Coach Discussion: All Purpose Coaching Thread Part III

[Puckatron 3000]

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.

Undoubtedly our D stats would be even worse though, if we were playing high event, and weren't say doing this:

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.

Play to your strengths is a legit strategy. But so is trying to shore up your weakest link, which in the Jets case is defense. It's a legitimate question whether shoring up our D is hurting our offense too much, or if instead we'd be worse off if we went high event. I don't know the answer, and I don't think anyone else does either, despite claims to the contrary. All these high event stats are an average of many teams of many different compositions. The average may not hold true for a team with really weak D.

I'd also argue that with a bunch of young, offensively gifted forwards who tend not to think defense, that at least working that into their game plan early in their career is something that pays off dividends in the long haul. We're seeing that with Laine and Ehlers now.

 

[surixon]

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.

Maurice has made it clear to the media exactly how he wants the team to play in the offensive zone:

• Wants offense driven by the points
• Wants to maintain zone time
• Doesn't like seam passes due to the possibility of an odd man rush against
• Not happy with the teams focus on transition offense as it puts pressure on the defense

Our offensive zone heat maps is exactly what you'd expect to see based on our coaches philosophy. Lots of perimiter play and point shots. As you stated earlier even our point shots don't often lead to second and third chance opportunities due to F3 being up high.

We essentially have a coach that is neutering our offense due to fear of the occasional bad turnover and odd man chance against.

Really our offensive performance is unacceptable and the game plan has a lot to do with it.

 

[surixon]

Undoubtedly our D stats would be even worse though, if we were playing high event, and weren't say doing this:



Play to your strengths is a legit strategy. But so is trying to shore up your weakest link, which in the Jets case is defense. It's a legitimate question whether shoring up our D is hurting our offense too much, or if instead we'd be worse off if we went high event. I don't know the answer, and I don't think anyone else does either, despite claims to the contrary. All these high event stats are an average of many teams of many different compositions. The average may not hold true for a team with really weak D.

I'd also argue that with a bunch of young, offensively gifted forwards who tend not to think defense, that at least working that into their game plan early in their career is something that pays off dividends in the long haul. We're seeing that with Laine and Ehlers now.

Playing a more high event system and teaching players to be responsible defensively are not mutually exclusive.

I have no issue with the Jets wanting their players to be good in their own end, nor do I have an issue with teaching players to make less risky plays in that end. I want hard back pressure through the nz so that our d can gap hard. It's what happens once we get out of the dzone or force a nz turnover is where I have an issue.

Maurice's ultra conservative style is limiting what our players can do offensively. He prefers safe dumps, soft chips, and nz regrouping over quick counters, attacking the line quickly with our defense activated. That to me is where the issue is. Once in the offensive we don't get enough players in danger areas so that even if we have a prolonged cycle it often goes back to the point or F3 up high for a long range shot with minimal trafic.

It's hard to imagine how we could get worse opening things up. We already give up the third most chances while generating the least amount of offensive chances.

Also I doubt anyone who wants a more high event system is aiming for total run and gun hockey. I for one just want our skilled players to be able to asses the situation and have the green light to attack quickly and hard when appropriate. I would like JoMo and Pionk to have the ability to pick their spots on when to activate and when not to.

Adding some creativity doesn't mean abandoning defense.

 

[Gm0ney]

Undoubtedly our D stats would be even worse though, if we were playing high event, and weren't say doing this:



Play to your strengths is a legit strategy. But so is trying to shore up your weakest link, which in the Jets case is defense. It's a legitimate question whether shoring up our D is hurting our offense too much, or if instead we'd be worse off if we went high event. I don't know the answer, and I don't think anyone else does either, despite claims to the contrary. All these high event stats are an average of many teams of many different compositions. The average may not hold true for a team with really weak D.

I'd also argue that with a bunch of young, offensively gifted forwards who tend not to think defense, that at least working that into their game plan early in their career is something that pays off dividends in the long haul. We're seeing that with Laine and Ehlers now.

Look at Pittsburgh. They've got a pretty no-name defense outside of Letang. Johnson-Letang, Pettersson-Marino, Riikola-Ruwedel...like I've honestly never heard of half those guys. And they've got nobodies all over the lineup - Kahun, Blueger, Blandisi, Di Pauli, Aston-Reese, Tanev. They're absolutely Shutting. It. Down.

And their offense is "average". 14 points better on offense and 25 points better on defense. Crosby's only played 17 games. Imagine this team if Scheifele were healthy and Little had to carry the load.

My point is...fire Maurice.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

I agree that high event isn't 100% mutually exclusive with a more defensive game. But it often is - like with Gm0ney's example that I quoted, of playing F3 high to help out with defense. Activating your defense is also an offense/defense trade-off. So sometimes are "quick counters" - such as a stretch pass to a guy who cheats a bit on defense.

I do agree the Jets could do a better job entering the zone with the puck. But I'm not sure that's an issue with our overall defensive strategy.

 

[Ducky10]

Playing a more high event system and teaching players to be responsible defensively are not mutually exclusive.

I have no issue with the Jets wanting their players to be good in their own end, nor do I have an issue with teaching players to make less risky plays in that end. I want hard back pressure through the nz so that our d can gap hard. It's what happens once we get out of the dzone or force a nz turnover is where I have an issue.

Maurice's ultra conservative style is limiting what our players can do offensively. He prefers safe dumps, soft chips, and nz regrouping over quick counters, attacking the line quickly with our defense activated. That to me is where the issue is. Once in the offensive we don't get enough players in danger areas so that even if we have a prolonged cycle it often goes back to the point or F3 up high for a long range shot with minimal trafic.

It's hard to imagine how we could get worse opening things up. We already give up the third most chances while generating the least amount of offensive chances.

Also I doubt anyone who wants a more high event system is aiming for total run and gun hockey. I for one just want our skilled players to be able to asses the situation and have the green light to attack quickly and hard when appropriate. I would like JoMo and Pionk to have the ability to pick their spots on when to activate and when not to.

Adding some creativity doesn't mean abandoning defense.

One of the biggest factors in all of this is the inability of half our D to be able to keep a tight gap and jump into the play to support the rush, aka "activate". I think a pairing of JoMo and Pionk would allow them to do this more, as well as perhaps a Buff-Niku pairing.

It's just not going to happen with this blue line. I honestly believe we'd see Maurice playing this style if he had the horses on the back end, it was exactly how they played during the conference final run. Don't ask me what happened last season, but I don't think it was scheme related.

 

[Ducky10]

I agree that high event isn't 100% mutually exclusive with a more defensive game. But it often is - like with Gm0ney's example that I quoted, of playing F3 high to help out with defense. Activating your defense is also an offense/defense trade-off. So sometimes are "quick counters" - such as a stretch pass to a guy who cheats a bit on defense.

I do agree the Jets could do a better job entering the zone with the puck. But I'm not sure that's an issue with our overall defensive strategy.

Any team will have F3 playing higher in the zone to provide back pressure and defensive support. The Jets however are almost exclusively maintaining the 3rd forward into the zone as F3, with little to no rotation. They aren't playing 2 on the puck as aggressively as they have in the past either, Maurice seems very reluctant to even commit 2 players below the goal line to support the puck, I think it's hurting their cycle game to a degree. If they lose a one on one battle, there isn't the support there to keep possession of the puck. They are playing almost an exclusively low to high game, with F3 mainly looking to help out along the half wall to send pucks back deep again.

It's very conservative and doesn't allow them to pull the opposition D from out between the hash marks much. You notice a lot of teams just stacking the box against the Jets, they aren't too worried about anyone cutting through a gap or overloading one side.

It's all predicated on preventing odd man rushes, which they've been pretty successful with, as well as not allowing the opposition to transition quickly and have our heavy footed D exposed. Of course all of that breaks down when they play so poorly through the neutral zone and turn pucks over at the blue lines.

We're playing to our lowest common denominator, no doubt. I'm not convinced many options at the moment, as much as I'd like to see them try.

 

[surixon]

Any team will have F3 playing higher in the zone to provide back pressure and defensive support. The Jets however are almost exclusively maintaining the 3rd forward into the zone as F3, with little to no rotation. They aren't playing 2 on the puck as aggressively as they have in the past either, Maurice seems very reluctant to even commit 2 players below the goal line to support the puck, I think it's hurting their cycle game to a degree. If they lose a one on one battle, there isn't the support there to keep possession of the puck. They are playing almost an exclusively low to high game, with F3 mainly looking to help out along the half wall to send pucks back deep again.

It's very conservative and doesn't allow them to pull the opposition D from out between the hash marks much. You notice a lot of teams just stacking the box against the Jets, they aren't too worried about anyone cutting through a gap or overloading one side.

It's all predicated on preventing odd man rushes, which they've been pretty successful with, as well as not allowing the opposition to transition quickly and have our heavy footed D exposed. Of course all of that breaks down when they play so poorly through the neutral zone and turn pucks over at the blue lines.

We're playing to our lowest common denominator, no doubt. I'm not convinced many options at the moment, as much as I'd like to see them try.

They also seem to have Morrissey and our d in general fleeing the zone early instead of pinching so that we have numbers back. This also hurts our ability to maintain offensive zone time.

It's kind of interesting to hear Maurice talk about offensive zone time when he isn't actually putting in place systems to help them maintain it. If anything he's doing the opposite.

 

[Ducky10]

They also seem to have Morrissey and our d in general fleeing the zone early instead of pinching so that we have numbers back. This also hurts our ability to maintain offensive zone time.

It's kind of interesting to hear Maurice talk about offensive zone time when he isn't actually putting in place systems to help them maintain it. If anything he's doing the opposite.

Agreed, he really is. It's very noticble that the D retreats much earlier from the blue line compared to the last 2 years. If F3 engages along the half wall on a 50/50 puck, the support usually comes from another forward and not the D coming down along the wall. Definitely a trust issue somewhere, he simply wants as many bodies behind the puck as often as possible.

 

[Jets4Life]

Laviolette fired by the Predators.

The plot thickens...

 

[KingBogo]

Laviolette fired by the Predators.

The plot thickens...

The plot thickens for who? Laviolette has underachieved massively with a roster that should be a very safe playoff team.

 

[Hunter368]

The plot thickens for who? Laviolette has underachieved massively with a roster that should be a very safe playoff team.

Agreed.....even if it was the summer and Pmo was fired Lav wouldn't even get a call from me if I was Chevy.

 

[Ducky10]

Rinne .896, Saros .892.

No wonder Laviolette is such a shitty coach.

 

[WolfgangPuck]

To be brutally honest I find that Coaches gets to coach or looks to be fired is determined mainly by how well his goalies play. PMo lives to coach another day or not is directly related by how well Helle and Brossoit plays. Things will get ugly for Maurice if his goalies SV % goes under .90

 

[Jets4Life]

To be brutally honest I find that Coaches gets to coach or looks to be fired is determined mainly by how well his goalies play. PMo lives to coach another day or not is directly related by how well Helle and Brossoit plays. Things will get ugly for Maurice if his goalies SV % goes under .90

Strange. I always thought it was based on the teams regular season record, and how well they performed in the playoffs (a Division winner who gets upset in the playoffs two years in a row is going to have a very short leash).

 

[GNP]

To be brutally honest I find that Coaches gets to coach or looks to be fired is determined mainly by how well his goalies play. PMo lives to coach another day or not is directly related by how well Helle and Brossoit plays. Things will get ugly for Maurice if his goalies SV % goes under .90

_________________________________________________

It's true what you say in a sense, that the Coach and his job are tied with Goaltender performance. Under 90% and the coach will feel the heat.

Let's also bear in mind with a good strong defense, and a coach that can create game plans to keep high danger shots to the outside so they don't become high danger, the Goalie save percentage goes up substantially.

It's up to the Coach sometimes to create game plans in accordance with the talent he has, to create game plans that will reduce goals against for his team. He has to get the best use of his talent he has.

 

[ps241]

Any team will have F3 playing higher in the zone to provide back pressure and defensive support. The Jets however are almost exclusively maintaining the 3rd forward into the zone as F3, with little to no rotation. They aren't playing 2 on the puck as aggressively as they have in the past either, Maurice seems very reluctant to even commit 2 players below the goal line to support the puck, I think it's hurting their cycle game to a degree. If they lose a one on one battle, there isn't the support there to keep possession of the puck. They are playing almost an exclusively low to high game, with F3 mainly looking to help out along the half wall to send pucks back deep again.

It's very conservative and doesn't allow them to pull the opposition D from out between the hash marks much. You notice a lot of teams just stacking the box against the Jets, they aren't too worried about anyone cutting through a gap or overloading one side.

It's all predicated on preventing odd man rushes, which they've been pretty successful with, as well as not allowing the opposition to transition quickly and have our heavy footed D exposed. Of course all of that breaks down when they play so poorly through the neutral zone and turn pucks over at the blue lines.

We're playing to our lowest common denominator, no doubt. I'm not convinced many options at the moment, as much as I'd like to see them try.

I agree with this post. Paul has modified the system to address the fact our D core is dressing 4 bottom pairing assets most nights. He is not going to get into a shootout by design with the D quality we have on this current team.

Not sure I love the system but I do understand the logic behind it.

 

[KingBogo]

I agree with this post. Paul has modified the system to address the fact our D core is dressing 4 bottom pairing assets most nights. He is not going to get into a shootout by design with the D quality we have on this current team.

Not sure I love the system but I do understand the logic behind it.

I also think it is a bit naive around here to believe that Maurice actually prefers having four Dman that should be slotted 6-9 in his lineup. I expect we see the build towards a more NHL quality backend as we move down the stretch. The key will ultimately be if Buff comes back, and if he doesn't if Chevy pays the price to fill the RHD top 4 spot from outside the organization. Assuming relatively good health I expect something like as we enter March:

Morrissey - Pionk
Niku - Buff (Buff replacement)
Kuli - Poolman

Not the greatest D group in NHL history but one actually made up of NHL quality players and one that is capable of supporting our strong forward group.

 

[ps241]

I also think it is a bit naive around here to believe that Maurice actually prefers having four Dman that should be slotted 6-9 in his lineup. I expect we see the build towards a more NHL quality backend as we move down the stretch. The key will ultimately be if Buff comes back, and if he doesn't if Chevy pays the price to fill the RHD top 4 spot from outside the organization. Assuming relatively good health I expect something like as we enter March:

Morrissey - Pionk
Niku - Buff (Buff replacement)
Kuli - Poolman

Not the greatest D group in NHL history but one actually made up of NHL quality players and one that is capable of supporting our strong forward group.

Buff has and is going to continue to determine allot this season. We have been hamstrung by my favorite player and his injury this season. Not sure how we are going to approach the deadline? I really think the standings are going to dictate allot.

 

[ps241]

Rinne .896, Saros .892.

No wonder Laviolette is such a ****ty coach.

Weird that both pretty established goalies sewered on the same half of a season?