Post-Game Talk: Kraken 4 - Jets 3

[Jets 31]

I still say they are holding off announcing bad news until after the deadline.

They have been very coy on him.

You thinking out for the season? If that's the case Chevy definitely has to pick up a decent winger

 

[jungles]

I still say they are holding off announcing bad news until after the deadline.

They have been very coy on him.

Agreed.

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

This feels a whole lot like the "the Jets win more with Enstrom out of the lineup, so he shouldn't play" argument, despite the fact that he impacts the game positively whenever he's on the ice. Judging a single player by a team's win/loss record doesn't make any kind of sense.

Obviously, you're not thinking of the inverse, of how great the team is (and Ehlers) when he plays 16 minutes or less. It's off the charts good (in the regular season).

 

[surixon]

You thinking out for the season? If that's the case Chevy definitely has to pick up a decent winger

I dunno. They have been very vague and the whole he's traveling with thr team when it was obvious he wasn't close just stunk of misdirection.

 

[Buffdog]

This feels a whole lot like the "the Jets win more with Enstrom out of the lineup, so he shouldn't play" argument, despite the fact that he impacts the game positively whenever he's on the ice. Judging a single player by a team's win/loss record doesn't make any kind of sense.

Holy strawman

I keep hearing that having schief and ehlers together is the best strategy to win long term. Thats the whole point that the Ehlers Nutswingers are trying to make. I've been told that winning with Schief and Connor together is "unsustainable"

My counterpoint is that splitting them up makes the line up more well rounded, and therefore more likely to win

What's the goal here? Win games? Make the team better? Or make Ehlers fancy stats look better?

So far @Dale53130 has PROVEN WITH ACTUAL RESULTS that Ehlers produces better with limited minutes AND the team loses more than it wins when he's paired with schiefele. What more is it gonna take for you people to say "gee, I never looked at it that way, mayber there are good reasons for the professional hockey player managers to be doing what they're doing"?

 

[Atoyot]

Obviously, you're not thinking of the inverse, of how great the team is (and Ehlers) when he plays 16 minutes or less. It's off the charts good (in the regular season).

That inverse logic was true with Enstrom as well.

Still doesn't make a ton of sense. He's never played above 17 minutes consistently, so why in the odd game that he does do the numbers go down? If he's playing a minute or two over that threshold how can it retroactively affect his game before he gets to that arbitrary threshold?

It's like me arguing that since the Jets are 15-0-1 in games where Ehlers scores a goal he should be put in every position to score. No, that's a coincidental stat. Judging a players value based on the win loss record on an 18 player team on whether or not an individual player plays a minute or two extra is asinine. Ehlers playing a couple minutes more doesn't make the other 17 players on the ice worse.

Holy strawman

I keep hearing that having schief and ehlers together is the best strategy to win long term. Thats the whole point that the Ehlers Nutswingers are trying to make. I've been told that winning with Schief and Connor together is "unsustainable"

My counterpoint is that splitting them up makes the line up more well rounded, and therefore more likely to win

What's the goal here? Win games? Make the team better? Or make Ehlers fancy stats look better?

So far @Dale53130 has PROVEN WITH ACTUAL RESULTS that Ehlers produces better with limited minutes AND the team loses more than it wins when he's paired with schiefele. What more is it gonna take for you people to say "gee, I never looked at it that way, mayber there are good reasons for the professional hockey player managers to be doing what they're doing"?

Can you explain where I used a strawman?

 

[Buffdog]

That inverse logic was true with Enstrom as well.

Still doesn't make a ton of sense. He's never played above 17 minutes consistently, so why in the odd game that he does do the numbers go down? If he's playing a minute or two over that threshold how can it retroactively affect his game before he gets to that arbitrary threshold?

It's like me arguing that since the Jets are 15-0-1 in games where Ehlers scores a goal he should be put in every position to score. No, that's a coincidental stat. Judging a players value based on the win loss record on an 18 player team on whether or not an individual player plays a minute or two extra is asinine. Ehlers playing a couple minutes more doesn't make the other 17 players on the ice worse.


Can you explain where I used a strawman?

Sure. Enstrom. He has nothing to do with this conversation. You're implying that the same logic can be applied to both situations, which is false

You're comparing a small sample size of games that Enstrom missed where the Jets did well vs 178 games of schief and ehlers together.

Why not just address the actual issue, which is that the Jets lose more than they win when those two are paired together.

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

They're your top line! They generally play the most minutes.

Everyone goes on about how much Ehlers impacts his line and the game, I use (basically) half of his career, to show you that he and the team don't do well (they suck actually), when he plays 17 minutes or more per game.

If you're saying that there's no correlation, then I no longer want to hear how much Ehlers impacts a game, because you're admitting otherwise.

Post-Game Talk: - JUMP TO THE PUMP: Jets have gas in 5-2 win over Sabres

I thought Noel moved Buff to defense Noel did, but Maurice left him there for awhile until he reigned in the roving a bit. It was under Maurice that Buff hit his true stride as a dominant player IMO. I forget who said it, but I remember a quote early in Jets 2.0 and the person was asked what...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[Buffdog]

If you're saying that there's no correlation, then I no longer want to hear how much Ehlers impacts a game, because you're admitting otherwise.

Curious to see what kind of mental gymnastics this generates

 

[Atoyot]

Sure. Enstrom. He has nothing to do with this conversation. You're implying that the same logic can be applied to both situations, which is false

You're comparing a small sample size of games that Enstrom missed where the Jets did well vs 178 games of schief and ehlers together.

Why not just address the actual issue, which is that the Jets lose more than they win when those two are paired together.

Enstrom missed 140 games by my quick count. Again, where's the strawman? You seem to be using a lot of words you don't understand lately and every time I ask you to explain what you think it means you just, don't.

They're your top line! They generally play the most minutes.

Everyone goes on about how much Ehlers impacts his line and the game, I use (basically) half of his career, to show you that he and the team don't do well (they suck actually), when he plays 17 minutes or more per game.

If you're saying that there's no correlation, then I no longer want to hear how much Ehlers impacts a game, because you're admitting otherwise.

Post-Game Talk: - JUMP TO THE PUMP: Jets have gas in 5-2 win over Sabres

I thought Noel moved Buff to defense Noel did, but Maurice left him there for awhile until he reigned in the roving a bit. It was under Maurice that Buff hit his true stride as a dominant player IMO. I forget who said it, but I remember a quote early in Jets 2.0 and the person was asked what...

forums.hfboards.com

Enstrom was on the top pairing playing 23+ minutes a game.

 

[KingBogo]

Thank you! Seriously, you get it, and you're likely the only person actually reading it.

And I know that you get it, because this is very much in line where I'm landing on too:

I'm reading it as well. Really nice work on this and I would say I align with what you are presenting. As a Jets first fan, I agree that we are a better team with Scheifele and Ehlers driving different lines. If I didn't care about the Jets success and had either one in a fantasy league or draft I'd prefer them playing together.

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

Here are all of the games, when Ehlers played less than 17 minutes (below).

Goals: 120
Assists: 144
PPG: 0.78
Games: 338
+93
217 wins/121 losses

Just to compare, vs whenever he played 17 minutes and up:

Goals: 74
Assists: 101
PPG: 0.72
Games: 244
-7
99 wins/145 losses

*Not updated to count Ehlers last two games.

How does he put up a higher PPG average in less time, than in games where he plays more?

Can we also start questioning the validity of P/60 as it applies to Ehlers?

@Gm0ney

 

[robertocarlos]

I still say they are holding off announcing bad news until after the deadline.

They have been very coy on him.

They should trade him and then feign ignorance on damages. You are talkin' 'bout Helle right?

Go Bro!

 

[surixon]

Obviously, you're not thinking of the inverse, of how great the team is (and Ehlers) when he plays 16 minutes or less. It's off the charts good (in the regular season).

What's the context though? How many of those games that he gets 17 minutes or more is he still on line two but plays more due to the team trailing vs. How many of those games are with him on line 1? Obviously that might put a slant on his results. Plays more when team is loosing but team still ends up loosing so results look bad.

He's played mostly second line minutes his tenure here so obviously that will be the bulk of his sample size.

I'd be curious to see his and the teams impact when he's line one at > 17 minutes vs. Line two at the same number of minutes.

 

[KingBogo]

What's the context though? How many of those games that he gets 17 minutes or more is he still on line two but plays more due to the team trailing vs. How many of those games are with him on line 1? Obviously that might put a slant on his results. Plays more when team is loosing but team still ends up loosing so results look bad.

He's played mostly second line minutes his tenure here so obviously that will be the bulk of his sample size.

I'd be curious to see his and the teams impact when he's line one at > 17 minutes vs. Line two at the same number of minutes.

Sounds like you have a weekend project

 

[DRW204]

what i found interesting was the pts per 5v5 TOI increase. looking at ehlers and a few other players over the past 3-seasons, and grouping their gp in 2min TOI buckets to smooth it a bit. you could also look at this minute by minute, i just am not sure if that's really telling us anything? 1 more 5v5 minute is like 1 extra shift? i dont see that as a big enough factor but . even the 2min buckets, is barely any difference (11-13 min) block to (15-17 min) is 3 5v5 shifts/gp. i do have this in 3min blocks as well though.

i reiterate i only looked at a few, but players like aho, reinhart, scheifele, mcdavid, and robertson have seen decrease in scoring efficiency as more mins played.

obviously there's differing sample sizes, gamescripts. if you're losing and playing from behind, offensive players will play more.

so concentrating on majority of the gp range

ie: sample size examples - Scheifele has 3 pts in the 9-11 5v5/toi gp block in 30 mins which is why 6 pts/60
mcdavid in the 11-13 min block has 10 pts in 120ish mins (5 pts/60)
robertsion in the 11-13 block has 31 pts in 460 mins (4 pts/60)

anyway i found that interesting.

i don't think the crux of the argument has been a huge increase in his TOI though necessarily, it's been the top line's overall performance

idk if id play ehlers more on the PP, i honestly haven't found him to be a great PP player although kind of hard to judge since pp2 as a whole is kinda meh overall. maybe at times when PP1 is stagnate and they need just a different look? but PP1 was gaining some traction.

when KC was out and the Jets went 12-2-2 with the league's best goal-differential (hey should we play more games with KC with 0mins?? ):
Ehlers was at 13.7 mins 5v5/toi gp, outside of that he is at 12.8 mins/gp. is 1 min really a big deal to some people here? like really, that's 1-2 shifts. but it's the top-line combo (80% of TOI ehlers-scheifele-x during KC's injury)

they were 9-1 when below 13.7 5v5 mins/gp, 3-1-2 when above that (yeah they have a couple more Ls b/c he's playing more to help them score if behind).

Another distinct stretch of games to look at was in 18-19- ehlers-scheifele-wheeler was the top-line to start the year and playing v well w/ KC-Little-Laine being the 2nd line. Ehlers broke his collarbone iirc in December. that's like 5 years now not saying its super representattive today, but could see how it related to other line combos or team scoring that specific year.

 

[Buffdog]

Enstrom missed 140 games by my quick count. Again, where's the strawman? You seem to be using a lot of words you don't understand lately and every time I ask you to explain what you think it means you just, don't.


Enstrom was on the top pairing playing 23+ minutes a game.

Me: this data says Jets lose more than they win when schief and Ehlers play together

You: yeah, but enstrom

Me: we aren't talking about enstrom, that's a strawman

You: you don't know what that word means

Um, it means exactly what I said it means.

"Refuting an argument other than the one under discussion"

AKA refuting a discussion about ehlers and schief with a comment about enstrom. Two ENTIRELY different convos

If you're gonna accuse someone of not knowing the meaning of a word, it usually helps to know the meaning yourself first

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

What's the context though? How many of those games that he gets 17 minutes or more is he still on line two but plays more due to the team trailing vs. How many of those games are with him on line 1? Obviously that might put a slant on his results. Plays more when team is loosing but team still ends up loosing so results look bad.

He's played mostly second line minutes his tenure here so obviously that will be the bulk of his sample size.

I'd be curious to see his and the teams impact when he's line one at > 17 minutes vs. Line two at the same number of minutes.

I did post Ehlers with Scheifele (earlier in this thread), and they were on the top line for over 100 games together. Frankly, that would pretty much be all of the top line games accounted for Ehlers, since Scheifele has almost always been on the top line (say for the odd game where they were actually on the 2nd line).

If it was a small sample size, sure, but, my stuff presented is pretty much counting for a quarter <-> half <-> full portion of his career.

what i found interesting was the pts per 5v5 TOI increase. looking at ehlers and a few other players over the past 3-seasons, and grouping their gp in 2min TOI buckets to smooth it a bit.

i reiterate i only looked at a few, but players like aho, reinhart, scheifele, mcdavid, and robertson see decrease in scoring efficiency as more mins played.

obviously there's differing sample sizes, gamescripts. if you're losing and playing from behind offensive will play more.

so concentrating on majority of the gp range (9-11 min per gp block to 15-17 mins block).

ie: sample size - Scheifele has 3 pts in the 9-11 5v5/toi gp block in 30 mins which is why 6 pts/60
mcdavid in the 11-13 min block has 10 pts in 120ish mins (5 pts/60)
robertsion in the 11-13 block has 31 pts in 460 mins (4 pts/60) (460 / 11 to 13 is 35-41gp)

View attachment 831481

anyway i found that interesting.

i don't think the crux of the argument has been a huge increase in his TOI though necessarily, it's been the top line's overall performance

idk if id play ehlers more on the PP, i honestly haven't found him to be a great PP player although kind of hard to judge since pp2 as a whole is kinda meh overall. maybe at times when PP1 is stagnate and they need just a different look? but PP1 was gaining some traction.

when KC was out and the Jets went 12-2-2 with the league's best goal-differential (hey should we play more games with KC with 0mins?? ):
Ehlers was at 13.7 mins 5v5/toi gp, outside of that he is at 12.8 mins/gp. is 1 min really a big deal to some people here? like really, that's 1-2 shifts. but it's the top-line combo.

they were 9-1 when below that, 3-1-2 when above that (yeah they have a couple more Ls b/c he's playing more to help them score if behind)

Thanks for your MASSIVE sample size (12-2-2). I see you like to move the goal posts quite a bit.

 

[surixon]

I did post Ehlers with Scheifele (earlier in this thread), and they were on the top line for over 100 games together. Frankly, that would pretty much be all of the top line games accounted for Ehlers, since Scheifele has almost always been on the top line (say for the odd game where they were actually on the 2nd line).

If it was a small sample size, sure, but, my stuff presented is pretty much counting for a quarter <-> half <-> full portion of his career.


Thanks for your MASSIVE sample size (12-2-2). I see you like to move the goal posts quite a bit.

Huh? I was generally curious about what the results would be. Wasn't trying to move goal posts or anything. Sorry must have missed your post of Fly with Mark. I'll have to go check it out when I have time.

 

[Gm0ney]

Me: this data says Jets lose more than they win when schief and Ehlers play together

You: yeah, but enstrom

Me: we aren't talking about enstrom, that's a strawman

View attachment 831492

You: you don't know what that word means

Um, it means exactly what I said it means.

"Refuting an argument other than the one under discussion"

AKA refuting a discussion about ehlers and schief with a comment about enstrom. Two ENTIRELY different convos

If you're gonna accuse someone of not knowing the meaning of a word, it usually helps to know the meaning yourself first

I think this is a misunderstanding - you weren't on HF when Enstrom would get injured for a stretch and the Jets would win a few games and some people concluded that the Jets were better without Enstrom.

The notion that the Jets are better served when Ehlers and Scheifele aren't on the same line is similar.

They're both wrong, fwiw...

 

[DRW204]

I did post Ehlers with Scheifele (earlier in this thread), and they were on the top line for over 100 games together. Frankly, that would pretty much be all of the top line games accounted for Ehlers, since Scheifele has almost always been on the top line (say for the odd game where they were actually on the 2nd line).

If it was a small sample size, sure, but, my stuff presented is pretty much counting for a quarter <-> half <-> full portion of his career.


Thanks for your MASSIVE sample size (12-2-2). I see you like to move the goal posts quite a bit.

i am aware, hence the

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

Huh? I was generally curious about what the results would be. Wasn't trying to move goal posts or anything. Sorry must have missed your post of Fly with Mark. I'll have to go check it out when I have time.

That wasn't directed at you.

I think this is a misunderstanding - you weren't on HF when Enstrom would get injured for a stretch and the Jets would win a few games and some people concluded that the Jets were better without Enstrom.

The notion that the Jets are better served when Ehlers and Scheifele aren't on the same line is similar.

They're both wrong, fwiw...

Very insightful. Like a White House press secretary...

 

[BarnabyJones PI]

Huh? I was generally curious about what the results would be. Wasn't trying to move goal posts or anything. Sorry must have missed your post of Fly with Mark. I'll have to go check it out when I have time.

I thought about many variables, I took a very rudimentary approach, so of course it's not perfect, but I still think over time (consideration to variance levelling out), that there's too much a correlation between his PPG going down (!) and the wins vs losses ratio is WAY too disproportionate. If the Jets had an average winning percentage, I would have thought twice about it, and I would have not paid much attention at all if the Jets had overall losing record over that time.

But we've won a lot of games since '15 through '24, vs losses, and I see no reason to think that the Jets have mismanaged his time. In fact, I think he's been well insulated; not left to his own devices after a certain threshold. He's in a sweet spot that's in line with getting the best out of his physical gifts and his mental sharpness (judgement).

I don't see how what I posted, doesn't make that abundantly clear.

 

[scelaton]

What's the context though? How many of those games that he gets 17 minutes or more is he still on line two but plays more due to the team trailing vs. How many of those games are with him on line 1? Obviously that might put a slant on his results. Plays more when team is loosing but team still ends up loosing so results look bad.

He's played mostly second line minutes his tenure here so obviously that will be the bulk of his sample size.

I'd be curious to see his and the teams impact when he's line one at > 17 minutes vs. Line two at the same number of minutes.

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?

Have a look at these numbers from the only season in which Ehlers averaged >18 minutes/g, especially +/-, since it was referenced in the data dump

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

 

[DRW204]

Holy strawman

I keep hearing that having schief and ehlers together is the best strategy to win long term. Thats the whole point that the Ehlers Nutswingers are trying to make. I've been told that winning with Schief and Connor together is "unsustainable"

My counterpoint is that splitting them up makes the line up more well rounded, and therefore more likely to win

What's the goal here? Win games? Make the team better? Or make Ehlers fancy stats look better?

So far @Dale53130 has PROVEN WITH ACTUAL RESULTS that Ehlers produces better with limited minutes AND the team loses more than it wins when he's paired with schiefele. What more is it gonna take for you people to say "gee, I never looked at it that way, mayber there are good reasons for the professional hockey player managers to be doing what they're doing"?

Edi nvm, OP mentioned what they did. I haven't been able to read through this thread entirely.

i don't think all the gp being posted are necessarily w/ scheifele though? like 17-18 scheifele missed from 12-27-2017 to 2-9-2018, do you just remove that stretch with his TOI entirely (tbh i didn't look at all the game logs if it was removed bc the images are messing up my browser )

even looking at 18-19; i just know this stretch really well- in Nov-Dec 2018 there's a bunch of games under 17 mins there, but he played a lot w/ scheifele at 5v5. and really stats from 4-5 years ago, how representative is that to the team now w/ new coach, new personnel etc.