. Is this still the case? Or has he been maturing. Also curious if he's been physical, throwing his body around/laying ppl out. Towards the end of his time in Buffalo, he'd resort to cross checking and end up in the box.

 

[fergiesbeak]

On paper I would say maybe top 10. Reality however no chance until we lower
our goals against and make the playoffs. Being healthy and having a strong defensive
5 on 5 scheme will be factors as well as solid goaltending. A lot of factors we have yet to see. I am optimistic that our lineup on paper is good but the jets are not top 10 in
anything. Here's hoping that changes this year!

 

[Neuf]

How has Myers been for you guys? In Buffalo he was literally collapsing under the pressure, so hopefully he's been doing a lot better lately not being relied on as #1.

He always seemed a little slow - mentally. And it seemed like he didn't know how to use his body so as a result he was always slow physically too, to react, push people, etc. Incredibly frustrating. Is this still the case? Or has he been maturing. Also curious if he's been physical, throwing his body around/laying ppl out. Towards the end of his time in Buffalo, he'd resort to cross checking and end up in the box.

He's injured too often to gain momentum. His start to the 16 season was the best i have seen him play. He was a force. But that was a few weeks.