Coach Discussion: Paul Maurice Pt II, The gooder, the badder, the uglier.

[surixon]

Postma and Dano couldn’t develop on other rosters either... Maybe the players have something to do with their own success? I’m sure we will see the same result with Petan on another team with a different coach as well

Of course they do. But development in most instances is tied to playing time, gaining experience and confidence. In Postma's case he wasn't given the opportunity to log sufficient minutes. He spent the better part of 4 years sitting in the press box or playing very limited minutes. Its hard to develop as player in that situation. When he left the org he was 28 years old and on the downward side of his career.

A good many careers are made or broken due to luck and opportunity. Being in the right place at the right time, for instance I would wager on a number of different organizations that didn't have our forward depth Petan would be an NHL regular by now if he was home grown and groomed by them.

 

[surixon]

You mean all coaches. All coaches have preferences whether those preferences are the same or not.

Agreed, for the non blue chip young players it comes down to luck and opportunity in many instances.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Of course they do. But development in most instances is tied to playing time, gaining experience and confidence. In Postma's case he wasn't given the opportunity to log sufficient minutes. He spent the better part of 4 years sitting in the press box or playing very limited minutes. Its hard to develop as player in that situation. When he left the org he was 28 years old and on the downward side of his career.

A good many careers are made or broken due to luck and opportunity. Being in the right place at the right time, for instance I would wager on a number of different organizations that didn't have our forward depth Petan would be an NHL regular by now if he was home grown and groomed by them.

That means Little is hurting Roslovic's development and now Rosie won't be the player he's meant to be. Change the lines.

 

[surixon]

Morrissey wouldn't be in the press box for any length of time. Because he can play hockey. Dano and petan can't. If you are given 100 plus games in the league you can't say they were never given a chance. Their development didn't stall by anything Maurice did.

You totally miss the point. I'm not going to get into it with you about Petan as we clearly don't agree on it.

 

[surixon]

That means Little is hurting Roslovic's development and now Rosie won't be the player he's meant to be. Change the lines right now.

If he is still on the fourth line getting 8 minutes a night a year from now then I would definitely start to get a bit concerned about it. His minutes could supplemented by playing him on the PK and PP that way he would play enough.

Plus in this case the players ahead of him are superior players so it is justified playing them ahead of him at this point. In the case of Postma the players paying ahead of him in Harrison, Pardy, Stuart etc were inferior players. Different situations.

 

[Adam da bomb]

If he is still on the fourth line getting 8 minutes a night a year from now then I would definitely start to get a bit concerned about it. His minutes could supplemented by playing him on the PK and PP that way he would play enough.

A whole year's development missed.

 

[TheJadePipe]

You totally miss the point. I'm not going to get into it with you about Petan as we clearly don't agree on it.

Agree to disagree,
The eye test tells me Petan just doesn’t have what is needed to be in the Jets, I can’t think of one forward we have that Petan should supplant for playing time... Heck I don’t think he could be in the top 9 of any NHL team, it’s not that he is getting small amounts of minutes which stumps his development..... Truth is he is getting small amounts of minutes because he has not earned more

 

[ffh]

You totally miss the point. I'm not going to get into it with you about Petan as we clearly don't agree on it.

All I know is petan Dano copp and Taney all started on 4th line with about the same minutes alloted to each. 2 earned bigger roles based on their play. Has nothing to do with a coach holding anybody back.

 

[Ducky10]

Agree to disagree,
The eye test tells me Petan just doesn’t have what is needed to be in the Jets, I can’t think of one forward we have that Petan should supplant for playing time... Heck I don’t think he could be in the top 9 of any NHL team, it’s not that he is getting small amounts of minutes which stumps his development..... Truth is he is getting small amounts of minutes because he has not earned more

Your eye test tells you, other eyes tell a different story. Hasn't earned more minutes? Why? So Roslo hasn't earned more than the 6 minutes he gets some nights? Perreault hasn't earned his minutes that he'll be losing once Copp returns. Chiarot has earned top 4 minutes a night? Morrow has earned the right to play at all? Lemieux earned his way back into the lineup?



Earned......that's a cliche.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

All I know is petan Dano copp and Taney all started on 4th line with about the same minutes alloted to each. 2 earned bigger roles based on their play. Has nothing to do with a coach holding anybody back.

Yup, but some narratives rely on feeling over facts.

Lets put it this way, if Dano and Petan played better and were regulars in our rotation, while lets say Copp and Tanev were on the outside looking in, the narrative would be the same, but the names would change. New narrative would be Maurice is holding back Copp and Tanev, while playing lesser players in Dano and Petan. Same story, different players.

Every team has bubble players, and every team's fan base has those that despise their coaches. Many of those fans, that despise their coaches, use the bubble players sitting in the press box, as examples of coaching incompetence.

 

[surixon]

Yup, but some narratives rely on feeling over facts.

Lets put it this way, if Dano and Petan played better and were regulars in our rotation, while lets say Copp and Tanev were on the outside looking in, the narrative would be the same, but the names would change. New narrative would be Maurice is holding back Copp and Tanev, while playing lesser players in Dano and Petan. Same story, different players.

Every team has bubble players, and every team's fan base has those that despise their coaches. Many of those fans, that despise their coaches, use the bubble players sitting in the press box, as examples of coaching incompetence.

The point was that Maurice gets praise for the players who developed under him and the ones that haven't are bums and can't play in the eysles of many here.

If he is to be praised for the good job he's done with some he should also be criticised for the ones he hasn't developed.

Just as the players should be praised/critiqued for not being able to take the next step.

You are right about the narrative on another org a guy like Tanev likely never sees NHL ice or never gets a second chance based on how bad he was his first year here. But he had a coach who had his back and liked what he brought so he was given a fairly long leash to develop. Others haven't been afforded the same luxury but that is life.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

The point was that Maurice gets praise for the players who developed under him and the ones that haven't are bums and can't play in the eysles of many here.

If he is to be praised for the good job he's done with some he should also be criticised for the ones he hasn't developed.

Just as the players should be praised/critiqued for not being able to take the next step.

You are right about the narrative on another org a guy like Tanev likely never sees NHL ice or never gets a second chance based on how bad he was his first year here. But he had a coach who had his back and liked what he brought so he was given a fairly long leash to develop. Others haven't been afforded the same luxury but that is life.

But there will always be players that fully develop under a coach, but are not good enough to crack the lineup. Is that a product of bad coaching, or great drafting?

What team has more of its draft picks playing in the league, over 150 games, since 2011 than us? What team's coaching staff has done a better job of promoting its prospects to the NHL, than the Jets and Maurice?

I have heard a couple of prospects allude to the fact the Jets roster is possibly the hardest roster in the league to crack, as we have so many solid prospects and so much depth.

And I disagree fully on Tanev's first year.

He easily outplayed both Dano and Petan in his first seasons, showed more tangible skills that translated instantly to the NHL, in his first season than either Dano or Petan.

I had numerous posts in his first season, stating that we would have a much more favorable impression of Tanev, had we drafted him in lieu of signing him as a UFA. Posters on here seemed to consider him a finished product that would flatline in development because he was 23. He has grown his game over the past couple of seasons, and is now a very important player for us.

 

[surixon]

But there will always be players that fully develop under a coach, but are not good enough to crack the lineup. Is that a product of bad coaching, or great drafting?

What team has more of its draft picks playing in the league, over 150 games, since 2011 than us? What team's coaching staff has done a better job of promoting its prospects to the NHL, than the Jets and Maurice?

I have heard a couple of prospects allude to the fact the Jets roster is possibly the hardest roster in the league to crack, as we have so many solid prospects and so much depth.

And I disagree fully on Tanev's first year.

He easily outplayed both Dano and Petan in his first seasons, showed more tangible skills that translated instantly to the NHL, in his first season than either Dano or Petan.

I had numerous posts in his first season, stating that we would have a much more favorable impression of Tanev, had we drafted him in lieu of signing him as a UFA. Posters on here seemed to consider him a finished product that would flatline in development because he was 23. He has grown his game over the past couple of seasons, and is now a very important player for us.

We can agree to disagree on Tanev. I can just as easily make an argument that someone else would rather have a fourth line that outplayed the opposition and gives Petan a longer leash instead of playing a poor player in Lemieux.

I have no idea why it's such a hard concept for some that despite all the good Maurice has done for this org he still has his blind spots and shortcomings and those short comings have impacted certain players more then others.

On the whole he's been far more good then bad but as someone who is interested in development and growth I want everyone in the org including the coaching staff to continue to grow and evolve. I was hoping to see more growth from Maurice in how he utilizes the bottom of his roster this season but also as he is back to his default.

 

[Adam da bomb]

The thing about Tanev is I doubt if anyone would blame the coach if he failed to make it. After all he doesn't have s pedigree and ppl like their thoroughbreds. Petan had a great juniors and Dano was a 1st rounder so they had both already developed their fan club. Tanev looked even less like an NHLEr. All he was was super fast which is less sexy than being a great passer or whatever Dano brought. He eventually showed he had more than that but the amount of hate he gets on here for surpassing the princes just because he was willing to work really hard and others weren't.
Ppl still show stats that say Dano is better and achieved more on his limited ice time.
Also do we blame Mo for kichton? What about Sutter Lipton? The Jets draft more players than Mo can find spaces for every year. Yet no one blames Maurice for these failures because it's the name of the game.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

We can agree to disagree on Tanev. I can just as easily make an argument that someone else would rather have a fourth line that outplayed the opposition and gives Petan a longer leash instead of playing a poor player in Lemieux.

I have no idea why it's such a hard concept for some that despite all the good Maurice has done for this org he still has his blind spots and shortcomings and those short comings have impacted certain players more then others.

On the whole he's been far more good then bad but as someone who is interested in development and growth I want everyone in the org including the coaching staff to continue to grow and evolve. I was hoping to see more growth from Maurice in how he utilizes the bottom of his roster this season but also as he is back to his default.

Its such a hard concept to understand, because its a false concept, your concept. Blind spots, your blind spots, are fully visible by many many others.

Blind spots, yet Petan has had 106 NHL games, and Maurice gave Dano 82 game thus far, in the NHL, which means they are not blind spots. Meanwhile Lemiuex, a player that has a measily 24 games in the NHL is considered a finish product in your opinion, and should be sitting, not developed further.

That is nonsensical.

What is more nonsensical is you stating Maurice falls back to his defaults, which is a laughable statement.

You wanted to see more growth on how Maurice utlizes our 4rth line this season, really? Sorry, this just sounds so ignorant and factless, its confusing to even try to understand what you are eluding to?

Jack Roslovic - 31 games in the league before this season, given the reigns of centering the 4rth line since the beginning of this season. Allowed to find his way in the middle, and improving with every game under his belt.

Mason Appleton: A big fat ZERO games in the league, now holding down a permanent position on the 4rth line, that is as green a prospect as you will find, making hay in the NHL, which is as about as pure an example of promoting your prospects.

Brendan Lemieux - Was the better prospect during training camp, as our training camp thread showed, many on here were announcing him as a starter on opening day. And while you are trying to convince us that Petan and Dano didn't get the same opportunity, Petan has 11 games this season to Lemieux's 15, yet Petan was out of the roster for a prolonged period of time. So 4 less games but missed the first weeks of the season.

There is prime examples of our coaching utilizing our prospects to fill out our 4rth line. Lemeiux had 11 games coming into this season, compared to Petan's 95 games.

So one player given plenty of opportunity, another hardly any going into this season, yet your narrative is the exact opposite, which makes it false.

No other coach has promoted as many prospects into the league as Maurice has since 2014, that alone shoots so many holes in your narrative.

Your only take on this is you would rather have Petan in over Lemieux, and you have somehow translated that into Maurice not being a solid coach. Its transparent, weak, and it lacks validity.

What makes your narrative weak is you have a couple of examples you believe supports it, and completely ignore several of the examples that work against it, stronger and more plentiful examples.

 

[Ducky10]

I don't dislike Tanev and he has carved out a valuable, specific role within the structure that Maurice has set and has gotten better at performing that role. Having said all that, I still think he's one of the easiest players on this team to replace, if he was out of the lineup the only place his absence might be felt is on the PK.

Petan was a victim of timing imo, I feel he was rushed to the NHL when he wasn't ready at that stage of his development. He was subsequently thrown in at various spots in the lineup and bounced back and forth to the press box, when he should of just been playing regular minutes with the Moose. His NHL time to date has been a hodge podge of linemates and roles, ridiculous really. Of course players have to accept some of the responsibility for their development, but I think in Petan's and Dano's situations, the Jets have not handled either of them very well.

 

[Adam da bomb]

I don't dislike Tanev and he has carved out a valuable, specific role within the structure that Maurice has set and has gotten better at performing that role. Having said all that, I still think he's one of the easiest players on this team to replace, if he was out of the lineup the only place his absence might be felt is on the PK.

Petan was a victim of timing imo, I feel he was rushed to the NHL when he wasn't ready at that stage of his development. He was subsequently thrown in at various spots in the lineup and bounced back and forth to the press box, when he should of just been playing regular minutes with the Moose. His NHL time to date has been a hodge podge of linemates and roles, ridiculous really. Of course players have to accept some of the responsibility for their development, but I think in Petan's and Dano's situations, the Jets have not handled either of them very well.

It's probably 80% on player 20% on team.

 

[surixon]

Its such a hard concept to understand, because its a false concept, your concept. Blind spots, your blind spots, are fully visible by many many others.

Blind spots, yet Petan has had 106 NHL games, and Maurice gave Dano 82 game thus far, in the NHL, which means they are not blind spots. Meanwhile Lemiuex, a player that has a measily 24 games in the NHL is considered a finish product in your opinion, and should be sitting, not developed further.

That is nonsensical.

What is more nonsensical is you stating Maurice falls back to his defaults, which is a laughable statement.

You wanted to see more growth on how Maurice utlizes our 4rth line this season, really? Sorry, this just sounds so ignorant and factless, its confusing to even try to understand what you are eluding to?

Jack Roslovic - 31 games in the league before this season, given the reigns of centering the 4rth line since the beginning of this season. Allowed to find his way in the middle, and improving with every game under his belt.

Mason Appleton: A big fat ZERO games in the league, now holding down a permanent position on the 4rth line, that is as green a prospect as you will find, making hay in the NHL, which is as about as pure an example of promoting your prospects.

Brendan Lemieux - Was the better prospect during training camp, as our training camp thread showed, many on here were announcing him as a starter on opening day. And while you are trying to convince us that Petan and Dano didn't get the same opportunity, Petan has 11 games this season to Lemieux's 15, yet Petan was out of the roster for a prolonged period of time. So 4 less games but missed the first weeks of the season.

There is prime examples of our coaching utilizing our prospects to fill out our 4rth line. Lemeiux had 11 games coming into this season, compared to Petan's 95 games.

So one player given plenty of opportunity, another hardly any going into this season, yet your narrative is the exact opposite, which makes it false.

No other coach has promoted as many prospects into the league as Maurice has since 2014, that alone shoots so many holes in your narrative.

Your only take on this is you would rather have Petan in over Lemieux, and you have somehow translated that into Maurice not being a solid coach. Its transparent, weak, and it lacks validity.

What makes your narrative weak is you have a couple of examples you believe supports it, and completely ignore several of the examples that work against it, stronger and more plentiful examples.

Now you are putting words into my mouth. I believe I have given Maurice plenty of credit. Where have I called him a bad coach. In fact I have done the opposite plenty of times the last two years. But unlike some here who seem unable to take a balanced approach I will happily point out areas where i think he needs to improve. Everyone on this planet has short comings and bias that influence how they go about their jobs. Just because he is an expert at coaching doesn't mean he is infallible or that he doesn't have areas to grow in. It's naive to think he has all the answers and everything he does is correct.

As far as the fourth line what has changed? Sure some of the pieces have changed Roslovic playing C and mismatch of wingers playing low minutes. He is still trotting them out 6 minutes of game meaning he still doesn't regularly trust them to play a regular shift. He still insists on putting a gritty player in a role on that line that does nothing but hurts the lines effectiveness.

Petan 54% CF
Lemieux 38% CF

One player in the top 5 in the team terms of outchancong their opposition when on the ice vs the player who is dead last with nobody else on this team even close to him playing instead. But yeah it's just a nonsensical argument..

 

[Ducky10]

Listening back to the Chris Butler interview, as well as a couple of others I've recently heard from players on struggling teams, it got me thinking about an area that Maurice has done really well in, imo. Those guys talk about their teams being mentally fragile, which is exactly what this team was when Maurice took over, they fell like a house of cards in a light breeze anytime something didn't go their way, they lacked the belief that they were good enough to overcome mistakes or bad breaks.

They are the exact opposite of that now and most of that was built last season. The Jets may be guilty of sitting back at times, but I never get the impression they do it because they are afraid to make a mistake or lose. They play fearlessly and most of the time with an aggression and belief in what they do. They are a talented bunch, which obviously helps, but their confidence in their game and what they are doing is what makes them an elite team. I think it's trait shared by the top 5-6 teams in the league, it separates them.

 

[Ducky10]

It's probably 80% on player 20% on team.

If you say so.

 

[Ducky10]

Now you are putting words into my mouth. I believe I have given Maurice plenty of credit. Where have I called him a bad coach. In fact I have done the opposite plenty of times the last two years. But unlike some here who seem unable to take a balanced approach I will happily point out areas where i think he needs to improve. Everyone on this planet has short comings and bias that influence how they go about their jobs. Just because he is an expert at coaching doesn't mean he is infallible or that he doesn't have areas to grow in. It's naive to think he has all the answers and everything he does is correct.

As far as the fourth line what has changed? Sure some of the pieces have changed Roslovic playing C and mismatch of wingers playing low minutes. He is still trotting them out 6 minutes of game meaning he still doesn't regularly trust them to play a regular shift. He still insists on putting a gritty player in a role on that line that does nothing but hurts the lines effectiveness.

Petan 54% CF
Lemieux 38% CF

One player in the top 5 in the team terms of outchancong their opposition when on the ice vs the player who is dead last with nobody else on this team even close to him playing instead. But yeah it's just a nonsensical argument..

Not to mention being a statistical drag on the players he shares the ice with as opposed to the other.

 

[Adam da bomb]

If you say so.

After all the team keeps winning without Petan. Petan losses millions who do you think has the more incentive to make it work. If Petan came to the rink everyday and treated it like it was his last he'd have stayed over Tanev. This is the first year Dano came to camp in shape 3 yrs ago we'd be like Tanev who.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

I think they want Lemieux in the lineup because I believe they want him for a specific skill set for the 4th line. Something which Petan cannot provide playing on the wing.

I believe they can be more patient with Lemieux because of age etc.. and they lack his particular skill set in the organization right now

 

[surixon]

After all the team keeps winning without Petan. Petan losses millions who do you think has the more incentive to make it work. If Petan came to the rink everyday and treated it like it was his last he'd have stayed over Tanev. This is the first year Dano came to camp in shape 3 yrs ago we'd be like Tanev who.

How do you know how hard Petan works? Petan often finished top 3 on the team in terms of the beep test and has come to camp in excellent shape each year based on everything I've heard.

I really get sick of people interpreting looking busy on the ice as giving max effort. Morrissey doesn't look busy on the ice most of the time but he's our most impacful defenseman because he takes the right lanes, has exceptional timing to go along with elite talent.

Petan was doing some of those things for us on the fourth line. He was taking the right lanes and forcing turnovers, he was in on the forecheck and he was responsible defensively. All this showed in the underlying stats were the fourth line and himself were highly effective. In all honesty outside of Copp and Roslovic not being able to convert on the numerous grade A chances he set them up with what more could have been realistically expected from Petan playing 6 minutes a night? Imo he did everything that was asked of him and was effective doing it.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

Now you are putting words into my mouth. I believe I have given Maurice plenty of credit. Where have I called him a bad coach. In fact I have done the opposite plenty of times the last two years. But unlike some here who seem unable to take a balanced approach I will happily point out areas where i think he needs to improve. Everyone on this planet has short comings and bias that influence how they go about their jobs. Just because he is an expert at coaching doesn't mean he is infallible or that he doesn't have areas to grow in. It's naive to think he has all the answers and everything he does is correct.
As far as the fourth line what has changed? Sure some of the pieces have changed Roslovic playing C and mismatch of wingers playing low minutes. He is still trotting them out 6 minutes of game meaning he still doesn't regularly trust them to play a regular shift. He still insists on putting a gritty player in a role on that line that does nothing but hurts the lines effectiveness.
Petan 54% CF
Lemieux 38% CF
One player in the top 5 in the team terms of outchancong their opposition when on the ice vs the player who is dead last with nobody else on this team even close to him playing instead. But yeah it's just a nonsensical argument..

You talk about being the voice of reason regarding Maurice, yet your examples are not reasonable.

You have 1 actual factual point, Petan over Lemieux, which you have tried to translate in to Maurice not being a solid developmental coach. Your example is very very weak, because we have watched Petan and Dano struggle for years at the NHL level, 100 plus games for both, to know that neither is shown enough to cement any spot on any NHL lineup.

You say everyone can improve, absolutely, but you are also trying to portray the areas of needed improvement as examples of Maurice’s incompetence as a coach. As stated name me another coach that has graduated more prospects into the league since 2014, than Maurice?

You say he sticks to the same players, stating “Some players have changed” on our 4rth line, yet ALL our players changed on that 4rth line, from a vet 4rth line last season to as green of a 4rth line as you will ever find in the NHL this season.

Do you see how you sound?

You take bits and bites of information that support your narrative while you ignore the ample examples that refute or contradict it.

One of the worst games our 4rth line played this season was with Petan on it, and had Lemiuex been in for that game, we all know the amount of ammo you would have generated from it. Gritty players deserve chances to develop and improve in the game as much as softer players that play a more skilled game. Petan has had ample opportunity, and just because you believe he is a better option than Lemieux, neither have earned anything to this point. Petan less, since he has had 5x the amount of opportunity that Lemieux has had to this point in their careers.