Wheeler in top 3 RW scoring through 5 years, 4 years, 3 years, 2 years and this year

[Whileee]

Anyone who says the Jets don't have any "star" players is forgetting about Mark Wheeler.

A "star" RW and RD doesn't make an elite core. That's always been the point of discussion.

In my view, we'll soon see that Scheifele > Little and Ehlers > Ladd. Improving the talent at the top end of the roster pushes high quality players down a level in the line-up, which is necessary to make the transition to a real contender.

 

[JetsFan815]

A "star" RW and RD doesn't make an elite core. That's always been the point of discussion.

In my view, we'll soon see that Scheifele > Little and Ehlers > Ladd. Improving the talent at the top end of the roster pushes high quality players down a level in the line-up, which is necessary to make the transition to a real contender.

I am pretty sure that exactly was the discussion this season, "Jets don't have enough elite players, every good playoff team has atleast 1 or 2 elite players" was the argument as I recall with "Kopitar and Doughty" being used as examples. [mod]

 

[Whileee]

I am pretty sure that exactly was the discussion this season, "Jets don't have enough elite players, every good playoff team has atleast 1 or 2 elite players" was the argument as I recall with "Kopitar and Doughty" being used as examples. [mod]

There have been many angles and debates. I've maintained that the Jets core wasn't up to the same standard as top teams. I still believe that, despite Wheeler's great season. Scheifele brings them closer, and Ehlers might, too.

I don't think the Jets have a duo that matches Doughty and Kopitar.

 

[KurtG8]

I dont see how Wheeler and Buff dont match Doughty and Kopitar, other than the fact that they play in Winnipeg vs LA.

The Stats, Wheeler has Kopitar by 4 points, and Buff has Drew by 2, and yes i know that LA's duo has a much better +/- but ill argue they are on a much better team. Buff has more PP and GWG's than Drew.

Whether u like one Duo over the other is a matter of preference imo. But its comparing Apples to Apples.

 

[Whileee]

I dont see how Wheeler and Buff dont match Doughty and Kopitar, other than the fact that they play in Winnipeg vs LA.

The Stats, Wheeler has Kopitar by 4 points, and Buff has Drew by 2, and yes i know that LA's duo has a much better +/- but ill argue they are on a much better team. Buff has more PP and GWG's than Drew.

Whether u like one Duo over the other is a matter of preference imo. But its comparing Apples to Apples.

I love Buff and Wheeler, but Kopitar and Doughty are a tier above. Points don't tell the whole story. Kopitar's role as a #1 C is an important consideration.

 

[garret9]

I put Doughty and Buff in the same tier. Doughty might be higher in the tier, might, but they are both there.

I also put Wheeler above anyone of their wingers, and while centres are valued more, it's still a team that makes it as the sum of their parts.


I 100% agree that Jets best players are undervalued due to team success outside of their own merits.

 

[Hobby Bull]

And Jagr! I keep forgetting about old man Jagr, he easily fits the generational label.

I have a different idea of "generational".

I think of it as once every 20 years. (and I know these guys don't even fit the 20 year rule)

Orr, Gretzky... Mario Lemieux... then it gets more difficult for me...

If you have three guys, or so, that are being labelled as generational who are pretty much in the same generation, then the term loses it's meaning altogether, and you have the current idea, certainly within the HF main boards, where your guy, if he's any good at all, becomes "generational".

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

There have been many angles and debates. I've maintained that the Jets core wasn't up to the same standard as top teams. I still believe that, despite Wheeler's great season. Scheifele brings them closer, and Ehlers might, too.

I don't think the Jets have a duo that matches Doughty and Kopitar.

I don't think it is necessary to match that pair. Or any other specific pair.

There are several different angles to the discussion/debate about elite players, elite cores etc.

Statements have been made many times that certain numbers and configurations of 'elite' players are needed to win the cup. I don't think there is any hard and fast specific requirement. You need to have the horses to outscore your opposition. That can be made up many different ways.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I love Buff and Wheeler, but Kopitar and Doughty are a tier above. Points don't tell the whole story. Kopitar's role as a #1 C is an important consideration.

Alright, throw Scheifele into the conversation. His scoring finished at a pace just 4 short of Kopitar's for the year. As it looks right now LAK do not have an elite line to match Schweehlers.

Which would be more important/valuable, an elite 1C or an elite 1st line where no one player quite meets the definition of elite?

Doughty-Muzzin outscore Buff-Trouba but wait until Trouba has his breakout season, likely the first season he is not anchored to Stu.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I have a different idea of "generational".

I think of it as once every 20 years. (and I know these guys don't even fit the 20 year rule)

Orr, Gretzky... Mario Lemieux... then it gets more difficult for me...

If you have three guys, or so, that are being labelled as generational who are pretty much in the same generation, then the term loses it's meaning altogether, and you have the current idea, certainly within the HF main boards, where your guy, if he's any good at all, becomes "generational".

Agree with the bold but you have to include Howe in your list at the back end and Jagr at the front. Crosby has not quite earned the generational label. Close but not quite. He's not done yet though. McD is off to a good start, apart from the injury. Check back in 8-10 years.

 

[Whileee]

I'm sure many of you recall this analysis from Garret (http://nhlnumbers.com/2015/12/17/helping-chevy-make-decisions-part-1-how-do-the-jets-compare-to-contenders/score).

If you look at the three clusters of bars on the left side of the graph you see a difference in distribution between the Jets, Contenders and Non-Contenders.

The Jets didn't have a single player with GAR above 20 (contenders average more than 1).

Note, however, that these charts were generated for two of the Jets seasons, including one in which several of their players had excellent seasons (notably Little and Wheeler). But, what if we look back to the Jets' "core" since 2011. How would they stack up to the standard of a "contender"?

GAR by season (2011/12 through 2014/15)

Little: 9.03, -0.57, 11.28, 23.00
Ladd: 11.50, 9.68, 12.27, 12.51
Wheeler: 12.10, 8.98, 14.18, 16.23
Kane: 12.84, 2.06, -3.82, -0.11
Enstrom: 9.00, 0.81, 1.85, 4.92
Buff: 1.99, 3.87, 0.33, 9.60
Bogo: -4.94, 2.24, -8.16, -9.68

That is the Jets' "core" through their prime years.

Based on Garret's analysis, a "contender" typically has 1-2 players with a GAR over 20. In 4 years, the Jets only had one player who reached that level in a season (i.e. 0.25 per year).

A contender would normally have around 5 players with a GAR of 10+. Between 2011/12 and 2014/15 the Jets had a total of 9 player performances that reached that plateau over a season, which averages to just over 2 players per year. The Jets never had more than 3 players from the original "core" with a GAR above 10 since 2011/12.

A lot of Jets had a "career season" in Maurice's full season, and I think that peak happened to come at a stage when many of the core were approaching the late 20's or 30 years old. Expecting that core to continue at that level of success at that age wasn't very realistic. Perhaps the Jets could have squeezed another year or two out of that vet core by building a stronger supporting cast, but that's hard to do consistently through free agency and unwise to do by trading young / future assets.

 

[garret9]

Average, not typical. Many teams had 0 and many had 2, which caused the mean to be just over 1. Common Whileee, you should know that mean is only the mean.

One thing to note is that GAR is heavily influenced by team strength.
This is why the Jets were contender level by GAR last season. They had many players in top 30 for their position and also had one above 20 (Little).

 

[Gm0ney]

Average, not typical. Many teams had 0 and many had 2, which caused the mean to be just over 1. Common Whileee, you should know that mean is only the mean.

One thing to note is that GAR is heavily influenced by team strength.
This is why the Jets were contender level by GAR last season. They had many players in top 30 for their position and also had one above 20 (Little).

It seems to me from looking at this chart that the Jets make up for the lack of +20 GAR players by having more 15-20 and 10-15 GAR players than contenders do on average. To interpret this as proof that the Jets core is/was not good enough seems specious...

 

[JetsFan815]

I'm sure many of you recall this analysis from Garret (http://nhlnumbers.com/2015/12/17/helping-chevy-make-decisions-part-1-how-do-the-jets-compare-to-contenders/score).

If you look at the three clusters of bars on the left side of the graph you see a difference in distribution between the Jets, Contenders and Non-Contenders.

The Jets didn't have a single player with GAR above 20 (contenders average more than 1).

Note, however, that these charts were generated for two of the Jets seasons, including one in which several of their players had excellent seasons (notably Little and Wheeler). But, what if we look back to the Jets' "core" since 2011. How would they stack up to the standard of a "contender"?

GAR by season (2011/12 through 2014/15)

Little: 9.03, -0.57, 11.28, 23.00
Ladd: 11.50, 9.68, 12.27, 12.51
Wheeler: 12.10, 8.98, 14.18, 16.23
Kane: 12.84, 2.06, -3.82, -0.11
Enstrom: 9.00, 0.81, 1.85, 4.92
Buff: 1.99, 3.87, 0.33, 9.60
Bogo: -4.94, 2.24, -8.16, -9.68

That is the Jets' "core" through their prime years.

Based on Garret's analysis, a "contender" typically has 1-2 players with a GAR over 20. In 4 years, the Jets only had one player who reached that level in a season (i.e. 0.25 per year).

A contender would normally have around 5 players with a GAR of 10+. Between 2011/12 and 2014/15 the Jets had a total of 9 player performances that reached that plateau over a season, which averages to just over 2 players per year. The Jets never had more than 3 players from the original "core" with a GAR above 10 since 2011/12.

A lot of Jets had a "career season" in Maurice's full season, and I think that peak happened to come at a stage when many of the core were approaching the late 20's or 30 years old. Expecting that core to continue at that level of success at that age wasn't very realistic. Perhaps the Jets could have squeezed another year or two out of that vet core by building a stronger supporting cast, but that's hard to do consistently through free agency and unwise to do by trading young / future assets.

This actually shows me that the core was great but the Jets were let down by poor depth. The bigger concern on that chart is how many negative GAR players there are on the Jets relative to a contender. Move those (0- -5) and <-5 players into the (0-5) and (5-10) range it wipes out the one less >20 GAR and then some. The negative GAR players should be easiest to fix, they are cheap, lots of good cheap replacements available in free agency. There really is no reason for a so called "budget" team like the Jets to be that much worse than a contender when it comes to their lowest rated players. You can't control whether you have Tarasenko on your team, that requires luck, you can totally control the quality of your depth players though. A budget team like the Jets should be feasting on other teams when it comes to good depth players as they are so easy to find. This graph shows me that the Jets have not done a great job fixing things that are completely in their control

 

[Whileee]

Average, not typical. Many teams had 0 and many had 2, which caused the mean to be just over 1. Common Whileee, you should know that mean is only the mean.

One thing to note is that GAR is heavily influenced by team strength.
This is why the Jets were contender level by GAR last season. They had many players in top 30 for their position and also had one above 20 (Little).

I looked around at a few other teams but didn't post. Suffice to say Kopitar towers above anyone the Jets have had.

Point is that the Jets' core hasn't historically matched contenders, and hardly match non contenders prior to 2014/15.

I've looked at the evidence and watched a lot of games. I'm still not persuaded that the Jets core has been good enough to be a consistent contender. I think it would have been a mistake to burn substantial assets to build around that core. I think we'll see a better core and supporting cast soon.

 

[Whileee]

It seems to me from looking at this chart that the Jets make up for the lack of +20 GAR players by having more 15-20 and 10-15 GAR players than contenders do on average. To interpret this as proof that the Jets core is/was not good enough seems specious...

Did you read my whole post? Other than 2014-15 the Jets core hardly ever had more than 2-3 players above 10. Nothing specious about looking at a bigger sample size, is there?

 

[garret9]

I looked around at a few other teams but didn't post. Suffice to say Kopitar towers above anyone the Jets have had.

Point is that the Jets' core hasn't historically matched contenders, and hardly match non contenders prior to 2014/15.

I've looked at the evidence and watched a lot of games. I'm still not persuaded that the Jets core has been good enough to be a consistent contender. I think it would have been a mistake to burn substantial assets to build around that core. I think we'll see a better core and supporting cast soon.

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.

 

[KingBogo]

Did you read my whole post? Other than 2014-15 the Jets core hardly ever had more than 2-3 players above 10. Nothing specious about looking at a bigger sample size, is there?

So Whileee how valid is a GAR measurement. Every time I look at the source information it seems to me that top defenseman get grossly under valued with this measurement. You have hall of famers with multiple cups measured behind middle of the road forwards with little personal or team success. I'm not sure I buy it as a particularly informative measure.

 

[garret9]

So Whileee how valid is a GAR measurement. Every time I look at the source information it seems to me that top defenseman get grossly under valued with this measurement. You have hall of famers with multiple cups measured behind middle of the road forwards with little personal or team success. I'm not sure I buy it as a particularly informative measure.

Not sure if you should ask Whileee about it.......

As to why:
The gap in talent between elite forwards vs replacement forwards is larger than the gap in elite defenders vs replacement defenders. So, the forwards have an overall larger impact in goal differential than defenders do, both in a positive and negative sense.

The opportunity cost of a hall of fame defender appears lower because ****** d-men are not as relatively bad as a ****** forward. Another factor can be also that the NHL is still pretty inefficient market in evaluating defenders.

Also, beware that the data pre-2007-2008 seasons are not as good, since things like shot attempts were not tracked then, and so WOI is only estimating some things.

Also, also, keep in mind a good player on a good team will do better than a equally good player on a bad team, in GAR.

In terms of descriptive statistics, it's very highly informative. It's not as predictive though. It's constructed so the weightings are based off of in sample testing, as opposed to out of sample testing you would do with testing the validity of Corsi vs Fenwick vs Goals as a goal predictor.

My graph, which shows a clear difference between average contender (semi-finals team) and non-contender (POs but no semi-finals) is a far better assessment on validity of how informative the measure is than it tracking to your own viewing of talent.

 

[KingBogo]

Not sure if you should ask Whileee about it.......

As to why:
The gap in talent between elite forwards vs replacement forwards is larger than the gap in elite defenders vs replacement defenders. So, the forwards have an overall larger impact in goal differential than defenders do, both in a positive and negative sense.

The opportunity cost of a hall of fame defender appears lower because ****** d-men are not as relatively bad as a ****** forward. Another factor can be also that the NHL is still pretty inefficient market in evaluating defenders.

Also, beware that the data pre-2007-2008 seasons are not as good, since things like shot attempts were not tracked then, and so WOI is only estimating some things.

Also, also, keep in mind a good player on a good team will do better than a equally good player on a bad team, in GAR.

In terms of descriptive statistics, it's very highly informative. It's not as predictive though. It's constructed so the weightings are based off of in sample testing, as opposed to out of sample testing you would do with testing the validity of Corsi vs Fenwick vs Goals as a goal predictor.

My graph, which shows a clear difference between average contender (semi-finals team) and non-contender (POs but no semi-finals) is a far better assessment on validity of how informative the measure is than it tracking to your own viewing of talent.

So I'm trying to wrap my head around this stat. Both Doughty and Keith have career numbers below 10.00 even though they have been key 25-30 min night key cogs on multiple cup winners, but they are far below (and just to name a few former Jets) Wellwood, Poni and Olli.

 

[garret9]

So I'm trying to wrap my head around this stat. Both Doughty and Keith have career numbers below 10.00 even though they have been key 25-30 min night key cogs on multiple cup winners, but they are far below (and just to name a few former Jets) Wellwood, Poni and Olli.

This is less you trying to wrap your head around this stat and more trying to wrap your head around comparing players of two different positions when the two positions have different population distributions.

Here is a quickly made ms paint image to maybe help:

Defenders have a tighter distribution, so being +x GAR is a bigger deal than being the same +x GAR for a forward.

EDIT: I should also point out that the same thing exists for shot metrics as well. So being +5 relCorsi is bigger deal for defender than forward.

 

[KingBogo]

This is less you trying to wrap your head around this stat and more trying to wrap your head around comparing players of two different positions when the two positions have different population distributions.

Here is a quickly made ms paint image to maybe help:

Defenders have a tighter distribution, so being +x GAR is a bigger deal than being the same +x GAR for a forward.

Okay but the way they were originally laid out it appeared the more players in the higher ranges the better. But with the discrepancy on how different positions are impacted is it a real measure? For example if you had Keith, Doughty and Karrlsson on your team all of who rank in the 4th category 5-10 this would be worse for team success than (and I won't even cherry pick) but a lot of rather middle of the road forwards that are ranked much higher?

 

[garret9]

Okay but the way they were originally laid out it appeared the more players in the higher ranges the better. But with the discrepancy on how different positions are impacted is it a real measure? For example if you had Keith, Doughty and Karrlsson on your team all of who rank in the 4th category 5-10 this would be worse for team success than (and I won't even cherry pick) but a lot of rather middle of the road forwards that are ranked much higher?

Yes, more players in the higher ranges is better.

If you have all 3 Keith, Dought, and Karlsson (and somehow not having it kill your forwards with cap restraints):
1) All three of those guys are going to have career years being with each other and you will get some high end resutls
2) Your forwards are going to have career years and have high end results

As I noted far above: GAR is impacted by quality of team.
The better your team is, the better an individual in that team will do, ceteris paribus.


Which goes to my point above to Whileee that many of the Jets players would have 1) done better in GAR and 2) be considered more elite than they currently are if the Jets had more depth than they have run with over 4/5 last seasons.

 

[KingBogo]

Yes, more players in the higher ranges is better.

If you have all 3 Keith, Dought, and Karlsson (and somehow not having it kill your forwards with cap restraints):
1) All three of those guys are going to have career years being with each other and you will get some high end resutls
2) Your forwards are going to have career years and have high end results

As I noted far above: GAR is impacted by quality of team.
The better your team is, the better an individual in that team will do, ceteris paribus.


Which goes to my point above to Whileee that many of the Jets players would have 1) done better in GAR and 2) be considered more elite than they currently are if the Jets had more depth than they have run with over 4/5 last seasons.

Okay by now I've looked up pretty much every top ranked D-Man in the league and they are pretty much all in the 12-5 range. Keith, Doughty, Subban, Weber, Suter, OEL. You could have the top 6 vote getters for the Norris in your lineup and all it would do is give you a big bump in the middle. I get they would help elevate the forwards more but does that accurately measure their true value?

 

[garret9]

Okay by now I've looked up pretty much every top ranked D-Man in the league and they are pretty much all in the 12-5 range. Keith, Doughty, Subban, Weber, Suter, OEL. You could have the top 6 vote getters for the Norris in your lineup and all it would do is give you a big bump in the middle. I get they would help elevate the forwards more but does that accurately measure their true value?

By the results, if so, not by enough to matter.

Especially in this situation, since it would also boost the Jets defenders like Enstrom, Trouba, and Byfuglien.

Everyone is on a level playing field. Everyone has defensemen on their team.