Player Discussion: Heinola Thread

[BoneDocUK]

If he is The player/potential player many of you think, if you can find a GM out there who is likeminded trade him now. Looks like Niku Jr. to me

Both players are Finnish. That’s about it in terms of comparables, and I’ve seen nearly every game both played for the Moose and Jets.

Pedigree, achievements at all levels of play, box scores, eye test, metrics and scouting reports, etc., show Heinola as a projected top 4 and maybe top pairing D with serious upside. But sure, let’s get rid of one of our few blue chippers because size, Finnishness, #NikuSux whatevs.

 

[TS Quint]

Both players are Finnish. That’s about it in terms of comparables, and I’ve seen nearly every game both played for the Moose and Jets.

Pedigree, achievements at all levels of play, box scores, eye test, metrics and scouting reports, etc., show Heinola as a projected top 4 and maybe top pairing D with serious upside. But sure, let’s get rid of one of our few blue chippers because size, Finnishness, #NikuSux whatevs.

He’s an overrated prospect. Blue chip? That’s far from the truth. Blue chip to me says you’re looking at a top pair player. I see him as being lucky to be a 2nd pairing main stay. Him and Niku are great offensive AHLers And weak defensive defensemen neither one can out offense their defense. It’s just not how the NHL works unless you are an elite offensive player. Heinola is not.

If the Jets are to be a the contending the that they should be he’s not an NHL player. more often than not when he is in the line up he shoots himself in the foot with turnovers and weak play In his own end. But if you want to turn the Jets into a development team then keep him. Maybe one day he becomes that 2nd pair guy. Maybe not. I’d be trying to find a GM who thinks he’s a “blue chip prospect” because he has never shown to be one. AHL points aren’t everything.

 

[10Ducky10]

Recalled again:

Winnipeg Jets recall Ville Heinola from the Moose on an emergency basis – Illegal Curve Hockey

Jets 2019 1st rounder heading back to the NHL.

illegalcurve.com

They are showcasing him for a deal!

 

[tbcwpg]

They are showcasing him for a deal!

Maybe to see his press box fashion sense.

 

[10Ducky10]

Copp, Stastny and Heinola for Laine!

 

[Heldig]

I will be displeased if they trade Heinola for a rental

 

[gojetsgo]

I will be displeased if they trade Heinola for a rental

they won't...

 

[B33R LEAGUE]

Is Ville back with the Moose?

 

[Atoyot]

Is Ville back with the Moose?

Yes, played the past 2 games.

 

[Upperdeckjet]

I'm thinking Chevy is looking at our current defense and assessing what he needs to do to make our backend worthy of playoff contention and success therein. As such, I simply believe that Heinola does not check off enough boxes to improve our compete level, based on the skill set he may be able to bring. For me personally, a lineup including a foursome of Morrissey, DeMelo, Pionk and Heinola would be cringeworthy. If I had my way, we would only see two of those players on the Jets next year, with Morrissey being the only lock.

It may be best if he's given a chance in another organization.

 

[BoneDocUK]

I'm thinking Chevy is looking at our current defense and assessing what he needs to do to make our backend worthy of playoff contention and success therein. As such, I simply believe that Heinola does not check off enough boxes to improve our compete level, based on the skill set he may be able to bring. For me personally, a lineup including a foursome of Morrissey, DeMelo, Pionk and Heinola would be cringeworthy. If I had my way, we would only see two of those players on the Jets next year, with Morrissey being the only lock.

It may be best if he's given a chance in another organization.

Why would that line-up be cringeworthy? Would it be more or less cringeworthy than, say, a foursome of JMo, DeMelo, Pionk and Stanley?

I also think that the Jets move Heinola, but I'm not sure it's the best play, especially if they're doing it in b/c of their investment in Stanley.

I think Stanley is a walking, sometimes skating counterargument to the "You need big D to keep the crease clear" premise.

 

[Upperdeckjet]

Why would that line-up be cringeworthy? Would it be more or less cringeworthy than, say, a foursome of JMo, DeMelo, Pionk and Stanley?

I also think that the Jets move Heinola, but I'm not sure it's the best play, especially if they're doing it in b/c of their investment in Stanley.

I think Stanley is a walking, sometimes skating counterargument to the "You need big D to keep the crease clear" premise.

Although giving Stanley that spot was not where I was going with my comment, Yes, I would find it less cringeworthy.

As to why I do not want to see that foursome together, I do not believe their combined talent set would bring us success. We've all watched enough playoff hockey to surmise why that would be.

 

[scarbrow21]

unfortunately Ville would have had to absolutely go off and be a force these playoffs to bring any sort of value. I think our internal value is much higher than Villes perceived value around the league and any return would be underwhelming

 

[BoneDocUK]

Although giving Stanley that spot was not where I was going with my comment, Yes, I would find it less cringeworthy.

As to why I do not want to see that foursome together, I do not believe their combined talent set would bring us success. We've all watched enough playoff hockey to surmise why that would be.

So, big bodies? Or a wholly different personnel?

If it's the former, I just don't think bigger, meaner D alone gets us any further. either in the regular season or in the POs.

Better systems that ditch the daft hybrid M2M scheme that no one ever seemed to understand, more mobility and skill, a focused and sustained team defence with an emphasis on a hard, fast forecheck and backcheck, clearer options for transition and passing lane cut-offs and a commitment to playing as five-man units are likely to help. No more Huddy should definitely help.

I don't think the Jets' D issues start or end with size, especially when that size has real and longstanding trade-offs in terms of hockey sense, positioning and mobility.

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

He’s an overrated prospect. Blue chip? That’s far from the truth. Blue chip to me says you’re looking at a top pair player. I see him as being lucky to be a 2nd pairing main stay. Him and Niku are great offensive AHLers And weak defensive defensemen neither one can out offense their defense. It’s just not how the NHL works unless you are an elite offensive player. Heinola is not.

If the Jets are to be a the contending the that they should be he’s not an NHL player. more often than not when he is in the line up he shoots himself in the foot with turnovers and weak play In his own end. But if you want to turn the Jets into a development team then keep him. Maybe one day he becomes that 2nd pair guy. Maybe not. I’d be trying to find a GM who thinks he’s a “blue chip prospect” because he has never shown to be one. AHL points aren’t everything.

I figured this forum would be a better place for this, things were getting WAY off topic in the other thread.

The most recent Hockey News redraft of 2019 had Heinola move up 4 spots from his draft position.

Now while the Hockey News certainly isn't what it once was, the Athletic just months ago did one as well ranking 7 tiers of projected status.

TIER 1: Projected NHL All-Star
TIER 2: Projected bubble NHL All-Star and top of lineup player
TIER 3: Projected top of lineup player
TIER 4: Projected bubble top and middle of lineup player
TIER 5: Projected middle of lineup player
TIER 6: Projected to play NHL games
TIER 7: Has a chance to play games

They ranked Heinola 19th of the entire 2019 draft class, the 5th ranked defensemen & as a tier 4 prospect projected to bubble as top pairing defensemen. Corey Pronman wrote the article.

Just today, Ates just wrote this about Heinola;

"Heinola completely controls the AHL game, even when he’s outmuscled. Every play runs through him, every pass is incisive and he’s a threat every time he’s in the offensive zone. The Moose exploit his strengths by encouraging him to be very aggressive in the neutral zone, stepping up on transition plays to turn pucks over and go on the attack."

 

[Adam da bomb]

I don't like how the only options are Heinola or Stanley when Pionk and Samberg were a great combination. I think i'd go in with the attitude that it's Samberg's position until Heinola plays better than him. I'd rather start Heinola on the 3rd pairing then.

 

[surixon]

He’s an overrated prospect. Blue chip? That’s far from the truth. Blue chip to me says you’re looking at a top pair player. I see him as being lucky to be a 2nd pairing main stay. Him and Niku are great offensive AHLers And weak defensive defensemen neither one can out offense their defense. It’s just not how the NHL works unless you are an elite offensive player. Heinola is not.

If the Jets are to be a the contending the that they should be he’s not an NHL player. more often than not when he is in the line up he shoots himself in the foot with turnovers and weak play In his own end. But if you want to turn the Jets into a development team then keep him. Maybe one day he becomes that 2nd pair guy. Maybe not. I’d be trying to find a GM who thinks he’s a “blue chip prospect” because he has never shown to be one. AHL points aren’t everything.

Most prospect rankings see Heinola as a blue chip prospect. Your selling him way short. His pre NHL contributions to date are right in line with Morrissey's. Not saying he will be as good but he has a similar ceiling. The kid is only 20 still and we're calling him overhyped?

He is one of two prospects we have with top pairing/line upside with Perfetti as the other one.

 

[Upperdeckjet]

So, big bodies? Or a wholly different personnel?

If it's the former, I just don't think bigger, meaner D alone gets us any further. either in the regular season or in the POs.

Better systems that ditch the daft hybrid M2M scheme that no one ever seemed to understand, more mobility and skill, a focused and sustained team defence with an emphasis on a hard, fast forecheck and backcheck, clearer options for transition and passing lane cut-offs and a commitment to playing as five-man units are likely to help. No more Huddy should definitely help.

I don't think the Jets' D issues start or end with size, especially when that size has real and longstanding trade-offs in terms of hockey sense, positioning and mobility.

So, yes and yes to your question and I very much agree with your comment on systems.

As well, I agree that our D issues do not start and end with size. However, that statement would ring more true to me if we did indeed run with that foursome.

To focus back on Heinola, I just don't see where he fits. Mentioning him and Stanley as interchangeable options would not even be a discussion point for me. Both players have room to develop. The question, for me, is what do we need on our blueline for balance. At the moment, it's certainly not Heinola (again, my opinion)

 

[surixon]

So, yes and yes to your question and I very much agree with your comment on systems.

As well, I agree that our D issues do not start and end with size. However, that statement would ring more true to me if we did indeed run with that foursome.

To focus back on Heinola, I just don't see where he fits. Mentioning him and Stanley as interchangeable options would not even be a discussion point for me. Both players have room to develop. The question, for me, is what do we need on our blueline for balance. At the moment, it's certainly not Heinola (again, my opinion)

Stanley doesn't really provide anything but size though which for me isn't a good enough reason to keep him in.

If you want some size and physicality then really Samberg is that guy as he can play good hockey while providing those elements.

In terms of growth arcs Stanley has 3 years on Ville and is much closer to his ceiling at his age then Ville is.

Having said that as is our dcore is stacked down the left and if Ville can't play RD he may help the org more in a trade to bring a piece we need.

With regards to Stanley I just don't see it. He needed be heavily sheltered in terms of deployment and in terms of partner to juat be good on the bottom pairing. The minute his safety net was taken away this year in terms of DeMelo and his caliber of comp improved a bit he fell flat on his face. Is it worth it to invest in a player who needs to be heavily sheltered to contribute in a bottom pairing role?

 

[Romang67]

Trading away a player at age 21 because it's awkward to fit him into an optimal playoff lineup when we aren't a playoff team at the moment seems hasty.

After the 2024/25 season, 3 years from now, we have one D-man signed. At that point, Heinola will be 24.

 

[Upperdeckjet]

Stanley doesn't really provide anything but size though which for me isn't a good enough reason to keep him in.

If you want some size and physicality then really Samberg is that guy as he can play good hockey while providing those elements.

In terms of growth arcs Stanley has 3 years on Ville and is much closer to his ceiling at his age then Ville is.

Having said that as is our dcore is stacked down the left and if Ville can't play RD he may help the org more in a trade to bring a piece we need.

With regards to Stanley I just don't see it. He needed be heavily sheltered in terms of deployment and in terms of partner to juat be good on the bottom pairing. The minute his safety net was taken away this year in terms of DeMelo and his caliber of comp improved a bit he fell flat on his face. Is it worth it to invest in a player who needs to be heavily sheltered to contribute in a bottom pairing role?

I'm not counting on Stanley or penciling him into our lineup next year by any means. Neither am I giving up on him. He clearly regressed last year and I think it was a confidence thing. The year prior and even his play against Montreal in the playoffs gave us hope that there was something there.

Personally, I have more time for Stanley then Heinola and that is simply a result of team needs. My thoughts may change as other moves are made over the off season, but that's how I see it today.

Yes, Samberg is my kind of hockey player. I'm also hopeful for several of our boys on the Moose.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Stanley doesn't really provide anything but size though which for me isn't a good enough reason to keep him in.

If you want some size and physicality then really Samberg is that guy as he can play good hockey while providing those elements.

In terms of growth arcs Stanley has 3 years on Ville and is much closer to his ceiling at his age then Ville is.

Having said that as is our dcore is stacked down the left and if Ville can't play RD he may help the org more in a trade to bring a piece we need.

With regards to Stanley I just don't see it. He needed be heavily sheltered in terms of deployment and in terms of partner to juat be good on the bottom pairing. The minute his safety net was taken away this year in terms of DeMelo and his caliber of comp improved a bit he fell flat on his face. Is it worth it to invest in a player who needs to be heavily sheltered to contribute in a bottom pairing role?

Yes Samberg is the answer. Also, you compare Heinola to Morrissey, but, where does Morrissey stand in terms of #1 Ds around the league?

 

[LowLefty]

Stanley doesn't really provide anything but size though which for me isn't a good enough reason to keep him in.

If you want some size and physicality then really Samberg is that guy as he can play good hockey while providing those elements.

In terms of growth arcs Stanley has 3 years on Ville and is much closer to his ceiling at his age then Ville is.

Having said that as is our dcore is stacked down the left and if Ville can't play RD he may help the org more in a trade to bring a piece we need.

With regards to Stanley I just don't see it. He needed be heavily sheltered in terms of deployment and in terms of partner to juat be good on the bottom pairing. The minute his safety net was taken away this year in terms of DeMelo and his caliber of comp improved a bit he fell flat on his face. Is it worth it to invest in a player who needs to be heavily sheltered to contribute in a bottom pairing role?

Stanley needs solid coaching and a system to work within - he's not the type of player that you throw out there with Smitty as a pairing within our current chaotic D systems and coaching. He's needs a methodical approach (IMO) - he's not going to get it down based on instinct or improvising.
Hard to say what his ceiling is until you give him that opportunity. But if he can get his d-game dialed in via coaching, especially as a defender , his size will be a factor - and we desperately need to get better in our zone.

I'd rather we stop projecting the guys ceiling under these conditions and wait and see what he looks like under better conditions. Stan's game actually slipped TY vs last - along with a few of our dmen - maybe TY is not the year we use to determine his potential. I'm sure the org feels the same way.

As for Ville, same answer - although I don't put as much into to a small dmans projections based on how they handled a slower, softer game at the AHL level.
He struggles a lot with the weight of the NHL game and that has to be considered when we look at his potential - especially as a dman who NEEDS to be able to defend regardless of his offensive instincts / potential.
This isn't even really a debate IMO - but we whitewash over this defensemen's struggle with size related tasks because of his offensive potential - yet he's a defensemen - makes no sense to me.

As for sheltering, there's nothing wildly surprising about a younger dman needing support from a more stable partner - especially when there appears to be no guidance out there.
That's usually how they break into the league and get their feet under them - and again, it's worth repeating, this was not the year to expect him to step on the ice and thrive within the mess we had out there (especially dzone defending).

It was interesting when they paired him with Smitty and many called out how poorly Stan played on that pairing and pressed on his need for "sheltering" - yet Schmidt was playing some of the worst hockey of his career anywhere they put him.

 

[surixon]

Yes Samberg is the answer. Also, you compare Heinola to Morrissey, but, where does Morrissey stand in terms of #1 Ds around the league?

I mean I'm not one to say JoMo is a top end number 1 but he's still a darn good player. Shouldn't the goal be to get as many of them as possible? If Heinola turns into a good second pairing guy or low end first pairing guy then thay is better then almost all we currently have.

 

[MardyBum]

Morrissey had played 1 NHL game by the end of his D+3 season, which Heinola is finishing up now. Come on.

It's like an amusement park ride with D prospects on here for some people. Must be this tall to be relevant