Post-Game Talk: Jets 3 - Caps 2 in OT

[johnnyonthspot]

I'd say it is pessimism since your predictions haven't happened yet. Fans can be pessimistic, you don't have to be sunshine and rainbows to be a fan of a team. In fact, many NFL fans I know are major pessimists, same as baseball. But that doesn't mean people are going to enjoy reading your stuff or interact with you in a certain way.

I appreciate your measured an informative response.
I feel that many posters on here can get away with being negative or pessimistic without facing the wrath that I do.
My takes are measured, reasoned, rational and based on more years of following hockey than many posters on here have been alive.

I am also a major supporter of all posters on here be it negative or positive or in-between.

I will not stop posting my thoughts and quite frankly do not want to interact with those who
A. Do not enjoy reading my stuff;
B. Are not open minded enough to see the nuance or read between the lines in my postings; and
C. Who are egotistical enough to be snobs on here.

Gojetsgo is the prime example of a poster who fits those category but Jets31 who is not a pessimistic poster is great to interact with on here.

It takes all kinds but at the end of the day we are all Jets fans and want to see them win the cup *( even if this is the leaf's year to win )

 

[ps241]

Giving up nick suzuki to protect him has ruined enstrom for me

Garret mentioned the org liked Liljegren in that spot, there is zero way to know if Suzuki would have been picked he was far from a slam dunk in his draft year.

 

[RabidOne]

Ellette was not favorite or hated by the Jets fan.
He does what he do best

as one of the JETS FAV 4 Defensemen as they called them before.

Housley
Numminen
Ellett
Oulasson

That was a seriously offensive (in a good way), top 4.
Housley was a machine for his short stint here. And I am sure Selanne said thanks as its no coincidence his 76 goal season came with Housley putting up 79 assists.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

There were a few, but most of them could fight so they had another role: Shawn Cronin, Jim Kyte. The one that might fit is Wade Campbell, but mostly because he was a bottom pair D that wasn't a fighter.

How about Scott Campbell who was protected over I think Kent Neilson .

 

[ICdave]

Today's practice media:

 

[RabidOne]

How about Scott Campbell who was protected over I think Kent Neilson .

As you can see from my profile pick that is the one that really stings.
And I am pretty sure Campbell retired after a year.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

As you can see from my profile pick that is the one that really stings.
And I am pretty sure Campbell retired after a year.

I did not even notice the picture and I think you are correct he retired shortly after the second season

 

[Gm0ney]

Dude, you were borderline mocking me for even implying Stanley was an adequate 6/7 dman for the regular season and that him and Miller were an ok bottom pair at the time (despite every metric pointing to that).

Remember the "being on thr ice for goals for and against is just a matter of luck" line of argument you had?

That said, it's admirable when people change their opinions based on the information available. We should all strive to do it more often (yeah, including myself lol)

I don't see a Stanley - Schenn bottom pairing as being in anyone's best interest... I've said all along that in order to make a deep run, Stanley would need to be upgraded. I made the mistake of just assuming that upgrade would come from acquiring a better LHD, and I was surprised they didn't get one at the deadline

But it looks like the org had a different idea... get a guy that brings the same thing they want from Stanley on their back end on the right side, then pair that with a better lefty - they handed that ball to Fleury, but it looks like he's fumbling it - which is a little surprising, considering how he impressed me at the start of the season

Do you really want to relitigate all that? I stand by everything I said in that argument and I haven't changed my opinion on anything (including my opinion that Stanley-Miller are fine together):

But picking one stat out of a small 200 minute sample (especially GF%, because goals are so luck driven) and making a determination is not going to give an accurate picture of Stanley-Miller's play or provide any predictive value. They're getting a .990 on-ice SV%...and while Hellebuyck is elite, that's just not sustainable. Their shot metrics are about breakeven. Which is fine for a sheltered 3rd pair.

I think this is where you misinterpret what I'm saying about GF%. I'm not a statistician, so maybe the technical terms for goals is that they're "rare events" and "randomly distributed"? Does that make more sense? You need a lot of data before you can separate the signal from the noise when it comes to goals.

 

[Buffdog]

Do you really want to relitigate all that? I stand by everything I said in that argument and I haven't changed my opinion on anything (including my opinion that Stanley-Miller are fine together):



I think this is where you misinterpret what I'm saying about GF%. I'm not a statistician, so maybe the technical terms for goals is that they're "rare events" and "randomly distributed"? Does that make more sense? You need a lot of data before you can separate the signal from the noise when it comes to goals.

I wish I knew which thread that discussion was in, because I'd love to go back and re-read it (it's funny how the Stanley hate pollutes every discussion on HFJets)

As for goals, I understand what you're saying... and I guess it comes down to how you (or a coaching staff) evaluates players. There's eye test, models (xGF%), stats (GF%, CF%), etc...

At the end of the day, everyone is hopefully using all of those to inform their opinions on players and their performance (leading to decisions about line ups, deployment, usage, etc)... and people will put varying amout of weight behind all those factors, and in the case of the org, other factors ("size", "grit", "good in the room", etc)... and that's perfectly OK too

The example I'll point out is, say, shot metrics (and models) vs goals. Yes, shot metrics and xGF have an advantage of a larger sample size to draw from, but at the end of the day, goals are what matter. There can absolutely be times when a GA or GF has nothing to do with a player on the ice, but also times when that player is the direct cause of it - and that's where I scoffed at your term "luck". Anyone who has played the game can recall a moment when they f***ed up and it led directly to a goal against

I'd wager that NHL coaching staff put a greater emphasis on goals than shots, but that's just a guess

 

[DRW204]

I am disillusioned becsuse of the past 2 playoff debacles.
This has been a stellar regular season but I refuse to get to excited until they show they can do this in the playoffs.

So last two playoffs debacles is the basis of your opinion on the Jets.... Yet you have the Leafs winning the cup, when's the last time they didn't experience a playoff debacle?

Closet Leafs fan continuously hedging your posts wishing for the Jets to lose and a big downfall. "Jets fan," hilarious.

 

[Gm0ney]

I wish I knew which thread that discussion was in, because I'd love to go back and re-read it (it's funny how the Stanley hate pollutes every discussion on HFJets)

As for goals, I understand what you're saying... and I guess it comes down to how you (or a coaching staff) evaluates players. There's eye test, models (xGF%), stats (GF%, CF%), etc...

At the end of the day, everyone is hopefully using all of those to inform their opinions on players and their performance (leading to decisions about line ups, deployment, usage, etc)... and people will put varying amout of weight behind all those factors, and in the case of the org, other factors ("size", "grit", "good in the room", etc)... and that's perfectly OK too

The example I'll point out is, say, shot metrics (and models) vs goals. Yes, shot metrics and xGF have an advantage of a larger sample size to draw from, but at the end of the day, goals are what matter. There can absolutely be times when a GA or GF has nothing to do with a player on the ice, but also times when that player is the direct cause of it - and that's where I scoffed at your term "luck". Anyone who has played the game can recall a moment when they f***ed up and it led directly to a goal against

I'd wager that NHL coaching staff put a greater emphasis on goals than shots, but that's just a guess

It was the Montreal PGT in January. And I was the model of decorum...until I wasn't. But I was provoked!

I think the emphasis is on process over goals. Goals are great, but the process is what gets you to the goals. In the short term, you can do everything right and still lose (or do everything wrong and still win). Getting the process right helps with sustainability. And shot metrics and analytics probably offer a better window on process than goals do over the short/medium term.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

So last two playoffs debacles is the basis of your opinion on the Jets.... Yet you have the Leafs winning the cup, when's the last time they didn't experience a playoff debacle?

Closet Leafs fan continuously hedging your posts wishing for the Jets to lose and a big downfall. "Jets fan," hilarious.

Yes, I am the only one thinking this my. You seriously need a Kenny and Renny Wake up call!!
You can call me that all you want just because it is their time to win does not make me a fan. The Leafs have had more debacles than the Jets but the Chicago Cubs went 80 years without a title and got one. It happens to even the most disdainful franchises.

You fall into the category of poster that cannot read between the lines or assess the nuance in my postings but that is ok at least we are having productive dialogue.

 

[DRW204]

Yes, I am the only one thinking this my. You seriously need a Kenny and Renny Wake up call!!
You can call me that all you want just because it is their time to win does not make me a fan. The Leafs have had more debacles than the Jets but the Chicago Cubs went 80 years without a title and got one. It happens to even the most disdainful franchises.

You fall into the category of poster that cannot read between the lines or assess the nuance in my postings but that is ok at least we are having productive dialogue.

I need the wake up call? It's not the 1960s, the last time your beloved franchise won a cup.

Sorry I don't give a shit enough about you Leafs fans on here to dissect every single one of your ridiculous posts.

Essentially every post game thread, you get called out by posters on the constant prediction of Jets L's.

I'm sure when the Jets lose the next game you'll be quick to post your "I told you so's" or about a possible L streak. Or if they win: giving yourself a pat on the back "see they win when I say they'll lose"... the constant hedging.

Anyway, rest up - your team plays at 10:30pm EST tonight.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

I need the wake up call? It's not the 1960s, the last time your beloved franchise won a cup.

Sorry I don't give a shit enough about you Leafs fans on here to dissect every single one of your ridiculous posts.

Essentially every post game thread, you get called out by posters on the constant prediction of Jets L's.

I'm sure when the Jets lose the next game you'll be quick to post your "I told you so's" or about a possible L streak. Or if they win: giving yourself a pat on the back "see they win when I say they'll lose"... the constant hedging.

Anyway, rest up - your team plays at 10:30pm EST tonight.

Yes, you do if you think I am the only one who thinks the "last two playoffs debacles is the basis of your opinion on the Jets". I know many are treading carefully and the Jets would not be the first NHL team to have great regular seasons only do 'crash' in the playoffs.


This is blashphomy: I'm sure when the Jets lose the next game you'll be quick to post your "I told you so's" or about a possible L streak. Or if they win: giving yourself a pat on the back "see they win when I say they'll lose"... the constant hedging.
I do not such thing. In fact if they win I am very happy especially if I think they will loose that game and have no issue eating jet fuel aka crow. So please stop with the drama and disinformation about me.

Finally, I am not leaf fan but I think they will win the cup. I am not staying up to watch the Leafs lose to the Sharks. My heart cannot take such a loss.

.

 

[10Ducky10]

Yes, you do if you think I am the only one who thinks the "last two playoffs debacles is the basis of your opinion on the Jets". I know many are treading carefully and the Jets would not be the first NHL team to have great regular seasons only do 'crash' in the playoffs.


This is blashphomy: I'm sure when the Jets lose the next game you'll be quick to post your "I told you so's" or about a possible L streak. Or if they win: giving yourself a pat on the back "see they win when I say they'll lose"... the constant hedging.
I do not such thing. In fact if they win I am very happy especially if I think they will loose that game and have no issue eating jet fuel aka crow. So please stop with the drama and disinformation about me.

Finally, I am not leaf fan but I think they will win the cup. I am not staying up to watch the Leafs lose to the Sharks. My heart cannot take such a loss.

.

Your heart can't take us such a loss but you are not a Leafs' fan? Yeah okay.
You are as transparent as Saran wrap.
If you want to look at playoff debacles, take a look at your favorite team the Toronto Maple Leafs.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

Your heart can't take us such a loss but you are not a Leafs' fan? Yeah okay.
You are as transparent as Saran wrap.
If you want to look at playoff debacles, take a look at your favorite team the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Are you seriously not getting the sarcasm in my response about the leaf's game tonight?
Let's put our energy into hoping the Jets dispose o the Devils' tomorrow night. It is a critical game since the Stars will smoke the Flames tonight unless you want the Jets to repeat their playoff debacle from last year by playing the Av's?? Hmm could (rubber)10 Ducky10 be a closet Av's fan??

 

[10Ducky10]

Are you seriously not getting the sarcasm in my response about the leaf's game tonight?
Let's put our energy into hoping the Jets dispose o the Devils' tomorrow night. It is a critical game since the Stars will smoke the Flames tonight unless you want the Jets to repeat their playoff debacle from last year by playing the Av's?? Hmm could (rubber)10 Ducky10 be a closet Av's fan??

When was the last time your Leafs won a playoff round? Have they won one in the last 20 years? And you are saying they are going to win the Stanley Cup this year???
Blatant Leafs fan.

 

[PhilJets]

Dave Ellett double OT GWG 1990, game 4. What could have been for the Jets that year.

Next season Hawerchuk goes to Buffalo, and Dave Ellett was traded to Toronto.

Ellett would still be my #1 for 1.0. Housley put up more points, but Ellett was the kind of defenseman who could win in the playoffs.

i was listening to my casette deck radio

i was so happy thought the Jets

That was a seriously offensive (in a good way), top 4.
Housley was a machine for his short stint here. And I am sure Selanne said thanks as its no coincidence his 76 goal season came with Housley putting up 79 assists.

its too bad top 4 is so good but the bottom pairing is really bad

 

[Cotton Eye Joe]

Coelacanth of the game:

With one of his strongest games of the season, getting in Wilson's grill, blazing through the neutral almost every shift, and of course the beautiful goal to beat the caps.

#27 Nikolaj Ehlers

View attachment 999518

View attachment 999521

The most talented Jet along with KFC.

 

[DRW204]

Yes, you do if you think I am the only one who thinks the "last two playoffs debacles is the basis of your opinion on the Jets". I know many are treading carefully and the Jets would not be the first NHL team to have great regular seasons only do 'crash' in the playoffs.


This is blashphomy: I'm sure when the Jets lose the next game you'll be quick to post your "I told you so's" or about a possible L streak. Or if they win: giving yourself a pat on the back "see they win when I say they'll lose"... the constant hedging.
I do not such thing. In fact if they win I am very happy especially if I think they will loose that game and have no issue eating jet fuel aka crow. So please stop with the drama and disinformation about me.

Finally, I am not leaf fan but I think they will win the cup. I am not staying up to watch the Leafs lose to the Sharks. My heart cannot take such a loss.

.

Blah blah blah bunch of flimsy cop outs and weak rationale. Drama and disinformation? Lmao you just created a thread to stir up more drama, while still pumping the Leafs tires. Your team lost last night.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

Blah blah blah bunch of flimsy cop outs and weak rationale. Drama and disinformation? Lmao you just created a thread to stir up more drama, while still pumping the Leafs tires. Your team lost last night.

60/40 split in favour of yes. Not blah blah or stirring up drama I wanted to see what other posters who do not have a hate on for me thought. They lost in a shootout after making a miraculous comeback. There are no shootouts in playoffs. Plus the Jets have lost to the Sharks.