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

[RageQuit77]

I don't think there will be any changes to 2nd line, not at least for next game.

PoMo is enough slow, rigid, methodical, and conservative that when he finally managed to put together somewhat functional roster as a whole, he won't change it.

It's not that 1st Line would be somehow bad in this game, it's simply that 2nd line shone so bright that it's impossible (and unnecessary) to look too deep to the functional combination of the whole.

Don't fix what is functional -principle.

 

[Calendal]

If he scores 5 goals with his next 5 shots, he'll still be below his career 5v5 sh%.

Something about this post I really like.

 

[mcpw]

Something about this post I really like.

gonna give an update (this comment was about 5v5 only):
when I made the post --- 0 goals from 30 shots (0%)
since I made the post --- 8 goals from 19 shots (42%)
whole season --- 8 goals from 49 shots (16.3%)
2016-18 --- 43 goals from 282 shots (15.3%)

5v5 numbers looking more normal now.

I expect improvement in the highlighted area:

an update on those numbers:
Little 1.04 -> 2.61
Laine 0.33 -> 2.17
Connor 0.88 -> 2.16
Scheifele 1.35 -> 1.75
Tanev 1.52 -> 1.66
Roslovic 1.42 -> 1.61
Wheeler 0.87 -> 1.50
Perreault 1.38 -> 1.42
Ehlers 1.29 -> 1.38
Lemieux 0.00 -> 1.02
Lowry 1.09 -> 0.91
Petan 0.00 -> 0.87
Copp 0.81 -> 0.80

it's all been shooting percentage. Not necessarily related to coaching, though the CLL line looks good.
Some of our players still have a ridiculously low oish% of less than 6.5% and should certainly produce more in the future. Those are Petan, Perreault, Lowry, Roslovic, and Ehlers.

 

[nobody imp0rtant]

I don't think there will be any changes to 2nd line, not at least for next game.

PoMo is enough slow, rigid, methodical, and conservative that when he finally managed to put together somewhat functional roster as a whole, he won't change it.

It's not that 1st Line would be somehow bad in this game, it's simply that 2nd line shone so bright that it's impossible (and unnecessary) to look too deep to the functional combination of the whole.

Don't fix what is functional -principle.

I'm not so optimistic. I'm counting the days until Maurice decides to move Connor back with Scheifele and Wheeler in an effort to get his "top line" going again. Perhaps even at their behest.

 

[WPGChief]

I'm not so optimistic. I'm counting the days until Maurice decides to move Connor back with Scheifele and Wheeler in an effort to get his "top line" going again. Perhaps even at their behest.

If Wheeler is looking for someone other than Ehlers to work with, I have a recommendation...

 

[MoreMorrissey]

Found this post while scrolling through the Oilers board, hope @GameChanger doesn't mind me posting it here but it's fantastic and very topical!

There's an interesting article about Olli Jokinen and the Winnipeg Jets in a Finnish magazine Ilta-Sanomat. It contains some thoughts that IMO are closely related to this topic so please don't get offended by this one message talking about them. If you can't tolerate it just skip this

I haven't got enough time to translate everything, but here's a some quotes (bolded) translated freely in a hurry:


It's great to see the team succeed. They've done a bloody good job. They've built the team through their own picks. That's where the base comes from and then there are some specific players by free agents and trades.

I was there two seasons too early. Or on the other hand I wasn't. If the coach had been of a different kind I believe we'd been a playoff team then, too. After I left the team was on paper basically the same or even worse but they went to the playoffs.

The problem with the previous coach Claude Noel was that half of the team didn't respect him.

Everything changed when Maurice came. During the rest of the season we had a heck of a stretch and we got pretty close to a playoff spot.

Under him they have excellent practises where they don't "take it the easy way" at all. They do everything seriously.

Maurice said that the best and the most eye opening thing for him was to go to Magnitogorsk (KHL) for a year. That's when he understood how difficult it is e.g. for an European to come to the NHL: a strange country and strange culture, where they speak a different language.

Paul communicates with players. He's actually interested about how the wife is doing in Winnipeg and how the children are doing at school. The players get a feeling that the coach cares. The players can see through if the coach is just talking some blank talk and if he asks that kind of things because someone told him to. Maurice does those things naturally.

That's important and that's what the current players are used to. In the old times the coach may have said hello a few times in the aisles of the arena. If the coach then came and started to ask how you're feeling one started to wonder what's going on now. That did I do something stupid? It's a bit of the opposite nowadays.

However, Jokinen reminds that even today there are coaches who don't communicate much with the players.

Olli Jokinen lataa syyn, jonka takia Winnipeg Jets ei menestynyt hänen aikanaan – ”Puolet joukkueesta ei kunnioittanut häntä”

 

[GameChanger]

Found this post while scrolling through the Oilers board, hope @GameChanger doesn't mind me posting it here but it's fantastic and very topical!

I should've realized to post it here, too, so thanks for sharing it!

 

[DuckyChuck]

More evidence of PoMo just being an all around good dude.

 

[Halberdier]

gonna give an update (this comment was about 5v5 only):
when I made the post --- 0 goals from 30 shots (0%)
since I made the post --- 8 goals from 19 shots (42%)
whole season --- 8 goals from 49 shots (16.3%)
2016-18 --- 43 goals from 282 shots (15.3%)

5v5 numbers looking more normal now.



an update on those numbers:
Little 1.04 -> 2.61
Laine 0.33 -> 2.17
Connor 0.88 -> 2.16
Scheifele 1.35 -> 1.75
Tanev 1.52 -> 1.66
Roslovic 1.42 -> 1.61
Wheeler 0.87 -> 1.50
Perreault 1.38 -> 1.42
Ehlers 1.29 -> 1.38
Lemieux 0.00 -> 1.02
Lowry 1.09 -> 0.91
Petan 0.00 -> 0.87
Copp 0.81 -> 0.80

it's all been shooting percentage. Not necessarily related to coaching, though the CLL line looks good.
Some of our players still have a ridiculously low oish% of less than 6.5% and should certainly produce more in the future. Those are Petan, Perreault, Lowry, Roslovic, and Ehlers.

Thanks for those numbers!

About shooting percentage, that's a different matter. For sure Laine had a ridiculously low shooting percentage and some of those should have gone in, no doubt and therefore partially caused by "luck" and/or confidence issues. Shooting percentage is however an end result, not a cause. As said, Laine had plenty of shots 5-on-5 also prior CLL, but wast majority of those were from situations where everybody was expecting him to shoot as there were really limited puck movement in ELL. It was almost always 1 pass in o-zone and then shoot. Or some shooting change Laine generated himself, so zero passes before shot. Even for Laine it's not easy to score from those kind of grade B chances. For example those scoring chances for 1st and 3rd Laine goal (heck, all of them to some degree) last night were total antithesis for those chances he got prior CLL this season.

Hockey is a team game. Hard to have success without lines that click.

 

[Halberdier]

Of course they are in the NHL. Maurice has the exact same complaints from posters as just about every fan base on HF has for their coach. The one common thing linking every fan base is no one likes their coach past the opening honey moon period.

Nah, I was merely joking, as @Duke749 figuratively passed from tape to tap for an empty netter, so I just had to bury it.

If talking seriously, I don't think 90% of NHL coaches are as bad as Maurice, but I could certainly think some 50% or more are as bad or worse than Maurice. To me Maurice is not a bad NHL coach overall, just mediocre with some rather annoying, glaring weaknesses. Some other coaches will have other glaring weaknesses, and there is no-one that's perfect. Maurice is definitely not looking as a Stanley Cup capable coach, but he is also not bad enough to totally destroy it if he gets unbelievably talented roster, like something Jets had in last playoffs.

 

[Psych0dad]

Nah, I was merely joking, as @Duke749 figuratively passed from tape to tap for an empty netter, so I just had to bury it.

If talking seriously, I don't think 90% of NHL coaches are as bad as Maurice, but I could certainly think some 50% or more are as bad or worse than Maurice. To me Maurice is not a bad NHL coach overall, just mediocre with some rather annoying, glaring weaknesses. Some other coaches will have other glaring weaknesses, and there is no-one that's perfect. Maurice is definitely not looking as a Stanley Cup capable coach, but he is also not bad enough to totally destroy it if he gets unbelievably talented roster, like something Jets had in last playoffs.

I agree with this. I know better coaches, I know worse ones. He has some strengths but also some big weaknesses. The talent level of the roster overcomes most of his shortcomings, but winning the cup requires more.

 

[Ducky10]

Nah, I was merely joking, as @Duke749 figuratively passed from tape to tap for an empty netter, so I just had to bury it.

If talking seriously, I don't think 90% of NHL coaches are as bad as Maurice, but I could certainly think some 50% or more are as bad or worse than Maurice. To me Maurice is not a bad NHL coach overall, just mediocre with some rather annoying, glaring weaknesses. Some other coaches will have other glaring weaknesses, and there is no-one that's perfect. Maurice is definitely not looking as a Stanley Cup capable coach, but he is also not bad enough to totally destroy it if he gets unbelievably talented roster, like something Jets had in last playoffs.

Name the last team to win the Stanley Cup without a very talented team? Great coaches aren't great coaches without great talent.

Defintely not looking as a Stanley Cup winning coach? It's hilarious that just because you keep saying that, you actually think it's true.

I don't think there are many, if any people here, that could tell me much about the majority of coaches in the NHL with any credibility.

 

[Highway1]

I honestly think Paul can win a cup with this group. Hellebuyck needs to get back to last years form for any chance to win it all. A hot goalie makes the entire team play better, take more risks to score etc. We have the horses, just need Hellebuyck to step up.

 

[Ducky10]

The "team is so good, even Maurice can't screw it up" is my favourite of all the anti Maurice memes.

Just because you disagree with some things the coach does, doesn't make him a poor or even average coach.

 

[LowLefty]

The "team is so good, even Maurice can't screw it up" is my favourite of all the anti Maurice memes.

Just because you disagree with some things the coach does, doesn't make him a poor or even average coach.

Well, in the world of hockey fans and their bias (if not expert) opinion, yes it does.

 

[Psych0dad]

The "team is so good, even Maurice can't screw it up" is my favourite of all the anti Maurice memes.

Just because you disagree with some things the coach does, doesn't make him a poor or even average coach.

You are correct. Just because I disagree doesn't make him anything. But the argument isn't that. His weaknesses have been described in detail, if you don't consider them weaknesses that's up to you.

 

[mcpw]

Whenever you're angry about PauMau's combinations and his stubbornness, remember: the 30-odd games Adam Lowry played PP1 as net front.
Remember the 5 power play goals and 9 power play points Lowry scored in 16-17. Yes, this was after Laine joined our team.
Some of the changes are slow, but most changes we've seen are for the better. We're not talking about PP1 Lowry anymore. 13 months ago? Very different story.

 

[Psych0dad]

Whenever you're angry about PauMau's combinations and his stubbornness, remember: the 30-odd games Adam Lowry played PP1 as net front.
Remember the 5 power play goals and 9 power play points Lowry scored in 16-17. Yes, this was after Laine joined our team.
Some of the changes are slow, but most changes we've seen are for the better. We're not talking about PP1 Lowry anymore. 13 months ago? Very different story.

Yeah he isn't completely hopeless but very slow. It's quite amazing how stubborn he is.

 

[Evil Little]

I honestly think Paul can win a cup with this group. Hellebuyck needs to get back to last years form for any chance to win it all. A hot goalie makes the entire team play better, take more risks to score etc. We have the horses, just need Hellebuyck to step up.

Last year was--by far--Holtby's worst as an NHLer.

If he scores 5 goals with his next 5 shots, he'll still be below his career 5v5 sh%.

lol

 

[Atoyot]

The "team is so good, even Maurice can't screw it up" is my favourite of all the anti Maurice memes.

Just because you disagree with some things the coach does, doesn't make him a poor or even average coach.

You're right, him being a poor coach makes him a poor coach.

 

[Imcanadianeh]

Yeah he isn't completely hopeless but very slow. It's quite amazing how stubborn he is.

Let’s be honest here, the stubborn excuse is usually used by people who feel younger players are better than they actually are.

Marlo Dano - “He’s a top 6 player, Maurice is just too stubborn to play him over a vet”. Clearly that isn’t right.

Nic Petan- “he’s an elite talent as long as he isn’t playing with thorburn”. Once again isn’t producing playing with whoever.

Paul Postma- “he’s a top 4 defenseman, google his stats”. He’s played 14 nhl games since leaving the jets and is now in the KHL.

 

[Slimy Sculpin]

What's the measure of a "good" or "great" NHL coach? I really don't know but here's a fact. Of the 20 or so current NHL coaches with 5 years or more at the helm (including a couple who have been fired recently), Paul Maurice is next to last in terms of PTS% (points obtained/maximum points available).

 

[PhilJets]

Im sometimes critical of Paul due to usage.

But i hope he wins a cup here.
Preferably this year right away

 

[LowLefty]

Im sometimes critical of Paul due to usage.

But i hope he wins a cup here.
Preferably this year right away

I find everyone is critical of Paul due to usage - including myself. That's pretty much the point some are trying to make - we'll never all agree on player usage.
So he's a bad coach.
IMO, the top coaches over time are usually measured base on their win/loss record which is usually based heavily on the skill of the teams they coached.

I think the wind will shift here soon - the 2nd line is seeing more ice time and that should keep a bunch of fans happy.
They may never give him credit for much of anything but they may at least cut back on the criticism.

 

[Howard Chuck]

I find everyone is critical of Paul due to usage - including myself. That's pretty much the point some are trying to make - we'll never all agree on player usage.
So he's a bad coach.
IMO, the top coaches over time are usually measured base on their win/loss record which is usually based heavily on the skill of the teams they coached.

I think the wind will shift here soon - the 2nd line is seeing more ice time and that should keep a bunch of fans happy.
They may never give him credit for much of anything but they may at least cut back on the criticism.

The only criticism that I had of Maurice was his TOI distribution and usage (both are related). He did a great job of bringing our high end young players into the NHL while still keeping the team competitive.

IMO, he just needed to shift gears a little, to shake up lines to optimize the talent. I think he has found something that works.

If he could just get PK'ers to replace 55/26 and use his lines according to effectiveness, I would be a happy camper. But we are so close to optimal right now, I can't complain. Watching the Little line get 18/19 minutes last game made me think maybe we have turned a corner.