Paul Maurice "State of the Union"
- Thread starter Whileee
- Start date
Guardian17
Strong & Free
I was happy to hear this from Maurice.
He stated that after last year, they realized the current core of the team, playing their best, could only manage to make the playoffs and be swept in four games.
He also stated that they realized this core was unlikely to play any better and challenge for a Stanley Cup.
So, the decision was made to go younger and develop an new core.
I'm happy that the Jets have decided to take the team in a new direction.
This means we are going to play a lot of young players who will make mistakes.
Mistakes mean we will lose games and not make the playoffs for a few years.
So be it.
As a Jets fan I am willing to be patient.
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
And Ladd. Buff was a tough call, but still good enough for a 5 year deal. At least that's what it looks like to me. I'm pretty sure Maurice doesn't think Pavs is going to be the goalie of his contender. It's about how and when to transition. He didn't throw anyone under the bus, but made it clear that decisions had a lot to do with developing young goalies. He even mentioned some concern with how Hutch might have had some problems handling the top role.
JetsFan815
Replacement Level Poster
- Jan 16, 2012
- 19,666
- 25,697
Listened to the interview and it seems like the TNSE gestapo got to Maurice before the interview as he was clearly toeing the party line. I wish they had asked some tougher questions like how Maurice felt when we didn't re-sign Stempniak, Tlusty and Frolik and how much missing those players had to do with the season playing out the way it did.
Listening to Maurice it sounds like he pays a reasonable amount of attention to analytics which doesn't jive with his love for Stu and Thorburn.
Listening to Maurice it sounds like he pays a reasonable amount of attention to analytics which doesn't jive with his love for Stu and Thorburn.
There was plenty of discussion about moving on to youth, implying not keeping Stemp, etc. Maurice said it was no surprise because that was the plan clearly articulated by Chevy and Chipman. Made the point that they had been very clear with this strategy. He said he was very happy with the direction and felt young enough to guide a young team towards contender status.
No insights shared about Thorbs and Stuart, though he did mention Stu as a core leader. Guess he has to since Stu wears an A.
Calling TSNE the "Gestapo" is exactly why some feel that perspectives about them have become highly subjective and a bit extreme.
Kent C Tugood
Not Quite Dead Yet
I feel like he sees it as well, pretty hard not to, and with reference to certain players eventually not being part of the core, they're probably on the list. But it doesn't help when the contracts signed to both Thorburn and Stuart force his hand a bit. Not sure why Stuart wasn't rotating out with Pardy and Postma earlier in the year, aside from that A on the sweater.
I think he actually was pretty candid about some things. You can't over step your bounds, especially after a season like this.
You don't walk into the board room after having a rough year on the job and start pointing fingers. He's smarter than that, we should all be smart enough to recognize that too.
What he does say is the Jets management made a decision, re:Stemp and Tlusty, to go young and had a pretty good idea all the way down to the Head Coach how that would factor in. They thought a 1st round sweep was about all that group had and made the decision to go young. Something a large faction of us have been saying has been happening this whole time. Having a bunch of vets in the lineup might have us in the playoff bubble hunt, but in the end is it worth it? Or should we be grooming the young guys, who look to have much brighter futures, with NHL experience for the future.
A on the sweater is a key clue. I wonder if they'll take opportunity of changing the captain to shuffle the other letters. Watch them name Stu captain and his place melt down.
It is 7 years since they bottomed out the last time. The studs picked at 3&4 overall were handed over to Noel to develop. This, all part of the process line, glosses over the incredible set backs the crew running this s%,>^%| show have provided us. It's not the core it's the Brass!
JetsFan815
Replacement Level Poster
- Jan 16, 2012
- 19,666
- 25,697
I liked the interview but the parts in the beginning with him saying how they thought the group from last year was on the downtrend clearly felt like a line fed to him. No way he would have said that 6 months ago
That bottom out is not on this management group. Come on dude. Are you going to pin Kovalchuk's departure on them too?
raideralex99
Whiteout Is Coming.
LMFAO ... now that's funny but true.Maurice also said that their penalties are down because the refs don't recognize all the new names on the jerseys
Puckatron 3000
Glitchy Prototype
Quality interview. Sure, H&L could have asked more aggressive questions. But if you go on the attack, Maurice goes on the defence and the honesty and intimacy of the interview gets shut down.
That being said, they did cover the tough subjects fairly well, from goalie sv%, to special teams struggles (Maurice's reaction was hilarious), to the general "what went wrong this season" questions. I know Lawless hasn't always been the most popular around here, but to me this interview raises both their profiles in my book. Hustler has a natural talent for interviews. A conversational flow and way of putting his guest at ease.
The interview again validates a lot of what myself and others have hypothesized about the youth movement. An interesting point Maurice made is that the young players individually haven't specifically been a problem this year. But he said with the youth came a different skill set, requiring a different team identity. And this is more what caused some ripple effects from the youth movement. I made this exact same argument in the many debates over whether Chevy had tried and failed to build a playoff team this year. While I'm sure TNSE would have been quite happy (and pleasantly surprised) with a playoff run, I remain convinced as ever that this year, including our short term troubles with the youth movement, are all part of a more future oriented plan.
Interesting comments on how Wheeler is an emotional player, and tends to still be geared up when he does his post game interviews. Which results in some pretty raw answers. No ****.
That being said, they did cover the tough subjects fairly well, from goalie sv%, to special teams struggles (Maurice's reaction was hilarious), to the general "what went wrong this season" questions. I know Lawless hasn't always been the most popular around here, but to me this interview raises both their profiles in my book. Hustler has a natural talent for interviews. A conversational flow and way of putting his guest at ease.
The interview again validates a lot of what myself and others have hypothesized about the youth movement. An interesting point Maurice made is that the young players individually haven't specifically been a problem this year. But he said with the youth came a different skill set, requiring a different team identity. And this is more what caused some ripple effects from the youth movement. I made this exact same argument in the many debates over whether Chevy had tried and failed to build a playoff team this year. While I'm sure TNSE would have been quite happy (and pleasantly surprised) with a playoff run, I remain convinced as ever that this year, including our short term troubles with the youth movement, are all part of a more future oriented plan.
Interesting comments on how Wheeler is an emotional player, and tends to still be geared up when he does his post game interviews. Which results in some pretty raw answers. No ****.
CorgisPer60
Barking at the net
I really like the interview and thought he was quite candid in a lot of his answers. You could tell that he stopped to frame his answer in a way that would tell you as much as what he wanted you to know. How much of that is toeing the party line, we'll never know. I don't doubt his answer about how management told him they would get younger and it would be growing pains, because Paul Maurice himself seems like such a straight shooter, and there's no duplicity or superfluidity in his answers. His interview is a far different beast than that of Cheveldayoff, who could speak for half an hour and never tell you anything.
I liked the bits on the goaltending, PK, and on Scheif's and Ehlers' maturation in their game this year. It's obvious that PMo thinks the world of these guys and he's realistic in his expectations with Scheifele. He sees him as more of a 2-way center who won't wow you with his numbers, but you could put him out against the top lines without fear. Basically, they're moulding him into Bryan Little, who is also basically Toews lite. I like that.
I liked the bits on the goaltending, PK, and on Scheif's and Ehlers' maturation in their game this year. It's obvious that PMo thinks the world of these guys and he's realistic in his expectations with Scheifele. He sees him as more of a 2-way center who won't wow you with his numbers, but you could put him out against the top lines without fear. Basically, they're moulding him into Bryan Little, who is also basically Toews lite. I like that.
Didn't catch the interview but it sounds like a good one. Looks to me ownership, management and the coach are all using the same play book. By this description intent has been made clear and people should now know what to expect going forward. As someone has been cheering this transition on it is confirmation of what we have been witnessing play out this season. A little over due but I'm happy nevertheless.
I did hear that 1290 will be replaying it over the weekend, and does anyone know when? I'm heading out to the lake today for the long weekend and will certainly make time to give it a listen.
I always have along with Stu and Thor. To me vets that came with the team and were then retained were considered to be core pieces. The only 3 worth keeping are Wheeler, Buff and Little. I'm neutral on Enstrom but he needs to stay until better alternatives are available.
just loading up the interview to listen to it in full, caught about half of it on the drive home.
The talk about the team and young guys and what not seemed ok, though i'm not as enamored with it as some.
My primary concern was wit how he framed his answers around ehlers and goaltending.
While the Ehlers answer was generally glowing/positive, the things that fired warning bells in my head was a number of statements that seemed to be pretty much at odds with what analytic numbers were telling us.
Essentially
A) seems oblivious to the "thorburn effect" and had a number of statements that felt like he didn't realize how positive Ehlers influence had been prior. He felt concerned with Ehlers play once the scoring stopped, but Ehlers was still generating a whallop of chances and opportunities and being a positive possession guy, he just wasn't getting lucky. That's a flag for me as it really seemed like interpreting some swings in sh% as a player "struggling".
B) The goal tending answer. Now i haven't heard the whole section yet, just caught the clips they replayed on the big show but i did not come away from that with any sort of confidence. We got the same old answers trotted out about Pavy having a career year a year ago, and about the team not being good enough in front of him defensively, and finally, what seems like an extreme hesitance to trust a young tender.
I guess my main issue here is there was 3 big statements in there that are diametrically opposed to what analytics tells us:
Nik Ehlers has been damn good at hockey since he came in and should never have been banished to the thorburn line
Defensive system play is absolute bullocks as for evaluating your 29 year-old goal tender.
NHL teams and GM's are actually TOO hesitant to try new younger goalies: research has been showing tenders to likely peak as young as 22-24, years/ages that are most frequently spent in the minors.
The interview wasn't all bad, and there was some good things that I caught, and I'm ok with their picked direction to rebuild around the young guys.
I liked his takes on Scheif, Petan, Ehlers (for the most part) lots of this seemed real good.
There's just a couple things he keeps saying that drive me up the wall as they run very counter to modern information, which is made all the more confounding as Maurice does reference analytic's quite a bit and SEEMS on the up and up.
The talk about the team and young guys and what not seemed ok, though i'm not as enamored with it as some.
My primary concern was wit how he framed his answers around ehlers and goaltending.
While the Ehlers answer was generally glowing/positive, the things that fired warning bells in my head was a number of statements that seemed to be pretty much at odds with what analytic numbers were telling us.
Essentially
A) seems oblivious to the "thorburn effect" and had a number of statements that felt like he didn't realize how positive Ehlers influence had been prior. He felt concerned with Ehlers play once the scoring stopped, but Ehlers was still generating a whallop of chances and opportunities and being a positive possession guy, he just wasn't getting lucky. That's a flag for me as it really seemed like interpreting some swings in sh% as a player "struggling".
B) The goal tending answer. Now i haven't heard the whole section yet, just caught the clips they replayed on the big show but i did not come away from that with any sort of confidence. We got the same old answers trotted out about Pavy having a career year a year ago, and about the team not being good enough in front of him defensively, and finally, what seems like an extreme hesitance to trust a young tender.
I guess my main issue here is there was 3 big statements in there that are diametrically opposed to what analytics tells us:
Nik Ehlers has been damn good at hockey since he came in and should never have been banished to the thorburn line
Defensive system play is absolute bullocks as for evaluating your 29 year-old goal tender.
NHL teams and GM's are actually TOO hesitant to try new younger goalies: research has been showing tenders to likely peak as young as 22-24, years/ages that are most frequently spent in the minors.
The interview wasn't all bad, and there was some good things that I caught, and I'm ok with their picked direction to rebuild around the young guys.
I liked his takes on Scheif, Petan, Ehlers (for the most part) lots of this seemed real good.
There's just a couple things he keeps saying that drive me up the wall as they run very counter to modern information, which is made all the more confounding as Maurice does reference analytic's quite a bit and SEEMS on the up and up.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE WATCH LIVE - AQUEDUCT RACE 8 - Long Island Stakes (Gr. 3) - Queens, New York CityWagers: 5Staked: $526.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-