Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Jets Prospects

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Flair Hay said:
On a scale of 1-10, what are the chances Samberg is a better NHL defenseman for us than Heinola? His tools just seem to project better to me, but maybe I'm just way underselling Ville?
Click to expand...
I think Samberg is just a more prototypical NHL D. But that's also just based on what the old school mentality of what GMs think a D should be.
 
scarbrow21 said:
I think Samberg is just a more prototypical NHL D. But that's also just based on what the old school mentality of what GMs think a D should be.
Click to expand...

Some of what old school GMs think is right, some is a bit rigid

Having a lot of size on defense is one they are right to value imo

I just feel like it's a question nobody asks. They are looked at as completely different tiers of prospects as NHLers. Maybe that's right, I dont watch the guys in Manitoba or anything. Just curious. I remember asking the same thing about Laine and Dubois before we won the lottery.
 
Flair Hay said:
Some of what old school GMs think is right, some is a bit rigid

Having a lot of size on defense is one they are right to value imo

I just feel like it's a question nobody asks. They are looked at as completely different tiers of prospects as NHLers. Maybe that's right, I dont watch the guys in Manitoba or anything. Just curious. I remember asking the same thing about Laine and Dubois before we won the lottery.
Click to expand...

Having size on D is a good thing, by itself. But it often comes with a price. You get size, but you sacrifice speed and skill, for example.

I think old school goes wrong by thinking that there is a template they can follow. Don't look at rigidly defined characteristics, like size, speed, etc. Look at effectiveness.

Every player will have a combination of strengths and weaknesses. Some players will make better use of their assets than others to achieve effectiveness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FonRiesen and None
Mortimer Snerd said:
Having size on D is a good thing, by itself. But it often comes with a price. You get size, but you sacrifice speed and skill, for example.

I think old school goes wrong by thinking that there is a template they can follow. Don't look at rigidly defined characteristics, like size, speed, etc. Look at effectiveness.

Every player will have a combination of strengths and weaknesses. Some players will make better use of their assets than others to achieve effectiveness.
Click to expand...

What do you think are the chances Samberg is more effective as a NHLer than Heinola?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Upperdeckjet
Flair Hay said:
What do you think are the chances Samberg is more effective as a NHLer than Heinola?
Click to expand...

Good question. I'd say that if Samberg was at the same level as he is now, but 2 years younger, the chances would be pretty good. But considering his age, Samberg probably doesn't have that much growth left in his game. Some of course, but not that much. Heinola should still have quite a bit of room to grow.

That said, Samberg could still end up being the better NHL'er. But that would be more a matter of Heinola disappointing than of Samberg excelling. Putting a number on the chances would just be a made up number, but say 1 in 3 or 4, FWIW.
 
Mortimer Snerd said:
Neaton was better than last year, but still no sign of ever playing in the NHL. Maybe not even the AHL.
Click to expand...
Neaton honestly had pedestrian numbers (especially given his age at the time) in Jr. A the year we drafted him. He had an incredible playoffs though which is likely why we drafted him. Would’ve preferred Dustin Wolf at the time but it’s not a huge deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mortimer Snerd
snowkiddin said:
Neaton honestly had pedestrian numbers (especially given his age at the time) in Jr. A the year we drafted him. He had an incredible playoffs though which is likely why we drafted him. Would’ve preferred Dustin Wolf at the time but it’s not a huge deal.
Click to expand...

A Jets scout actually sent me video on Ethan Haider before the draft so I thought that's where they were gonna go. Bit of a bummer because he's doing really well at Clarkson.
 
MardyBum said:


Not a bad ranking considering where we've picked.
Click to expand...


Just posting the intro and conclusion for non-Athletic members:

The Jets were one of the more challenging teams to slot in this year’s ranking because their pool’s depth is a little thinner than the other teams ranked in the league’s upper half, but I’m really quite high on their very best prospects.

I debated ranking them a two or three spots lower (which could have slid the Predators, Flyers and Sharks up by one) before ultimately settling on this spot on the strength of their top end.

Their top three prospects are the strongest 1-2-3 of the series so far and they’ve been insulated by newcomers like Nikita Chibrikov and Dmitry Rashevsky.

[...]

The Jets pool breaks down into four groups. They are: 1, 2-3, 4-11, 12-17. I think Perfetti’s got star level upside. Lucius and Heinola are both potential impactful, upper half players just below a team’s stars (with Lucius as a long shot star). And those next two groups have NHL potential and are divided based on a combination of probability/ceiling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FonRiesen, hn777, Duke749 and 5 others
JetsUK said:
Just posting the intro and conclusion for non-Athletic members:

The Jets were one of the more challenging teams to slot in this year’s ranking because their pool’s depth is a little thinner than the other teams ranked in the league’s upper half, but I’m really quite high on their very best prospects.

I debated ranking them a two or three spots lower (which could have slid the Predators, Flyers and Sharks up by one) before ultimately settling on this spot on the strength of their top end.

Their top three prospects are the strongest 1-2-3 of the series so far and they’ve been insulated by newcomers like Nikita Chibrikov and Dmitry Rashevsky.

[...]

The Jets pool breaks down into four groups. They are: 1, 2-3, 4-11, 12-17. I think Perfetti’s got star level upside. Lucius and Heinola are both potential impactful, upper half players just below a team’s stars (with Lucius as a long shot star). And those next two groups have NHL potential and are divided based on a combination of probability/ceiling.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing! I like that Wheeler notes he wouldn’t be surprised to see Lucius be a two-and-done player at college.



Also saw this a moment ago theorizing Chibrikov could be ready after next year as well. Add in that Rashevsky’s contract is done in the KHL following the end of next year, and Jets could have 3 forwards with top-6 potential knocking on the door at 2023/2024 training camp.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jets4Life, MrBoJangelz71, Krauser and 10 others
JetsUK said:
Just posting the intro and conclusion for non-Athletic members:

The Jets were one of the more challenging teams to slot in this year’s ranking because their pool’s depth is a little thinner than the other teams ranked in the league’s upper half, but I’m really quite high on their very best prospects.

I debated ranking them a two or three spots lower (which could have slid the Predators, Flyers and Sharks up by one) before ultimately settling on this spot on the strength of their top end.

Their top three prospects are the strongest 1-2-3 of the series so far and they’ve been insulated by newcomers like Nikita Chibrikov and Dmitry Rashevsky.

[...]

The Jets pool breaks down into four groups. They are: 1, 2-3, 4-11, 12-17. I think Perfetti’s got star level upside. Lucius and Heinola are both potential impactful, upper half players just below a team’s stars (with Lucius as a long shot star). And those next two groups have NHL potential and are divided based on a combination of probability/ceiling.
Click to expand...

Pretty solid ranking given our lack of picks and lack of high first rounders the last 4 to 5 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snowkiddin, Duke749 and gojetsgo
Still weird to me how Chibrikov fell to us in his draft. I had him going in the mid-to-late first. Glad he's having a solid season so far
 
  • Like
Reactions: hn777 and SM
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom