Post-Game Talk: Jets 2 - Kraken 1

[KingBogo]

It seems kc is playing lower in our zone.

Agreed, but not by much. Enough to be in a support position rather than a jumping the zone position. They also don't leave the zone as quickly. Now the 1st pass is in our zone and possession is established before they start attacking.

 

[Buffdog]

It seems kc is playing lower in our zone.

A huge part of that line's improvement is zone exits. They're getting hemmed in less, and closer support is a big part of it. They're also flying the zone more when appropriate

I think the biggest thing is that as soon as the puck is turned over in the O zone, guys get back to the defensive side of the puck and they set up in a 1-2-2 instead of all out press in the o zone trying to get the puck back. It allows them to set up their defensive structure in the D zone much earlier and easier

 

[Jack7222]

For the record, I never said the line was good. I said that the org wanted them and the Lowry line to play vs other teams top players, hold their own and have the Ehlers line beat soft match ups.

I think the biggest reason that line is better this season is because of a couple of tactical changes that Arniel has instituted over Bone's system. I'm curious if you'd be able to identify them

Connor is actually backchecking more and shying away from contact less in the dzone? He's being given confidence of coaching, presumably, to carry the puck more out of the dzone and make more controlled transitions without just dumping it?

That's what I see, i dunno if you're referring to something more arcane but if so that maybe would have been a more interesting post than dredging up this debate..

A huge part of that line's improvement is zone exits. They're getting hemmed in less, and closer support is a big part of it. They're also flying the zone more when appropriate

I think the biggest thing is that as soon as the puck is turned over in the O zone, guys get back to the defensive side of the puck and they set up in a 1-2-2 instead of all out press in the o zone trying to get the puck back. It allows them to set up their defensive structure in the D zone much earlier and easier

Hadn't read this before posting but yeah i do think that's good insight. I think Connor is also carrying the puck way more outside the ozone (always puzzled me why he didn't do so much before) and they're playing a bit lot more possession heavy through the nz

 

[KingBogo]

A huge part of that line's improvement is zone exits. They're getting hemmed in less, and closer support is a big part of it. They're also flying the zone more when appropriate

I think the biggest thing is that as soon as the puck is turned over in the O zone, guys get back to the defensive side of the puck and they set up in a 1-2-2 instead of all out press in the o zone trying to get the puck back. It allows them to set up their defensive structure in the D zone much earlier and easier

Agreed. It is a much more patient and disciplined game. But still with the green light to attack aggressively, when they have a position or numbers advantage.

 

[KingBogo]

Connor is actually backchecking more and shying away from contact less in the dzone? He's being given confidence of coaching, presumably, to carry the puck more out of the dzone and make more controlled transitions without just dumping it?

That's what I see, i dunno if you're referring to something more arcane but if so that maybe would have been a more interesting post than dredging up this debate..



Hadn't read this before posting but yeah i do think that's good insight. I think Connor is also carrying the puck way more outside the ozone (always puzzled me why he didn't do so much before) and they're playing a bit lot more possession heavy through the nz

Actually I'd say Connor is backchecking less and instead putting himself in better defensive position so he doesn't have to do the hard backcheck. Good defense is preventative rather than chasing.

 

[Buffdog]

Actually I'd say Connor is backchecking less and instead putting himself in better defensive position so he doesn't have to do the hard backcheck. Good defense is preventative rather than chasing.

I've for sure noticed guys busting their asses to get back on odd man rushes maybe more than last year... but you're absolutely right in that being in the position as the puck is turned over leads to way less of those rushes in the first place

 

[Adam da bomb]

I've for sure noticed guys busting their asses to get back on odd man rushes maybe more than last year... but you're absolutely right in that being in the position as the puck is turned over leads to way less of those rushes in the first place

Which is important as we have seen sometimes players cheat or make the offensive play like ehlers did when he was the last man back. I’m guessing kc or shove would have trusted themselves for offence instead of making safe play.

 

[Cotton Eye Joe]

I think I can answer that

People here assumed that the line wasn't successful due to its makeup

The coaching staff saw the potential in the line and knew it was due to how they were playing

The only answer any posters had on here for improving the top line was putting Ehlers on it. The coaching staff knew better

And how have the Jets fared in playoffs?
Just maybe fans opinions (or complaints as you refer to them) on lineups and line combinations might be better than the coaches.
That's what this board is about. Voice an opinion, any opinion, at any given time. Be open to everyone doing so.

 

[Buffdog]

And how have the Jets fared in playoffs?
Just maybe fans opinions (or complaints as you refer to them) on lineups and line combinations might be better than the coaches.
That's what this board is about. Voice an opinion, any opinion, at any given time. Be open to everyone doing so.

The Jets didn't lose.in the playoffs because of line combos

It's a cute little fantasy to think that you know more than a professional hockey coach, so you go ahead and enjoy it

 

[Cotton Eye Joe]

View attachment 962831

The Jets didn't lose.in the playoffs because of line combos

It's a cute little fantasy to think that you know more than a professional hockey coach, so you go ahead and enjoy it

So why have they lost in past playoffs wise one?

 

[Buffdog]

So why have they lost in past playoffs wise one?

To start, Helle hasn't been up to his regular season standard

The biggest issue last year was zone exits IMHO. Our D did a terrible job retrieving pucks behind them and making clean 1st passes. Way too many failed exits and uncontrolled exits that resulted in quick neutral zone counter attacks. They made an adjustment to send wingers out of the zone to solve the avs D men from activating but that led to tip ins into the offensive zone with no sustained pressure.

Also, the timing and number of penalties was terrible. We'd be down 2, get within one and all of a sudden take a penalty and give up a PP goal.

Lastly, I think that as a team they were gassed. Nino talked about them pushing too hard down the stretch. Bone's scheme of high pressure in all 3 zones is notoriously taxing to play. Guys in Dallas have talked about how shitty it was to play in

That doesn't go into individual poor performances, but I think that getting shitkicked the way they did wasn't because 2 or 3 guys played poorly

 

[Adam da bomb]

To start, Helle hasn't been up to his regular season standard

The biggest issue last year was zone exits IMHO. Our D did a terrible job retrieving pucks behind them and making clean 1st passes. Way too many failed exits and uncontrolled exits that resulted in quick neutral zone counter attacks. They made an adjustment to send wingers out of the zone to solve the avs D men from activating but that led to tip ins into the offensive zone with no sustained pressure.

Also, the timing and number of penalties was terrible. We'd be down 2, get within one and all of a sudden take a penalty and give up a PP goal.

Lastly, I think that as a team they were gassed. Nino talked about them pushing too hard down the stretch. Bone's scheme of high pressure in all 3 zones is notoriously taxing to play. Guys in Dallas have talked about how shitty it was to play in

That doesn't go into individual poor performances, but I think that getting shitkicked the way they did wasn't because 2 or 3 guys played poorly

Also the decision to bring in players who were slow when the team identity was speed.

The decision to keep miller on bench was a weird one.

 

[Skidooboy]

I tracked the defensive zone exits again last night. I'm not tracking forwards, but I probably should. The Jets forwards do a lot of zone exiting.

Pionk: 12 successes (8 uncontrolled, 2 pass, 2 carry), and 0 failures.

DeMelo: 11 successes (6 uncontrolled, 5 pass) and 0 failures.

Heinola: 8 successes (3 uncontrolled, 2 pass, 3 carry) and 0 failures.

Morrissey: 6 successes (2 uncontrolled, 2pass, 2 carry) and 4 failures.

Stanley: 5 successes (1 uncontrolled, 4 pass) and 0 failures.

Samberg: 5 successes (2 uncontrolled, 2 pass, 1 carry) and 2 failures.

47 successful exits, 6 failures. 88.7% success rate. Admittedly, Seattle wasn't doing much to impede the Jets' exits.

Jets overwhelmingly used the RD to exit - not sure if that was by design or just an adjustment to what the Kraken were giving them.

It's been a strange couple of games. I feel like the Jets haven't had any panic situations where they're hemmed in and desperately trying to clear the puck. Exits have been going off with hardly a hitch.

i imagine most of the failures were in the first period?

 

[Buffdog]

Also the decision to bring in players who were slow when the team identity was speed.

The decision to keep miller on bench was a weird one.

Oh, for sure

But in a series that we lost 4-1 and was never really in, Collin Miller wouldn't have been the difference

 

[MyNameIsTaken]

I think part of it is that the coaching staff for two seasons in a row saw a reason to keep that line together that might not have been apparent to posters on here. It's that refusal.to acknowledge that people close to the team have info that we aren't privy to that I DO complain about

I wonder how many of us have even watched a single Jets practice, let alone been on the ice for every single one. Chemistry between players can start to emerge there before it shows up in games... as well as lack of chemistry. Not to mention attitudes, work ethic, etc

To some degree I think there's a bit of that with Stan, too... which might even extend into the locker room and how he fits with the core. Wouldn't surprise me if TNSE would sacrifice a little on ice performance for a happy room since we've seen what a splintered room can do to overall team performance

I think this is a very good post. Also looks like it inspired a very healthy conversation about a typically controversial topic, so kudos on the post and kudos to those involved.

I strongly agree that the coaching staff has access to more information than us. The belief that anyone who just looks at numbers and watches games can come up with clear cut, easy improvements is almost always misguided imo. Generally speaking I think that is your mission to talk back against, and I do respect that haha (not to put words in your mouth!)

That being said, _did_ the coaches see anything in particular that made it right to keep them together while they were not getting the results we might have wanted out of a top line? If this turns out to be a hot streak and they fall off for the second half of this year, do we still reward the coaches for seeing something and sticking with it? What we are seeing now isn’t really proof that they were correct, for just as many reasons as what we were seeing before wasn’t proof it couldn’t work.

Moral of the story is that we just don’t have enough information, as fans, to make conclusive decisions either way. Dumb, considering we are on a message board where the entire point is prognosticating over what teams should and are doing, but like, go crazy. But go crazy with a healthy dose of realism knowing you really don’t know the actual answer. Basically ever. Don’t attack other posters, don’t attack the players.

I dunno, I’m on way too much of a high horse here, but I do find the atmosphere on hfboards to be pretty rough at times and wish everyone could just take a healthy step back sometimes.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Oh, for sure

But in a series that we lost 4-1 and was never really in, Collin Miller wouldn't have been the difference

No, but, the bringing two slower players makes me wonder if they knew their identity and who they are. If not, pretty hard to game plan.

I think this is a very good post. Also looks like it inspired a very healthy conversation about a typically controversial topic, so kudos on the post and kudos to those involved.

I strongly agree that the coaching staff has access to more information than us. The belief that anyone who just looks at numbers and watches games can come up with clear cut, easy improvements is almost always misguided imo. Generally speaking I think that is your mission to talk back against, and I do respect that haha (not to put words in your mouth!)

That being said, _did_ the coaches see anything in particular that made it right to keep them together while they were not getting the results we might have wanted out of a top line? If this turns out to be a hot streak and they fall off for the second half of this year, do we still reward the coaches for seeing something and sticking with it? What we are seeing now isn’t really proof that they were correct, for just as many reasons as what we were seeing before wasn’t proof it couldn’t work.

Moral of the story is that we just don’t have enough information, as fans, to make conclusive decisions either way. Dumb, considering we are on a message board where the entire point is prognosticating over what teams should and are doing, but like, go crazy. But go crazy with a healthy dose of realism knowing you really don’t know the actual answer. Basically ever. Don’t attack other posters, don’t attack the players.

I dunno, I’m on way too much of a high horse here, but I do find the atmosphere on hfboards to be pretty rough at times and wish everyone could just take a healthy step back sometimes.

I think it’s interesting a number of coaches have seen things the same way.
If I was a coach I’d probably change things up just so I could make my mark not just same old.

 

[snowkiddin]

I dunno, I’m on way too much of a high horse here, but I do find the atmosphere on hfboards to be pretty rough at times and wish everyone could just take a healthy step back sometimes.

If you think it's rough here, you should check out the Jets subreddit.

Those mofos were legitimately upset that we didn't throw Stanley into that trade with Chicago the other day

 

[MyNameIsTaken]

No, but, the bringing two slower players makes me wonder if they knew their identity and who they are. If not, pretty hard to game plan.


I think it’s interesting a number of coaches have seen things the same way.
If I was a coach I’d probably change things up just so I could make my mark not just same old.

If we’re just throwing theories out there, I think that’s an interesting point. To keep on the same tone as my previous message though, if we are trying to use that as evidence that there is something tangible to 55-81 I think it’s still fair to conclude we just don’t have enough information to know.

If you think it's rough here, you should check out the Jets subreddit.

Those mofos were legitimately upset that we didn't throw Stanley into that trade with Chicago the other day

Yeah… I said hfboards, but I really meant the internet as a whole. It’s got a bit of a bad rap :p

 

[Buffdog]

I think this is a very good post. Also looks like it inspired a very healthy conversation about a typically controversial topic, so kudos on the post and kudos to those involved.

I strongly agree that the coaching staff has access to more information than us. The belief that anyone who just looks at numbers and watches games can come up with clear cut, easy improvements is almost always misguided imo. Generally speaking I think that is your mission to talk back against, and I do respect that haha (not to put words in your mouth!)

That being said, _did_ the coaches see anything in particular that made it right to keep them together while they were not getting the results we might have wanted out of a top line? If this turns out to be a hot streak and they fall off for the second half of this year, do we still reward the coaches for seeing something and sticking with it? What we are seeing now isn’t really proof that they were correct, for just as many reasons as what we were seeing before wasn’t proof it couldn’t work.

Moral of the story is that we just don’t have enough information, as fans, to make conclusive decisions either way. Dumb, considering we are on a message board where the entire point is prognosticating over what teams should and are doing, but like, go crazy. But go crazy with a healthy dose of realism knowing you really don’t know the actual answer. Basically ever. Don’t attack other posters, don’t attack the players.

I dunno, I’m on way too much of a high horse here, but I do find the atmosphere on hfboards to be pretty rough at times and wish everyone could just take a healthy step back sometimes.

Well said

Whenever someone makes a decision that I don't agree with, the first thing I always ask myself is "do they know something I don't know?". Looking at the same circumstances with less or different information can make my opinion wrong, even though it seems right based on what I know

With regards to CSV, it was clear to everyone that on ice results were better with ESV than CSV. Clearly, both Bonea and Arniel had all the same info we had, plus it's safe to say that they had more insight that we weren't privy to

So either they were wrong, or the info they had that we didn't have made them right... but since we don't know what it was, people just assumed it was the former

What I found curious is that both of them were outright asked about it by the press (Murat and maybe someone else). BOTH coaches sort of danced around the answer in such a way that it seems obvious to me that they knew something but weren't willing to share it for whatever reason

This all goes back to the Dunning Kruger thing where people think they know best because they know a little. I've been training jiu jitsu for a long time and back when I was starting to get good at it, my coach would show us a technique and I'd say "it seems like it would be better if you did it this way"... to which he'd always respond "you'd never do it that way because if you did, your opponent could easily do X or Y or Z"

The irony is now that I'm far beyond that point, when I see a technique and think that I'd do it differently, I immediately say "I'd think it would be better to do it this way, but I'm sure that there's a really good reason not to,... I just don't know enough to know what it is"

Knowing enough to know that you don't know much is a very comfortable and happy place to get to on a topic. The top experts in topics are the ones that say "we don't know" and "were not sure" and "I used to think x but then I changed my mind when I found out y" the most often

 

[Adam da bomb]

If we’re just throwing theories out there, I think that’s an interesting point. To keep on the same tone as my previous message though, if we are trying to use that as evidence that there is something tangible to 55-81 I think it’s still fair to conclude we just don’t have enough information to know.


Yeah… I said hfboards, but I really meant the internet as a whole. It’s got a bit of a bad rap :p

I’m not arguing with you. It may be lack of information. More so because teams have to keep with what’s working. If they go cold change it up.

 

[MyNameIsTaken]

I’m not arguing with you. It may be lack of information. More so because teams have to keep with what’s working. If they go cold change it up.

Sorry

 

[Adam da bomb]

Sorry

Evidence right now says it works. If evidence says otherwise in second half you got to do what works and is best for team. Pretty much exactly what you said.

 

[Gm0ney]

i imagine most of the failures were in the first period?

Morrissey, Pionk and Samberg's first exit attempts were all failures in the first period. Morrissey had 2 failed exits in the first. So 4 in the first, 1 in the second and 4 in the 3rd.

That's 9 failed exits altogether, not 6. I miscalculated the totals there when tallying everything up.

So an 83.9% success rate. 53.2% controlled exits.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

OR...

1. Don't complain
OR
2. Look at more than just those numbers before you do complain

It's one thing to complain about how a line is playing, but it's another to criticize the coaching staff for line combinations (while insinuating you know better) and to suggest that that's the problem

Arniel had faith in those three playing together. Posters on here complaining ablut them did not. We all know now who was right and who was wrong. You'd think that the people who were wrong would learn from that, but that's not the case

Oh come on. Connor and Scheif together have been a problem for years until they turned it around this year. How many years? As many as they have been together. And both of them were consistently better when they played apart. Numbers, eye-test, every way you could look at it. Was Arniel right? In the end yes, and I suspect he had something to do with the change since the problem had existed for so long under so many other coaches.

I don't know how he did it but I am glad he did. That has freed him up to do other things with other lines. Obviously we have to give Scheif and Connor credit too.

None of that means that those of us calling for a change for years were wrong. It means that the problem was fixed another way. Not that it didn't exist.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I hear what your saying and can see the validity in it.
My concern is standing pat because things are looking good now, we are at the top of the league and we are leading the league in goals.
Last season, many "experts" in the media and on here, predicted the Jets best matchup in the playoffs was the Avs. We were "looking good" going into playoffs. We saw what happened. Our low GAA was destroyed, our D was walked and we did not have an answer to the Avs attack.
The majority of our scoring has come from our top line. For sure, opponents will slow them down come playoffs.
We have had many games where we don't score alot of goals. We then have a bunch of games where we pile on with 5 or more goals, many times against teams at the end of a road trip or weaker teams. My concern is when we face a tough opponent come playoffs who score 3 or more, we will depend on our top line to do the majority of scoring.
I would be in favour of giving up some future if we could acquire a top 6 experienced forward with 2-3 years of term. And also acquiring a bigger, experienced D on the back end.

Your point is that despite how good we are there is room to improve. Of course that is true. It is always true.

I don't think the problem last year was that we weren't good enough for the Avs in the PO. It was that the Avs got us away from our game. We were not good enough to beat them at their game. Come PO again and the same will happen, regardless of who we play, if they manage to get us playing their game instead of ours.

If we acquire the players you want they need to fit the team that we have and they need to be more effective than the players they will displace. It doesn't always work out that way. The team right now is in a good space. I don't want to mess with that carelessly.