Post-Game Talk: "Unfortunately, since I bet on the other team, uh, we won't be going for pizza." (Jets 4 Flames 1)

[voyageur]

Beaulieu is last among our regular D-men in DZ starts / 60.

Are you sure about that? I didn't format it right, but that's the d-zone starts bolded.

Skater Advanced Statistics

1	Mason Appleton	25	C	11	118	95	55.4	6.8	97	74	56.7	8.7	11.3	94.7	106.0	50.6	49.4	12:50	11:35	4	8	0.7	25	80.0
2	Nathan Beaulieu	28	D	11	131	151	46.5	-5.1	101	115	46.8	-4.7	13.5	90.8	104.3	43.1	56.9	17:60	15:23	3	11	0.3	22	54.5
3	Kyle Connor	24	LW	11	130	146	47.1	-4.2	92	113	44.9	-7.2	16.7	83.3	100.0	60.7	39.3	19:55	15:42	8	6	0.6	57	49.1
4	Andrew Copp	26	C	11	156	144	52.0	2.7	123	110	52.8	4.0	11.7	90.6	102.3	46.8	53.2	19:44	14:49	6	6	2.3	53	64.2
5	Dylan DeMelo	27	D	7	96	101	48.7	-2.5	69	75	47.9	-5.2	10.0	87.8	97.8	54.7	45.3	18:12	15:44	1	10	1.0	14	50.0
6	Nikolaj Ehlers	24	LW	11	149	141	51.4	1.8	109	104	51.2	1.6	15.3	96.3	111.6	52.6	47.4	17:03	14:57	2	4	1.5	59	66.1
7	Derek Forbort	28	D	11	164	154	51.6	2.2	129	117	52.4	3.6	11.3	92.2	103.6	56.1	43.9	21:07	18:09	2	11	0.5	40	42.5
8	David Gustafsson	20	C	4	17	18	48.6	-3.9	13	16	44.8	-8.1	0.0	92.9	92.9	50.0	50.0	5:49	5:48	1	0	0.0	2	50.0
9	Jansen Harkins	23	C	9	55	62	47.0	-3.5	44	49	47.3	-2.7	0.0	93.8	93.8	28.1	71.9	8:23	8:00	1	1	-0.5	7	57.1
10	Ville Heinola	19	D	1	8	9	47.1	-14.6	6	7	46.2	-15.2	50.0	100.0	150.0	40.0	60.0	14:22	12:36	0	0	-0.2	1	100.0
11	Patrik Laine	22	RW	1	10	13	43.5	-11.7	9	7	56.3	5.0	25.0	75.0	100.0	60.0	40.0	16:20	13:11	0	0	0.3	6	50.0
12	Trevor Lewis	34	C	11	55	60	47.8	-2.6	41	43	48.8	-1.4	3.1	96.2	99.3	31.0	69.0	9:13	7:15	2	1	0.2	15	66.7
13	Adam Lowry	27	LW	11	114	102	52.8	3.4	92	77	54.4	5.7	12.1	90.2	102.3	48.9	51.1	16:23	11:13	7	4	0.4	40	60.0
14	Josh Morrissey	25	D	11	175	186	48.5	-2.6	130	146	47.1	-4.7	10.3	88.7	99.0	48.1	51.9	23:52	18:26	1	12	0.7	40	42.5
15	Sami Niku	24	D	3	34	43	44.2	-3.5	22	37	37.3	-9.1	5.6	89.3	94.8	40.9	59.1	12:26	12:11	0	4	0.3	4	25.0
16	Mathieu Perreault	33	C	11	111	86	56.3	7.8	84	65	56.4	7.9	12.5	93.6	106.1	54.8	45.2	12:02	10:11	3	4	0.8	25	40.0
17	Neal Pionk	25	D	11	180	152	54.2	6.2	139	113	55.2	7.7	10.5	90.7	101.2	59.0	41.0	22:56	19:08	3	11	0.2	31	54.8
18	Tucker Poolman	27	D	1	9	11	45.0	-9.1	5	5	50.0	-3.3	0.0	66.7	66.7	37.5	62.5	18:53	16:17	0	2	0.5	1	0.0
19	Mark Scheifele	27	C	11	166	154	51.9	2.6	123	116	51.5	2.1	11.1	89.0	100.1	57.3	42.7	22:29	17:58	13	8	-0.5	49	59.2
20	Logan Stanley	22	D	10	98	98	50.0	0.1	73	70	51.0	1.5	12.5	96.1	108.6	51.7	48.3	12:21	11:51	2	5	1.3	37	45.9
21	Paul Stastny	35	C	11	141	136	50.9	1.1	104	104	50.0	-0.1	15.0	90.3	105.3	57.3	42.7	17:34	13:39	4	6	3.1	32	53.1
22	Nate Thompson	36	C	4	14	22	38.9	-11.8	8	15	34.8	-13.4	0.0	100.0	100.0	27.3	72.7	7:25	5:35	0	1	0.1	1	100.0
23	Kristian Vesalainen	21	W	4	17	25	40.5	-9.2	12	14	46.2	-5.6	0.0	100.0	100.0	50.0	50.0	7:25	7:21	0	1	0.0	3	100.0
24	Blake Wheeler	34	RW	11	130	154	45.8	-6.1	93	117	44.3	-8.1	9.7	82.6	92.3	65.9	34.1	19:14	15:13	7	3	-0.1	35	65.7

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Romang67]

Rebuilding our D corps requires Samberg and Heinola to move up the depth charts sooner rather than later. It isn't just about the fact that we need improvement now. It is also that an inability to move up now will suggest a lower peak to their careers. Samberg in particular, being already 22 and having 3 full years of NCAA under his belt, needs to 'arrive' this season. If he can't outperform Stanley and Beaulieu now that says something about his likely ceiling.

If Maurice can't deal with more than 1 rookie per season the rebuild of our D corps is just going to take too long. If our prized prospects can't take a job from some of our bottom pairing Dmen then they are never going to be the difference makers we need.

This is a very real issue this season. In that past, letting one rookie D-man try to make it onto the team per season wasn't a major issue because we actually had a pretty strong defense up until everyone left us. We REALLY don't now. I honestly do think we could have an alright (if nowhere near what it was 3 seasons ago) D if Samberg and Heinola come as advertised. If so, we could have a bunch of middle pairing D-men who could cut it as top pairing D-men on a weak roster, but potentially no clear borderline NHLers. But if Stanley is the only rookie who makes the team this year, followed by either Samberg or Heinola next year, followed by a third the year after, we're looking at years of a well below average D.

 

[Romang67]

Are you sure about that? I didn't format it right, but that's the d-zone starts bolded.

Skater Advanced Statistics

Relatively:

1	Nathan Beaulieu	D	11	162:45	14:47	51.98	58.99	46.84	40.55	46.08	46.81	28.39	33.92	45.56	2.95	2.95	50.00	2.02	2.88	41.20	22.86	30.6	42.76	7	14.75	32.20	1.84	1.84	50.00	10.39	91.30	1.017	4.42	9.95	4.42	53.82	50.00	11.8	16.59	14.01	45.71
2	Nikolaj Ehlers	L	11	152:49	13:53	59.68	51.83	53.52	43.58	38.48	53.11	34.94	29.45	54.27	4.32	0.79	84.62	2.88	2.22	56.47	31.8	26.7	54.36	10.99	10.99	50.00	2.75	0.79	77.78	12.36	97.33	1.097	10.21	13.35	5.1	45.54	66.67	14.13	18.06	13.35	51.43
3	Dylan DeMelo	D	7	105:39	15:05	57.36	60.2	48.79	40.89	44.3	48.00	30.67	30.1	50.47	2.84	3.98	41.67	2.49	2.74	47.68	31.8	27.83	53.33	13.06	15.9	45.10	1.7	3.41	33.33	9.26	86.79	0.961	10.22	10.79	5.11	51.68	66.67	19.88	18.17	15.9	55.56
4	Mark Scheifele	C	11	180:25	16:24	52.87	48.22	52.30	40.24	36.25	52.61	28.93	28.27	50.58	2	2.66	42.86	2.08	2.38	46.61	29.26	24.94	53.99	10.64	12.97	45.07	1.66	2.33	41.67	6.90	90.59	0.975	8.31	13.3	5.32	40.9	60.98	14.63	16.96	10.97	57.14
5	Logan Stanley	D	10	118:06	11:48	54.87	52.33	51.18	42.68	38.1	52.83	30.48	28.45	51.72	3.56	1.02	77.78	2	1.97	50.39	22.86	25.4	47.37	7.11	12.7	35.90	2.54	0.51	83.33	11.67	96.43	1.081	7.11	13.21	5.59	51.31	56.00	16.26	21.34	14.23	53.33
6	Josh Morrissey	D	11	187:33	17:03	55.35	58.22	48.73	40.31	45.75	46.84	31.35	33.27	48.51	2.24	3.52	38.89	2.42	2.85	45.98	29.11	28.79	50.28	12.48	14.4	46.43	1.28	3.52	26.67	7.14	89.42	0.966	6.72	8.64	6.08	54.07	52.50	15.04	14.4	16.96	47.00
7	Blake Wheeler	R	11	153:58	13:59	47.54	60.01	44.20	35.07	45.2	43.69	25.72	32.73	44.00	1.56	5.84	21.05	1.91	3.31	36.54	26.5	32.73	44.74	10.13	17.14	37.14	1.17	5.07	18.75	6.06	82.14	0.882	11.69	14.81	6.62	46.76	63.83	20.26	18.7	10.91	65.00
8	Kyle Connor	L	11	158:22	14:23	45.84	56.07	44.98	32.58	42.81	43.22	22.35	30.69	42.14	2.65	4.55	36.84	1.51	3.04	33.28	25.01	33.34	42.86	8.71	16.67	34.33	1.14	4.17	21.43	11.86	85.19	0.970	12.12	13.26	6.82	42.05	64.00	20.08	17.81	12.5	61.63
9	Paul Stastny	C	11	140:48	12:48	61.79	60.09	50.70	45.17	46.45	49.30	35.37	31.53	52.87	4.26	2.56	62.50	3.31	2.97	52.74	34.09	32.81	50.96	13.64	15.77	46.38	1.7	2.56	40.00	12.05	91.89	1.039	13.64	12.36	6.82	45.17	66.67	20.45	16.62	15.34	57.14
10	Mathieu Perreault	L	11	110:28	10:02	65.71	49.42	57.08	49.42	37.47	56.88	36.93	28.24	56.67	3.8	1.09	77.78	2.87	1.68	63.14	31.5	21.18	59.79	13.03	6.52	66.67	3.26	0	100.00	10.29	96.15	1.064	12.49	11.4	7.06	50.51	63.89	17.92	18.46	15.75	53.23
11	Andrew Copp	C	11	151:58	13:48	63.57	55.28	53.49	49.75	42.64	53.85	37.9	32.77	53.63	3.16	1.97	61.54	3.12	2.46	55.99	31.59	24.87	55.94	11.06	11.84	48.28	1.97	1.18	62.50	8.33	93.98	1.023	12.63	12.24	7.11	42.25	64.00	17.37	16.58	16.58	51.16
12	Neal Pionk	D	11	191:34	17:25	54.49	43.53	55.59	41.65	31.94	56.60	31.32	23.8	56.82	2.51	1.57	61.54	2.14	1.85	53.60	25.99	22.86	53.21	8.14	9.4	46.43	1.57	0.63	71.43	8.00	93.42	1.014	7.52	15.35	7.2	43.22	51.06	20.04	20.36	12.84	60.95
13	Derek Forbort	D	11	189:22	17:13	50.69	47.52	51.61	39.29	35.48	52.54	29.78	26.3	53.11	2.85	1.9	60.00	2.08	2.14	49.36	25.03	24.39	50.64	8.55	9.82	46.55	1.58	0.63	71.43	9.57	92.77	1.023	8.55	14.89	7.6	45.94	52.94	19.01	20.91	13.62	58.25
14	Mason Appleton	C	11	124:25	11:18	57.86	46.29	55.56	45.33	36.16	55.62	34.24	27.97	55.04	2.89	0.96	75.00	2.28	1.87	54.93	23.63	21.7	52.13	11.09	8.68	56.10	2.41	0	100.00	8.45	96.55	1.050	13.5	13.5	10.61	45.81	56.00	17.84	20.73	18.81	48.68
15	Adam Lowry	C	11	118:22	10:45	58.29	50.68	53.49	45.11	38.52	53.94	33.45	30.41	52.38	3.55	2.53	58.33	2.19	2.08	51.30	22.3	22.81	49.44	9.12	8.62	51.43	3.04	0.51	85.71	10.61	91.67	1.023	15.2	14.7	12.16	46.63	55.56	20.27	22.3	20.27	50.00

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

That's sorted by DZ starts / 60. Beaulieu starts a low percentage of his starts in the OZ, but he actually doesn't start a high number of starts in the DZ. Most of his starts, like most players, are either in the NZ or on the fly. IIRC, the on-the-fly change is a big reason why zone starts don't matter as much as you'd think, but I haven't looked into analytics for that in a few years so I can't say for certain.

 

[HannuJ]

Again with the Chiarot icing king. Over his last couple of seasons with the Jets that was simply not true.

There is a site that records icings for and against with a player on the ice and he was better in that metric than a bunch of other Jets.

listen, even if you're correct and my memory's flawed, i'd argue that, dollar to dollar, Forbort's a better contract/player.
i'm totally fine on not having a Chiarot on my team. Forbort's been really, really good. he would be a solid #4 D man on almost all NHL teams and likely an upgrade for most NHL teams.

Myers? maybe we all agree on him not being much of a loss. Myers giveth and Myers taketh away.

 

[HannuJ]

Killing plays should result in less zone time and fewer scoring chances against. So if Beaulieu is good at stopping plays (I don't see it), then he must be especially bad at all the other parts of the game (transition defense, positioning, puck movement).
View attachment 393307

i mean, can we frame this so we can (partially) defend the logic in dressing Stanley and the lack of logic in dressing Beaulieu?

 

[HannuJ]

I thought we assessed coaches based on their records around here. Now I'm confused.


Actually, the issue for me is playing Beaulieu at all. I sort of wonder whether it's because they are playing the Flames and Maurice thinks he needs the muscle. Or maybe it's just to get his expansion draft games in (seems doubtful).

or option #3, which is Maurice thinks he's a good veteran presence and does all the little things right, even though his stats show that he does almost all of the little things wrong.

 

[voyageur]

This is a very real issue this season. In that past, letting one rookie D-man try to make it onto the team per season wasn't a major issue because we actually had a pretty strong defense up until everyone left us. We REALLY don't now. I honestly do think we could have an alright (if nowhere near what it was 3 seasons ago) D if Samberg and Heinola come as advertised. If so, we could have a bunch of middle pairing D-men who could cut it as top pairing D-men on a weak roster, but potentially no clear borderline NHLers. But if Stanley is the only rookie who makes the team this year, followed by either Samberg or Heinola next year, followed by a third the year after, we're looking at years of a well below average D.

You can't leave fundamentals out of the equation. We saw last year that a poor PK severely impacted our performance. Even early this year. So you absolutely need guys you can trust on the PK. Going 2-4 on the PK would likely lose us games. We would need players who regularly contribute positive results 5 on 5, to a factor that mitigates potential loss on the PK. That's a balancing act for statisticians. And with rookies you rarely know their impact, so it's a degree of uncertainty. Without AHL reps it's even harder to measure, because PK is not something you focus on in practice, especially at a high intensity level.

None of our rookies have any impact in this regard to start. Stanley is being allowed to grow his game, but he hasn't been relied upon on the PK, and that's surprising because he was often on the top unit of the Moose. Maurice favours vets, and I'm sure he has his reasons.

I think we've seen models of success in the Penguins, where there were only 2 real puck movers (Letang and Schultz), with the defense being rounded out by defensive impact players.

We've got those 2 puck movers in Morrissey and Pionk, though I don't think you can measure Morrissey to a Letang prime level by any means. Morrissey also has a strong defensive impact, when he is on. So that will allow Heinola to make us a 3 headed monster, with the rest of the spots being filled with role players. De Melo is one, I'd expect Samberg/Stanley to compete for the other, with likely another vet, Beaulieu/Forbort type to be a PK leader.

I think you can afford patience with both Samberg and Heinola, and the way Chevy constructed his roster to start the season would indicate that will be the way. I'm worried that Samberg has such enormous hype that he might suffer from just being average to start, so it might be a better idea to keep working him to above average.

Heinola on the roster gives us the depth that is only possible through ELCs to be able to replace a puck mover in the lineup with an internal solution if injury should beset any of our defensemen. Knock on wood though, been a pretty clean bill of health to start, for our defense. So now performance is the main factor.

 

[WolfHouse]

Relatively:

1	Nathan Beaulieu	D	11	162:45	14:47	51.98	58.99	46.84	40.55	46.08	46.81	28.39	33.92	45.56	2.95	2.95	50.00	2.02	2.88	41.20	22.86	30.6	42.76	7	14.75	32.20	1.84	1.84	50.00	10.39	91.30	1.017	4.42	9.95	4.42	53.82	50.00	11.8	16.59	14.01	45.71
2	Nikolaj Ehlers	L	11	152:49	13:53	59.68	51.83	53.52	43.58	38.48	53.11	34.94	29.45	54.27	4.32	0.79	84.62	2.88	2.22	56.47	31.8	26.7	54.36	10.99	10.99	50.00	2.75	0.79	77.78	12.36	97.33	1.097	10.21	13.35	5.1	45.54	66.67	14.13	18.06	13.35	51.43
3	Dylan DeMelo	D	7	105:39	15:05	57.36	60.2	48.79	40.89	44.3	48.00	30.67	30.1	50.47	2.84	3.98	41.67	2.49	2.74	47.68	31.8	27.83	53.33	13.06	15.9	45.10	1.7	3.41	33.33	9.26	86.79	0.961	10.22	10.79	5.11	51.68	66.67	19.88	18.17	15.9	55.56
4	Mark Scheifele	C	11	180:25	16:24	52.87	48.22	52.30	40.24	36.25	52.61	28.93	28.27	50.58	2	2.66	42.86	2.08	2.38	46.61	29.26	24.94	53.99	10.64	12.97	45.07	1.66	2.33	41.67	6.90	90.59	0.975	8.31	13.3	5.32	40.9	60.98	14.63	16.96	10.97	57.14
5	Logan Stanley	D	10	118:06	11:48	54.87	52.33	51.18	42.68	38.1	52.83	30.48	28.45	51.72	3.56	1.02	77.78	2	1.97	50.39	22.86	25.4	47.37	7.11	12.7	35.90	2.54	0.51	83.33	11.67	96.43	1.081	7.11	13.21	5.59	51.31	56.00	16.26	21.34	14.23	53.33
6	Josh Morrissey	D	11	187:33	17:03	55.35	58.22	48.73	40.31	45.75	46.84	31.35	33.27	48.51	2.24	3.52	38.89	2.42	2.85	45.98	29.11	28.79	50.28	12.48	14.4	46.43	1.28	3.52	26.67	7.14	89.42	0.966	6.72	8.64	6.08	54.07	52.50	15.04	14.4	16.96	47.00
7	Blake Wheeler	R	11	153:58	13:59	47.54	60.01	44.20	35.07	45.2	43.69	25.72	32.73	44.00	1.56	5.84	21.05	1.91	3.31	36.54	26.5	32.73	44.74	10.13	17.14	37.14	1.17	5.07	18.75	6.06	82.14	0.882	11.69	14.81	6.62	46.76	63.83	20.26	18.7	10.91	65.00
8	Kyle Connor	L	11	158:22	14:23	45.84	56.07	44.98	32.58	42.81	43.22	22.35	30.69	42.14	2.65	4.55	36.84	1.51	3.04	33.28	25.01	33.34	42.86	8.71	16.67	34.33	1.14	4.17	21.43	11.86	85.19	0.970	12.12	13.26	6.82	42.05	64.00	20.08	17.81	12.5	61.63
9	Paul Stastny	C	11	140:48	12:48	61.79	60.09	50.70	45.17	46.45	49.30	35.37	31.53	52.87	4.26	2.56	62.50	3.31	2.97	52.74	34.09	32.81	50.96	13.64	15.77	46.38	1.7	2.56	40.00	12.05	91.89	1.039	13.64	12.36	6.82	45.17	66.67	20.45	16.62	15.34	57.14
10	Mathieu Perreault	L	11	110:28	10:02	65.71	49.42	57.08	49.42	37.47	56.88	36.93	28.24	56.67	3.8	1.09	77.78	2.87	1.68	63.14	31.5	21.18	59.79	13.03	6.52	66.67	3.26	0	100.00	10.29	96.15	1.064	12.49	11.4	7.06	50.51	63.89	17.92	18.46	15.75	53.23
11	Andrew Copp	C	11	151:58	13:48	63.57	55.28	53.49	49.75	42.64	53.85	37.9	32.77	53.63	3.16	1.97	61.54	3.12	2.46	55.99	31.59	24.87	55.94	11.06	11.84	48.28	1.97	1.18	62.50	8.33	93.98	1.023	12.63	12.24	7.11	42.25	64.00	17.37	16.58	16.58	51.16
12	Neal Pionk	D	11	191:34	17:25	54.49	43.53	55.59	41.65	31.94	56.60	31.32	23.8	56.82	2.51	1.57	61.54	2.14	1.85	53.60	25.99	22.86	53.21	8.14	9.4	46.43	1.57	0.63	71.43	8.00	93.42	1.014	7.52	15.35	7.2	43.22	51.06	20.04	20.36	12.84	60.95
13	Derek Forbort	D	11	189:22	17:13	50.69	47.52	51.61	39.29	35.48	52.54	29.78	26.3	53.11	2.85	1.9	60.00	2.08	2.14	49.36	25.03	24.39	50.64	8.55	9.82	46.55	1.58	0.63	71.43	9.57	92.77	1.023	8.55	14.89	7.6	45.94	52.94	19.01	20.91	13.62	58.25
14	Mason Appleton	C	11	124:25	11:18	57.86	46.29	55.56	45.33	36.16	55.62	34.24	27.97	55.04	2.89	0.96	75.00	2.28	1.87	54.93	23.63	21.7	52.13	11.09	8.68	56.10	2.41	0	100.00	8.45	96.55	1.050	13.5	13.5	10.61	45.81	56.00	17.84	20.73	18.81	48.68
15	Adam Lowry	C	11	118:22	10:45	58.29	50.68	53.49	45.11	38.52	53.94	33.45	30.41	52.38	3.55	2.53	58.33	2.19	2.08	51.30	22.3	22.81	49.44	9.12	8.62	51.43	3.04	0.51	85.71	10.61	91.67	1.023	15.2	14.7	12.16	46.63	55.56	20.27	22.3	20.27	50.00

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

That's sorted by DZ starts / 60. Beaulieu starts a low percentage of his starts in the OZ, but he actually doesn't start a high number of starts in the DZ. Most of his starts, like most players, are either in the NZ or on the fly. IIRC, the on-the-fly change is a big reason why zone starts don't matter as much as you'd think, but I haven't looked into analytics for that in a few years so I can't say for certain.

I really thought we were doomed with Mo’s man love for Boo - but his game is steadily improving...

said it before, when our D is just ‘average’ Mo simplifies his defensive structure and we perform better...

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

This is a very real issue this season. In that past, letting one rookie D-man try to make it onto the team per season wasn't a major issue because we actually had a pretty strong defense up until everyone left us. We REALLY don't now. I honestly do think we could have an alright (if nowhere near what it was 3 seasons ago) D if Samberg and Heinola come as advertised. If so, we could have a bunch of middle pairing D-men who could cut it as top pairing D-men on a weak roster, but potentially no clear borderline NHLers. But if Stanley is the only rookie who makes the team this year, followed by either Samberg or Heinola next year, followed by a third the year after, we're looking at years of a well below average D.

Exactly.

The issue of having multiple rookies on D gets overstated. There are 2 risks. 1) Having 2 rookies on the same pair is an obvious risk. But as long as no more than 1 is on the ice at any one time it doesn't matter how many there are in total. 2) If we never have more than 1 on a pair it means we can only shelter 1 at a time on the bottom pair. The 2nd rookie needs to be talented enough to play 2nd pair.

The alternative to having a rookie play higher up the depth chart is to alternate the rookies. Say 5 games in and then 5 out for 2 of them. When the more talented one accumulates enough experience, you can move him up to the 2nd pair. At that point, you might have the option of starting to platoon a 3rd rookie, if you have a sufficiently talented one available.

If we can accommodate only 1 rookie Dman, it needs to be one with more upside that Stanley has if we are going to make any progress on D this year.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Agree...my point was that we can learn from history and not make the same mistake twice.
Valamaki is a history lesson.

True.
And it is not hindsight for those people who said this at the time. That was foresight. Some of us never liked the compromise move Chevy made. Valimaki was my choice at 13.

But it depends on what the actual alternative was. None of us can know who we would have lost if Chevy had not made any deal. Also, none of us can know with any certainty who Chevy would have drafted at 13. The story was that Jets were interested in Liljegren. I like to believe that they would have gotten over that interest by draft day and taken Valimaki.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

agreed. It's sadly lacking at times. People should be thankful there's an NHL team in this town.

People are thankful there is an NHL team in this town.
Getting upset, annoyed, bitchy, when that team loses in no way implies any lack of thankfulness that we have a team.

 

[WolfHouse]

True.
And it is not hindsight for those people who said this at the time. That was foresight. Some of us never liked the compromise move Chevy made. Valimaki was my choice at 13.

But it depends on what the actual alternative was. None of us can know who we would have lost if Chevy had not made any deal. Also, none of us can know with any certainty who Chevy would have drafted at 13. The story was that Jets were interested in Liljegren. I like to believe that they would have gotten over that interest by draft day and taken Valimaki.

There was some real nice talent left on the board between 10-20 that year... then it dropped off a fair bit

I'm totally against a trade like that... EXCEPT Appleton is suddenly showing more than Roslo ever did and Harkins has a very solid game - might rethink things if this keeps up

 

[ps241]

Rebuilding our D corps requires Samberg and Heinola to move up the depth charts sooner rather than later. It isn't just about the fact that we need improvement now. It is also that an inability to move up now will suggest a lower peak to their careers. Samberg in particular, being already 22 and having 3 full years of NCAA under his belt, needs to 'arrive' this season. If he can't outperform Stanley and Beaulieu now that says something about his likely ceiling.

If Maurice can't deal with more than 1 rookie per season the rebuild of our D corps is just going to take too long. If our prized prospects can't take a job from some of our bottom pairing Dmen then they are never going to be the difference makers we need.

I think orgs have there way and I am not looking at it as damming to the prospects yet especially in this weird season.

Samberg needs to play allot somewhere if it is the AHL for now to get him acclimated to a new system so be it. Heinola is ready now and I think injuries will open a door at some point this season.

 

[Howard Chuck]

I think Heinola makes us better the minute he starts playing. He played very well every NHL game he played for the Jets. His one game this year was too pairing with Josh and he did a fantastic job.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Rebuilding our D corps requires Samberg and Heinola to move up the depth charts sooner rather than later. It isn't just about the fact that we need improvement now. It is also that an inability to move up now will suggest a lower peak to their careers. Samberg in particular, being already 22 and having 3 full years of NCAA under his belt, needs to 'arrive' this season. If he can't outperform Stanley and Beaulieu now that says something about his likely ceiling.

If Maurice can't deal with more than 1 rookie per season the rebuild of our D corps is just going to take too long. If our prized prospects can't take a job from some of our bottom pairing Dmen then they are never going to be the difference makers we need.

Beaulieu is really our only bad d. Forbort has been more than a replacement level d. Stanley deserves his games right now doesn’t mean Heinola doesn’t deserve them as much or more. If Stanley can become a real pmd like garret suggested that is worth exploring more than Heinola’s puck movement which we already have Pionk and Morissey for.
So Stanley should get his pk minutes and a chance to rush test.
Another factor is to see what we have before draft as both Heinola and Samberg are protected by age.
Interested to see who slots in with injury poolman or Heinola.
Also our d is a lot better than last yr with kulikov sbisa replaced by forbort and Stanley.

 

[SUX2BU]

People are thankful there is an NHL team in this town.
Getting upset, annoyed, bitchy, when that team loses in no way implies any lack of thankfulness that we have a team.

well, if being upset, annoyed, and bitchy is a way of being thankful then that’s a funny way of showing it .....

oh, by the way, is your multi quote thingy broken ?

 

[Jet]

listen, even if you're correct and my memory's flawed, i'd argue that, dollar to dollar, Forbort's a better contract/player.
i'm totally fine on not having a Chiarot on my team. Forbort's been really, really good. he would be a solid #4 D man on almost all NHL teams and likely an upgrade for most NHL teams.

Myers? maybe we all agree on him not being much of a loss. Myers giveth and Myers taketh away.

I'd wholeheartedly agree. Forbort has been one of our best, most consistent D and at 1MM you just can't beat the value.

Just sayin', Chiarot was really good for us the last two years, but many did not want to let go of their bias and give credit where credit is due.

I liked Tyler Myers, he was a risk reward guy for sure.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

There was some real nice talent left on the board between 10-20 that year... then it dropped off a fair bit

I'm totally against a trade like that... EXCEPT Appleton is suddenly showing more than Roslo ever did and Harkins has a very solid game - might rethink things if this keeps up

True those two are looking good. But they were drafted in '15 so it has no effect on the '17 draft.

That '15 draft class was just so good. Lots of good players into the 4th rd and some good ones even into the 6th and 7th.

 

[White Out 902]

well, if being upset, annoyed, and bitchy is a way of being thankful then that’s a funny way of showing it .....

oh, by the way, is your multi quote thingy broken ?

As someone who was around in 1996, I'm going to push back on this. Losing the team was brutal, and the joy of their return was deeply felt. But the idea that you can only be a thankful and good fan is by being a cheerleader is really obnoxious to me. I think we would all get along on the boards a lot better if people would drop garbage narratives.

 

[BigZ65]

Exactly.

The issue of having multiple rookies on D gets overstated. There are 2 risks. 1) Having 2 rookies on the same pair is an obvious risk. But as long as no more than 1 is on the ice at any one time it doesn't matter how many there are in total. 2) If we never have more than 1 on a pair it means we can only shelter 1 at a time on the bottom pair. The 2nd rookie needs to be talented enough to play 2nd pair.

The alternative to having a rookie play higher up the depth chart is to alternate the rookies. Say 5 games in and then 5 out for 2 of them. When the more talented one accumulates enough experience, you can move him up to the 2nd pair. At that point, you might have the option of starting to platoon a 3rd rookie, if you have a sufficiently talented one available.

If we can accommodate only 1 rookie Dman, it needs to be one with more upside that Stanley has if we are going to make any progress on D this year.

Two things:

It will be important for both guys to play games. Heinola did get the WJC and games in Finland, Samberg has not played in a long time. The Moose starting up will be great for their development. I don't think we can discount that in the big picture of their development either.

Second, Heinola's ELC sliding could be quite important to our next contending window both in terms of cap space and extending his years to UFA. Obviously we're speculating on where the Jets see themselves today but to me the next window really opens next season, they could go on a run this season too but have some opportunities to really super charge the roster this off-season.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I think orgs have there way and I am not looking at it as damming to the prospects yet especially in this weird season.

Samberg needs to play allot somewhere if it is the AHL for now to get him acclimated to a new system so be it. Heinola is ready now and I think injuries will open a door at some point this season.

Heinola should probably be playing now. I wonder if Stanley has been getting all of the games because Cgy was expected to play a (dirty) physical game? If that is not the reason, then Heinola and Stanley should have been sharing the available games. Beaulieu should go to the PB once he has enough games to qualify for the XD.

I will be extremely disappointed if Samberg can't win a regular spot on the 3rd pair this year, given his age and experience. That will tell me that he will never be much, if any better than a #5. We don't need him to be a #5, we need #3 or #4 at least from him.

They have been practicing enough, long enough, that he should be able to play for the Jets by now. In TC the long lay-off was used to explain his failure to make the team. That excuse should be gone by now.

If we have to downgrade our estimates of our D prospects, then we are still in trouble with our D corps, even with the unexpected bonus from Stanley.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Beaulieu is really our only bad d. Forbort has been more than a replacement level d. Stanley deserves his games right now doesn’t mean Heinola doesn’t deserve them as much or more. If Stanley can become a real pmd like garret suggested that is worth exploring more than Heinola’s puck movement which we already have Pionk and Morissey for.
So Stanley should get his pk minutes and a chance to rush test.
Another factor is to see what we have before draft as both Heinola and Samberg are protected by age.
Interested to see who slots in with injury poolman or Heinola.
Also our d is a lot better than last yr with kulikov sbisa replaced by forbort and Stanley.

Forbort has been good. I agree with Jet that Beaulieu is not awful, but he is still a #6. DeMelo has been a bit of a disappointment. Or maybe it is that Morrissey has been a bit of a disappointment with DeMelo. Not sure. Forbort just makes up for DeMelo.

I wouldn't call our D a lot better. Kuli was overpaid but not that bad. Sbisa was actually pretty good for his salary, especially compared to some others we had.

Stanley is getting way overrated here lately. He is surprisingly good, but he still doesn't look like ever being more than a 3rd pair D. He might just possibly rise to a #4, but I will be happy if he is a good 3rd pair man. We have a whole bunch of 2nd and 3rd pairing Dmen. We have1, top pairing Dman at most, maybe none. I don't think having 2nd pairing Dmen playing on the 3rd pair makes up for having 2nd pairing Dmen playing on the 1st pair.

If a very good F corps can win with good goaltending in spite of a weak D corps, we are going to find out.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

well, if being upset, annoyed, and bitchy is a way of being thankful then that’s a funny way of showing it .....

oh, by the way, is your multi quote thingy broken ?

The dissatisfaction over a loss, or over bad play has no connection to the gratitude for having a team, one way or another. Just 2 totally separate things.

I use that multi-quote thingy when it fits.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Forbort has been good. I agree with Jet that Beaulieu is not awful, but he is still a #6. DeMelo has been a bit of a disappointment. Or maybe it is that Morrissey has been a bit of a disappointment with DeMelo. Not sure. Forbort just makes up for DeMelo.

I wouldn't call our D a lot better. Kuli was overpaid but not that bad. Sbisa was actually pretty good for his salary, especially compared to some others we had.

Stanley is getting way overrated here lately. He is surprisingly good, but he still doesn't look like ever being more than a 3rd pair D. He might just possibly rise to a #4, but I will be happy if he is a good 3rd pair man. We have a whole bunch of 2nd and 3rd pairing Dmen. We have1, top pairing Dman at most, maybe none. I don't think having 2nd pairing Dmen playing on the 3rd pair makes up for having 2nd pairing Dmen playing on the 1st pair.

If a very good F corps can win with good goaltending in spite of a weak D corps, we are going to find out.

But our 7th man is Heinola who was our 7th man last year? Bite to?Our 8th is poolman. We didn’t have an 8th last year we had ahl tweeners.
Forbort is better value for his mil than sbisa at his 900 k.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Heinola should probably be playing now. I wonder if Stanley has been getting all of the games because Cgy was expected to play a (dirty) physical game? If that is not the reason, then Heinola and Stanley should have been sharing the available games. Beaulieu should go to the PB once he has enough games to qualify for the XD.

I will be extremely disappointed if Samberg can't win a regular spot on the 3rd pair this year, given his age and experience. That will tell me that he will never be much, if any better than a #5. We don't need him to be a #5, we need #3 or #4 at least from him.

They have been practicing enough, long enough, that he should be able to play for the Jets by now. In TC the long lay-off was used to explain his failure to make the team. That excuse should be gone by now.

If we have to downgrade our estimates of our D prospects, then we are still in trouble with our D corps, even with the unexpected bonus from Stanley.

Can Samberg play enough in this season we’d have to protect him?