Coaching ...

[Goalie]

The Pipeline was empty when this team got here, Cormier is a perfect example of just that... He was our top prospect along with Carl Klingberg who i believe is either playing in Europe now or selling insurance somewhere. Cormier now is at best a depth player, don't ask me why they call him up, that's probably a Maurice decision tho. 

 

I guess, maybe instead of calling up Petan or De Leo who they feel would benefit more from playing 15 20 minutes a night on the farm rather than 4 minutes with the big club. 

 

The Moose suck eh, they do, but the kids on that team show a ton of potential, you know who really sucks on the moose tho, The vets like fraser, cormier, halischuk (altho he's all heart and hustle and probably a good guy to have around) 

 

The Moose don't suck cuz of the kids, they are actually only winning games when the kids show up, they are sucking cuz the vets are doing nothing to help the kids. I've been to several games and from what I've seen, and maybe it's just the games i've been 2 but... The Kids aren't the problem on the Moose, the Vets are. Kind of like with the big club outside of Wheeler and Buff. Little is having a pretty bad year 2 all things considered. 

 

I guess, I'll go back a few weeks, Blake Wheeler, our future captain, went out in the media and called out his team mates for maybe not giving it their all... i guess when a player does that, he has a reason to do it. What that reason is,  it's anyones guess really but... that's a guy that's in the room that the kids on the Jets look up too, Ehlers,Scheif,They all gravitate towards Wheeler now. That's what you want to see. This team might turn it around quicker than some people think. It might not be next season but.. it's not gonna be long b4 they are legit contenders. 

 

Edited February 3, 2016 by Goalie

[Goalie]

Last thing... @FrostyWinnipeg You need to get over this idea that empty net goals actually matter, they don't, goal differential is really irrelevant. It actually is totally irrelevant. Yeah they give up a ton of empty net goals but you know what that actually means? It means they have been down a ton with a minute or so left in the game, if you lose in regulation, losing 5 3 is the same as losing 4 3. It's a loss and you get no points. 

[iso_55]

3 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Management and ownership has it figured out. that's why they didnt lock themselves in to any over-priced veteran contracts this season knowing they had a plethora of Free Agents to re-sign for next season.

Management has figured this out? We'll see. I sure hope so.

Edited February 3, 2016 by iso_55

[Floyd]

1 hour ago, Mr Dee said:

Did you think that they liked the entire makeup of that Atlanta team from their roster, their farm club all the way through to their draft prospects. I don't think so. They had to undergo quite a change in direction and philosophy, not to mention the entire SMS makeup. So yes, I would say revamped. 

Burmi and Cormier? 

Ill give you Cormier, but I think Burmistrov has value.

And Cormier is a good example of how long it takes to flip a main roster and a farm team's roster.

Jets have flipped Redmond, Santorelli, Wright, ODell, Stemp, Tangradi, etc etc etc... while Cormier has somehow stuck

Theres has been a huge roster turnover in the last five years - its just in the bottom six and top Moose players... somehow Thorbs, Burmi and Peluso have survived...

Chevy has turned over a huge part of this team, it just hasnt been a stable turnover and it hasnt really worked out... yet.

[The Unknown Poster]

Those three have all been resigned. They are players the organization likes and wants here. Cormier is a decent AHL player who can provide some stability as needed on the 4th line as a call up. I don't have a problem with him

 

[Ducky]

53 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Last thing... @FrostyWinnipeg You need to get over this idea that empty net goals actually matter, they don't, goal differential is really irrelevant. It actually is totally irrelevant. Yeah they give up a ton of empty net goals but you know what that actually means? It means they have been down a ton with a minute or so left in the game, if you lose in regulation, losing 5 3 is the same as losing 4 3. It's a loss and you get no points. 

I don't agree with the bolded.... If the season ended today, in the East Conference the only team making the playoffs that has a minus in goal differential is Detroit. The only team without a minus is the Habs at zero and they are out of the playoffs. All other teams are a plus that would playing the post-season.

 

In the West Conference....Anaheim -9 and Nashville -3 are in the playoffs. Nashville has the last playoff spot with 55 games and Minny is a point back with a game in hand and they are a +4.   

 

That's 3 teams out of 16 with a minus in the goal differential. I'm not saying if you keep your goal differential in the plus that  you will make the playoffs; however, if you are a minus team, I am saying that your chances of making the playoffs are not very good at all.

 

Floyd, why not a good turnover? He has injected rookies like Scheifele, Trouba, Lowry, Copp, Ehlers, and Chiarot (and Armia and Hellebuyck recently).

 

 

[Goalie]

Plus Minus is nothing, it means nothing, Goal Differential, it's irrelevant too. Ideally you want to be scoring more goals than you are giving up for sure, that's how it works, you score more you win, after all hockey like football and every other sport is about who scores the most. However, with that being said, Giving up empty net goals makes no difference, you are losing regardless. Like i said, 4 3 loss in regulation is the same as a 5 3 loss with an empty netter or even a 10 0 loss in regulation, it's all the same. You get zero points. The idea is to get points, ideally 2, at the least 1, in those games that we have given up empty net goals... it's irrelevant cuz if the score was let's say 4 3 and we pulled the goal and the other team made it  5 3, when the whistle blew at the end of the game, the game ended up 5 3. We didn't score to make it 5 4. 

The only time i think Empty Net goals are relevant is when you actually score after the other team has scored on the empty net...

 

Like for example, yesterday, say dallas scores with 40 seconds left but then the next shift we come back and score to make it 5 4. The difference would then be the empty net goal but in most/all case this year, that hasn't happened. 

 

Yeah so let's say we have given up 20 empty net goals (bet it's around there if not more actually).yeah our goal differential might be closer if those goals didn't go in but... the reality is, we still would have lost all those games. 

 

We aren't losing games cuz the other team is scoring on empty nets. That's really the bottom line there, we are losing games cuz we aren't scoring enough goals to win. 1 empty net goal here, 2 there, a loss is a loss is a loss really. Yeah without those empty net goals maybe our goal differential isn't as lopsided as it is but... we'd still be where we are in the standings regardless of giving up empty net goals.

 

When have we scored when we pulled the goalie this year? We haven't i don't think so, regardless we still lose, we still get no points, our goal differential might be closer but... the points total which in the big picture is all that matters is the same. 

Edited February 3, 2016 by Goalie

[Ducky]

I was just pointing out that most team that are in the playoffs, have a plus in the goal differential.

The Jets have 15 empty net goals against and not sure how many they have scored. Their plus/minus is -16. You're right though, those empty net goals don't matter at all. With or without them, we aren't making the playoffs. Edmonton has McDavid back and I am betting they pass the Jets in the final standings. I also see Calgary and possibly TO passing them as well. The Jets have an absolutely horrible schedule starting March 1st and I see them slipping down (up?) to 3rd place in the tank with only the CBJ and Sabres finishing below them. A pretty good chance at first overall. A top 6 of Matthews, Wheeler, Armia, Scheif, Connor and Ehlers would look nice in a couple of years.

[Goalie]

So would Laine puljujarvi Tkachuk and others instead of Matthews. There is some talent in this draft for sure. 

[FrostyWinnipeg]

4 hours ago, Ducky said:

Edmonton has McDavid back and I am betting they pass the Jets in the final standings. I also see Calgary and possibly TO passing them as well.

I only see TO and COLUM being worse then us down the stretch. Heck Buff won tonight.

[Floyd]

6 hours ago, Ducky said:

Floyd, why not a good turnover? He has injected rookies like Scheifele, Trouba, Lowry, Copp, Ehlers, and Chiarot (and Armia and Hellebuyck recently).

2011 jets...?

Ladd-little-Wheeler

Kane-Scheifele-Wellwood

Stapleton-Burmi-Antropov

Thorburn-Slater-Glass

Enstrom-Buff

Stuart-Bogo

Oduya-Hainsey

2015

Stafford-Little-Wheeler

Perreault-Scheifele-Ehlers

Ladd-Lowry-Burmi

Thorburn-Copp-Armia

Trouba-Buff

Enstrom-Myers

Stuart-Chiarot

 

Im not saying theres no turnover... theres been a lot of turnover.  Without the tracksuit, Im not sure that Kane and Bogo are not still here...

I think our 2015 can beat our 2011 lineup... but just barely.  Maybe Im impatient...

84 points in 2011... wonder if we will hit that this year.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Who replaced Schief? He was only here for 10 games.

[Ducky]

11 hours ago, Floyd said:

2011 jets...?

Ladd-little-Wheeler

Kane-Scheifele-Wellwood

Stapleton-Burmi-Antropov

Thorburn-Slater-Glass

Enstrom-Buff

Stuart-Bogo

Oduya-Hainsey

2015

Stafford-Little-Wheeler

Perreault-Scheifele-Ehlers

Ladd-Lowry-Burmi

Thorburn-Copp-Armia

Trouba-Buff

Enstrom-Myers

Stuart-Chiarot

 

Im not saying theres no turnover... theres been a lot of turnover.  Without the tracksuit, Im not sure that Kane and Bogo are not still here...

I think our 2015 can beat our 2011 lineup... but just barely.  Maybe Im impatient...

84 points in 2011... wonder if we will hit that this year.

You should also list what is in the system not only the p layers on the roster...

 

 

Goalie, you do know that Armia outscored both of those Finns in the same league when he playing there right?

[Goalie]

Armia is a good player but those 2 fins are better and have higher upside. It's just reality. I like armia but.... those 2 Finnish kids are way better overall. Whole package there. You do also realize that in 19 games armia has 3 points? Not exactly lighting it up and I get he's not playing with good linemates but 3 points in 19 games isn't good. 

Edited February 5, 2016 by Goalie

[Ducky]

What did Ehlers go? 25 or 26 games wasn't it......it takes time for these kids to adapt to the big league (some never do). They aren't the big fish any more.

[Goalie]

Ehlers is on pace for about 45 points. As a rookie that's pretty good. Armia isn't 19 tho. He's 22 or something. But with that being said... I don't get how Burmi does nothing but is on the third line and Armia who showed signs of improvement playing with better players is on the 4th. Ladd Lowry Armia would be better in my opinion but I'm not the coach. I think Armia deserves a chance to play more and has more potential than Burmi does. Bogo Kane Burmi were the last 3 Atlanta draft picks. Well first rounders. 2 are gone and I'd suspect soon... all 3 will be. I'll say this... if the Jets are around in 2010 I don't think they take Burmi.  I'm not convinced they would have picked Kane or Bogo either. Just based on their criteria which seems to be based on character and hockey sense.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Goalie

[Ducky]

Ehlers is on pace for 38 points... Little between Ladd and Armia is what I was thinking. Leave ESW, and Perreault between Staf and Copp. Lowry between Burmi and Thorbs.....jeez, too bad Maurice doesn't come here all that often.

[Goalie]

Think this topic deserves a BUMP