HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Maurice vs Noel: why are there tangable differences?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-24-2014, 07:00 AM
  #1
HannuJ
Registered User
 
HannuJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Toronno
Posts: 953
vCash: 367
Maurice vs Noel: why are there tangable differences?

First, I have to make Garrett proud and state that this is a small sample size.
but clearly this team is playing differently under Maurice.

are we just seeing an outlier/spike due to a coaching change and nothing more?
is there a new (read: actual) system that was magically implemented in the 1-2 practices Maurice had in Alberta?

Goals against are down and the Jets look more organized in their own zone. coincidence?

you're seeing Pavs and Bogo play as different players under Maurice. How and why?

How much credit should we give Maurice as a coach, versus being a fresh face? Or do we just look at the players and say that the decides, for whatever reason, to show up now that Noel is gone?

curious on your takes.

HannuJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 07:16 AM
  #2
GermanJetsFan
*PEW* *PEW* *PEW*
 
GermanJetsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Darmstadt, GER
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,027
vCash: 50
I think the biggest thing that has changed over the last 5 games is attitude and psychological things. We KNOW by now, Noel wasn't a good communicator with his players. We thought this would be the case by how it looked like, players kinda said it in interviews and they even underline this by saying that Maurice is communicating great. It's not a coincidence... they pretty much say "he's a way better communicator than Noel and that helps us a lot because we need someone vocal".


Along with that, yesterday someone (I can't remember who and in which thread) posted part of an interview with players from another team talking about not believing in the way they played with their last coach. Maybe the person can post it again? It sounded very familiar and I think our players think the same way about Noel.

So believing in yourself + getting good feedback + playing in a way that fits your team not only on the ice but in your head = the way they are playing over the 5 games.


That's what I think at least

GermanJetsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 07:30 AM
  #3
Aavco Cup
Registered User
 
Aavco Cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 2149
They maintain a structure in front of the net. You don't see three or four guys chasing the puck behind the net or along the boards.

Mo said after the game they haven't made any changes offensively yet. Concentrated on defense so far. The next change would be the way the team forechecks.

Aavco Cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 07:31 AM
  #4
maximus tacitus
KeepKane and CarryIn
 
maximus tacitus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Clutchinsonville
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,830
vCash: 50
well you can definitely see a different approach defensively at both ends of the rink
2 glaring changes would be on the forecheck and attacking points in Dzone but it's early and I'm withholding meaningful commentary until after the Leafs game

Jets should be able to dominate possession 5v5 on Saturday and since I know the Leafs inside out I hope to get a better read on the team

I just pray that Carlyle doesn't play the defensive whizkid Jay McClement for 30 minutes and screws up any proper analysis

maximus tacitus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 08:37 AM
  #5
Howard Chuck
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Howard Chuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,446
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanJetsFan View Post
I think the biggest thing that has changed over the last 5 games is attitude and psychological things. We KNOW by now, Noel wasn't a good communicator with his players. We thought this would be the case by how it looked like, players kinda said it in interviews and they even underline this by saying that Maurice is communicating great. It's not a coincidence... they pretty much say "he's a way better communicator than Noel and that helps us a lot because we need someone vocal".


Along with that, yesterday someone (I can't remember who and in which thread) posted part of an interview with players from another team talking about not believing in the way they played with their last coach. Maybe the person can post it again? It sounded very familiar and I think our players think the same way about Noel.

So believing in yourself + getting good feedback + playing in a way that fits your team not only on the ice but in your head = the way they are playing over the 5 games.


That's what I think at least
That was me. I always remembered that quote by Matt Duchene regarding the Avs coaching change and thought it applied perfectly to the Jets while Noel was still coach. Now I believe it applies even more. That and the fact that I still think that Noel didn't communicate clearly, based on his public disclosures. Maurice is a wealth of information in comparison.

You won’t find Matt Duchene in ex-Avalanche coach Joe Sacco’s fan club. “There is no doghouse with Patrick (Roy),” said Duchene, who chafed at Sacco’s style. “(Roy) brings you in, sits you down, you talk constructively, then you go back out and play.” Duchene said Sacco had a plan, but “it was the wrong plan. He wanted us to dump and chase.” Roy is more puck-control.

“There were very few people in this (dressing) room who were happy. Our style of play, it wasn’t right for this team. We knew it would fail,” Duchene told the Denver Post. “That was the hard part. We knew (any) success was going to be short-lived. It was hard to really be excited about it.

“For myself, it was really hard to look at what we were doing and think it would keep on working. I can honestly say now, it’s not like that.”

Duchene credits Roy for working with players “constructively” rather than having a doghouse. He also appreciates his fast-paced system.

Howard Chuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 09:13 AM
  #6
allan5oh
#Dive4Five #31Buyout
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 6,409
vCash: 50
You are seeing a different style of play. No the system has not changed top to bottom, but we're seeing more attention to detail. This is both because of a hungry energized team and a coach that points out the small things. Case in point Stuart boxing guys out several times in front of the net preventing screened/tipped shots. Backcheckers picking up the third man in a little better, although this can still improve. D-men keeping the gap a little bit tighter instead of just backing up. Pavelec seems to be better with rebounds and getting it to his d-men instead of no mans land. Like Maurice said, either freeze it or get it within the first two feet, or the corner. Anything else is a failure. You can tell Pavelec has been practicing rebounds. We also seem to not cheat on line changes like we did before. The PP actually has some set plays, but is not predictable.

According to Pierre Maguire, Maurice really looks at all the details. Apparently players are not allowed to glide to the bench for a line change. He also likes guys shooting in stride instead of gliding for a second. Little stuff like this adds up.

allan5oh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 09:39 AM
  #7
Nothing Is New
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 446
vCash: 500
Team is playing better but still TETT if its something Maurice is doing or just players compensating for not playing so well for Noel. It does appear that Maurice communicates more on the bench and is more involved in game details - as it is happening.

Nothing Is New is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 09:43 AM
  #8
allan5oh
#Dive4Five #31Buyout
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 6,409
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nothing Is New View Post
Team is playing better but still TETT if its something Maurice is doing or just players compensating for not playing so well for Noel. It does appear that Maurice communicates more on the bench and is more involved in game details - as it is happening.
That's funny because Maurice is actually kinda known not to do that. Like he said after the first game, he just can't help himself. I expect it to subside, he's more of a coach that deals with pet peeves after a game. Practice is for coaches, the game is for the players.

allan5oh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 10:24 AM
  #9
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,744
vCash: 50
Not my area of expertise, which means usually I just lurk and not talk so you guys don't realize how dumb I am But..........................

It looked like to me like there is more "above the puck" play for forecheck and more collapse and less swarm.

If I'm wrong, which I'd put at 50/50 with me in this area, then feel free to correct me.

Also, some have said better zone entry and zone exits, but I haven't tracked that since Noel being gone so I don't know if
1) true or false
and
2) better decision making or players just playing better

I hope though there is less of this:

garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 10:35 AM
  #10
Joe Hallenback
Registered User
 
Joe Hallenback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 7,401
vCash: 500
They swarm less in the offensive zone and really try hard not to 5 man collapse in the defensive zone.

The biggest plus for me so far is how little they give the opposing team on rebounds or 2nd chances.

I have yet to see them fall into bad habits so far other then maybe forcing plays in the offensive zone when the best thing to do would be to continue to cycle.

Joe Hallenback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 10:37 AM
  #11
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,002
vCash: 574
Doug Maclean lkes to tell the story about how the game after he as fired as the Florida coach they won like 8-1 and the prior number of games they really struggled scoring. They then went on to win 5 of their next 25 games.

My point here is I think it's still a bit premature to be thinking this team is much superior to the team under Noel.

cheswick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 10:43 AM
  #12
winnipegger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 84
vCash: 500
Sometimes (edmonton) the issue is player personnel being overvalued and not performing under any system.

Sometimes the issue really is the coach. Remains to be seen we'll know by april, but I think it really was the coach.

winnipegger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 10:47 AM
  #13
Guerzy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,330
vCash: 50
To me, I just never believed this team was as bad as the results we were getting. For whatever reason Noel + this group simply did not work. We re-lived the same days, problems, highs and lows over and over and over again from the very beginning starting October 2011. Zero identity. It was always the same, nothing ever changed. Coaches always said the same things, players always said the same things. Chevy kept the "core" but swapped out essentially the entire supporting cast, still nothing changed.

I'm not saying this is a playoff team, and it's also too early to tell if this team has indeed turned a corner, but I just never believed we were as bad as the results indicated. Something was always just 'off' with this team under Noel. We just continuously went in circles.

__________________
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=43225&dateline=141082  3903
"The ‘now’ is very good in Chicago. The ‘now’ back in the days when they were drafting first, second and third? It wasn’t very good. But the core of fans that stuck with them, if you asked them now, I betcha they’d say it was worth it.” - Kevin Cheveldayoff
Guerzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 10:57 AM
  #14
Channelcat
Registered User
 
Channelcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 975
vCash: 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
Not my area of expertise, which means usually I just lurk and not talk so you guys don't realize how dumb I am But..........................

It looked like to me like there is more "above the puck" play for forecheck and more collapse and less swarm.
Much more "above puck" play. This team is still not a playoff team yet regardless of who is coaching, but it is much better now than it was under Claude. I am of the opinion that there wasn't much respect or belief in Claude in that dressing room. The biggest problem may have been the intensity level. We have already heard comments from many of the players on the issue of "goofing around" during practice and such. Besides those intangibles there is also the system play and set plays.....like the point to point one timer. Remember that one? How many breakaways did we give up on that ridiculous play. Only took Claude two years to finally scrap it. Plus no forecheck, no covering points, it was like like our defensive system was just scramble around the front of the net and try to look you're doing something.

Claude was an awful NHL coach, and I don't feel sorry for him at all.

Channelcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 11:00 AM
  #15
ajmidd12
Know-It-All
 
ajmidd12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hungover
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,553
vCash: 204
Bottom line I think it's the on the fly teaching method Maurice implemented and "back to basics".

We all knew deep down our guys can play with the big boys but confidence levels kept them from performing. They appear to be rejuvenated and finally playing as a team.

I love the "block shots" mantra, our team has played two of the best teams in the league very very well this past week. It's very encouraging to see them finally showing the efforts we know they are capable of. The team looks much more composed in their own end and has started carrying the puck in and protecting waiting for backup, no more of the ******** d to d one timers that usually hurt us previously.

*EDIT* HERE IT IS.... DING DING DING.... POST 1,500

ajmidd12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 11:08 AM
  #16
Jet
Moderator
Drop the danged puck
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New Glasgow
Country: Scotland
Posts: 17,480
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerzy View Post
To me, I just never believed this team was as bad as the results we were getting. For whatever reason Noel + this group simply did not work. We re-lived the same days, problems, highs and lows over and over and over again from the very beginning starting October 2011. Zero identity. It was always the same, nothing ever changed. Coaches always said the same things, players always said the same things. Chevy kept the "core" but swapped out essentially the entire supporting cast, still nothing changed.

I'm not saying this is a playoff team, and it's also too early to tell if this team has indeed turned a corner, but I just never believed we were as bad as the results indicated. Something was always just 'off' with this team under Noel. We just continuously went in circles.
I agree with all of this. I still say with league average goaltending and better coaching this team would have been playoff bound. It's super early and I'm not here to toot my own horn but it feels good to be right about Noel (so far)

__________________
The Olympic Line
Jet is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 11:25 AM
  #17
truck
HFB Partner
 
truck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,429
vCash: 495
A very simple change that I have noticed is:

During breakouts - particularly breakouts in transitional play - the centre and the D man (the one that doesn't have the puck) are staying deeper in the defensive zone.

Under Noel the forward group and Stu had a tendency to fly the zone as soon as a D man got a hold of the puck. This led players getting cornered without a target or a passing lane far to often, created turnovers and wasted controlled possession.

This is happening less. Not sure if this is all coaching or simply a function of the opponents over a small sample, but I have noticed a change.

truck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 12:17 PM
  #18
HannuJ
Registered User
 
HannuJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Toronno
Posts: 953
vCash: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Hallenback View Post
They swarm less in the offensive zone and really try hard not to 5 man collapse in the defensive zone.

this.
never understood why Noel did that.

HannuJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 12:29 PM
  #19
troubabooster
Registered User
 
troubabooster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Stonewall
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
Doug Maclean lkes to tell the story about how the game after he as fired as the Florida coach they won like 8-1 and the prior number of games they really struggled scoring. They then went on to win 5 of their next 25 games.

My point here is I think it's still a bit premature to be thinking this team is much superior to the team under Noel.
Sure its early but there is a definite difference. all/most of the players lost the desire to play for Noel because they didn't believe in his system (ie, not suited to the players we have) and he just wasn't communicating very effectively.

troubabooster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 12:38 PM
  #20
WaveRaven
Registered User
 
WaveRaven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnerpeg
Posts: 473
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by troubabooster View Post
Sure its early but there is a definite difference. all/most of the players lost the desire to play for Noel because they didn't believe in his system (ie, not suited to the players we have) and he just wasn't communicating very effectively.
So in other words the players quit ...... sounds about right. And it's painfully obvious who those players are.

It's just matter of time until the same thing occurs, unless we make significant changes to the core of this team.

WaveRaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 12:51 PM
  #21
BigZ65
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,803
vCash: 350
It's a ridiculous comparison to make this soon. Maurice has the full attention of the team right now. They know that they are being evaluated and the next big move is one of the core players getting dealt.

Anyone remember how Carolina looked in 2011-12 before Maurice was fired? They were 5 games under .500 with Maurice, and 5 games over with Muller. Since then, they are a .500 team under Muller.

This is the problem with the interim coach situation. It gives a false read on the ability of the interim coach because of the response a firing causes on the players side of things.

Claude Noel coached CBJ to 2 games over .500 while Hitchcock coached the same team to 5 games below .500. There are a million examples of this in pro sports.

BigZ65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 12:54 PM
  #22
troubabooster
Registered User
 
troubabooster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Stonewall
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaveRaven View Post
So in other words the players quit ...... sounds about right. And it's painfully obvious who those players are.

It's just matter of time until the same thing occurs, unless we make significant changes to the core of this team.
Duchene, who chafed at Sacco’s style. “(Roy) brings you in, sits you down, you talk constructively, then you go back out and play.” Duchene said Sacco had a plan, but “it was the wrong plan. He wanted us to dump and chase.” Roy is more puck-control.

“There were very few people in this (dressing) room who were happy. Our style of play, it wasn’t right for this team. We knew it would fail,” Duchene told the Denver Post. “That was the hard part. We knew (any) success was going to be short-lived. It was hard to really be excited about it.

“For myself, it was really hard to look at what we were doing and think it would keep on working. I can honestly say now, it’s not like that.”

pretty much says it all. Nobody quit -they just couldn't see any future playing such a backward style. If its so painfully obvious who the quitters were, why is EVERYONE playing so much better now?

troubabooster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 12:59 PM
  #23
BigZ65
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,803
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by troubabooster View Post
Duchene, who chafed at Sacco’s style. “(Roy) brings you in, sits you down, you talk constructively, then you go back out and play.” Duchene said Sacco had a plan, but “it was the wrong plan. He wanted us to dump and chase.” Roy is more puck-control.

“There were very few people in this (dressing) room who were happy. Our style of play, it wasn’t right for this team. We knew it would fail,” Duchene told the Denver Post. “That was the hard part. We knew (any) success was going to be short-lived. It was hard to really be excited about it.

“For myself, it was really hard to look at what we were doing and think it would keep on working. I can honestly say now, it’s not like that.”

pretty much says it all. Nobody quit -they just couldn't see any future playing such a backward style. If its so painfully obvious who the quitters were, why is EVERYONE playing so much better now?
And in two years they'll be pissed at Pat Roy.

BigZ65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 01:22 PM
  #24
meedle
Registered User
 
meedle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 3,845
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigZ65 View Post
And in two years they'll be pissed at Pat Roy.
But at least they made the playoffs and are going to go on a run. Big difference from going 2nd last in the NHL to currently top 6. All coaches have a shelf life.

meedle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2014, 02:09 PM
  #25
rymr66
Registered User
 
rymr66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: anyang
Country: South Korea
Posts: 180
vCash: 500
My biggest complaint about coach Claude and what i like the most about Paul Maurice are how they deploy their lines - especially the line combinations they use.

While Noel was here we only really ever had one line that consistently produced - Ladd Little and Wheeler.

During that time he was never able to build a line around Kane - part of that wasn't his fault because of the personnel he had to deploy.

Some of that was his decision making.

I don't think Claude Noel put his players in a position to succeed (by surrounding them and combining them with complimentary parts.

I like the way Maurice has put together three lines with Buff on forward.

Playing the lines like this allows us to limit the amount of time we use our fourth line.

I also think we have finally found a way to surround Kane with players that will help him reach his potential.

Again not all of this was Noel's fault, but I think he contributed to it.

rymr66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:35 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.