Coach Discussion: All Purpose Coaching Thread Part III

[jepjepjoo]

It is much more drastic than that as I believe you are comparing team xGF% vs Laine's xGF%. We should compare team xGF% with Laine off the ice vs Laine's xGF% to determine Laine's impact on these metrics as the former comparison has Laine's impact already baked into the team numbers.

In terms of league wide rankings, in almost all these season the Jets xGF% and CF% ranking is anywhere around 6, 8 or 10 places higher league wide with Laine off the ice. That is a huge confounding variable that needs to be taken into account when looking at Jets performance in these metrics and when deciding how much blame should lay at Maurice's feet for that as was bien argued in the post I was responding to.

His GF% impact is much more positive due to his elite shot, not denying that, only presenting these metrics as those were the ones that @surixon highlighted in his post as being on a decline the last few years of the Maurice era.

My numbers are correct and yours are incorrect, sorry. Impact is the keyword.

 

[JetsFan815]

My numbers are correct and yours are incorrect, sorry.

In what way are my numbers "incorrect"? This is objective data that if you think it is incorrect you can easily prove it. Doesn't seem like you are doing that?

 

[jepjepjoo]

In what way are my numbers "incorrect"? This is objective data that if you think it is incorrect you can easily prove it. Doesn't seem like you are doing that?

Data can be correct even if the conclusion is not.

example:

Your chart says Laine "impact" this season to xGF% is 1.09.

Jets xGF% without Laine on the ice is 43.12%
With Laine included it's 43.10%
Laine impact(non isolated) on the xGF% is -0.02 percentage points.

 

[KingBogo]

I understand both takes on whether Maurice should stay or go. Tip of the hat to Surixon for explaining his gripes with the coach in such a well thought-out manner.

My take is that he should stay, as long as the team looks "right" (even if that doesn't mean winning games a lot of the time) this year. Whereas if we slip into the kind of funk we were in last year, it's time to consider other options.

Two years ago the WCF run was solid, and I was certainly happy with Maurice that year.

Last year sucked. I'm of the opinion that "something happened in the room" (tm). The team just looked lack-luster for most of the year. You could maybe blame Maurice for letting that happen or not fixing it sooner, but coaches don't have a magic wand. But I look at it as a positive that the team appears back on track this year in terms of dedication and effort. Maurice appears to have pulled through whatever our troubles were with a handle on the room. Seems to me he was part of the solution, not the problem.

This year, I like how the team is playing most nights. But it's obvious our D is holding us back - even with many playing decently well above their pay grade. I consider our current problems a roster issue and not a coaching issue. I also credit Maurce that our young guys that have developed under his tenure are looking great.

Last thing that's been on my mind is the "Jets should play high event hockey" argument. It's tough to know whether that's true or not. But it seems to me the opposite theory also seems plausible - that our super talented team doesn't need to be coached to focus on offense (they do that naturally already), but rather coaching defense to add to our already potent offense is the best way to maximize this team.

That's all very hand-wavy and non-statistical, but just how I see it.

Nice balanced post Puck and despite the disagreements on Maurice in this thread, IMO it is beyond question that you have hit the nail on the head that our current problems are a roster issue more so than a coaching issue. No coach in the world would have long term success running out our D core on a nightly bases. We have 1 top pairing player in Morrissey, but he is not a dominant #1 D that easily carries others. We have a #3 who is offensively gifted (Pionk), but who would really benefit from a partner that could support him rather than make have him learn how to specialize in evasive maneuvers for self preservation. Then we have Poolman who would be a good #6 but is playing on the top pairing way above his pay grade and skill level. IMO it falls on Chevy to fix these holes first and foremost before Maurice gets judged on this season.

There are a few potential solutions. Niku is the obvious one, but I am concerned about usage. He already has had an injury plagued season and if we pair him a Bitetto or a Dalstrom I don't know how many shovel passes to his feet he can survive. I'm more hopeful than I have been that Buff returns, but this remains a big if and won't be any time soon. Maybe Samberg gets signed in mid to late March but that is a long way off and there are too many uncertainties to be treated as a solution at this time. That's what we got and IMO Chevy needs to fix this before you can make a judgement call on the coach.

A coaching change now without fixing the roster might do more harm than good. Maurice seems to be highly liked by the team and most certainly has the room and full support of the leadership group. If he is made the scapegoat for which is very obliviously a roster issue, you may take the final wind out of the sails of this group, even if it is unintentional. If a coaching change is made, it will likely be very amicable and be done in the off season with Chevy addressing the obvious roster needs at the same time.

Of course there is always the possibility Maurice is able to hold things together long enough for Chevy and or fate to help solve the glaring roster issues and Maurice gets credited for a saved season and gets a contract extension this summer. Could go either way at this point.

 

[DRW204]

oof

 

[surixon]

oof

Jets are just bad at trying to be a low event team. Can't get much worse then what we are at.

 

[DashingDane]

Nice balanced post Puck and despite the disagreements on Maurice in this thread, IMO it is beyond question that you have hit the nail on the head that our current problems are a roster issue more so than a coaching issue. No coach in the world would have long term success running out our D core on a nightly bases. We have 1 top pairing player in Morrissey, but he is not a dominant #1 D that easily carries others. We have a #3 who is offensively gifted (Pionk), but who would really benefit from a partner that could support him rather than make have him learn how to specialize in evasive maneuvers for self preservation. Then we have Poolman who would be a good #6 but is playing on the top pairing way above his pay grade and skill level. IMO it falls on Chevy to fix these holes first and foremost before Maurice gets judged on this season.

There are a few potential solutions. Niku is the obvious one, but I am concerned about usage. He already has had an injury plagued season and if we pair him a Bitetto or a Dalstrom I don't know how many shovel passes to his feet he can survive. I'm more hopeful than I have been that Buff returns, but this remains a big if and won't be any time soon. Maybe Samberg gets signed in mid to late March but that is a long way off and there are too many uncertainties to be treated as a solution at this time. That's what we got and IMO Chevy needs to fix this before you can make a judgement call on the coach.

A coaching change now without fixing the roster might do more harm than good. Maurice seems to be highly liked by the team and most certainly has the room and full support of the leadership group. If he is made the scapegoat for which is very obliviously a roster issue, you may take the final wind out of the sails of this group, even if it is unintentional. If a coaching change is made, it will likely be very amicable and be done in the off season with Chevy addressing the obvious roster needs at the same time.

Of course there is always the possibility Maurice is able to hold things together long enough for Chevy and or fate to help solve the glaring roster issues and Maurice gets credited for a saved season and gets a contract extension this summer. Could go either way at this point.

Just to clarify my view. I wouldn’t let Paul go until after the season. And it wouldn’t be because of this season as I totally agree he doesn’t have the defense to compete. In my world he should have been let go last summer so half a season doing decent with a subpar squad doesn’t change that.

 

[JetsFan815]

Data can be correct even if the conclusion is not.

example:

Your chart says Laine "impact" this season to xGF% is 1.09.

Jets xGF% without Laine on the ice is 43.12%
With Laine included it's 43.10%
Laine impact(non isolated) on the xGF% is -0.02 percentage points.

There is a reason all the relative metrics (Rel and Rel Teammate) are derived from looking at player on ice vs player off ice, and not player on ice vs team aggregate including the player being on ice. Your comparison is like if you are doing a study to compare the impact of mercury in water and then using a town which already has a high amount of mercury in their water as your control group and comparing the health of those people to your experimental group who is being given water with an even higher mercury content. You will not get an accurate result as the impact of mercury is already baked into your control group. To actually answer your question correctly, you'd need to compare your experimental group with mercury water's results to a control group whose water didn't have any mercury in it.

 

[JetsFan815]

On the flip side you have Ehlers getting better and Lowry and Copp entering their primes.

I think it's interesting that our best XGF and corsi lines the last few years have been our grinders who play the game like Maurice wants while our skilled players have suffered.

You are right about skilled players maybe not being the best two way guys but when they are allowed to open things up they tend to dominate the corsi and xGF

Are those "grinding" lines good xGF and Corsi lines while our skill players have struggled in the same area because of the style Maurice is asking them to play or is that the case because players on those "grinding" lines are just good at controlling play whereas some of our skilled players are not? I mean guys like Thorburn and Peluso who are grinders struggled big time under Maurice whereas Scheifele, Wheeler, Perreault all skilled players thrived. I am not certain if the causality arrow goes from Maurice's System ----> Grinding line having success and skill players struggling.

I used to be fairly skeptical of Maurice at certain points in the past but I changed my perspective 2 seasons ago. The guy is at the very least an average to above average coach and while the Jets might see some boost around the margins if he is replaced and there is a new message, I find it hard to believe they'd see a big turnaround.

 

[surixon]

Are those "grinding" lines good xGF and Corsi lines while our skill players have struggled in the same area because of the style Maurice is asking them to play or is that the case because players on those "grinding" lines are just good at controlling play whereas some of our skilled players are not? I mean guys like Thorburn and Peluso who are grinders struggled big time under Maurice whereas Scheifele, Wheeler, Perreault all skilled players thrived. I am not certain if the causality arrow goes from Maurice's System ----> Grinding line having success and skill players struggling.

I used to be fairly skeptical of Maurice at certain points in the past but I changed my perspective 2 seasons ago. The guy is at the very least an average to above average coach and while the Jets might see some boost around the margins if he is replaced and there is a new message, I find it hard to believe they'd see a big turnaround.

I think it's a combination of our skilled players not playing a system that they are comfortable with as well as the fact our skilled players have some trouble controlling the play.

Why might you ask that I feel that way? Moat of the time that this team is forced to open things up our skilled players suddenly dominate the shot and XGF charts. Sure some of that is score effect but they perform better when they are allowed to be more creative, especially off the rush.

Certain players are wired to play the game differently. Lowry and Copp are good at playing that down low game. Laine, Ehlers and Connor not so much.

I have argued for a multifaceted system where the top 6 is given the freedom to take chances and be creative whereas the bottom 6 plays the cycle/grind game.

Also I have argued that Scheifele was at his most dominate in 2016/17 when he was A zone entry fiend. The Scheife of the two prior years was much more of a one dimensional goal scorer imo.

He has looked fantastic at times this year when he has been back driving hard through the nz and making plays at the other teams blue lines. Laine looks at his best when he's doing that as well.

Also I agree that Maurice is an average to slightly above average coach. It doesn't mean that he is the right coach for this group or the best fit.

 

[lomiller1]

Interesting interview by Maurice today. A few nuggets...

He's clearly not that happy with their play recently, and in particular doesn't like that they have turned into a team that just relies on the rush, rather than zone time and cycling. He feels that gives his D less stress than trying to trade rushes and defend more in their own zone. I think the current line-up is really oriented to rush, the top two lines have become focused on rush hockey instead of cycling more, and Lowry's line lacks good cycling players without Copp.

He clearly knows that his D is overmatched in terms of skill. He likes how hard they compete, but realizes their limitations. Praise for Poolman and his development. Even more praise for Kulikov, indicating he thought he was a big loss. I think we'll see Kulikov slide back into the 2nd pair when he's back.

Obviously very happy that Copp is returning soon. He really likes the Copp-Lowry duo, but also hinted at perhaps separating them and shaking up the line-up to get more balance. My guess is that he might be looking at moving Copp up to 2C if the team doesn't improve their play soon, and moving Wheeler back to the wing, demoting Roslovic to the 3rd line.

Here's a preview of a forward line-up I think we might see fairly soon if the Jets' performance doesn't improve:

Connor-Scheifele-Laine
Ehlers-Copp-Wheeler
Perreault-Lowry-Roslovic
Harkins-Shore-Appleton

When Little returns, I think we might see something like this...

Connor-Scheifele-Laine
Ehlers-Copp-Wheeler
Perreault-Little-Roslovic
Harkins-Lowry-Appleton/Shore

My own preference for the top 6 in the short term might be...

Ehlers-Scheifele-Laine
Connor-Copp-Wheeler

Connor-Copp-Wheeler is fine, but overall there are diminishing returns to stacking top players together. In a cap world where you need to have lesser players in the lineup we’d be better off spreading our scoring talent across 3 lines then putting 2 offensively skilled players together with either a defensive player or puck retriever.

This way you have 3 great lines instead of only 2. Next you keep shifts short instead of the 50-60 seconds per shift our top players tend to run. This means players play at a higher overall pace and effort level which should help fix some of out puck possession issues. This also gets line 3-4 more play time so we are not as injury prone and because we have moved some higher end talent onto these lines we can exploit the weaker lines on other teams.

I’d like to see something more like this when we are healthy:
Perreault – Scheifele – Laine
Ehlers – Wheeler - Little
Connor – Copp – Roslovic
Harkins(?) – Lowry – Appleton


Keeping guys around just for the PK doesn't make sense when our PK is bad even with them out there. Just put some of the younger faster players out there and teach them the role if they are not getting enough ice time otherwise.

 

[rkp]

interesting comments on the HNIC between periods about the new style of coaching and the success they are having regarding usage of players offensive capabilities as opposing to developing there defensive side of the game...basically offense wins games, it seems. It came across they weren't afraid to let the players use their style of play to dominate the game.

pomo is an average coach and nothing more and never will be anything but that. he admits the reason he got to 700 wins so quickly was because of the talent on the team. despite having a full compliment on last season, the analytics are similar to this season with a less than full compliment of defencemen.

now with issues with niku this morning on the radio, it would be best for the team to clean the slate and start anew with the new style of coaching personnel. there have been too many issues regarding the usage and handling of the talent of the team. I wonder if there have been said like issues with pascal, coach of the moose.

 

[surixon]

Connor-Copp-Wheeler is fine, but overall there are diminishing returns to stacking top players together. In a cap world where you need to have lesser players in the lineup we’d be better off spreading our scoring talent across 3 lines then putting 2 offensively skilled players together with either a defensive player or puck retriever.

This way you have 3 great lines instead of only 2. Next you keep shifts short instead of the 50-60 seconds per shift our top players tend to run. This means players play at a higher overall pace and effort level which should help fix some of out puck possession issues. This also gets line 3-4 more play time so we are not as injury prone and because we have moved some higher end talent onto these lines we can exploit the weaker lines on other teams.

I’d like to see something more like this when we are healthy:
Perreault – Scheifele – Laine
Ehlers – Wheeler - Little
Connor – Copp – Roslovic
Harkins(?) – Lowry – Appleton


Keeping guys around just for the PK doesn't make sense when our PK is bad even with them out there. Just put some of the younger faster players out there and teach them the role if they are not getting enough ice time otherwise.

Agreed, smarts, positioning and speed are all more important then grit and being able to block a shot.

It's another thing Maurice hasn't learned yet. You need player to be able to block passing lanes on PKs now.

 

[lomiller1]

The problem with the Jets is that they play high event hockey in defensive zone and low event hockey in the offensive zone. I kind of suspect that this happens because PM is looking to try and optimize shot quality when in fact shot quantity is the best way to open up high grade scoring chances.

There is a simple formula for success in the NHL. Get pucks and bodies to the net and when the other team reacts to this, THEN the seam passes etc open up. I think the Jets are trying to do it the other way around and looking for the seam passes first but because there is no pressure these never open up.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

Borque over Harkins... Yeah time to send old dinosaur mo away

 

[Gm0ney]

Are those "grinding" lines good xGF and Corsi lines while our skill players have struggled in the same area because of the style Maurice is asking them to play or is that the case because players on those "grinding" lines are just good at controlling play whereas some of our skilled players are not? I mean guys like Thorburn and Peluso who are grinders struggled big time under Maurice whereas Scheifele, Wheeler, Perreault all skilled players thrived. I am not certain if the causality arrow goes from Maurice's System ----> Grinding line having success and skill players struggling.

I used to be fairly skeptical of Maurice at certain points in the past but I changed my perspective 2 seasons ago. The guy is at the very least an average to above average coach and while the Jets might see some boost around the margins if he is replaced and there is a new message, I find it hard to believe they'd see a big turnaround.

I believe Maurice's gameplan is designed to play to the strengths of grinding players. He wants everyone out there humping it along the boards, extending offensive zone time, not really worried about making anything out of it. You can see this in the Jets' heat maps - very little from in tight, a preponderance of perimeter/point shots - minus the traffic in front because F3 has to play high in the zone to be ready to help out on D.

Maurice wants to play it safe, and try to keep things low-event. Well, it's not working. It hasn't been working for two seasons.

Here's a good explanation of low-event and high-event hockey:


For those blind to Twitter:

"Game pace: If you're a low-skill team, a low-event game helps increase the role of luck and might help you eek out some extra wins.
If you're a high-skill team, high-event games are good because they increase the likelihood that your skill advantage wins out."

The Jets don't look too bad on the game pace chart - but unfortunately the xGA/60 is what's driving that. Nobody's less dangerous in the offensive zone than the Jets. Only Chicago and the Rangers are higher-danger in their own zone.

Corsi might be a better pure measure of pace - and the Jets look a little better than with xG. Overall they have the 10th fewest Corsi/60. But as with xG, a lot of that is driven by their lack of offense. The Jets are 24th in generating Corsis, and 22nd at preventing Corsis.

So we have a coach who seems to want to slow the pace, despite having a good goalie and highly skilled team offensively...which appears to be the opposite of what they should be doing. We also are in a situation where the only place we're successfully slowing the pace is in the offensive zone.

 

[surixon]

I believe Maurice's gameplan is designed to play to the strengths of grinding players. He wants everyone out there humping it along the boards, extending offensive zone time, not really worried about making anything out of it. You can see this in the Jets' heat maps - very little from in tight, a preponderance of perimeter/point shots - minus the traffic in front because F3 has to play high in the zone to be ready to help out on D.

Maurice wants to play it safe, and try to keep things low-event. Well, it's not working. It hasn't been working for two seasons.

Here's a good explanation of low-event and high-event hockey:


For those blind to Twitter:

"Game pace: If you're a low-skill team, a low-event game helps increase the role of luck and might help you eek out some extra wins.
If you're a high-skill team, high-event games are good because they increase the likelihood that your skill advantage wins out."

The Jets don't look too bad on the game pace chart - but unfortunately the xGA/60 is what's driving that. Nobody's less dangerous in the offensive zone than the Jets. Only Chicago and the Rangers are higher-danger in their own zone.

Corsi might be a better pure measure of pace - and the Jets look a little better than with xG. Overall they have the 10th fewest Corsi/60. But as with xG, a lot of that is driven by their lack of offense. The Jets are 24th in generating Corsis, and 22nd at preventing Corsis.

So we have a coach who seems to want to slow the pace, despite having a good goalie and highly skilled team offensively...which appears to be the opposite of what they should be doing. We also are in a situation where the only place we're successfully slowing the pace is in the offensive zone.

Well said.

 

[Gm0ney]

Fun Fact: The Jets currently have the 10th worst PK% in NHL history. Although to be fair, they didn't keep track of PK% until 1977-78...so only the 10th worst in 42 seasons. 41 really because there was no season due to the 2005 lockout. That's not so bad then. #extendmaurice

Edit: For you optimists, that's the 1082nd best PK% in NHL history...

 

[lomiller1]

I believe Maurice's gameplan is designed to play to the strengths of grinding players. He wants everyone out there humping it along the boards, extending offensive zone time, not really worried about making anything out of it. You can see this in the Jets' heat maps - very little from in tight, a preponderance of perimeter/point shots - minus the traffic in front because F3 has to play high in the zone to be ready to help out on D.

Maurice wants to play it safe, and try to keep things low-event. Well, it's not working. It hasn't been working for two seasons.

Here's a good explanation of low-event and high-event hockey:


For those blind to Twitter:

"Game pace: If you're a low-skill team, a low-event game helps increase the role of luck and might help you eek out some extra wins.
If you're a high-skill team, high-event games are good because they increase the likelihood that your skill advantage wins out."

The Jets don't look too bad on the game pace chart - but unfortunately the xGA/60 is what's driving that. Nobody's less dangerous in the offensive zone than the Jets. Only Chicago and the Rangers are higher-danger in their own zone.

Corsi might be a better pure measure of pace - and the Jets look a little better than with xG. Overall they have the 10th fewest Corsi/60. But as with xG, a lot of that is driven by their lack of offense. The Jets are 24th in generating Corsis, and 22nd at preventing Corsis.

So we have a coach who seems to want to slow the pace, despite having a good goalie and highly skilled team offensively...which appears to be the opposite of what they should be doing. We also are in a situation where the only place we're successfully slowing the pace is in the offensive zone.

We have a team that gets outshot and out-chanced most nights. Keeping the pace low gives us a better chance to steal games with goaltending and/or one of our shooters picking the corner. What our coaches can't seem to solve is how we can out-chance the opposition.

 

[jepjepjoo]

There is a reason all the relative metrics (Rel and Rel Teammate) are derived from looking at player on ice vs player off ice, and not player on ice vs team aggregate including the player being on ice. Your comparison is like if you are doing a study to compare the impact of mercury in water and then using a town which already has a high amount of mercury in their water as your control group and comparing the health of those people to your experimental group who is being given water with an even higher mercury content. You will not get an accurate result as the impact of mercury is already baked into your control group. To actually answer your question correctly, you'd need to compare your experimental group with mercury water's results to a control group whose water didn't have any mercury in it.

Those certainly are words.

 

[Gm0ney]

We have a team that gets outshot and out-chanced most nights. Keeping the pace low gives us a better chance to steal games with goaltending and/or one of our shooters picking the corner. What our coaches can't seem to solve is how we can out-chance the opposition.

We're not really keeping the defensive zone pace low though...so why not up the tempo in the offensive zone? This team is awesome at 4v4 and 3v3 when they have a bit of room and don't have to concentrate on D. The D sucks. The team has fast, skilled, players. Build around that.

 

[surixon]

We're not really keeping the defensive zone pace low though...so why not up the tempo in the offensive zone? This team is awesome at 4v4 and 3v3 when they have a bit of room and don't have to concentrate on D. The D sucks. The team has fast, skilled, players. Build around that.

Yup you notice a difference in play and results when they go for it offensively.

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

We are arguably the worst team in the league by most possession and xG metrics. The roster certainly has holes in it but does anyone think we should be that bad? If Helle was average or worse we might be in the bottom 5.

I don't think Paul is a bad coach per se, but this team needs a new voice imo. We're not going anywhere anytime soon, and as the old saying goes, you can't fire all the players.

Maurice is a known quantity. We could definitely do worse finding someone else, but we could definitely do better, and the known quantity isn't good enough so it is worth the risk.

 

[Whileee]

He needs to throw zone time out the window imo. Nothing wrong with cycling but the goal shouldn't ge to just keep the puck on the wall in their end.

I get that the defense is overmatched but imo instead of doubling down on being risk adverse we need to try to create more offense.

I don't disagree completely, but I do think the Jets need to have more zone time. They are so bad at defending in their own zone that they can't be cavalier about turning over possession in any zone. I'm not a huge advocate of just tossing pucks at the net. I think an extended shift in the offensive zone can create opportunities for a skilled team to capitalize. If the Jets skilled players just start throwing pucks at the net they negate one of their main advantages over other teams. What they need a bit more of is net-focused offensive plays, and they would be much more effective if they had one or two more D that could activate and create a threat in the offensive zone.

 

[Gm0ney]

I don't disagree completely, but I do think the Jets need to have more zone time. They are so bad at defending in their own zone that they can't be cavalier about turning over possession in any zone. I'm not a huge advocate of just tossing pucks at the net. I think an extended shift in the offensive zone can create opportunities for a skilled team to capitalize. If the Jets skilled players just start throwing pucks at the net they negate one of their main advantages over other teams. What they need a bit more of is net-focused offensive plays, and they would be much more effective if they had one or two more D that could activate and create a threat in the offensive zone.

But I think the Jets are largely just tossing pucks at the net - their shot-attempts/60 are 24th and their xGF is dead last. Everything's coming from pretty far out. The only team worse on offense is Detroit (-15). This team has a Top 5 - Top 6 in the league. There's no way this should be happening.

Meanwhile, in the defensive zone...it would be one thing if we were sacrificing some offense to make the defense respectable, but this ain't it, as the kids say...only the Rangers (+16) and the Blackhawks (+11) are worse in their own zone.