Post-Game Talk: Jets 4 - Habs 1

[Jet]

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.

Yeah honestly that kind of annoyed me. He had a really strong game and his reward was to sit for the next 5

 

[Jets 31]

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 agree totally with you and it's weird but the coaches see something we don't. Stanley has played some good games this season but his bad games seem really bad.Maybe they are playing him alot to try and trade him at the deadline.

 

[Jets 31]

Yeah honestly that kind of annoyed me. He had a really strong game and his reward was to sit for the next 5

I thought Coghlan played well enough to get more games too.

 

[Moloch]

Im fine with stanley staying in the lineup for the next two but lets at least get fleury out for a few, he has not been good.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

My theory is Miller is nursing some kind of injury. Not enough to put him out on IR but enough that they need to give him a week or so off

 

[DRW204]

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.

yes the NHL season is 84 games.

 

[snowkiddin]

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.

It’s been nine seasons already?!

2016…

blink

2025…

 

[Royale With Cheese]

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.

NHL season is 82 games.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

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.

Season is 82 games.

I'd be surprised if they all maintain those paces and if they all play all of the remaining games. I think KFC will get at least 100 IF he plays all remaining games. I'll leave the predictions at that.

 

[johnnyonthspot]

Not a Perfetti fan?

I like Perfetti. I wish he would score more often but he is a good player.
He said he wants to play more like a little prick: MSN

 

[Gil Fisher]

Yes, Yes, close, Yes

Close, No, Yes, Close but probably not in another 50 games

 

[johnnyonthspot]

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

Good point. They have said they like his size, a poster here pointed out they need him for the pk but none of it adds up unless he is Chipmans long lost brother, son or nephew??

 

[Gil Fisher]

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

Spot on, Joe!

 

[kanadalainen]

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

 

[RabidOne]

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...

Mmmm, steamed ham….

 

[Jets 31]

We are spoiled with all the winning of games we need something to bitch about.

 

[Snowboy]

CAUSE THEY ARE MY HAPPY TRAAAAAAAILS

Nice comment...Roy

He had a bit of a tough night.

Again!

 

[Adam da bomb]

Season is 82 games.

I'd be surprised if they all maintain those paces and if they all play all of the remaining games. I think KFC will get at least 100 IF he plays all remaining games. I'll leave the predictions at that.

Predicting he plays all the remaining games I think is the easiest bet to make.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Predicting he plays all the remaining games I think is the easiest bet to make.

No way I would bet on that. Just too many injuries in hockey. No to mention that he must have a target on his back with the way he has been playing.

 

[MardyBum]

Screw Laine. He doesn't want to play here? Get the fuq outta town with Kane and Trouba and PLD and any other player that doesn't want to play here.
One trick pony and not even that at 8.7m a year!!!

Plenty of criticisms for Laine, but this one is certainly one of the worst. Not the city certainly, or the fans.

 

[Jets 31]

It's pretty amazing that we have a chance for not 1 but 2 guys getting 50 goals this season.

 

[Adam da bomb]

It's pretty amazing that we have a chance for not 1 but 2 guys getting 50 goals this season.

We have a small chance of 2 guys at 60.

 

[Gm0ney]

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"

Whew...it's a good thing you have all those strawmen to carry the goalposts around the field for you.

1) GF% was the biggest stat last year! (Not really. It wasn't cited in isolation. No one's saying this.)

2) Stanley has the 2nd best GF% on the Jets! (Not meaningful in small sample, his shot metrics and modeled stats range from team worst to meh).

3) GF% wasn't luck driven last year! (Wasn't used in isolation, much larger sample. No one's saying this).

4) If Stanley was bad the numbers should say that but: 2nd best GF%! (Most of the numbers do say Stanley is bad - except GF%, which we know is highly susceptible to luck).

5) To raideralex99 - My problem with the stats nerds is that just because Stanley has 2nd best GF% doesn't mean he's the best defenseman. (Again, no one is saying this besides you.)

6) "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" (Please show me where I made that claim. Once again, no one's claiming this. You pedantically latched on to me saying "giving up more" instead of "has a worse ratio of". In net terms does it make a difference?)

oh good lord there's more!

"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"​

- Oops! Your bias is showing - you've got that table sorted in reverse, but whatever. He's 5/7 on the Jets in xGA/60. I guess that settles it.​

"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"​

- Again, I never said he was bad at defending, although I will say he's not particularly good at it by any measure.​

"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""​

- I never said the CSV sample size was large, I said the C+S and E+S samples were much larger than the Miller+Stanley sample. Also, the CSV sample was bad across the board, not just GF% (and GF%, as I may have mentioned, is not particularly useful in small samples in isolation).​

​

All I've been saying, over and over, is that GF% is a poor metric to use in a small sample and in isolation to judge Stanley by. Luckily, no one is using it that way except you! Every other metric/analytic has him ranked low...except the GF% outlier, which we already know is highly susceptible to luck.

So in summary, there's no "one stat to rule them all". GF% is highly susceptible to randomness. Larger samples are better than smaller samples. Miller is better than Stanley (but if you have to have Stanley out there every goddamn night, putting him with Miller looks like the best bet). It would be nice to see if anyone else is good with Miller but Stanley Über Alles...

 

[Gm0ney]

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

Oops...your bias is showing...you didn't sort the list:

5v5 Giveaways/60
Morrissey 2.64
Pionk 2.75
DeMelo 3.04
Miller 3.99
Fleury 4.07
Samberg 4.13
Stanley 4.35

Maybe he's better on the PK (spoiler alert, he sure f***ing isn't):

4v5 Giveaways/60
Samberg 0.86
DeMelo 1.12
Pionk 3.96
Stanley 4.92

Well there must be something he's good at. He's tall. That's a bonus. He takes quite a few penalties, so that limits the damage he can do giving away the puck on the penalty kill. He also has that magical power to generate a massively positive goal differential despite not being able to generate xGF at all, and being a mediocre 5/7 in preventing xGA - all while looking terrible. This guy's a keeper!

 

[BobTheSolarsystem]

Whew...it's a good thing you have all those strawmen to carry the goalposts around the field for you.

1) GF% was the biggest stat last year! (Not really. It wasn't cited in isolation. No one's saying this.)

2) Stanley has the 2nd best GF% on the Jets! (Not meaningful in small sample, his shot metrics and modeled stats range from team worst to meh).

3) GF% wasn't luck driven last year! (Wasn't used in isolation, much larger sample. No one's saying this).

4) If Stanley was bad the numbers should say that but: 2nd best GF%! (Most of the numbers do say Stanley is bad - except GF%, which we know is highly susceptible to luck).

5) To raideralex99 - My problem with the stats nerds is that just because Stanley has 2nd best GF% doesn't mean he's the best defenseman. (Again, no one is saying this besides you.)

6) "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" (Please show me where I made that claim. Once again, no one's claiming this. You pedantically latched on to me saying "giving up more" instead of "has a worse ratio of". In net terms does it make a difference?)

oh good lord there's more!

"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"​

- Oops! Your bias is showing - you've got that table sorted in reverse, but whatever. He's 5/7 on the Jets in xGA/60. I guess that settles it.​

"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"​

- Again, I never said he was bad at defending, although I will say he's not particularly good at it by any measure.​

"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""​

- I never said the CSV sample size was large, I said the C+S and E+S samples were much larger than the Miller+Stanley sample. Also, the CSV sample was bad across the board, not just GF% (and GF%, as I may have mentioned, is not particularly useful in small samples in isolation).​

​

All I've been saying, over and over, is that GF% is a poor metric to use in a small sample and in isolation to judge Stanley by. Luckily, no one is using it that way except you! Every other metric/analytic has him ranked low...except the GF% outlier, which we already know is highly susceptible to luck.

So in summary, there's no "one stat to rule them all". GF% is highly susceptible to randomness. Larger samples are better than smaller samples. Miller is better than Stanley (but if you have to have Stanley out there every goddamn night, putting him with Miller looks like the best bet). It would be nice to see if anyone else is good with Miller but Stanley Über Alles...

Stanley Uber Alles haha...