Player Discussion: Winnipeg Jets Defense

[voyageur]

Bias isn't always a conscious thing. But if the guy who is collecting it has been anti-Stanley since before he was drafted, then it should probably be reviewed for objectivity

There's a reason for peer review in science

Statistics can always be interpreted differently. Asking the same question with a different perspective.

For one what's a successful controlled exit? Tape to tape?, If you shoot for a tip that transitions zones is that successful? Could anyone really say what the discrepancy between Pionk leading uncontrolled exits and Morrissey leading controlled exits translates to? Is Pionk the best defenseman at moving the puck under chaos?

Once you come to mistrust your government, many stats need interpretation.

 

[MardyBum]

I'm neutral on Stanley. I dont give a f*** if he's good or not

He's 4th on my LHD depth chart behind JoMo, Snerg and Fleury

Zone exits aside... other stats paint him in a more favorable light vs the rest of Jets defenders at 5v5. How often does Garrett post about those stats?

Which stats? How often are YOU posting about those stats, and how often are you posting them when it paints Stanley in a positive vs negative light? Because he does, but you'd likely just dismiss them. "Stats nerds" and all that.

He's fifth on mine, but Fleury was just as poor with Pionk, as neither are top 4 dmen. So maybe Stanley could be 4th.

 

[MardyBum]

Statistics can always be interpreted differently. Asking the same question with a different perspective.

For one what's a successful controlled exit? Tape to tape?, If you shoot for a tip that transitions zones is that successful? Could anyone really say what the discrepancy between Pionk leading uncontrolled exits and Morrissey leading controlled exits translates to? Is Pionk the best defenseman at moving the puck under chaos?

Once you come to mistrust your government, many stats need interpretation.

???

 

[Buffdog]

Also, re: Garrett's zone exit stats

Its another example of trying to use relative rates to make something look more significant than it is

148 zone exit attempts is about 5.3 per game (which seems awfully low to me). Even IF that number is right...

Based.in his percentages:
41 successful zone exits = 1.5/game
48 partially controlled exits = 1.7/game
48 failed exits = 1.7/game

So first of all, where are the other 11 attempts?

Second of all... even if Stan was average on the Jets and averaged 55/25/20..

That would be
81 successful exits = 2.9/game
37 partial = 1.3/game
30 failed = 1.1/game

Barely seems significant

Which stats? How often are YOU posting about those stats, and how often are you posting them when it paints Stanley in a positive vs negative light? Because he does, but you'd likely just dismiss them. "Stats nerds" and all that.

He's fifth on mine, but Fleury was just as poor with Pionk, as neither are top 4 dmen. So maybe Stanley could be 4th.

Stats don't paint anyone in any light. That's your problem. They are numbers... objective... they don't give a f***. They are what they are

The problem with you people is that you ignore the ones you don't like, or try to explain them away. All I heard about all last season was Ehlers and Schief and Connor and GF% and xGF%. Why are they absent in the Stanley discussion? Seems like a contradiction

 

[MardyBum]

Also, re: Garrett's zone exit stats

Its another example of trying to use relative rates to make something look more significant than it is

148 zone exit attempts is about 5.3 per game (which seems awfully low to me). Even IF that number is right...

Based.in his percentages:
41 successful zone exits = 1.5/game
48 partially controlled exits = 1.7/game
48 failed exits = 1.7/game

So first of all, where are the other 11 attempts?

Second of all... even if Stan was average on the Jets and averaged 55/25/20..

That would be
81 successful exits = 2.9/game
37 partial = 1.3/game
30 failed = 1.1/game

Barely seems significant


Stats don't paint anyone in any light. That's your problem. They are numbers... objective... they don't give a f***. They are what they are

The problem with you people is that you ignore the ones you don't like, or try to explain them away. All I heard about all last season was Ehlers and Schief and Connor and GF% and xGF%. Why are they absent in the Stanley discussion? Seems like a contradiction

That's the point. The people who make these don't just post them when they see fit and go silent for years. It's people who dislike "analytics and nerd stats" that only bring them up to serve a purpose and make a mockery of it.

Stanley has been bad for years. I used this year so a certain poster wouldn't be complaining about previous years counting(which matter!).

Why are the people talking about Connor/Scheifele/Ehlers missing in a thread titled Winnipeg Jets Defense.

...

Stanley has seemingly plenty of rope to turn around his exits and play in general. He strung together a few good games. Definitely should not have been given top 4 mins. Probably shouldn't be on the PK

 

[Buffdog]

That's the point. The people who make these don't just post them when they see fit and go silent for years. It's people who dislike "analytics and nerd stats" that only bring them up to serve a purpose and make a mockery of it.

Stanley has been bad for years. I used this year so a certain poster wouldn't be complaining about previous years counting(which matter!).

Why are the people talking about Connor/Scheifele/Ehlers missing in a thread titled Winnipeg Jets Defense.

...

Stanley has seemingly plenty of rope to turn around his exits and play in general. He strung together a few good games. Definitely should not have been given top 4 mins. Probably shouldn't be on the PK

The reason I brought up CSV was to illustrate how selectively stats are used by the stats community. GF% and xGF% were the numbers used by posters that thought Ehlers should play with Schief and Vilardi.. so why no mention of them when evaluating Stanley? It at least appears like they're being omitted because they don't back the narrative that Stanley is our worst defenseman (at least this season).

The next predictable step will be someone saying "well, yeah... BUT...." and going on to justify why these things are only important indicators in certain situations (which conveniently always back up that person's narrative)

The way it should work is that the numbers help us form a conclusion... not the other way around

 

[MardyBum]

The reason I brought up CSV was to illustrate how selectively stats are used by the stats community. GF% and xGF% were the numbers used by posters that thought Ehlers should play with Schief and Vilardi.. so why no mention of them when evaluating Stanley? It at least appears like they're being omitted because they don't back the narrative that Stanley is our worst defenseman (at least this season).

The next predictable step will be someone saying "well, yeah... BUT...." and going on to justify why these things are only important indicators in certain situations (which conveniently always back up that person's narrative)

The way it should work is that the numbers help us form a conclusion... not the other way around

What would you like?

Can't just look at one and "get the picture", that's not how it works.

Doesn't even include different pairing combinations.

It'd be nice if it were easy.

No one is shitting on CSV anymore because they're actually performing like a good line? They're not perfect and have had some concerning dips throughout the year as a "top line on a contender", but would you like to compare their goals% and xG to last year to see why no one is ranting and raving and are more concerned about the 2nd/3rd/4th and 5v5 offense generating in general?

 

[Buffdog]

What would you like?

View attachment 958394


View attachment 958396

View attachment 958397

Can't just look at one and "get the picture", that's not how it works.

Doesn't even include different pairing combinations.

It'd be nice if it were easy.

No one is shitting on CSV anymore because they're actually performing like a good line? They're not perfect and have had some concerning dips throughout the year as a "top line on a contender", but would you like to compare their goals% and xG to last year to see why no one is ranting and raving and are more concerned about the 2nd/3rd/4th and 5v5 offense generating in general?

So based on what you just posted, if you removed the names and just labeled the players "Defenceman A, Defenseman B, etc"... would Stanley's anonymous numbers jump off the page as the player that should receive the amount of hatred that he does?

The answer is "no", BTW

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

You got it

View attachment 958235

Not a pretty picture but that card is a little out of date. Doesn't have either last year or the first half of this year. Whether you think good or bad, this has been Stan's best season so far.

 

[Crocket]

Incredible hits and gap closing by Bauer. I wish we had a physical defenseman

 

[voyageur]

Incredible hits and gap closing by Bauer. I wish we had a physical defenseman

You're really on about Tyrel Bauer. I get that you like fighters, but he was -1 again last night, in a win, which puts him at 2nd worse for the Moose defense. When Salomonsson returns it's either him or Kuzmin that will come out of the lineup, he's quite a ways down the depth chart. As it stands he's got Lundmark and Barteaux (an AHL contract) ahead of him on the depth chart.

If he's lucky he might get a game this year against Calgary, but I'd still be surprised at that. I am not sure Tyrel Bauer is anywhere near an NHL defensemen.

 

[10Ducky10]

Stanley is a better D man than Bauer.

 

[Gm0ney]

I think Bauer will stay in the Moose lineup - the org likes the toughness he brings and the fans love a good tilt.

Yeah he runs around and goes for hits...but that's what he has to do to keep his job. That's what they want him to do.

I don't think he has the skill to make the NHL. He's way down on the org depth chart (RHD DeMelo - Pionk - Miller - Coughlin - Heinola (on his off side) - Salomonsson - then maybe he's in the mix 7-10?)

But this guy likes what he sees:

 

[Moloch]

Excited to see Samberg back in action tomorrow

Does anyone have any historical data they can share that compares his season this year vs last year? I thought Garret Hohl did a thread on twitter about it but I cant find it.

 

[10Ducky10]

I wonder what JMo and Sammy would look like as a 1st pairing with JMo on the right side?

 

[DRW204]

Unsurprising Stanley is still in following his game vs Nashville. The Jets themselves said he’s not going to get any better sitting in the press box. He needs to be in the Top 6.

 

[voyageur]

Unsurprising Stanley is still in following his game vs Nashville. The Jets themselves said he’s not going to get any better sitting in the press box. He needs to be in the Top 6.

If I remember the last Kings game correctly they were physically dominant up front, Jets had a lot of trouble matching them, with tired legs, and I think they'd pose the same kind of troubles that Ottawa did for Heinola. Different game than Nashville who were probably just cruising through the end of their road trip, and got some PPs to stay in the game. It will be questioned though, I think Stanley would be best to erase the last game from his memory.

 

[Bob E]

I could get behind a playoff d lineup of:

Morrissey - DeMelo
Samberg - Pionk
Lindgren - Miller
Fleury/Coghlan

I'd even consider resigning Lindgren if he's a good fit in the room, on the bottom pairing, and 1st PK unit, if the dollars were reasonable. Having played on the same WJC team as Samberg could help the team transition should a deal happen.

 

[Crocket]

Stanley is a better D man than Bauer.

Bauer is a better skater, hitter and fighter.