- Feb 24, 2015
- 22,124
- 36,661
Post-Game Talk: Jets fall to the Knights 3 -1
- Thread starter Afterburner
- Start date
Like any sport, hustling is better than coasting. See it in soccer, basketball, etc.
Jets let vgk slow the game down. My friend who doesn't watch much hockey said they looked slow compared to 1st game. Skate boys, yuuuu can doooo it!
WolfgangPuck
Registered User
- May 12, 2012
- 2,015
- 2,788
As a fan I was emotional spent after the Nashville series Anything going forward is gravy No expectations from me
Vegas has a hard working team with good transition game Cant be taken lightly just cause they are an expansion team.
Vegas has a hard working team with good transition game Cant be taken lightly just cause they are an expansion team.
Well I won't see same users posting how we are the best team ever after we win than.
On a serious note tho. When I was 6 years old my father told me one phrase. After he told me that a lot of other people told me the same thing.
I'm glad I listened to it, believed in it and used ever since.
Playing, coaching at work even at home lol. The phrase is "It's never as good as you think it is and it's never as bad you feel it is".
Board Bard
Dane-O-Mite
- Jun 7, 2014
- 7,888
- 5,055
You could take slices of a large sample that have teams that are down 1-0 coming back to win several times in a row or nearly so, and other slices that have the trailing team losing 20 times in a row. Your probabilities mean nothing in a best-of-7 series.
thegr8one66
Registered User
Again....you keep bringing regular season games into your argument. While your stats/facts have value and they are a good tool, hockey’s a hard game to quantify. Too many variables. Your facts don't get don’t get down to the root of it.
The human element is complex and unknowable, but that doesn’t mean you pretend it doesn’t
exist. I understand you're trying to take more of the guesswork and subjectivity out of judging our team’s chances of winning/losing.
But statistics are imperfect and no one actually thinks they are perfect. Just like there aren't people who just watch statistics but not the game. You're trying to convince people that a spreadsheet will tell you what's going to happen. You seem to believe your facts are statistically verifiable for predicting.
You can't quantify why the Jets will lose going forward if they give up the first goal.....but we know they probably will. The Jets' opponents have detailed knowledge of our tendencies when down in a game.You're reluctant to acknowledge these kinds of things and bring up "small sample sizes". But we've played 14 games. We're talking about 5 of them. That's 36% of our games. Seems like a pretty good sample size.
He did quantify it why the Jets will lose going forward if they give up the first goal - because statistically it is very likely that teams lose after giving up the first goal. That is the expected outcome.
AlphaLackey
Registered User
I'll just focus on this, since this seems to be the only new ground here:
Yeah, that's exactly what I've said, in each and every post I've made on the topic. If the Jets give up the first goal, they WILL, in fact, probably lose the game. My contention is only with people who say that our chance of winning if trailing first is zero or virtually zero, based on a sample size of 5 games where you also have to ignore our comeback victory.
Yeah, that's exactly what I've said, in each and every post I've made on the topic. If the Jets give up the first goal, they WILL, in fact, probably lose the game. My contention is only with people who say that our chance of winning if trailing first is zero or virtually zero, based on a sample size of 5 games where you also have to ignore our comeback victory.
Robinson2187
Registered Schmoozer
Lowsy's hurt so he gets a pass from me. Laine looks to have something bothering him as well but it might just be fatigue. Agree on Ehlers needing to step up big time.
off topic rant: co-worker said in game 7 of Nashville series that the Jet's would definitely lose. I asked if he watches a lot of hockey. He said he only watches soccer and that he's seen a lifetime total of one hockey game (on TV when he was in a bar). well...f@@@y@@. end of rant
Stumbledore
Registered User
He turned the puck over at least 6 times, 4 of those giveaways were in his own end. The fact that he didn't "cause" any goals is because his teammates clean up after him. Check out comments elsewhere from Paul Maurice explaining that when he anticipates a phase of the game will be largely in our own end (usually the third period), he limits Laine's minutes.
Stumbledore
Registered User
Those "4 idiots" were teammates going on a line change. When the line changes, you dump the puck in. You don't try and stickhandle past THREE opposing players. Save your risky, egotistical flourishes for another time and just do what your team needs you to do: dump the puck in.
At center ice, four of the players on the ice thought that their teammate would do the expected, sensible thing. Instead, he screwed up, hence the goal.
I will defend your right to be wrong on this one. Just not to the death. I mean, I hardly even know you...
A series of real solid posts AlphaLackey. It does seem a bit weird someone has to work so hard to explain pretty common sense concepts.
Edit: Just to add a bit more. There have been 71 games so far this playoffs, with 20 games one by the team that went behind 1-0 for a 28.17% chance. After 5 games of being down 1-0, a 1-4 record (20%) is the most probable outcome. BTW our 88.9 % winning percentage when we go up 1-0 is the highest among all playoff teams.
Last edited:
raideralex99
Whiteout Is Coming.
raideralex99
Whiteout Is Coming.
Sorry I saw it different. Connor was not trying to stick handle through 4 guys its more like they attacked him and caused the turned over BIG difference.
I would suggest that if the Jets are down a goal or two ... let Vegas have the puck and then hit every Vegas player that touches the puck and soon the will cough up the puck too.
Seriously how Vegas played last night after they got a lead is BS ... playing not to lose. If the refs would call the cross checking on #55 especially when he does have the puck it would be a different game.
burnoutberry
Registered User
The Jets need to stay out of the casinos etc. to avoid the Vegas Flu. That's the goal.
What!?!?! No rippers?!?! NOOOOO!!!
burnoutberry
Registered User
I didn't feel that the jets played a bad game. They weren't rewarded for some of their opportunities whereas Vegas capitalized on our mistakes. I'm confident that the Jets will respond with a strong showing in Vegas.
PerryPooley
Registered User
- Dec 28, 2011
- 1,453
- 359
Laine appears to have no confidence handling pucks right now.
ryerockarola
Registered User
- Nov 20, 2011
- 6,000
- 7,586
Which is why when playing the point on the PP he also had to retreat to his own end.... and bring the puck up the ice. That's not his game and is asking for trouble if he's to do that regularly, which I don't think hes supposed to.l But it happened once, and one time is one time too many.
sipowicz
The thrill is gone
- Mar 16, 2011
- 31,610
- 41,097
That’s exactly why I would go with Appleton in his place with Petan in Ehlers place and Niku in for Enstrom! Poolman in for Chariot.....
No hyperbolic comments. Nothing overly negative. Just something to think about...
The real takeaway here folks is not whether the Jets will be able to generate sufficient high danger scoring chances and ultimately goals - but rather, whether the Jets will be able to take away the ability of Vegas to do the same. We have not faced a team that generates offence almost exclusively off the rush, through quick counter attacks from mistakes/ turnovers in the neutral zone, with the forwards doing most if not all playmaking. Whenever the puck is deeper in the offensive zone, there is limited low to high work - notice how few goals are scored from the points but rather from plays into the slot area or the direct net front area. It will be critically important that our D and (normally) our C mark their man consistently, without breakdown or error, if we are to defuse this offence.
Can we be successful - absolutely. But it will require that we play almost the complete opposite of the way we played last night. Vegas is very opportunistic and excels at capitalizing on opponent mistakes. Limit or eliminate those mistakes boys.
The real takeaway here folks is not whether the Jets will be able to generate sufficient high danger scoring chances and ultimately goals - but rather, whether the Jets will be able to take away the ability of Vegas to do the same. We have not faced a team that generates offence almost exclusively off the rush, through quick counter attacks from mistakes/ turnovers in the neutral zone, with the forwards doing most if not all playmaking. Whenever the puck is deeper in the offensive zone, there is limited low to high work - notice how few goals are scored from the points but rather from plays into the slot area or the direct net front area. It will be critically important that our D and (normally) our C mark their man consistently, without breakdown or error, if we are to defuse this offence.
Can we be successful - absolutely. But it will require that we play almost the complete opposite of the way we played last night. Vegas is very opportunistic and excels at capitalizing on opponent mistakes. Limit or eliminate those mistakes boys.
Last census there were 705,244 people living in Winnipeg proper. Based on this suggestion I'd place you at 705, 244th on the list of those I'd be comfortable making roster decisions.
ryerockarola
Registered User
- Nov 20, 2011
- 6,000
- 7,586
i can't forget what it was exactly.
it was either that most of the accounts he followed were foot fettish women accounts or female porn star accounts.
once someone noticed, he unfollowed.
The Blue Baron
Registered User
Ad
Latest posts
-
Historical relevance of Kucherov and MacKinnon's 2024 season?- Latest: Professor What
