Post-Game Talk: Jets 4 - Habs 1

[JetsFan815]

All the people who suddenly fell in love with Kovacevic this year should be pushing to keep at it with Stan for a couple more years. If all things are equal. But strangely they don't.

Kovacevic was a 3rd year pro then who had never had a run at the NHL level. Stanley is in his 7 pro year as a player with 5 of those at the NHL level. He is what he is at this point.

 

[10Ducky10]

He is what he is at this point.

Exactly and that is not very good.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

The game plan coming out of first intermission was to work the Habs D down low.

Hutson is obviously quick on his skates and a strong passer but it was like watching a father vs son game when he was trying to push Barron off the puck late in the third.

Makes Ville look like a brute.

He also got steamrolled by that little prick Perfetti but then agen The Powerless Tool aka Stanley got knocked of the puck by Gallagher.
Hutson has tremendous upside just needs to hit the weights.

 

[BobTheSolarsystem]

I see @Buffdog is convoluting things again... easiest to use this chart for discussion purposes

Stan is middle of the pack... and quite good with Miller - yet Miller's stats are better with Pionk and Coghlan in very short samples
Again, though - this stuff actually supports Garret's argument about regressing to the mean - as Jomo-DeMelo have by far more minutes in their sample size than Stan-Miller... this also makes an even stronger case for Samberg as an 'elite' Dman though
Bottom line is Miller needs to be an every game player... then return to see these stats once he's hit 300 mins

What we know...
Stan-Fleury are horrible
Stan makes Pionk and Heinola worse
Miller makes Stan better
Miller's CF% is considerably better without Stan and without Fleury
Stan is better than Fleury
DeMelo may not be in a position to 'carry' a third pairing
Samberg makes everyone on the ice 'better' CF% with/without
Stan literally makes everyone on the ice 'worse' CF% with/without

 

[johnnyonthspot]

Stan has to be in the press box down the stretch and come playoff time.
Anyone who thinks he is good to go as our 5 or 6 D has been fooled.
He painfully struggles against speed, high skill and snap decisions.

He simply has low hockey IQ and while he makes a decent first pass with a good shot from the point; his defensive miscues overshadow the good especially with other competent dmen in the press box

I see @Buffdog is convoluting things again... easiest to use this chart for discussion purposes

View attachment 969092

Stan is middle of the pack... and quite good with Miller - yet Miller's stats are better with Pionk and Coghlan in very short samples
Again, though - this stuff actually supports Garret's argument about regressing to the mean - as Jomo-DeMelo have by far more minutes in their sample size than Stan-Miller... this also makes an even stronger case for Samberg as an 'elite' Dman though
Bottom line is Miller needs to be an every game player... then return to see these stats once he's hit 300 mins

What we know...
Stan-Fleury are horrible
Stan makes Pionk and Heinola worse
Miller makes Stan better
Miller's CF% is considerably better without Stan and without Fleury
Stan is better than Fleury
DeMelo may not be in a position to 'carry' a third pairing
Samberg makes everyone on the ice 'better' CF% with/without
Stan literally makes everyone on the ice 'worse' CF% with/without

Thanks for this now send it to Chevy!! Great work. I can never understand these analytics charts but you broke it down very well!!

 

[Buffdog]

Do you think Stanley is a good enough player to play on the 3rd pairing in the NHL?
Do you think he is better than Miller? Fleury? Heinola?

He's good enough to play there, but if they're going to compete, they should upgrade. Same with 3RD

In terms of who he is and isn't better than... I think it's pretty close and probably varies game by game. All four are bottom pairing D men at best. They all play a different type of game

I've liked Fleury since the start of the year (great physical tools) but for some reason, his results are worse than Stan's.

I like Miller but he does tend to panic with the puck under pressure.

Heinola has his strengths, but I really don't think that he's had enough of an opportunity to show himself

 

[Howard Chuck]

My bad one player Miller is better I'll fix it ... Heinola might be better against fast skating we don't know he doesn't get a chance but Stanley is definitely better than Heinola agianst the heavy teams.

I thought Heinola was coming along really nicely in the few games that they let him string together. I would have thought that he would be perfect in a game like this or against any really quick team.

 

[Romang67]

Watching him in those early years, I'd see him struggle to do the right thing with the puck and turn it over or be unable to clear it - but man, I thought he'd get that stuff sorted out. A lot of his troubles seemed to be either "you're just not going to get away with that in the NHL" or "just a fraction of a second faster and that's an elite play". He was 18...not sure how everything stalled there.

It's honestly pretty astounding, and makes me wonder if it's as simple as his immaturity shining through. That he simply believed all the people that told him his shot was god's gift to earth, and there was no need to focus on becoming a better hockey player.

Just by the numbers, he went from being a flawed player in terms of shot metrics and driving play when he just entered the league, to being an embarrassing unplayable shit show 5v5 after year 2. Right around the time when Maurice seemed to try to push for him to becoming a multidimensional player.

Kyle Connor, who I think most people have straight up agreed has been straight up awful in terms of driving play and playing defense through his career, has positively fine looking numbers by comparison. This year, both of their 9th NHL season, Connor is closer to being the best player in the league in xGF% than Laine is to Connor. And it's not close.

 

[raideralex99]

See, you're doing it again

GF% wasn't "luck driven" when talking about ES vs CS

And from there, EVERYONE has the same goalie behind them - if Stanley was causing the worst outcomes on the team, the numbers should say that. But he's 62 GF% over 530 minutes on the ice.. 2nd best. That's EXACTLY what you want from your 3rd pairing.

And of course you're going to shelter your 3rd pairing... if you put them out against the other teams best, they'd be your 1st pairing lol. Every team does it

I have a hard time believing those Stanley stats. Yesterday in the third period when Montreal had a push in the third ... Stanley was on the ice. The other night vs Utah or Flames CVS were caved in the DZ 2 shifts in a row with Stanley on the ice the 3rd shift CVS spent the whole time in the OZ with Samberg and Poink as D men. I don't watch Stanley like a hawk looking for mistakes but when the Jets are getting outworked and can't get the puck I can spot who is on the ice. I like it when I don't notice Stanley on the ice ... no mistakes that's a good thing.
I'm not attacking Stanley here or you ... I'm just pointing out that if the stats are trying to tell me Stanley is the 2nd best D man on the team ... I call BS.

 

[JetsFan815]

Watching him in those early years, I'd see him struggle to do the right thing with the puck and turn it over or be unable to clear it - but man, I thought he'd get that stuff sorted out. A lot of his troubles seemed to be either "you're just not going to get away with that in the NHL" or "just a fraction of a second faster and that's an elite play". He was 18...not sure how everything stalled there.

Most players have a fair amount of improvement from their rookie years to when they hit their peak, esp ones who come into the league at a young age. So it is bizarre that he flatlined or even slightly declined from the player he was at 18. Jack Hughes was a much worse player than Laine in his rookie year but he developed. Nothing happened with Laine's game. Even if he was never going to be a force at 5v5, one would have hoped his game would have developed by now where wasn't a complete albatross in that situation.

To think there were people here saying he deserved a top line role over Wheeler, who as much as he had decline was still better.

I was glad when the Jets moved on from him. You can't win with a player like that being your #1 RW which was what he wanted to stay.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Remember when a second period collapse was the Jets thing? Sure glad to see that in the rearview mirror.

I was impressed with the Habs first period. They are not as bad as they used to be. But Jets were just too much for them from late in the first on. Dominated them in the second.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

I am not a Fleury fan. I get that fans love him because he skates fast but he is the classic all tools no toolbox type of player. I know people hate plus/minus but he is by far the worst player on the team in that regards. I would rather they play Stan/Miller or Heinola/Miller. I think right now because of that start we had they are just riding him and hoping he can put the tools together but I don't see it

 

[BobTheSolarsystem]

He simply has low hockey IQ and while he makes a decent first pass with a good shot from the point; his defensive miscues overshadow the good especially with other competent dmen in the press box


Thanks for this now send it to Chevy!! Great work. I can never understand these analytics charts but you broke it down very well!!

The tricky part is they have this with better info...

 

[Buffdog]

I have a hard time believing those Stanley stats. Yesterday in the third period when Montreal had a push in the third ... Stanley was on the ice. The other night vs Utah or Flames CVS were caved in the DZ 2 shifts in a row with Stanley on the ice the 3rd shift CVS spent the whole time in the OZ with Samberg and Poink as D men. I don't watch Stanley like a hawk looking for mistakes but when the Jets are getting outworked and can't get the puck I can spot who is on the ice. I like it when I don't notice Stanley on the ice ... no mistakes that's a good thing.
I'm not attacking Stanley here or you ... I'm just pointing out that if the stats are trying to tell me Stanley is the 2nd best D man on the team ... I call BS.

I think your last sentence sums up the problem that I have with stats and "statsnerds"

Stanley's 62 GF% is second best on the team... but that doesn't mean that he's the second best D man on the team. You can't draw that conclusion from that metric without context. It's just the result of that one specific measure while he's on the ice with who he's out there with, and against who he is out there against

If he were given JoMo's icetime, it would likely be a disaster. But he's not JoMo... he's the third pairing Dman and his job is to hopefully be on the ice for more goals for than against. It's the coaching staff's job to put him in situations where he is likely to succeed at that

I think that as the end of the day, if I were to say "hey, we have a 3rd pairing defenseman, and when he's on the ice, the team outscores the opposition at pretty much a 2:1 clip" most Jets fans would be ecstatic. But as soon as they find out that his name is "Logan Stanley", they want him gone

 

[Gm0ney]

See, you're doing it again

GF% wasn't "luck driven" when talking about ES vs CS

And from there, EVERYONE has the same goalie behind them - if Stanley was causing the worst outcomes on the team, the numbers should say that. But he's 62 GF% over 530 minutes on the ice.. 2nd best. That's EXACTLY what you want from your 3rd pairing.

And of course you're going to shelter your 3rd pairing... if you put them out against the other teams best, they'd be your 1st pairing lol. Every team does it

Ooooh! You got me there! Except...no one was just pointing at GF% as evidence. Also the sample was much larger and it consistently showed that Scheifele+Connor got out-everythinged (including GF%), while Scheifele+Ehlers out-everythinged their opponents (including GF%).

Here are Stanley's current rankings among 227 defensemen with 200 TOI at 5v5 around the NHL:

CF% 191st
FF% 174th
SF% 177th
xGF% 142nd
SCF% 143rd
HDCF% 134th (the 41st percentile!)
GF% 10th

Hmmm...one of these numbers is not like the others!

So is your conclusion that every other statistic is the real outlier, and that Stanley has some magical ability to keep pucks out of the net - even though he's giving up more shot attempts, unblocked shot attempts, shots, expected goals, scoring chances and high danger scoring chances than just about every other defenseman in the league and on the Jets?

And he's doing it to such an extent that he's the 10th ranked defenseman in GF%?

And it's totally undetectable by the eye test - in fact by the eye test he frequently looks like a clown?

You steam a good ham, Buffdog...

 

[Gm0ney]

I think your last sentence sums up the problem that I have with stats and "statsnerds"

Stanley's 62 GF% is second best on the team... but that doesn't mean that he's the second best D man on the team. You can't draw that conclusion from that metric without context. It's just the result of that one specific measure while he's on the ice with who he's out there with, and against who he is out there against

If he were given JoMo's icetime, it would likely be a disaster. But he's not JoMo... he's the third pairing Dman and his job is to hopefully be on the ice for more goals for than against. It's the coaching staff's job to put him in situations where he is likely to succeed at that

I think that as the end of the day, if I were to say "hey, we have a 3rd pairing defenseman, and when he's on the ice, the team outscores the opposition at pretty much a 2:1 clip" most Jets fans would be ecstatic. But as soon as they find out that his name is "Logan Stanley", they want him gone

No one is arguing he's the 2nd best on the team citing his 62% GF.

No one is arguing that we should draw conclusions based on one metric without context.

No one's saying put him on the first pairing! lol

The debate is whether a 26 year old defenseman who's bad by every measure (except GF% - which is very luck driven - and in Stanley's case, where every other indicator points negative, it's almost certainly luck) should be guaranteed a lineup spot.

 

[Buffdog]

Ooooh! You got me there! Except...no one was just pointing at GF% as evidence. Also the sample was much larger and it consistently showed that Scheifele+Connor got out-everythinged (including GF%), while Scheifele+Ehlers out-everythinged their opponents (including GF%).

Here are Stanley's current rankings among 227 defensemen with 200 TOI at 5v5 around the NHL:

CF% 191st
FF% 174th
SF% 177th
xGF% 142nd
SCF% 143rd
HDCF% 134th (the 41st percentile!)
GF% 10th

Hmmm...one of these numbers is not like the others!

So is your conclusion that every other statistic is the real outlier, and that Stanley has some magical ability to keep pucks out of the net - even though he's giving up more shot attempts, unblocked shot attempts, shots, expected goals, scoring chances and high danger scoring chances than just about every other defenseman in the league and on the Jets?

And he's doing it to such an extent that he's the 10th ranked defenseman in GF%?

And it's totally undetectable by the eye test - in fact by the eye test he frequently looks like a clown?

You steam a good ham, Buffdog...

Are you sure about the bolded? I'll give you a hint... when talking about xGF%, etc... you're talking about a ratio. Ratios have numerators and denominators

According to your claim (before you started acting like you've dunked on me), Stanley should be giving up the most xGA/60 on the Jets. Turns out you'd be wrong

Stan is firmly in the middle of the pack for Jets D men, doing a good job defending vs the players he's put out there against

So why all the low % numbers? Surprisingly, it's because the Jets shoot the puck less when he's on the ice and he specifically doesn't shoot much

So when you say that he's bad at defending, that's statistically false. He actually needs to improve on generating shot attempts for both him and his teammates

And edit: the CSV sample size that you called "big" was 192 minutes last year. Stans sample size this year is 530 minutes, and you called it "small"

 

[Crocket]

My bad one player Miller is better I'll fix it ... Heinola might be better against fast skating we don't know he doesn't get a chance but Stanley is definitely better than Heinola agianst the heavy teams.

Stanley is categorically worse because he's a giveaway machine prone to bad penalties.

Are you sure about the bolded? I'll give you a hint... when talking about xGF%, etc... you're talking about a ratio. Ratios have numerators and denominators

According to your claim (before you started acting like you've dunked on me), Stanley should be giving up the most xGA/60 on the Jets. Turns out you'd be wrong

View attachment 969129

Stan is firmly in the middle of the pack for Jets D men, doing a good job defending vs the players he's put out there against

So why all the low % numbers? Surprisingly, it's because the Jets shoot the puck less when he's on the ice and he specifically doesn't shoot much

View attachment 969130

So when you say that he's bad at defending, that's statistically false. He actually needs to improve on generating shot attempts for both him and his teammates

And edit: the CSV sample size that you called "big" was 192 minutes last year. Stans sample size this year is 530 minutes, and you called it "small"

Given his ice time and line up, he's really bad. Stan plays 60% of his minutes in the 3rd when we have the lead. In face he often played the 2 or 3 shifts in the last 5 minutes in games we lead by more than 2 goals.
He's sheltered and not good

 

[Buffdog]

Stanley is categorically worse because he's a giveaway machine prone to bad penalties.


Given his ice time and line up, he's really bad. Stan plays 60% of his minutes in the 3rd when we have the lead. In face he often played the 2 or 3 shifts in the last 5 minutes in games we lead by more than 2 goals.
He's sheltered and not good

Giveaways/60

Demelo: 3.0
JoMo: 2.6
Pionk: 2.7
Stanley: 4.3
Samberg: 4.1
Miller: 4.0

All 3rd pairings are sheltered, by definition

 

[Jets 31]

Not a Stanley fan but he's definitely playing with Lowry out so no point in bitching about it, for now anyway.

 

[Jets 31]

He also got steamrolled by that little prick Perfetti but then agen The Powerless Tool aka Stanley got knocked of the puck by Gallagher.
Hutson has tremendous upside just needs to hit the weights.

Not a Perfetti fan?

 

[JetsFan815]

I am not a Fleury fan. I get that fans love him because he skates fast but he is the classic all tools no toolbox type of player. I know people hate plus/minus but he is by far the worst player on the team in that regards. I would rather they play Stan/Miller or Heinola/Miller. I think right now because of that start we had they are just riding him and hoping he can put the tools together but I don't see it

I am amazed how Fluery has managed to get himself ahead of or at worst on par with Miller on the depth chart. Fluery is from the same draft year as Ehlers, hoping he cant "put the tools together" at this point is hope backed by nothing. Why even re-sign Miller if that's what they think of him? Kovacevic was available for a 4th round pick in the summer.

Not a Stanley fan but he's definitely playing with Lowry out so no point in bitching about it, for now anyway.

He is playing with or without Lowry. The man has yet to be healthy scratched a single time all season. He is the de-facto #5 d-man on this team. Arniel forcing Miller out of the lineup and making Samberg play on his offhand at the end of last season makes perfect sense now. Arniel is 100% consistent in how he has deployed Stanley. That is the reason for the bitching. Stan will continue to play when Lowry is healthy. Stan will also continue to play even after the Jets trade for another top-6 d-man since he is the real #5 dman on this team. It will take acquiring 2 d-men that Arniel considers good enough plus no injuries for him to be out of the lineup.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Connor reaching 50 goals or 100 pts?

KFC on a 102.5 pt pace
Scheifele on a 90 pt pace
Ehlers on a 86 pt pace - he won't make it due to having missed 9 games, but that is the 82 game pace.
FWIW - we'll see where they all end up.

 

[Adam da bomb]

KFC on a 102.5 pt pace
Scheifele on a 90 pt pace
Ehlers on a 86 pt pace - he won't make it due to having missed 9 games, but that is the 82 game pace.
FWIW - we'll see where they all end up.

Interesting I doubt they all hit them after all isn’t the season 84 games? So that means kfc has to get 37 in 32 games. I’m predicting 94.
I’m not sure how to calculate games missed, so it’s not 41 in 32 games. I will be impressed if he hits 75.
Schief has to hit 33 in 32 games. I’m predicting he hits 88.

Based on those numbers I doubt any of them hits their targets. I know that’s not what pace means, but, actually records what has previously happened.

 

[DRW204]

KFC on a 102.5 pt pace
Scheifele on a 90 pt pace
Ehlers on a 86 pt pace - he won't make it due to having missed 9 games, but that is the 82 game pace.
FWIW - we'll see where they all end up.

ehlers probably has the least going for him to maintain that pace at under 16 mins a night with Perfetti+Names. KC+Scheifele play with each other 20+/night, odds are better for at least one of them to hit that.

I am amazed how Fluery has managed to get himself ahead of or at worst on par with Miller on the depth chart. Fluery is from the same draft year as Ehlers, hoping he cant "put the tools together" at this point is hope backed by nothing. Why even re-sign Miller if that's what they think of him? Kovacevic was available for a 4th round pick in the summer.



He is playing with or without Lowry. The man has yet to be healthy scratched a single time all season. He is the de-facto #5 d-man on this team. Arniel forcing Miller out of the lineup and making Samberg play on his offhand at the end of last season makes perfect sense now. Arniel is 100% consistent in how he has deployed Stanley. That is the reason for the bitching. Stan will continue to play when Lowry is healthy. Stan will also continue to play even after the Jets trade for another top-6 d-man since he is the real #5 dman on this team. It will take acquiring 2 d-men that Arniel considers good enough plus no injuries for him to be out of the lineup.

i saw a table recently that aavcocup was tracking the injuries and healthy scratches for Jets dmen. you're right, Stanley hasn't been scratched once despite some of his low-lights and stretches of poor play. it really isn't a 3rd pair rotation that they originally talked up, it's a 6D spot rotation with Stanley being the mainstay on the third pair.