Training Camp 2017 Part II

[MardyBum]

He didn't use them they way you wanted him to. Is that you mean?

How do you get to be the one to decide whether it was right or not?

The way I wanted him to, or the way that led to us being out-shot and out-chanced and only being in the top 10 of the league in goals due to ridiculous oish%'s and sh%'s of our top 6? Numbers that aren't likely to be repeatable without an improvement in shot totals and a big jump from the young guys in performance?

The one that had our third line scoring like a fourth line, or our fourth line scoring like. . . . nothing?

I'm not the one deciding whether it was right or not.

 

[surixon]

The way I wanted him to, or the way that led to us being out-shot and out-chanced and only being int the top 10 of the league in goals due to ridiculous oish%'s and sh%'s of our top 6? Numbers that aren't likely to be repeatable without an improvement in shot totals and a big jump from the young guys in performance?

The one that had our third line scoring like a fourth line, or our fourth line scoring like. . . . nothing?

I'm not the one deciding whether it was right or not.

Yup imo Moe botched it on a number of levels last year. Injuries or not we have significantly more talent then to finish bottom 10 in shot metrics.

 

[Whileee]

I actually like the idea of keeping the PK for the bottom-6, and the even-strength and PP for the top-6. Last season, Little and Wheeler played too much on the PK. Even Scheifele played more than I would have liked to see.

This season I think they can cut down the total amount of time Scheifele and Wheeler play, by just cutting out the PK time.

Here's how I would like to see the time distribution...

50 minutes even strength

Top-6: 30 minutes
Bottom-6: 20 minutes

5 minutes PP

Top-6: 5 minutes

5 minutes PK

Bottom-6: 5 minutes

Top-6 end up with an average of 17.5 minutes each (plus or minus, with Wheeler and Scheif getting more, Little and Perreault getting a bit less).

Bottom-6 end up with about 12.5 minutes each (Lowry and Copp might get more with extra PK duty; Petan and Dano maybe some PP).

 

[MardyBum]

I actually like the idea of keeping the PK for the bottom-6, and the even-strength and PP for the top-6. Last season, Little and Wheeler played too much on the PK. Even Scheifele played more than I would have liked to see.

This season I think they can cut down the total amount of time Scheifele and Wheeler play, by just cutting out the PK time.

Here's how I would like to see the time distribution...

50 minutes even strength

Top-6: 30 minutes
Bottom-6: 20 minutes

5 minutes PP

Top-6: 5 minutes

5 minutes PK

Bottom-6: 5 minutes

Top-6 end up with an average of 17.5 minutes each (plus or minus, with Wheeler and Scheif getting more, Little and Perreault getting a bit less).

Bottom-6 end up with about 12.5 minutes each (Lowry and Copp might get more with extra PK duty; Petan and Dano maybe some PP).

As long as Hendricks/Tanev don't touch the ice with any regularity I can deal with Maurice's lineups. At least the guys he will choose to play disregarding those two have talent and can be useful 5v5 and on the pk. I'd love for a bit more spreading with Perreault carrying a line and someone sheltered up in the top 6, but if it keeps Tanev/Hendricks out i'll take whatever I can get.

Edit : And the ability to properly distribute ice time and not be afraid of playing a line would be huge for stamina and health this year.

 

[KingBogo]

Your problem was using raw stats though.

How so? Run the numbers you want and make your own conclusions. Hockey analytics aren't all that complex, and they have pretty big gaps in their explanatory power. For Petan he had middle of the road possession numbers, was pushed into the offensive zone and had better quality team mates than Lowry for example. Who got s*** on in terms of the quality of team mates and pushed into the defensive zone relentlessly and still had approx same possession numbers.

 

[Aavco Cup]

The way I wanted him to, or the way that led to us being out-shot and out-chanced and only being in the top 10 of the league in goals due to ridiculous oish%'s and sh%'s of our top 6? Numbers that aren't likely to be repeatable without an improvement in shot totals and a big jump from the young guys in performance?

The one that had our third line scoring like a fourth line, or our fourth line scoring like. . . . nothing?

I'm not the one deciding whether it was right or not.

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here TBH. It just sounds like random ranting.

My point was that you have an opinion. But that opinion is yours and it is not universal.

 

[MardyBum]

How so? Run the numbers you want and make your own conclusions. Hockey analytics aren't all that complex, and they have pretty big gaps in their explanatory power. For Petan he had middle of the road possession numbers, was pushed into the offensive zone and had better quality team mates than Lowry for example. Who got s*** on in terms of the quality of team mates and pushed into the defensive zone relentlessly and still had approx same possession numbers.

Because raw stats don't really tell anything.

Player A had 70 points

Player B had 50 points

Player A had 70 points in 70 games

Player B had 50 points in 45 games

Player A had 70 points in 70 games averaging 15 min a game

Player B had 50 points in 45 games averaging 17 min a game

Player A had 70 points in 70 games averaging 15 min a game with 4 of those min being PP time

Player B had 50 points in 45 games averaging 17 min a game with zero PP time but 3 min PK time

Context matters. Not sure what raw stats you meant by your previous post, but Garret pretty succinctly broke down Petan with Tanev/Thorburn and away from Tanev/Thorburn and the differences are so drastic I don't see how you can ignore them.

Also, Petan did not have better quality teammates than Lowry game in and game out. He did for a short time, but his ice time with them playing on a competent line were so different than his ice time of 6-8 min with Thorburn that Wheeler is his second highest 5v5 linemate despite playing maybe 7-8 games with him out of his entire season.

 

[Whileee]

The way I wanted him to, or the way that led to us being out-shot and out-chanced and only being in the top 10 of the league in goals due to ridiculous oish%'s and sh%'s of our top 6? Numbers that aren't likely to be repeatable without an improvement in shot totals and a big jump from the young guys in performance?

The one that had our third line scoring like a fourth line, or our fourth line scoring like. . . . nothing?

I'm not the one deciding whether it was right or not.

Laine and Armia were bigger contributors to the Jets being out-shot last season than Thorbs. Laine was also a big reason for such a high oiSH%.

 

[Aavco Cup]

If some of those stats sites that broke down ice allocation still existed I'd be able to show you that his preferred method is thebkoaded top 6, checking line and missmashed 4th.

My "assumption" or educated guess as i prefer is based on a past pattern ohlf behavior with him. Sure he'll change players around some but it will predominantly be him rotating the top 6 forwards amongst themselves and the bottom 6 forwards amo far themselves thus really not changing anything.

Well I'm not as convinced as you are. In many ways last seasons "evidence" was tainted by injuries. It's entirely possible you are right but you still seem to have a lot of confirmation bias involved in your prediction. Also I'm not convinced any other coach would do things differently with this lineup. I see a lot of similar things done around the NHL by other coaches whether they have 20 years experience or brand new yo the job.

I wonder how many here criticizing Maurice have ever coached high end hockey.

I've heard lots of things about Maurice that have been proven wrong. After all he never plays young players right?

 

[MardyBum]

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here TBH. It just sounds like random ranting.

My point was that you have an opinion. But that opinion is yours and it is not universal.

I'm saying I don't have an opinion. I have the entirety of analytics telling me something. Our third line scored like a fourth line, that's not an opinion, it's a fact. Our fourth line scored like it barely existed, another fact. Our top 6 did have a really high oish% and sh%, again a fact. I'm not basing my opinion on how I want Maurice to make our lines, I'm basing them on how they performed and how people who we should be listening to with regards to analytics think they should be based.


I'm just reading all of this and agreeing with them. That's all.

If you disagree with analytics, great, good for you. Not much more to discuss.

 

[KingBogo]

Because raw stats don't really tell anything.

Player A had 70 points

Player B had 50 points

Player A had 70 points in 70 games

Player B had 50 points in 45 games

Player A had 70 points in 70 games averaging 15 min a game

Player B had 50 points in 45 games averaging 17 min a game

Player A had 70 points in 70 games averaging 15 min a game with 4 of those min being PP time

Player B had 50 points in 45 games averaging 17 min a game with zero PP time but 3 min PK time

Context matters. Not sure what raw stats you meant by your previous post, but Garret pretty succinctly broke down Petan with Tanev/Thorburn and away from Tanev/Thorburn and the differences are so drastic I don't see how you can ignore them.

Also, Petan did not have better quality teammates than Lowry game in and game out. He did for a short time, but his ice time with them playing on a competent line were so different than his ice time of 6-8 min with Thorburn that Wheeler is his second highest 5v5 linemate despite playing maybe 7-8 games with him out of his entire season.

If you just want to be fed other people's arguments I'm good with that. I prefer playing around with the numbers and coming to my own conclusions. Hockey analytics are pretty imprecise still. At least what the public gets to see, so that I wouldn't hang my hat on too much.

 

[Aavco Cup]

I'm saying I don't have an opinion. I have the entirety of analytics telling me something. Our third line scored like a fourth line, that's not an opinion, it's a fact. Our fourth line scored like it barely existed, another fact. Our top 6 did have a really high oish% and sh%, again a fact. I'm not basing my opinion on how I want Maurice to make our lines, I'm basing them on how they performed and how people who we should be listening to with regards to analytics think they should be based.


I'm just reading all of this and agreeing with them. That's all.

If you disagree with analytics, great, good for you. Not much more to discuss.

I see no analytics in your posts. Do you work in analytics? I'm still not sure what you are even saying.

 

[surixon]

Well I'm not as convinced as you are. In many ways last seasons "evidence" was tainted by injuries. It's entirely possible you are right but you still seem to have a lot of confirmation bias involved in your prediction. Also I'm not convinced any other coach would do things differently with this lineup. I see a lot of similar things done around the NHL by other coaches whether they have 20 years experience or brand new yo the job.

I wonder how many here criticizing Maurice have ever coached high end hockey.

I've heard lots of things about Maurice that have been proven wrong. After all he never plays young players right?

He wouldn't have a job here if he didn't coach play young players I'm sure he was smart enough to realise that. I've given him credit for the individual development of many of the players anyhow so not sure why you brought that up. My issues are with systems and roster composition and usage. In essence his ability to mold all the talent into a cohesive effective team. I felt that he was terrible in that regard last year and I'm not giving him an out due to injuries as we likely would have fared far worse in the standings without great deal of puck luck.

See Sullivan and Babcock for two examples of coaches who run things differently. Quinville in Chicago's hay day ran a balanced top 9 with a 4th line checking unit that got high defensive zone starts. LA also ran a strong top 9 for their cup wins. I don't r ember the last team to win with the top 6 bottom 6 configuration. All the successful teams recently have gone with the balanced approach as its harder to shut every line down. It frustrates me that we have the talent to do that and chose not too.

 

[MardyBum]

I see no analytics in your posts. Do you work in analytics? I'm still not sure what you are even saying.

The entirety of this season and offseason has had Garret and others posting about the Jets lineups, quite frequently with analytics, and if you've chosen to ignore it, so be it. I'm not proclaiming to work in analytics, as I literally just stated in my last post I've just been reading everything they have posted.

If you want me to show you analytics go fix the search function.

I'm saying Garret and others have shown time and time again the way Maurice deploys his lines can be considered outdated, his "bottom 6" scores below the ice time they receive. If you wan't me to post stats for you you'll have to wait, as I mainly used http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/thankyou.html[]url] and haven't dived deep into Corsica. But it's not like i'm the one making these arguments, again i'm just repeating what I've read from guys I consider more informed than you or I. If you don't believe me then just don't respond.

 

[Dayofthedogs]

Didn't Moe have us running at some fairly impressive 5vs5 levels in the pre season with whatever line up we were icing?

Frankly I could hardly care what line up we were icing in practice 2 days before the regular season starts. I am able to even care less knowing the line up he had 2 days before the season starts had the best fourth line we have iced in some time. A 4th line you can just call the 3rd line for all intents and purposes and save any heartache that those peticular line rushes give.

If I'm certain of anything if the line up or individual lines PoMo trots out Wednesday aren't getting it done you'll see something else very shortly. If PoMo continues to not get it done he will be looking for work by Xmas.

 

[Mathmew Purrrr Oh]

Because raw stats don't really tell anything.

Player A had 70 points

Player B had 50 points

Player A had 70 points in 70 games

Player B had 50 points in 45 games

Player A had 70 points in 70 games averaging 15 min a game

Player B had 50 points in 45 games averaging 17 min a game

Player A had 70 points in 70 games averaging 15 min a game with 4 of those min being PP time

Player B had 50 points in 45 games averaging 17 min a game with zero PP time but 3 min PK time

Context matters. Not sure what raw stats you meant by your previous post, but Garret pretty succinctly broke down Petan with Tanev/Thorburn and away from Tanev/Thorburn and the differences are so drastic I don't see how you can ignore them.

Also, Petan did not have better quality teammates than Lowry game in and game out. He did for a short time, but his ice time with them playing on a competent line were so different than his ice time of 6-8 min with Thorburn that Wheeler is his second highest 5v5 linemate despite playing maybe 7-8 games with him out of his entire season.

Preach!

 

[Jimby]

The other teams don't have third lines that are that drastically better scoring goals than the Jets. The Penguins had 8 forwards who scored 10 or more goals at even strength last year. The Preds had 6. The Jets had 7.

 

[pucka lucka]

The other teams don't have third lines that are that drastically better scoring goals than the Jets. The Penguins had 8 forwards who scored 10 or more goals at even strength last year. The Preds had 6. The Jets had 7.

The "other teams", and you proceed to name 2. One of those teams has 1.75 generational centers and an elite goalie.

 

[Mathmew Purrrr Oh]

current activity : playing around with the numbers til I get an answer I like

 

[Mathmew Purrrr Oh]

I see no analytics in your posts. Do you work in analytics? I'm still not sure what you are even saying.

this post doesn't seem very positive in nature

in fact it seems rather confrontational

 

[Blue Shakehead]

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here TBH. It just sounds like random ranting.

My point was that you have an opinion. But that opinion is yours and it is not universal.

A poster's comment is just his opinion? What a novel concept! What is your opinion, exactly?

 

[Aavco Cup]

He wouldn't have a job here if he didn't coach play young players I'm sure he was smart enough to realise that. I've given him credit for the individual development of many of the players anyhow so not sure why you brought that up. My issues are with systems and roster composition and usage. In essence his ability to mold all the talent into a cohesive effective team. I felt that he was terrible in that regard last year and I'm not giving him an out due to injuries as we likely would have fared far worse in the standings without great deal of puck luck.

See Sullivan and Babcock for two examples of coaches who run things differently. Quinville in Chicago's hay day ran a balanced top 9 with a 4th line checking unit that got high defensive zone starts. LA also ran a strong top 9 for their cup wins. I don't r ember the last team to win with the top 6 bottom 6 configuration. All the successful teams recently have gone with the balanced approach as its harder to shut every line down. It frustrates me that we have the talent to do that and chose not too.

More confirmation bias.......he only plays the young players because he has to......blah blah blah

I'm going to give up this conversation. I am not a Maurice "fan" I just think a lot of people here are over the top in the criticism and its not really justified. Everyone here is an expert yet nobody has ever worn those shoes. I know it won't go away. I also think he's pretty much not very different from a typical NHL coach. The next guy will not do things that much differently.

I've probably seen Maurice at work more than anyone here. I like his practices. They are so different from what Noel did. I like how things he works on in practice show up in the game. I see the respect he commands players give the man on the ice during those practices.

My real beef is that this should be an optimistic time of year. And yet it seems all preseason all we talk about is fringe players and 4th line and it all just seems so negative

TC is over Cu in the other threads

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I'll agree with this. There seemed to be lots of opportunity and people read way to much into every practice, even drills within practice. Our top 6 have now been cast in stone as no one has been able to push MP out. Lowry was always going to be #3 C. I'm mostly happy that our 4th looks promising. Also I like that Poolman is still up. I will maintain he is an every day NHLer by seasons end.

Agree about Lowry.

I've been predicting about 60 games for Poolman as an injury replacement. By everyday player I assume you mean when healthy. Whose job is he going to take? Are you suggesting a trade?

 

[surixon]

More confirmation bias.......he only plays the young players because he has to......blah blah blah

I'm going to give up this conversation. I am not a Maurice "fan" I just think a lot of people here are over the top in the criticism and its not really justified. Everyone here is an expert yet nobody has ever worn those shoes. I know it won't go away. I also think he's pretty much not very different from a typical NHL coach. The next guy will not do things that much differently.

I've probably seen Maurice at work more than anyone here. I like his practices. They are so different from what Noel did. I like how things he works on in practice show up in the game. I see the respect he commands players give the man on the ice during those practices.

My real beef is that this should be an optimistic time of year. And yet it seems all preseason all we talk about is fringe players and 4th line and it all just seems so negative

TC is over Cu in the other threads

Why are you being so confrontational with me Aavco? I don't really appreciate you accusing me of this or that. Everyone has biases you included. I've tried being fair to Maurice over the years, I've given him plenty of credit when I feel he's earned it. I don't blindly hate the guy but last year did a number on me as a fan and I'm not going to apologize for having a show me attitude with him. I'm also not going to bite my tongue and stay quiet for when numerous numbers and yes my belief indicates he's using his roster ineffectively.

You are free to like him, his practices etc., I'm not going to tell you not to. I respect your opinion on things you have seen going to the rink but these things haven't translated in wins yet. If they play like I believe they can this year I'll be the first to give him a thumbs up and admit i was wrong, in fact I don't want to be right about him.

In the end I want to see this team make hay and I'll cheer for everyone, yes even the coach. This is my last thread on this at least until after the results of Wednesday :p

Finally I am really optimistic about this year! Optimal ine composition or not ;p

 

[JetsFan815]

I actually like the idea of keeping the PK for the bottom-6, and the even-strength and PP for the top-6. Last season, Little and Wheeler played too much on the PK. Even Scheifele played more than I would have liked to see.

No one disagrees with that in principal. The issue here is that some of the guys the Jets are trying to sell as "PK Specialists" are not good 5-on-5 and not really that good at the PK to make up for their 5v5 issues, moreover it results in the entire lineup being out of balance. Tanev was at the bottom of Jets forwards with > 50 mins played on the PK in terms for both shot impact and xG impact. Hendricks is around a middle of the road PK'r if you compare his last 5 years with what the Jets did last season, he comes out ahead of Tanev around the same ballpark as Matthias but behind guys like Lowry, Armia, Copp. We can most likely get a similar impact PK'r in-house that is much better 5 on 5 and can be a more versatile player for us