Agreed, but the question remains. Can he take the team to the next level of performance where they clearly distance themselves from the "mushy middle" and become a true contender? Seems to me that, with Maurice`s tactical and strategic approach to the game of hockey, our boys have an extremely difficult challenge ahead. And just to be clear, my premise is that we will at some point in the relatively near future have a roster of players with skill/quickness no different than many other contender teams.
Coach Discussion: All Purpose Coaching Thread Part III
- Thread starter tbcwpg
- Start date
- Status
Agreed, but the question remains. Can he take the team to the next level of performance where they clearly distance themselves from the "mushy middle" and become a true contender? Seems to me that, with Maurice`s tactical and strategic approach to the game of hockey, our boys have an extremely difficult challenge ahead. And just to be clear, my premise is that we will at some point in the relatively near future have a roster of players with skill/quickness no different than many other contender teams.
WPGChief
Registered User
A lot of the arguments I'm seeing lately is that apparently Maurice is doing better this year with a provably worse roster which only raises more questions, to be frank.
With a record of 118 -61 -17 that is very impressive, I think Maurice will have a lot of options where he wants to coach. It's most impressive this year, with practically all our defense missing --not to mention Tanev and Joel Armia. I think Maurice will be in heavy demand.
If this Barry Trotz guy got $ 4 mil per year to coach the Islanders, and Babcock got in the $ 6 mil range to coach the Leafs --then I ask posters, what is Maurice worth $$$$$ ??? I think Maurice is just as good a coach as Babcock IMO. Trotz is also very impressive, and has done a great job with the Islanders--totally turned them around.
I think Maurice's market value will be around $ 3.5 -$ 4 mil per year, and I have "no doubt" a very rich Seattle group would pay that, for a likeable guy to sell the game of hockey for their new club. Maurice is a very likeable guy, and a great salesman.
What do posters think Maurice is worth ?? I think around $ 4 mil -- but will the Jets go that high on him ?? I think they maybe could afford to, but will they go that much ?? -- I wonder ??
If I had to guess, I would think Maurice makes around $ 1.2 mil per season right now ??- not sure.
I also do not think --just because Maurice knows Francis --will that affect his decision to go to Seattle --as business is business, and very separate from friends. This will all be about money.
If this Barry Trotz guy got $ 4 mil per year to coach the Islanders, and Babcock got in the $ 6 mil range to coach the Leafs --then I ask posters, what is Maurice worth $$$$$ ??? I think Maurice is just as good a coach as Babcock IMO. Trotz is also very impressive, and has done a great job with the Islanders--totally turned them around.
I think Maurice's market value will be around $ 3.5 -$ 4 mil per year, and I have "no doubt" a very rich Seattle group would pay that, for a likeable guy to sell the game of hockey for their new club. Maurice is a very likeable guy, and a great salesman.
What do posters think Maurice is worth ?? I think around $ 4 mil -- but will the Jets go that high on him ?? I think they maybe could afford to, but will they go that much ?? -- I wonder ??
If I had to guess, I would think Maurice makes around $ 1.2 mil per season right now ??- not sure.
I also do not think --just because Maurice knows Francis --will that affect his decision to go to Seattle --as business is business, and very separate from friends. This will all be about money.
Last edited:
He's been here since the "let's go young" stage and I think he would like to see this out here.
WPGChief, I think Helle and Laine and Scheif have a lot to do with that not to mention Wheeler and Pionk's play. Of course, I think Maurice has a ton to do with it as well. Systems have changed and seem to be working well. The team is a lot more fun to watch this year as well.
WPGChief, I think Helle and Laine and Scheif have a lot to do with that not to mention Wheeler and Pionk's play. Of course, I think Maurice has a ton to do with it as well. Systems have changed and seem to be working well. The team is a lot more fun to watch this year as well.
Ducky10
Searching for Mark Scheifele
- Nov 14, 2014
- 19,809
- 31,387
Blaming coaches for the ills of a hockey team is usually an exercise in scapegoating. There were a number of issues with the Jets last season, mostly player performance related and seemingly team dynamics related. Coaching played a part as well, just not nearly as many people want to believe.
Teemusalami204
Registered User
Its alot more fun to watch an overachieving team then an underachieving one
Ducky10
Searching for Mark Scheifele
- Nov 14, 2014
- 19,809
- 31,387
Given some more talent on the backend and some more depth in the bottom 6, I don’t think the Jets have an extremely difficult task ahead. The Jets showed they could be disciplined playing an effective system in 2017-18 but unfortunately got derailed by a hot goaltender and some untimely cold streaks. There was nothing wrong tactically with how that team played and that was under Maurice.
Winning a championship in anything requires a lot of things to be going your way at the right times. I can see that being the Jets in the not too distant future, assuming the personal deficiencies are addressed.
Last edited:
_______________________________________________
I agree with this post, and I think with a couple key additions to our backend, we could win the Stanley Cup. If we don't add them , I think we'll be a playoff team , but fall a little short, of winning a Cup.
Chevy seems to be a guy that can find these types of guys, and sometimes pulls them out of nowhere.
I think the answer will end up being, with Buff ?? will he return to the Jets, and if not, what can we get for him ? This will likely be key.
- Feb 24, 2015
- 23,159
- 39,087
I have removed myself from that line of thinking.
He’s done a good job considering all the moving parts this season.
IMO it is one of the false narratives of this board that Maurice is inferior to other NHL coaches in terms of his tactical and strategic approaches. I haven't seen anyone present convincing evidence that this should be the accepted as fact. The Jets had one underachieving season, and that IMO can be attributed to what was going on in the room more than anything. To date this season the team is overachieving and a lot of that has to do with how Maurice has got a group of castoffs to play defense as a group, minimizing their individual deficiencies. I found Murat's article in the Athletic on how he was wrong on Pionk interesting to how Maurice sees the game and how he has helped a defense group become greater than the sum of its parts.
- Mar 10, 2010
- 35,554
- 33,894
I like to think of myself as somewhat pragmatic when it comes to coaching and reffing in the NHL. Last season what I saw out of our team was unacceptable from a coaching perspective. It appeared from the outside looking in Paul had lost the necessary influence over the players to keep things under control. Many orgs would have fired their coach but TNSE are patient. I said If we picked up where we left off again this season it would be time for a change.
It turns out that didn’t happen. Amazing goaltending always makes coaches and team's look better than they are but Paul appears to be back to having the teams ear and no matter what I think there is no chance TNSE will fire him at this snap shot in time.
What are the three things you can count on in life?
Death
Taxes
All of HFBoards hating their teams coach
Good post, but I don't know if Maurice lost the influence in the room, but rather gave too much over to the leadership group believing it would help take them over the top. This tuned out to be a strategic misstep he has since corrected and we are seeing the corresponding results. Last season I think Wheeler's over the top intensity played well to guys like Scheifele, Morrissey and Lowry, but really missed the mark with the younger guys like Ehlers, Laine and Rosie. I would also guess Buff didn't care much for the intense style everyday at the rink. Add in the dynamics of Trouba clearly wanting out and I think things went off the rails. Last summer I think Maurice worked hard to pull in the reins and get guys like Laine to trust that things would be different. My take is the guys in the room are feeling like a tight knit group again and we are seeing the results.
A castaway from one of the league's worst defense corpses. Beyond ridiculous, really.
If you were left with the impression that I feel Maurice is inferior to other coaches , I failed to express myself very well. The issue is that Maurice is far too much like most other coaches in the League - limited to basically one type of hockey that either fits or does not fit the team given him by the GM. The problem is he sets the predetermined system and then expects the players to get the most out of the system,rather than develop a system based upon the players provided.
To be sure, I do feel that the tactics and strategies used by Maurice are too unsophisticated/too conservative/ too non-aggressive, and will leave the team at a dis-advantage when put up against the better teams in the League. The problem with providing"evidence" to support any discussion of the tactics and strategies used by Maurice is clear - there is no common foundation understanding from which to begin the discussion. Any discussion of alternatives for limiting entry to the defensive zone/of alternative defensive zone coverages/ of differing breakout approaches/of re-groups vs quick strike alternatives for transitioning through the neutral zone/ of structured entries to the offensive zone/ of how to utilize the D as part of the offensive attack/ and of course the options for specialty team play, are touched on only superficially and then quickly lost in the normal one sentence chatter of this discussion board.
By the way, you have now promoted your own narrative concerning the team`s performance under Maurice , without acknowledging that there are alternatives.Is it not possible that the team`s performance last season represented the "norm" ,and that the performance in 2017/18 was the anomally? Got any evidence to back up your narrative?
(just pullin your chain a bit) 
Last year's roster was pretty bad without Ehlers, Buff and Morrissey. Where would this roster be if Ehlers wasn't contributing like he is and Laine was playing like he did last season?
Quick question:
If you were to judge a coach in early December, which single metric would you use?
1) 5v5 xGF%
2) 5v5 CF%
3) Special teams' %
4) Points %
5) PDO
If you were to judge a coach in early December, which single metric would you use?
1) 5v5 xGF%
2) 5v5 CF%
3) Special teams' %
4) Points %
5) PDO
No,there was nothing wrong tactically with how that team played.(emphasis on the word wrong). But surely we can agree that some tactics and strategies have potential to be more effective than others in the game of hockey. In my view, 2017/18 may have been the anomalous year - one where the team played a less than optimal style of hockey but went relatively deep into the playoffs because everything went right for them. It was a circumstance where an average team did very well simply because it was our turn to do so. And dare I say that 2018/19 was more reflective of what will happen on an ongoing basis with Maurice calling the shots.
I have stopped complaining about the coaching lately and I have enjoyed the games much more. I do agree with @ecolad in that roster limitations lead themselves to the type of system that Maurice excels with (Low event hockey) and the team is performing fairly well. Now the team would likely be a bubble team without elite goaltending. Give them solid .919 goaltending and things wouldn't look as good.
I also think that with the talent in the system that a more high event offensive system will be needed at some point moving forward. There are still issues with this teams special teams systems and execution that will need to be figured out if the team is to continue to perform well this year.
I also think that with the talent in the system that a more high event offensive system will be needed at some point moving forward. There are still issues with this teams special teams systems and execution that will need to be figured out if the team is to continue to perform well this year.
So many people afraid to move on from anyone from a management group that in the cold light of day only advanced past the first round one year out of eight. A first round exit again and maurice should be gone and chevy looked at, in my insignificant opinion.
Are jets 2.0 successes really that great so far? To me it's pretty equal to jets 1.0 minus the thrill of having a superstar like hawerchuk, as much as I love scheif and laine.
Are jets 2.0 successes really that great so far? To me it's pretty equal to jets 1.0 minus the thrill of having a superstar like hawerchuk, as much as I love scheif and laine.
______________________________________________
I think the darkened print above is true, but also believe that Maurice didn't have a lot of choice. The reason is Wheeler was in his contract renewal year, and wanted to stay with Scheifele to keep his production up, to give him a lot bigger contract --which he got.
In order to keep control of the room, you need key guys that are supporting you, and Maurice needed Wheeler to do that. Wheeler is also very influential with Scheifele, and Maurice needs these guys to watch his back, and support his strategies. I likely would have done the same thing. Now Wheeler is satisfied with his big contract, and will be willing to support Maurice's decision to break up the Wheeler, Scheifele 1st line. I think Maurice handled this right.
I think Maurice is handling the Jet's dressing room politics as good as can be expected. It's showing this year --the players have bought in. I think the improved play of Ehlers and Laine this year, is proof of this, and the players buying into Maurice's new system.
- Mar 10, 2010
- 35,554
- 33,894
Yea the best we can tell I think I would align with you on why things fell apart. At the end of the day I still hold the coach responsible for that since it’s his room. Paul is a players coach and he leaned heavily on his leaders and last season that back fired and he couldn’t or didn’t make the adjustments mid season. That being said teams have off seasons all the time and what we saw last year was not a crazy outlier. I am glad the coaches and leaders have course corrected and gotten things back on the rails this season. I personally really enjoy the scrappy underdog role we are playing.
Psych0dad
Registered User
Stumbledore
Registered User
scarbrow21
Registered User
Hot take prediction:
Jets this year are the Pens of old in that they win the cup this year on the backs of an abundance of talent up front with little to nothing on the back end. I doubted those pens just like I doubt these Jets to be legit contenders but the similarities are there especially the hot goaltending...
Jets this year are the Pens of old in that they win the cup this year on the backs of an abundance of talent up front with little to nothing on the back end. I doubted those pens just like I doubt these Jets to be legit contenders but the similarities are there especially the hot goaltending...
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
GDT: GAME 16 | Philly Flies into O-town | Thu Nov 14 2024, 7PM | TSN5, RDS2- Latest: Pierre from Orleans
-
