May 25, 2018
Posts per Day
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>masterjuddi</b></div><div>For next year for sure, but what about this year? just ride it out?</div></div>
I think if you're saying absolutely anything about this year, it needs to be predicated on whether you actually think the Jets are serious contenders.
And the answer is no. Pionk, Poolman, and Morrissey are the only defensemen who belong in the NHL, and Poolman is not a top pairing defenseman. Niku does too in that he deserves and probably needs the experience to grow, but his play is not significantly affecting the Jets' defensive prowess.
Riding it out is far and away the best option. Laine, Roslovic, Poolman, Pionk have all made strides this season.
Next season Kulikov is off the books. Give Laine a 4M raise and sign him long term, trim the fat off of the roster and use the money to extend the other kids. Wait for Buff to make a decision about his future and then go sign a UFA if Buff leaves.
Ok, there was a lot of really flimsy to downright bad arguments here, so I'm going to go through this one at a time.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>The St. Louis Blues just won a cup with 35 year old Alexander Steen playing LW on their 4th line and he makes more then Little does, even if Little is 3/4 as good as he is now he'll be better then big and slow Lowry dragging down his linemates, funny enough 3/4 of Bryan Little now is regualar 3rd line production, something Lowry has NEVER accomplished... ?</div></div>
Using an individual example as proof of contrary is just lazy rhetoric. Firstly, Alexander Steen is foremost a liability to his team with his cap hit. If you think that St Louis doesn't regret that extension, you're off. Winning the cup with an anchor is impressive, and, given how hit-and-miss professional contracts are, the Jets at some point will probably need to win with an anchor. That being said, the Blues won in spite of Steen, not because of him. For every success story of an albatross contract out there, there is twice as many if not more, horror stories.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>But hey keep clinging to your fancy stat nonsense that tells you how good and important Lowry is, a guy who can't break the 30 point mark with 14+ minutes of ice time is a 4th line player plain and simple, tough for you and the analytics believers to accept but it's a very true fact. </div></div>
"A very true fact." Well no, actually it isn't. Fancy stats is just a quantitative measure of chances on the ice vs the chances you give up on the ice. It's no different from +/- except now we also count shots, misses, and blocks. It gives you an imperfect, but largely accurate measure of where the puck is spending it's time when a player is out on the ice. It's kind of universally agreed that +/- is a stupid stat because of how goalie dependent it is. Corsi is just an improvement to increase the sample size and do what +/- is supposed to measure, but better. If you think that corsi (shots+misses+blocks) is a little too general, feel free to just look at fenwick (shots + misses), shots (self explanatory), or high danger chances (shots from the slot and crease). The big knock on Corsi is that different stat counting sites can have different definitions of a chance, miss, or high danger chance. But the point isn't to be perfect it's just to give a trend to whose zone players spend their time on the ice.
You very clearly are not an NHL coach or executive, so your subjective opinion of how Lowry or any hockey player plays has about as much credibility as my subjective opinion. But anyone with internet can look up a player's on-ice statistics. When Lowry is on the ice the Jets generate a better ratio of offense for to offense generated against. That is what a true fact actually looks like. Lowry also does it playing on a much cheaper line. (Averaging about 6-8) million while Little does less with more (8-16million.) That is also what a true fact looks like.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>You do realize Lowry isn't even on pace for 20 points this season yeah?? He's just producing what he's capable of, 4th line player production and nothing more. </div></div>
I'm not too worried about that. Lowry's healthy, is playing with an AHL cast, and that's pretty much the story of his season. As I said before, I'm more interested in the ratio of offense generated for to offense generated against. I don't care whether we win games 3-1, 5-3, or 2-1. If we spend more time in their zone then they spend in our we can afford to not score goals at will. Scoring is also largely shooting percentage based, which anyone with a hockey background can tell you is highly variable. I'll take Lowry because of how sustainable his game is. If Lowry doesn't have a great year, c'est la vie. Slump years happen, and playing with Gabriel Bourque and Marc Letestu to start the year off is a valid excuse.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>Even a 32-34 year old Bryan Little will have enough offensive skill to not completely drag down a 3rd line like Lowry has ALWAYS done, obviously it depends on how Little recovers from his injury but if Little can't contribute at a decent clip he'll likely retire I'm guessing. </div></div>
This is largely incorrect, given that if you define dragging down as the residual between a player on the ice with Lowry and without Lowry with respect to the ratio of offense generated to offense generated against, Lowry improves his line mates and the defensive pairings he plays with. I've beat that dead horse enough already so let's talk about Little.
Little is great. He is a really possession driving role player in the same way the Lowry is, and he really had his reputation as a defensive forward thrashed by 2018-2019 Laine. He also generates excellent bottom 6 offense. That being said, he doesn't produce at clip that would justify giving him opportunities in the top 6, has missed significant playing time in the last 5 years, and is making 5.3 million dollars from the next 4+ years. Not a lot of bad to actually say about his game, but the durability, and contract are huge. You think Little would retire if his production dipped? Why? Because of all the other veteran NHL players that have retired when their production dipped? Little has obligations to his family to make as much money as he can, there is zero reason to assume he would not accept playing as a shadow of himself for 5.4 million dollars.
You mentioned that you think PoMo needs to go. Absolutely. But that has more to do with Roslovic's mismanagement last year, and Niku's mismanagement last year and this year.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>Bryan Little is a good player, Adam Lowry is an easily replaceable 4th liner at best, the sooner Lowry is gone the sooner the Jets can actually resemble a true contender.</div></div>
2 Years from now? Are you kidding me?
Bryan Little, right now, is a middle 6 forward who is 32 years old, is on the wrong side of his production vs age curve, has missed significant time in the last 5 years due to injuries, and is signed to a multi year 5+M extension. Lowry is younger, holding relatively steady in production, no major injuries, and isn't signed to a multi-year 5+M extension.
The defining factor in this comparison should be the extension. You are going to be paying 35 year old Bryan Little over 5 million dollars. I don't care how overrated you think Lowry is, paying 28 year old Adam Lowry in the 2.5-3.5 million dollar range is soooooo much better than the former.
This isn't even a close comparison.