I'm really not trying to be a **** about this. But if somehow you had the 6 universally agreed upon top 6 defenseman in the league on your roster it wouldn't really matter much?
Wheeler in top 3 RW scoring through 5 years, 4 years, 3 years, 2 years and this year
- Thread starter Wedgeden
- Start date
I'm really not trying to be a **** about this. But if somehow you had the 6 universally agreed upon top 6 defenseman in the league on your roster it wouldn't really matter much?
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
The opportunity cost is relative to other defenders, not other forwards.
So your top defenders are still getting you that value.
Your forwards are relative to other forwards and what value they supply.
Great player, but someone with no shot of making the HOF cannot be considered an elite in my mind. He's a late bloomer who has never cracked the 30 goal mark.
The true elite talents emerge very young, produce at that level for a decade plus.
The true elite talents emerge very young, produce at that level for a decade plus.
Last edited:
I agree that Kopi is better C than Scheifele or Little.
After that, I think you are just plain wrong.
Jets historically matched contenders in the 2015-16 season. Notice how most Jets had their best GAR last season (with the exception of injured Kane who wanted out and Bogosian which includes his games in Buffalo)? That's not coincidental.
A player's GAR is team influenced, which you pointed out yourself when this board was talking about Myers low GAR in Buffalo.
The graph I used the averaged the previous 3 seasons of performance to estimate how the Jets were doing, but that of course diminishes the impact of things like Byfuglien at defense, Maurice over Noel, and the impact of the Jets finally getting real depth from Chevy.
The point of the graph was to show that Jets already had the talent in place, just needed a boost. The non-contending teams after all was averaging play off calibre teams eliminated pre-conference finals. That graph does NOT including any non-play off teams. So, the graph was showing the Jets had the talent to be in the playoffs, and depth could push them to contenders. They had top end talent that put them between the average semi-finals team and playoff team eliminated prior to the semi-finals, despite the anchors.
However, removing the anchors would both push the Jets with making up for "non-elite talent", but also push the Jets good/great talent into elites. Good results begets good results across the whole team.
I want to repeat this (not just for you but everyone) the contender is the average GAR distribution of ALL playoff teams that does not make conference finals.
If you want just the 2015-2016 performances, here are the Jets:
Note: Jets have more than 23 players in this graph, due to me including all trades and call ups, so the distribution isn't quite matched. All the "extras" will exist in the +/-5 distributions with the exception of Harrison, Myers, and Bogosian.
I think the "burn substantial assets to build around that core" is a straw man argument since no one is asking that.
What we are saying is 2015-16 proves that the Jets had a team that could have done well for 5 seasons given better goaltending and depth. This could have been accomplished without burning the future and keeping to the draft and development plan.
I look at the evidence, and I watch a lot of games too. I just think you are wrong.
Now, there is more than one way to skin a cat, and Chevy may still be able to succeed with what he is doing. However, Jets could have won and could have done a lot better than what they did without burning the team's future, and saying otherwise I don't think is founded in very good logic.
I'll give you the goaltending argument, which is dragging the Jets back. It's the Achilles heel of the team, with the only positive being higher draft picks than the team deserved. Which of the high performing 2015-16 Jets are from the new core (Scheifele, Perreault, Trouba). What you seem to be saying is that the Jets are being held back by their 4th liners and bottom pair D. The Jets top 17 in 2015-16 were on par with contenders, but the finished 25th. My guess is that a number of the Jets poorest GAR performers in 2015-16 are young players getting NHL experience, which will probably be helpful in the future.
In any case, considering the "core" from Atlanta, I think they were good players that maybe could have made the playoffs another time or two with better goaltending and a better supporting cast. I don't think that filling the roster with easily acquired vets would have made this team a contender.
By the way, every team is going to have more low GAR performers if you include call ups and young players.
The other opportunity cost of short term fixes to drag the team into the playoffs a few more times is lower draft picks.
I think the long play was the right one.
Last edited:
broinwhyteridge
Registered User
broinwhyteridge
Registered User
CaptainChef
Registered User
I agree that Kopi is better C than Scheifele or Little.
After that, I think you are just plain wrong.
Jets historically matched contenders in the 2015-16 season. Notice how most Jets had their best GAR last season (with the exception of injured Kane who wanted out and Bogosian which includes his games in Buffalo)? That's not coincidental.
A player's GAR is team influenced, which you pointed out yourself when this board was talking about Myers low GAR in Buffalo.
The graph I used the averaged the previous 3 seasons of performance to estimate how the Jets were doing, but that of course diminishes the impact of things like Byfuglien at defense, Maurice over Noel, and the impact of the Jets finally getting real depth from Chevy.
The point of the graph was to show that Jets already had the talent in place, just needed a boost. The non-contending teams after all was averaging play off calibre teams eliminated pre-conference finals. That graph does NOT including any non-play off teams. So, the graph was showing the Jets had the talent to be in the playoffs, and depth could push them to contenders. They had top end talent that put them between the average semi-finals team and playoff team eliminated prior to the semi-finals, despite the anchors.
However, removing the anchors would both push the Jets with making up for "non-elite talent", but also push the Jets good/great talent into elites. Good results begets good results across the whole team.
I want to repeat this (not just for you but everyone) the contender is the average GAR distribution of ALL playoff teams that does not make conference finals.
If you want just the 2015-2016 performances, here are the Jets:
Note: Jets have more than 23 players in this graph, due to me including all trades and call ups, so the distribution isn't quite matched. All the "extras" will exist in the +/-5 distributions with the exception of Harrison, Myers, and Bogosian.
I think the "burn substantial assets to build around that core" is a straw man argument since no one is asking that.
What we are saying is 2015-16 proves that the Jets had a team that could have done well for 5 seasons given better goaltending and depth. This could have been accomplished without burning the future and keeping to the draft and development plan.
I look at the evidence, and I watch a lot of games too. I just think you are wrong.
Now, there is more than one way to skin a cat, and Chevy may still be able to succeed with what he is doing. However, Jets could have won and could have done a lot better than what they did without burning the team's future, and saying otherwise I don't think is founded in very good logic.
Thats my take on it & its always been my take on it. We don't need "elite" players, all we ever needed was an average goal-tender & some additional depth in the bottom ranks of D & F.
Easiest things to fix without spending draft picks & all that stuff -- instead he dithered.
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
No.
Call ups will not be the poor GAR. GAR is aggregate stat, not rate stat.
Call ups do not have the ice time to create large GAR.
As I said, the call ups are all really close to 0.
The Jets "young players" were Lowry and Scheifele, who did not have low GAR either. Both were quite decent actually. Lowry's dropped this year, but a lot of it was from him not getting to spend a tonne of time with wingers like Frolik and Perreault. Depth impacts results.
The ones with large negatives from last year are *mostly* those with split time on the Jets and also terrible teams, like Bogosian, Myers, and Harrison. The GAR includes their time on both teams.
Quality depth, like Frolik, Stempniak, Tlusty, and Perreault caused the Jets to perform like a quality team. Had the Jets had that type of depth over the 5 seasons, there would be far fewer questions on whether or not the Jets have elite players.
You can acquire and keep that kind of depth with wise decision making without breaking the bank or costing the future in draft and developing. Teams do do that.
I'm fine with Chevy wanting to recycle and move on. It's his decision and it might work out. 100% though that it wasn't the only way to make the Jets successful.
There was no *one* (Edited to add what I meant to say) "right" play or path.
Last edited:
Wait, you're saying that Bogo and Myers were part of the player group that dragged the Jets down because of their terrible stats with the Sabres? Some adjustments needed to the analysis, I think.
How does the Jets' chart look if you just compare 2014/15 and 2015/16? Remember, the Jets only got Stemp and Tlusty for the last 5-6 weeks of the season.
The year before the Jets acquired him (2013/14), Lee Stempniak GAR = -7.16. The Jets signed Galiardi instead, who had a GAR of 3.15 the year before (2013/14). That seemed like an okay idea at the time, but it's not always easy to predict which cheap free agent vet is going to have a banner year, and which one is going to be bad. This year Stempniak was good (with 1st line minutes), but Tlusty was a dud.
We all know who the pitiful players on the Jets are / were... Slater, Stuart and Pavs. Thorbs and Peluso, too, but they don't play that much so not as much of a drag on the team.
The Jets could likely have been more efficient in picking up vets to fill the lower part of the roster, but I think they did a decent job with Perreault and Frolik. As I noted above, Stempniak didn't look like much of a bargain before last season. The main issue has always been goaltending. Another playoff year or two might have been fun, but then maybe you don't have Trouba and Ehlers on the roster.
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
Uh where did I say that? (bolded)
I'm sorry, I think you should probably re-read a bit more carefully.
I was pointing out why the Jets 2015-16 in graph that I quickly made for this thread had what it had. The Jets had a higher number of players in all areas which I was explaining why. You then said that the call ups and youth were the big negative GAR players, and I was pointing out that this was false and the lower GAR players in that graph were different.
You are also making some fundamental errors of with using GAR in your example with Stempniak and Galiardi. GAR is being used to be descriptive of what occurred, not a predictive measure of future performance. I'm pretty sure I made clear the distinctions earlier in this thread.
You are starting to really conflate the different conversations that are going on here.
In the end, I think you are very much wrong and that the evidence points this out. I don't think there is any way one will convince the other of their position.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
This concludes Garret's venture into this thread.
Cheers.
Well, let's just agree on what we are disagreeing about.
We disagree as to whether the Jets have had a sufficient "core" of players to be a regular contender. I don't think they have been, and I'm not persuaded that the GAR refutes that (particularly if you go back to the 2011/12 to 2013/14 seasons). Regardless, I'd need to see a more persuasive counterfactual to sway me.
We seem to agree that the Jets lower end of the line-up has been deficient, and that they couldn't have competed with a poor bottom half of the line-up. You appear to support the view that the Jets could have and should have made more effort to improve the bottom part of the line-up with shrewd free agent signings and perhaps cheap acquisition of vets. I don't disagree that they could have done better, but I don't mind much that they didn't, and support the approach of building that part of the line-up through youth (while getting a few decently high draft picks along the way).
Ciao.
(By the way, here is what I was referencing vis-Ã -vis Bogo and Myers)...
pucka lucka
Registered User
It's too bad. I doubt the conflation and obfuscation that's occurring is intentional. I think most of us would like for you to stick it out and keep explaining these things.
Should I have included Joe Pavelski in this? nhl.com has him as a centre and I'm not sure how many points he's scored as a winger and how many he's scored as a centre.
With Pavelski in the mix that would drop Wheeler to top 4.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Game 3 Dallas Stars @ Colorado Avalanche - Series tied 1-1Wagers: 14Staked: $19,882.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-
