Post-Game Talk: Kraken 4 - Jets 3

[hn777]

Then it should be easy to repost it.

This. Unpredictability can also be a good thing.

We have discussed the defensive woes with Connor on the topline at great length, but Scheifele without Ehlers is an issue in itself (NST from last three seasons):

View attachment 829157

As shown, the huge swing in Goal Differential can be explained largely by the difference in High Danger Goals (For vs Against). I guess, Ehlers is so good in transition, he helps Scheifele move from negative to heavily positive results.

Edit:
Scheifele with Ehlers: Positive GD, xGF% and HDGF%
Ehlers w/o Scheifele: Positive GD, xGF% and HDGF%
Scheifele w/o Ehlers: Negative GD, xGF% and HDGF%

 

[KingBogo]

Edit:
Scheifele with Ehlers: Heavily positive GD, xG% and HDG

No one is arguing that.

 

[Buffdog]

Edit:
Scheifele with Ehlers: Positive GD, xG% and HDGF%
Ehlers w/o Scheifele: Positive GD, xG% and HDGF%

But what's the point of that?

We've been told that it helps us win games (which is the ultimate goal here, right?)

Is that why you're advocating for them to play together?

 

[hn777]

No one is arguing that.

But what's the point of that?

We've been told that it helps us win games (which is the ultimate goal here, right?)

Is that why you're advocating for them to play together?

Sorry, I was finishing the post on the fly. See edits

 

[Buffdog]

Sorry, I was finishing the post on the fly. See edits

K, but my question remains...

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

Yup. The dump of data in those posts was TLDR for most, and there are way too many confounding variables to make it worthy of serious discussion.

In the end, it doesn't take long to look at pooled data for the obvious conclusions, rather than mining it to find a contrary point. Ehlers has only averaged > 17 minutes per game in 2 seasons out of the nine he's been on the Jets. In those two seasons, the Jets were 19th and 20th in league standings and had a negative goal differential. What do you suppose was happening with the team when Ehlers was promoted?

Seemingly lost in this, which I didn't catch the first time, was that you didn't read what I had posted.

I didn't isolate just the "seasons" that he averaged more than 17 minutes per game. I posted, and showed the records, of EACH game that he played +17 minutes per game, in all of the years. There are some golden years in their too!

Multiple people discrediting something they didn't even bother to look at. Though I misread your post too the first time...

 

[hn777]

But what's the point of that?

We've been told that it helps us win games (which is the ultimate goal here, right?)

Is that why you're advocating for them to play together?

I mean, I see a problem with a topline playing the most minutes, and barely threading water, while someone who demonstrably can help them/Scheifele outplay and outscore the opposition at 5v5 is playing middle-6 minutes.

Again, I see the point in Ehlers playing on his own line, but I suggest playing him more at 5v5 then.
Or play him topline minutes with Scheifele, as Scheifele is much more efficient with Ehlers than without. I don't get the, he is difficult/confusing to play with angle. Scheifele is one who has enough pace in his own game to follow Ehlers' pace for the benefit of both.

 

[Board Bard]

I don't think that there is a single person who is swinging from the "Ehlers Nutsack" who can think objectively, so...

Thats the whole point that the Ehlers Nutswingers are trying to make.

Poster implies he is objective while those with a differing opinion are not. Uses the terms "Ehlers Nutsack" and "Ehlers Nutwsingers" to buttress his "objective" position.

Vladmir Putin has a job for you in his PR department.

 

[Buffdog]

I mean, I see a problem with a topline playing the most minutes, and barely threading water, while someone who demonstrably can help them/Scheifele outplay and outscore the opposition at 5v5 is playing middle-6 minutes.

Again, I see the point in Ehlers playing on his own line, but I suggest playing him more at 5v5 then.
Or play him topline minutes with Scheifele, as Scheifele is much more efficient with Ehlers than without. I don't get the, he is difficult/confusing to play with angle. Scheifele is one who has enough pace in his own game to follow Ehlers' pace for the benefit of both.

You didn't really answer the question... maybe you're a politician lol

 

[Buffdog]

Poster implies he is objective while those with a differing opinion are not. Uses the terms "Ehlers Nutsack" and "Ehlers Nutwsingers" to buttress his "objective" position.

Vladmir Putin has a job for you in his PR department.

Irony is lost on you

I'm with @Dale53130 posting actual results as to why ehlers is deployed the way he is. Not one person from the other side has even said "thats an interesting point"

I even singled put a post by @hn777 as asking some very good questions about the data posted by Dale. Name one person on the other side that has done something similar

 

[Jack7222]

Well thought out and nuanced. I wish more posters were as objective and open minded

You're trying sooo hard to find fights last couple days hey

 

[hn777]

You didn't really answer the question... maybe you're a politician lol

But what's the point of that?

We've been told that it helps us win games (which is the ultimate goal here, right?)

Is that why you're advocating for them to play together?

My answer is: Yes, IMO this will help the Jets win games.
IIRC, I saw you commenting, you didn't see a problem in the CSV topline being neutral in +/-, if the other lines could outscore easier opposition then. But why not choose a topline composition, that over a pretty big sample size has outscored opposition almost 2:1 instead of settling for 1:1?
It's much easier to allow the other lines to just reach neutral, then.

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

Irony is lost on you

I'm with @Dale53130 posting actual results as to why ehlers is deployed the way he is. Not one person from the other side has even said "thats an interesting point"

I even singled put a post by @hn777 as asking some very good questions about the data posted by Dale. Name one person on the other side that has done something similar

That's true. Outside of @KingBogo most responses are like "meh", and they're (likely) not even reading it. And I included the game logs just to show as reference, and that I'm not making anything up.

 

[Buffdog]

You're trying sooo hard to find fights last couple days hey

Huh? Giving a poster a compliment is picking a fight now?

Weird take

I'll explain this as best I can, then I'll f*** right off

Here's my summary of everything:

1. Ehlers and schiefele have better on ice results with each other than apart

2. Ehlers and schiefele have better on ice results than Connor and schief

Both of those seem to be irrefutable. Stats posted by many posters including goal differential and xGF% (which isn't percect) prove it

BUT

3. Ehlers and schief on separate lines makes the Jets forward group tougher to match up against and gives the team a better chance of winning. Stats that @Dale53130 has dug up makes that irrefutable as well

And

4. Ehlers himself seems to have more success when his minutes are somewhat limited. Facts from Dale support that as well, and the org seems to agree. See my little physiology lesson in this thread for a plausible explanation as to why

So what it really comes down to is "does having ehlers and schief on the same line give the team a better chance of winning"? The historical answer seems to be "no", which although paradoxical to some degree, makes sense when looking at the depth/matchups that separation them creates

 

[Buffdog]

My answer is: Yes, IMO this will help the Jets win games.
IIRC, I saw you commenting, you didn't see a problem in the CSV topline being neutral in +/-, if the other lines could outscore easier opposition then. But why not choose a topline composition, that over a pretty big sample size has outscored opposition almost 2:1 instead of settling for 1:1?
It's much easier to allow the other lines to just reach neutral, then.

So how do you explain the data that @Dale53130 has posted that seems to indicate that having them together results in the Jets losing more than they win?

Sometimes when we follow data, it takes us to unexpected places, but that's science. The Jets *should* win more than they lose while icing a better 1st line, but they don't

There is also a reason why the Oilers don't default to McDrai. The two of them are dominant together but they play on separate lines much of the time. Why do you think that is, if having a dominant 1st line is most important?

 

[Jack7222]

That's true. Outside of @KingBogo most responses are like "meh", and they're (likely) not even reading it. And I included the game logs just to show as reference, and that I'm not making anything up.

fwiw I like that you looked that stuff up and read through it, it is definitely interesting and got a bit of interesting conversation going.

I doubt many people here are so set in their ways as some think; Ehlers just happens to be a player that has excellent results 5 on 5 and feels underused, so it's a place where there's going to be some specific criticism surrounding him and Connor. Always good to have perspectives on both sides of things though IMO.

 

[Jack7222]

Huh? Giving a poster a compliment is picking a fight now?

Weird take

I'll explain this as best I can, then I'll f*** right off

Here's my summary of everything:

1. Ehlers and schiefele have better on ice results with each other than apart

2. Ehlers and schiefele have better on ice results than Connor and schief

Both of those seem to be irrefutable. Stats posted by many posters including goal differential and xGF% (which isn't percect) prove it

BUT

3. Ehlers and schief on separate lines makes the Jets forward group tougher to match up against and gives the team a better chance of winning. Stats that @Dale53130 has dug up makes that irrefutable as well

And

4. Ehlers himself seems to have more success when his minutes are somewhat limited. Facts from Dale support that as well, and the org seems to agree. See my little physiology lesson in this thread for a plausible explanation as to why

So what it really comes down to is "does having ehlers and schief on the same line give the team a better chance of winning"? The historical answer seems to be "no", which although paradoxical to some degree, makes sense when looking at the depth/matchups that separation them creates

Calling people who happen to disagree with you "ehlers nuthuggers" and accusing them of cognitive dissonance and moving goalposts is a really childish way to argue IMO. Someone posting information like Dale did should invite discussion, but you took it as an opportunity to dunk on anybody who you saw as an "Ehlers supporter" and even made fun of people for daring to question whether there might be other reasons for the results posted. It's honestly a wonder anyone is replying to you at all, IMO.

 

[Buffdog]

Calling people who happen to disagree with you "ehlers nuthuggers" and accusing them of cognitive dissonance and moving goalposts is a really childish way to argue IMO. Someone posting information like Dale did should invite discussion, but you took it as an opportunity to dunk on anybody who you saw as an "Ehlers supporter" and even made fun of people for daring to question whether there might be other reasons for the results posted. It's honestly a wonder anyone is replying to you at all, IMO.

I sure did. After weeks of people refusing to be aware of their biases and dissonance, I got cheeky. It's a frustrating thing to have to deal with when trying to discuss a topic in good faith

 

[Gm0ney]

For every game Ehlers plays 17+ minutes, he also played less than 17 minutes at some point in the game. You are making a mistake if you conclude that playing Ehlers more than 17 minutes somehow creates worse results. If they just benched him at, like, 15 minutes, he'd have more points and the Jets would win more? Does that make any sense? No.

It also doesn't make sense to attribute a loss to an individual player. Especially a forward who's generally outscoring the opposition almost 2-1.

I think the ones claiming that Ehlers getting more TOI is *causing* the Jets to lose games need to meet the higher burden of proof. Just pointing it out and saying "why won't you Ehlers knob gobblers accept the tRuTH?" - when we have mountains of data showing that when Ehlers on the ice it's overwhelmingly beneficial to the Jets - just doesn't cut it.

 

[Buffdog]

For every game Ehlers plays 17+ minutes, he also played less than 17 minutes at some point in the game. You are making a mistake if you conclude that playing Ehlers more than 17 minutes somehow creates worse results. If they just benched him at, like, 15 minutes, he'd have more points and the Jets would win more? Does that make any sense? No.

It also doesn't make sense to attribute a loss to an individual player. Especially a forward who's generally outscoring the opposition almost 2-1.

I think the ones claiming that Ehlers getting more TOI is *causing* the Jets to lose games need to meet the higher burden of proof. Just pointing it out and saying "why won't you Ehlers knob gobblers accept the tRuTH?" - when we have mountains of data showing that when Ehlers on the ice it's overwhelmingly beneficial to the Jets - just doesn't cut it.

What's the definition of "beneficial"?

Ultimately, it has to be "wins", no?

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

For every game Ehlers plays 17+ minutes, he also played less than 17 minutes at some point in the game. You are making a mistake if you conclude that playing Ehlers more than 17 minutes somehow creates worse results. If they just benched him at, like, 15 minutes, he'd have more points and the Jets would win more? Does that make any sense? No.

It also doesn't make sense to attribute a loss to an individual player. Especially a forward who's generally outscoring the opposition almost 2-1.

I think the ones claiming that Ehlers getting more TOI is *causing* the Jets to lose games need to meet the higher burden of proof. Just pointing it out and saying "why won't you Ehlers knob gobblers accept the tRuTH?" - when we have mountains of data showing that when Ehlers on the ice it's overwhelmingly beneficial to the Jets - just doesn't cut it.

I've already addressed this in my response to @hn777.

You still haven't said anything about the question I asked you twice now, about how Ehlers managed to score more points per game when he played less minutes, and how it doesn't correlate with P/60.

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

For every game Ehlers plays 17+ minutes, he also played less than 17 minutes at some point in the game. You are making a mistake if you conclude that playing Ehlers more than 17 minutes somehow creates worse results. If they just benched him at, like, 15 minutes, he'd have more points and the Jets would win more? Does that make any sense? No.

So, ignore everything? Play it safe? Never ask any questions? Don't look for correlations?

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

What's the definition of "beneficial"?

Ultimately, it has to be "wins", no?

I mean, seriously. We had a little win streak recently, and a number of people weren't happy about it, because it didn't correlate with their process of winning. We had winning streaks before KC went down, the "complete game" (according to Rick Bowness), but we just fixate on one streak, a significant enough one sure but not exactly the largest sample size either, and make very little considerations about who we were playing against on that streak, etc.

We sure ran into a lot of hot goaltending in the backhalf of the Ehlers, Vilardi, Scheifele streak too, and I wonder who takes the kind of shots that keep the opposing goalie sharp throughout the games. The little things people want to ignore when it's convenient.

 

[Gm0ney]

What's the definition of "beneficial"?

Ultimately, it has to be "wins", no?

You're almost there...and how does a team get wins? By ________ more ______s than the opponents.

 

[Buffdog]

You're almost there...and how does a team get wins? By ________ more ______s than the opponents.

First line scoring more goals?

YOU'RE almost there