Their plans for Heinola are pretty clear, actually. It takes some pattern recognition, but perhaps you'll get there at some point.
The Jets draft prospects. Some of them are "their guys". These are the Rutgers, Perfettis, Sambergs, Stanleys, Connors and what have you. They get as many shots as they could ever ask for. People here scream at me for suggesting that our prospects shouldn't get roster spots above the fourth line for nothing, but it was totally OK to see Perfetti and Connor get top 6 ice time with no track record of anything. These guys become NHLers, because heck, it's pretty difficult not to when you get what you need.
The rest - imagine Vesalainen, Niku, Chisholm, Heinola, Petan - are "not their guys". They don't get shots, and if/when they get them, they are short in nature and end abruptly. The organisation never trusts them. As a result, they miss out on getting NHL experience during the years where you need to get it as a prospect to carve out a healthy career there. They get to their 25s with barely any games under their belt, because they have been stuck with an organisation who doesn't give them anything. When they finally escape, it's probably too little, too late - tough to make it in anywhere else, when you have been deprived of chances when it mattered. At 25, they start asking "why haven't you made it yet", not just "can you make it".
For some reason, calling these "not their guys" what they are gets a negative reaction around here, even though these boards as a whole are pretty good at identifying the prospects who belong to the first group. I imagine this is because it requires less thought to say "he bust, he bad" than to think about why certain types of our prospects predictably don't become much of anything. The busts haven't exactly fit just one mould as skaters, mind you.
In all likelihood, you refuse to understand this - or perhaps we need to wait for another couple of promising prospects bust in awfully similar conditions.
