Winnipeg Jets going into the 24/25 season

[voyageur]

Samberg-Pionk was actually a great pair last year. If they’re together next year, I would be happy with that.

I think with some cohesion that could come with offseason practice there is at least potential for a skating pair there that can match speed. I'm hoping for a bounce back year from Pionk...though his role may change if Ville takes the reigns of PP2.

 

[scelaton]

Nothing new though our HFBoards fan base needs scapegoats. I think it’s made worse by the passionate Nik fans not laying down and going along with it. It’s the debate that keeps the fire burning.

Nothing is as bad as the dark days of the Lainiacs invading our board and pimping out “the” chosen one that we were holding back.

You may not be right on that point any more. I think a lot of Nik fans have quietly walked away because the debate became so polarized, often personal and just not much fun.

Ehlers is great fun to watch (albeit frustrating at times) but he is not my favourite player. But for many, his utilization became a proxy for everything that is wrong with the decision-making in this organization.

I'm happy for Arniel and genuinely hope he makes objectively better, evidence-informed decisions to complement his experience and interpersonal skills. Other than that, with the likely loss of important UFAs and no real stars in the pipeline, I'm finding it hard to get my hopes up. Ehlers impending departure is a proxy for all that, but it's not just about Ehlers at all.

 

[ps241]

You may not be right on that point any more. I think a lot of Nik fans have quietly walked away because the debate became so polarized, often personal and just not much fun.

Ehlers is great fun to watch (albeit frustrating at times) but he is not my favourite player. But for many, his utilization became a proxy for everything that is wrong with the decision-making in this organization.

I'm happy for Ariel and genuinely hope he makes objectively better, evidence-informed decisions to complement his experience and interpersonal skills. Other than that, with the likely loss of important UFAs and no real stars in the pipeline, I'm finding it hard to get my hopes up. Ehlers impending departure is a proxy for all that, but it's not just about Ehlers at all.

At this time last year I thought things looked pretty bleak. We had major decisions to make on PLD, Scheif, Helle, and Wheeler (was fading). Most of us were speculating on how we were going to retool or rebuild or what was going to happen.

June 27th Wheeler got bought out, June 27th ish PLD gets traded in a blockbuster. Then later that summer we get the sneaky resigning of Scheif and Helle. All this actively set us up for what turned into a great regular season.

I look at the stage we are in right now as similar but different to last year at this time. We have decisions to be made and very little news. In that void we have fans throwing shit at the wall to see what might stick.

This summer could be very different if the pending UFA’s and Nik all decide to not sign here. time will tell but I look at this stretch here as the noisy phase where fans squawk allot while waiting for results.

Last year it was a different group of players in the spotlight but there was lots of noise too.

 

[FlappyGiraffe]

Yeah, it is Ehlers time to be the scapegoat, after cruising through most of his time in Winnipeg being one of the golden boys. At this point it is really only Morrissey that hasn't felt this boards rathe yet. But his time will no doubt come when age catches up with him, especially if he signs a too long legacy contract after his current one. Of course the prospects are all gold until they play in the NHL, then the warts will soon get magnified.

Morrissey was getting it pretty bad a few years ago, some people were clamouring for him to be exposed during the Seattle draft to get out of the contract lol

 

[Buffdog]

Morrissey was getting it pretty bad a few years ago, some people were clamouring for him to be exposed during the Seattle draft to get out of the contract lol

I remember some "reporter" had a model that spit out that his contract was one of the worst in the league lok

 

[tbcwpg]

I remember some "reporter" had a model that spit out that his contract was one of the worst in the league lok

He's not a reporter. He also said Morrissey is way better now than he was when that article was written. Murat wrote about why he disagreed and that guy changed his opinion.

 

[Buffdog]

He's not a reporter. He also said Morrissey is way better now than he was when that article was written. Murat wrote about why he disagreed and that guy changed his opinion.

Good for him. I have respect for people who admit when they're wrong and can change their opinion when new info comes to light

 

[tbcwpg]

Good for him. I have respect for people who admit when they're wrong and can change their opinion when new info comes to light

Also it's not just his personal opinion. It's a statistical model that has a baseline per $ and compares how far away from that baseline a player is. There have been players on those lists that even the author says should not be there based on trajectory but based on their play up until that point, the value per $ is bottom tier. Usually very promising rookies who have signed their first big deal after their ELC.

 

[Buffdog]

Also it's not just his personal opinion. It's a statistical model that has a baseline per $ and compares how far away from that baseline a player is. There have been players on those lists that even the author says should not be there based on trajectory but based on their play up until that point, the value per $ is bottom tier. Usually very promising rookies who have signed their first big deal after their ELC.

Models are only as good as their inputs and how they're weighted - this goes across all disciplines

If a model shoots out an outlier like that, all the inputs and the model itself needs to be looked at

 

[Jack7222]

Models are only as good as their inputs and how they're weighted - this goes across all disciplines

If a model shoots out an outlier like that, all the inputs and the model itself needs to be looked at

Another way to look at it is it did accurately depict just how bad Morrissey was playing for a stretch. He definitely turned it around, but I don't know how much of an outlier this model it was at the time.

 

[tbcwpg]

Models are only as good as their inputs and how they're weighted - this goes across all disciplines

If a model shoots out an outlier like that, all the inputs and the model itself needs to be looked at

No I think it just means the model requires some interpretation. If you start adjusting for other factors like age etc then it's overly complicated and not a great model.

Also this came after Morrissey had a year where he really struggled. Murat's argument was that Morrissey, and the other D, were asked that year to give up the opposition blue line and be very conservative in preventing rush chances, which did not match Morrissey's strengths at all. He said that in training camp that year, Morrissey was being given freedom to pinch or join in the offence and that he should have a bounce back year, and he did. So the model wasn't totally misinformed when it said it was bad value.

Here's part of the write up in that article:

But role doesn’t completely excuse results that have been as poor as Morrissey’s over the last two seasons. Only one defenseman, Duncan Keith, has been on the ice for more expected goals against in that time than Morrissey. The fact his goals rate is fine helps and likely speaks to the disconnect between his numbers and his reputation, but that likely has a lot more to do with Connor Hellebuyck than Morrissey. A defenseman’s job is to make life easier for his netminder. Morrissey hasn’t done that and it’s why his projected value is so low.

 

[Buffdog]

No I think it just means the model requires some interpretation. If you start adjusting for other factors like age etc then it's overly complicated and not a great model.

Also this came after Morrissey had a year where he really struggled. Murat's argument was that Morrissey, and the other D, were asked that year to give up the opposition blue line and be very conservative in preventing rush chances, which did not match Morrissey's strengths at all. He said that in training camp that year, Morrissey was being given freedom to pinch or join in the offence and that he should have a bounce back year, and he did. So the model wasn't totally misinformed when it said it was bad value.

Here's part of the write up in that article:

But role doesn’t completely excuse results that have been as poor as Morrissey’s over the last two seasons. Only one defenseman, Duncan Keith, has been on the ice for more expected goals against in that time than Morrissey. The fact his goals rate is fine helps and likely speaks to the disconnect between his numbers and his reputation, but that likely has a lot more to do with Connor Hellebuyck than Morrissey. A defenseman’s jo

is to make life easier for his netminder. Morrissey hasn’t done that and it’s why his projected value is so low.

Pretty sure that was the season that JoMo's dad was terminal with cancer

Again, not to bash models or math or analytics, but they tend to miss out on the whole "human experience"

Life, art, love, and even sports can't be boiled down to equations. I realize I'm getting a little "out there" on this one - and I haven't even been into the weed lol

 

[tbcwpg]

Pretty sure that was the season that JoMo's dad was terminal with cancer

Again, not to bash models or math or analytics, but they tend to miss out on the whole "human experience"

Life, art, love, and even sports can't be boiled down to equations. I realize I'm getting a little "out there" on this one - and I haven't even been into the weed lol

For sure, there are other factors that go into a player's level of play but when writing about the results of a mathematical formula then you can't really factor that in. I'm also pretty sure we didn't know about that when it was written.

 

[DRW204]

Another way to look at it is it did accurately depict just how bad Morrissey was playing for a stretch. He definitely turned it around, but I don't know how much of an outlier this model it was at the time.

yeah it's like if a player is playing bad + underperforming their cap-hit.... & people recognized and commented on it objectively.

& when the player started playing better....... the commentary coincided with it too *gasp* WOW, what a revelation.

 

[Weezeric]

yeah it's like if a player is playing bad + underperforming their cap-hit.... & people recognized and commented on it objectively.

& when the player started playing better....... the commentary coincided with it too *gasp* WOW, what a revelation.

If you believed that analytics can tell you what happened in the past, sure, but many proponents claim that they are predictive. That was the whole purpose of that article, to predict what a player’s value would be over the life of a contract. The prediction was horribly wrong.

That is the biggest problem with hockey analytics. There will never be a big enough sample to adjust for all the variables.

 

[ps241]

If you believed that analytics can tell you what happened in the past, sure, but many proponents claim that they are predictive. That was the whole purpose of that article, to predict what a player’s value would be over the life of a contract. The prediction was horribly wrong.

That is the biggest problem with hockey analytics. There will never be a big enough sample to adjust for all the variables.

Predictive models with sporting events, Stock markets, weather patterns (the list goes on) all need to be taken with a grain of salt. Nothing wrong with using said models as long as you are aware of its limitations.

 

[Buffdog]

Predictive models with sporting events, Stock markets, weather patterns (the list goes on) all need to be taken with a grain of salt. Nothing wrong with using said models as long as you are aware of its limitations.

Well said, and therein lies the problem

Too many people base their opinions soley on models/analytics, or even worse find a stat to support their biases

Models and analytics are useful tools but are only part of the big picture

 

[Whileee]

One observation about the Jets going into next season... Samberg-Pionk was a good pair last season, both in the regular season and in the playoffs. I could certainly make the argument that going forward Samberg-Pionk is a better pair than Dillon-Pionk, if it comes down to it.

Samberg-Pionk is probably a 3rd pair on a very good team, so the Jets would need to find a way to build a 2nd pair via trade / free agency (assuming they keep Morrissey-DeMelo as a top pair).

Jets' D was fairly effective last season, but over-run in the playoffs. I think Samberg-Pionk could have managed lighter usage vs. the Avs. The Morrissey-DeMelo pair struggled vs. the Avs top forwards, but a lot of that was the dysfunctional Jets F lines, too. Jets just weren't able to keep pace with the Avs and couldn't generate enough forecheck or match their transition speed, so the D were really put under a lot of pressure.

 

[DRW204]

Predictive models with sporting events, Stock markets, weather patterns (the list goes on) all need to be taken with a grain of salt. Nothing wrong with using said models as long as you are aware of its limitations.

making predictions using anything need to be taken with a grain of salt b/c guessing what's going to happen 2-3 years from now is ridiculously difficult. look at the avs jets series thread for example, or how many ppl wrote edmonton off early this year.... and these were evidently much shorter term.

at the time though, morrissey was no good & not sure who was predicting him being a norris level guy in that timeframe. mostly everywhere from this forum, eye-test, stats etc. was kind of saying the same thing (including me). take a scan through some of the threads or comments at the time. he's played way better and the aforementioned methods have also corroborated this & the commentary is much more positive.

he apparently was the 7th highest-valued D this season by the similar measurement (this was posted on March 7th), which i think is roughly where he ranks league wide (top 5-10 range)

 

[Whileee]

No I think it just means the model requires some interpretation. If you start adjusting for other factors like age etc then it's overly complicated and not a great model.

Also this came after Morrissey had a year where he really struggled. Murat's argument was that Morrissey, and the other D, were asked that year to give up the opposition blue line and be very conservative in preventing rush chances, which did not match Morrissey's strengths at all. He said that in training camp that year, Morrissey was being given freedom to pinch or join in the offence and that he should have a bounce back year, and he did. So the model wasn't totally misinformed when it said it was bad value.

Here's part of the write up in that article:

But role doesn’t completely excuse results that have been as poor as Morrissey’s over the last two seasons. Only one defenseman, Duncan Keith, has been on the ice for more expected goals against in that time than Morrissey. The fact his goals rate is fine helps and likely speaks to the disconnect between his numbers and his reputation, but that likely has a lot more to do with Connor Hellebuyck than Morrissey. A defenseman’s job is to make life easier for his netminder. Morrissey hasn’t done that and it’s why his projected value is so low.

I think the problem was both with the model and the interpretation. The model is static and cross-sectional and doesn't consider a longer trajectory. Similarly, the interpretation ignores a lot of the information based on previous performance and the current context. Put any #1D into a situation where the rest of the D are Pionk, Forbort, Poolman, Sbisa, Bitetto and Beaulieu and you end up getting swamped.

Recognizing that every model has important outliers and being able to identify them is an essential part of the analytical process. Consider another D; Skjei. The Canes traded a 1st round pick to acquire him from the Rangers, despite his dropping value. He bounced back and is now a core player. Clearly, they looked beyond the models per se and made a good decision to acquire and keep him.

 

[tbcwpg]

I think the problem was both with the model and the interpretation. The model is static and cross-sectional and doesn't consider a longer trajectory. Similarly, the interpretation ignores a lot of the information based on previous performance and the current context. Put any #1D into a situation where the rest of the D are Pionk, Forbort, Poolman, Sbisa, Bitetto and Beaulieu and you end up getting swamped.

Recognizing that every model has important outliers and being able to identify them is an essential part of the analytical process. Consider another D; Skjei. The Canes traded a 1st round pick to acquire him from the Rangers, despite his dropping value. He bounced back and is now a core player. Clearly, they looked beyond the models per se and made a good decision to acquire and keep him.
View attachment 884377

Sure as part of an internal analysis or a deep dive on a player, but in an article on the Athletic it's not gonna be that deep. I'm sure the Jets did a similar analysis that you suggest in deciding to lock him up that long.

 

[ps241]

making predictions using anything need to be taken with a grain of salt b/c guessing what's going to happen 2-3 years from now is ridiculously difficult. look at the avs jets series thread for example, or how many ppl wrote edmonton off early this year.... and these were evidently much shorter term.

at the time though, morrissey was no good & not sure who was predicting him being a norris level guy in that timeframe. mostly everywhere from this forum, eye-test, stats etc. was kind of saying the same thing (including me). take a scan through some of the threads or comments at the time. he's played way better and the aforementioned methods have also corroborated this & the commentary is much more positive.

he apparently was the 7th highest-valued D this season by the similar measurement (this was posted on March 7th), which i think is roughly where he ranks league wide (top 5-10 range)

Nobody's eye test saw the rise of Morrissey coming that I am aware of. The best that might have existed back then from his still diehard fans is guys who hadn't written him off since his partners usually sucked but nobody saw the guy coming that Josh and Bones created in Frankenstein's lab.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

If you believed that analytics can tell you what happened in the past, sure, but many proponents claim that they are predictive. That was the whole purpose of that article, to predict what a player’s value would be over the life of a contract. The prediction was horribly wrong.

That is the biggest problem with hockey analytics. There will never be a big enough sample to adjust for all the variables.

It is so much about sample size and the needed sample sizes are so large that players come and go without ever generating large enough samples to accurately predict what will come next.

 

[WolfHouse]

Sure as part of an internal analysis or a deep dive on a player, but in an article on the Athletic it's not gonna be that deep. I'm sure the Jets did a similar analysis that you suggest in deciding to lock him up that long.

How on earth did they decide Pionk was worth as much as Jomo then... he hadn't shown anything beyond a blip in one season

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

How on earth did they decide Pionk was worth as much as Jomo then... he hadn't shown anything beyond a blip in one season

Morrissey's AAV is 375k higher. Not much, I know.
Pionk signed 2 years later. More recent signings tend to be higher.
That one season was a contract year. Funny how that matches up.