Toggle sidebar

Injury Report: Jets health in the playoffs

Huffer said:
The injury thread is now the Stanley thread lol.

IMO, one of the things with Stan is that on both ends of the spectrum (good and bad) his plays can be high event / highly noticeable.

So sometimes you see him out there shut down a zone entry, or easily physically remove a guy from the puck, or take two or three long strides and easily get the puck out of the zone and you're like, yes, if the Jets can get this out of a 6'7" D man, that is going to be great. And I can see the alluring appeal for the coaches too. Sometimes it's just right there.

But on the flipside, sometimes he makes some really bad reads in the neutral zone and allows a pretty uncontested zone entry, or he fumbles the puck and then makes a free pizza type D zone pass, or just gets caught running around the D zone. And those ones seem to end in quality chances against or goals.

Agree with the comments about being heavily partner dependent from a complementary skill perspective. I think almost all players are, but I'd imagine it's more magnified with the depth players.
Click to expand...
What a great post. Also, of course it is!
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Adam da bomb and voyageur
Jet said:
I'm going to guess a couple of things:

The average fan and their bias is not a good measure of a players performance
The echo chamber is real when it comes to player assessment

I am open to ideas I hadn't considered but the Chevy and his pride argument has never sat well with me.
Click to expand...
Well I don't base my opinions on anyone else's. I base it on what I see. IMO Stanley is a liability every time he plays and it's a mystery why he's still in the big league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnonoJet
Jet said:
Like I'll talk about Stanley with a guy like Gm0ney all day because he comes with a well thought out argument and is respectful (if not a little sassy). I don't necessarily agree with everything he says but I love the discussion.

These guys who just continually say shit like Stanley sucks, or he's the worst player even of the taxi squad - that's just, IMHO, idiotic spew.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Gm0ney is good (although one of our Stanley convos devolved, but that was before he came around to sharing the opinion I've had of Stanley all along)

I really appreciate any nuanced and objective views
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Gm0ney, Adam da bomb and Jet
MelikeJets said:
Well I don't base my opinions on anyone else's. I base it on what I see. IMO Stanley is a liability every time he plays and it's a mystery why he's still in the big league.
Click to expand...
Stats say otherwise, providing he's put in the right situation - which is the same as anyone at the bottom of an NHL roster

Have you considered that, when provided with objective evidence that counteracts your opinion, you might be wrong?
 
Buffdog said:
Stats say otherwise, providing he's put in the right situation - which is the same as anyone at the bottom of an NHL roster

Have you considered that, when provided with objective evidence that counteracts your opinion, you might be wrong?
Click to expand...
Sure I have no problem being proven wrong. I just don't like having my opinion being called "bullshit"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eyeseeing
Jet said:
There is a lot of evidence to support this:
  • People bitching about Stanley when he isn't even dressed
  • People blaming Stanley for plays that aren't his fault
  • People blowing mistakes way out of proportion
  • People saying something that is the right play but doesn't work out due to the chaotic nature of hockey is Stanley's fault
  • People refusing to give Stan any credit for good play
Of course, those people will call me a Stan fan or whatever else they want to call me. I'm trying to be as objective about it as I possibly can.

The part that irritates me the most about it is a bunch in that group don't even try to be objective or open-minded they just want to continually write the same lazy narrative over and over again.
Click to expand...
Na, you just don't want to see reality. People don't just hate players for no reason.
Here's the problem, which you don't seem to get for some reason.
Stanley has had over all good games this season but mostly has been meh. The main problem is, he doesn't offer anything other than just not making glaring mistakes. He doesn't add anything offensively, which is ok but his defense does offer anything other than just not being bad. The stats don't show bad passes into people's feet, bad decisions with the puck, throwing the puck 3 feet to his partner when in trouble, essentially, just playing hot potato. He plays sheltered minutes at home. It was clear as day on the road when not in ideal matchups. This was true of all our D BUT, they proved in the right roles, they Excell, not just go back to basic play.

Flurey has been very up and down, he needs to get a shot in the role again after playing such a strong game. He is just as streaky as Stan BUT, when he's good, he a FAR better D than Stan. When he's bad, he's just as bad. So, it makes sense to ride the person with more potential to be great. If you think that doesn't make sense, then there's no hope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Puckatron 3000 and slurpee addict
Jet said:
There is a lot of evidence to support this:
  • People bitching about Stanley when he isn't even dressed
  • People blaming Stanley for plays that aren't his fault
  • People blowing mistakes way out of proportion
  • People saying something that is the right play but doesn't work out due to the chaotic nature of hockey is Stanley's fault
  • People refusing to give Stan any credit for good play
Of course, those people will call me a Stan fan or whatever else they want to call me. I'm trying to be as objective about it as I possibly can.

The part that irritates me the most about it is a bunch in that group don't even try to be objective or open-minded they just want to continually write the same lazy narrative over and over again.
Click to expand...
Stanley's ugly and somewhat frequent gaffes are supercharged by negativity bias. This leads to a general negative opinion of him and now there's confirmation bias - bad things are amplified, good things are downplayed.

This is just human nature, and mostly related to the eye test. I don't think fan sentiment toward Stanley would be much different if we'd never heard of Corsi.

Those biases can certainly contribute to how/which stats are presented to make an argument, but I try not to post one number from a small sample without context. If there's a large, consistent sample and you look at it from a few different angles, then the stats can be compelling evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Puckatron 3000, Hank Chinaski, Jet and 1 other person
TheGovernment said:
Na, you just don't want to see reality. People don't just hate players for no reason.
Here's the problem, which you don't seem to get for some reason.
Stanley has had over all good games this season but mostly has been meh. The main problem is, he doesn't offer anything other than just not making glaring mistakes. He doesn't add anything offensively, which is ok but his defense does offer anything other than just not being bad. The stats don't show bad passes into people's feet, bad decisions with the puck, throwing the puck 3 feet to his partner when in trouble, essentially, just playing hot potato. He plays sheltered minutes at home. It was clear as day on the road when not in ideal matchups. This was true of all our D BUT, they proved in the right roles, they Excell, not just go back to basic play.

Flurey has been very up and down, he needs to get a shot in the role again after playing such a strong game. He is just as streaky as Stan BUT, when he's good, he a FAR better D than Stan. When he's bad, he's just as bad. So, it makes sense to ride the person with more potential to be great. If you think that doesn't make sense, then there's no hope.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the word salad.

I think my opinion on the subject is pretty balanced, just because it doesn't align with yours doesn't mean I don't get it.

Maybe you mean I don't just cowtow to the general consensus and actually want to dig a little deeper.

Airing your grievances and biased opinion in a huge paragraph doesn't really make much of an argument - you kind of fall into that group that just wants to shout their emotional opinions about Stanley without trying to strip bias out of it and trying to understand it better.

A reminder:

I don't think Stanley is a great defenseman
I said I think Fleury should get another opportunity based on his work in game 7
I am happy with the lineup choice Arniel made today (whether Stan was available I don't know)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adam da bomb and Buffdog
TheGovernment said:
Na, you just don't want to see reality. People don't just hate players for no reason.
Here's the problem, which you don't seem to get for some reason.
Stanley has had over all good games this season but mostly has been meh. The main problem is, he doesn't offer anything other than just not making glaring mistakes. He doesn't add anything offensively, which is ok but his defense does offer anything other than just not being bad. The stats don't show bad passes into people's feet, bad decisions with the puck, throwing the puck 3 feet to his partner when in trouble, essentially, just playing hot potato. He plays sheltered minutes at home. It was clear as day on the road when not in ideal matchups. This was true of all our D BUT, they proved in the right roles, they Excell, not just go back to basic play.

Flurey has been very up and down, he needs to get a shot in the role again after playing such a strong game. He is just as streaky as Stan BUT, when he's good, he a FAR better D than Stan. When he's bad, he's just as bad. So, it makes sense to ride the person with more potential to be great. If you think that doesn't make sense, then there's no hope.
Click to expand...

"you just don't want to see reality"


maybe it's you who doesn't see it...

..and Arneil has said 100% the opposite and shown his thoughts with definable actions so we know it's not just words.
.
He's dressed Stanley almost every single time he's been healthy... he's stated he believes Stanley is a big part of the D and having him in the lineup gives "us the best chance to win"

so I wonder...what is it you see that the current Jack Adams finalist Presidents cup trophy winning head coach doesn't see?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TS Quint and Jet
TheGovernment said:
Na, you just don't want to see reality. People don't just hate players for no reason.
Here's the problem, which you don't seem to get for some reason.
Stanley has had over all good games this season but mostly has been meh. The main problem is, he doesn't offer anything other than just not making glaring mistakes. He doesn't add anything offensively, which is ok but his defense does offer anything other than just not being bad. The stats don't show bad passes into people's feet, bad decisions with the puck, throwing the puck 3 feet to his partner when in trouble, essentially, just playing hot potato. He plays sheltered minutes at home. It was clear as day on the road when not in ideal matchups. This was true of all our D BUT, they proved in the right roles, they Excell, not just go back to basic play.

Flurey has been very up and down, he needs to get a shot in the role again after playing such a strong game. He is just as streaky as Stan BUT, when he's good, he a FAR better D than Stan. When he's bad, he's just as bad. So, it makes sense to ride the person with more potential to be great. If you think that doesn't make sense, then there's no hope.
Click to expand...
Re: bolded

That's exactly what the stats should show if they turned into shots against or xGA (given a proper sample size)

While Stan ranks at the bottom of the Jets defensemen in those numbers, they aren't way out of line. And at the end of the day, somebody needs to be the worst defenseman on the team

His stats say exactly what many of us are saying about him... he's ideally a 7D who can slot in on the bottom pairing provided he has the right partner and his matchups are managed properly
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skidooboy, Jets 31, Adam da bomb and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 5 more.
    • Total: 23 (members: 18, guests: 5)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom