Prospect Info: Jets Prospects

[surixon]

I speculate that Lambert was moved to wing with the Moose in preparation for Ehlers leaving.

That was my thought. He was moved right around the 4 nations break. That would be right around when they would have likely been trying to iron out an extension with Ehlers.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Teams are doing well if they're hitting on 2 NHLers per year at the draft.

Yes. What are they doing if they don't hit on 2 per year, or if most of their 'hits' are 6-8 Dmen or 10-14 F?

'23 & '24 look like possibly producing at that 2 per year rate, though probably in those bottom of the depth chart roles. Maybe 1 a little higher up. But still maybe only 1 hit. Too soon to judge those drafts.

'22 looks like a good bet to produce 2 and maybe even 3 mid depth chart players.

'21 maybe 1.

'20 1 top 6.

'19 looking like none.

'18 1 4th liner/PB tweener. Maybe count Chisholm there but he hasn't made it yet and we got nothing for him.

'17 Samberg and Kovacevic. 2 good Dmen though, again, we never got anything for one of them. So what we got was 1.

Not great, even considering draft position. We probably do quite a bit better if we trade fewer picks at the TD. OTOH, we are probably doing better than a lot of other PO/contending teams who have traded away even more draft capital.

Losing Chisholm and, especially Kovacevic make me wonder about our evaluation of our own prospects. Instead of over rating them we seem to be doing the opposite, at least with the Dmen. Since we haven't drafted that many D prospects this really hurts.

 

[surixon]

Yes. What are they doing if they don't hit on 2 per year, or if most of their 'hits' are 6-8 Dmen or 10-14 F?

'23 & '24 look like possibly producing at that 2 per year rate, though probably in those bottom of the depth chart roles. Maybe 1 a little higher up. But still maybe only 1 hit. Too soon to judge those drafts.

'22 looks like a good bet to produce 2 and maybe even 3 mid depth chart players.

'21 maybe 1.

'20 1 top 6.

'19 looking like none.

'18 1 4th liner/PB tweener. Maybe count Chisholm there but he hasn't made it yet and we got nothing for him.

'17 Samberg and Kovacevic. 2 good Dmen though, again, we never got anything for one of them. So what we got was 1.

Not great, even considering draft position. We probably do quite a bit better if we trade fewer picks at the TD. OTOH, we are probably doing better than a lot of other PO/contending teams who have traded away even more draft capital.

Losing Chisholm and, especially Kovacevic make me wonder about our evaluation of our own prospects. Instead of over rating them we seem to be doing the opposite, at least with the Dmen. Since we haven't drafted that many D prospects this really hurts.

I've long sense felt this org has a better pulse with regards to our forward prospects.

The Stanley project cost the team a better dmen in Kovacevik who does the same role.

I always liked Chisholm and he could have provided puck moving from the third pairing.

I'm close but not quite ready to throw in the towel on Heinola. I wonder if getting Schenn as the defensive/physical player for the third pairing might open up a spot for Ville on the third pairing next year.

 

[snowkiddin]

I've long sense felt this org has a better pulse with regards to our forward prospects.

The Stanley project cost the team a better dmen in Kovacevik who does the same role.

I always liked Chisholm and he could have provided puck moving from the third pairing.

I'm close but not quite ready to throw in the towel on Heinola. I wonder if getting Schenn as the defensive/physical player for the third pairing might open up a spot for Ville on the third pairing next year.

Yes. But think of how much size, strength, and physicality a Stanley and Schenn pairing gives us.

I don't think we really know what we have in Stanley yet. He hasn't been given a fair shake. Maybe pairing him with another physical guy is what leads to his breakout

 

[surixon]

Yes. But think of how much size, strength, and physicality a Stanley and Schenn pairing gives us.

I don't think we really know what we have in Stanley yet. He hasn't been given a fair shake. Maybe pairing him with another physical guy is what leads to his breakout

I think you have found out what Arniel's secret weapon is for the playoffs

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I've long sense felt this org has a better pulse with regards to our forward prospects.

The Stanley project cost the team a better dmen in Kovacevik who does the same role.

I always liked Chisholm and he could have provided puck moving from the third pairing.

I'm close but not quite ready to throw in the towel on Heinola. I wonder if getting Schenn as the defensive/physical player for the third pairing might open up a spot for Ville on the third pairing next year.

Shutting Pionk down has prevented any chance of seeing a Ville/Schenn 3rd pair - if there was one. I doubt Ville is here next season to try it. Either some other team picks him up on waivers or they let him go back to Europe.

Arniel wanted more size on the 3rd pair so Ville never had a chance. He would have needed to score a lot in his various little windows of opportunity.

 

[surixon]

Shutting Pionk down has prevented any chance of seeing a Ville/Schenn 3rd pair - if there was one. I doubt Ville is here next season to try it. Either some other team picks him up on waivers or they let him go back to Europe.

Arniel wanted more size on the 3rd pair so Ville never had a chance. He would have needed to score a lot in his various little windows of opportunity.

I expect he'll be gone as well.

 

[ICdave]

 

[surixon]

Under a ppg for a d plus 2 offensive player is actually pretty poor. Hopefully he had a major bounce back year next year in his first year as pro.

 

[Teppo Numenor]

Under a ppg for a d plus 2 offensive player is actually pretty poor. Hopefully he had a major bounce back year next year in his first year as pro.

I would say he is still ppg , considering a early trade and new teammates. We won’t know how his game translates till he is actually playing pro. Coaches were trying to make him a two way player.

 

[Teppo Numenor]

Yes. What are they doing if they don't hit on 2 per year, or if most of their 'hits' are 6-8 Dmen or 10-14 F?

'23 & '24 look like possibly producing at that 2 per year rate, though probably in those bottom of the depth chart roles. Maybe 1 a little higher up. But still maybe only 1 hit. Too soon to judge those drafts.

'22 looks like a good bet to produce 2 and maybe even 3 mid depth chart players.

'21 maybe 1.

'20 1 top 6.

'19 looking like none.

'18 1 4th liner/PB tweener. Maybe count Chisholm there but he hasn't made it yet and we got nothing for him.

'17 Samberg and Kovacevic. 2 good Dmen though, again, we never got anything for one of them. So what we got was 1.

Not great, even considering draft position. We probably do quite a bit better if we trade fewer picks at the TD. OTOH, we are probably doing better than a lot of other PO/contending teams who have traded away even more draft capital.

Losing Chisholm and, especially Kovacevic make me wonder about our evaluation of our own prospects. Instead of over rating them we seem to be doing the opposite, at least with the Dmen. Since we haven't drafted that many D prospects this really hurts.

The team has accountants who understand sunk cost fallacy but they don’t work in hockey ops i guess. Both Kovi and Chism are better than stan but they couldn’t give up on a guy they traded up to draft

 

[mondo3]

Yes. What are they doing if they don't hit on 2 per year, or if most of their 'hits' are 6-8 Dmen or 10-14 F?

'23 & '24 look like possibly producing at that 2 per year rate, though probably in those bottom of the depth chart roles. Maybe 1 a little higher up. But still maybe only 1 hit. Too soon to judge those drafts.

'22 looks like a good bet to produce 2 and maybe even 3 mid depth chart players.

'21 maybe 1.

'20 1 top 6.

'19 looking like none.

'18 1 4th liner/PB tweener. Maybe count Chisholm there but he hasn't made it yet and we got nothing for him.

'17 Samberg and Kovacevic. 2 good Dmen though, again, we never got anything for one of them. So what we got was 1.

Not great, even considering draft position. We probably do quite a bit better if we trade fewer picks at the TD. OTOH, we are probably doing better than a lot of other PO/contending teams who have traded away even more draft capital.

Losing Chisholm and, especially Kovacevic make me wonder about our evaluation of our own prospects. Instead of over rating them we seem to be doing the opposite, at least with the Dmen. Since we haven't drafted that many D prospects this really hurts.

Would be interesting if you listed how many picks we had in each of those years

 

[Flair Hay]

I would say he is still ppg , considering a early trade and new teammates. We won’t know how his game translates till he is actually playing pro. Coaches were trying to make him a two way player.

He has bounced back pretty well from his start. Definitely some factors working against him.

That said... probably not good he was struggling to produce when coaches are trying to use him in a two way role at the Junior level?

He has a lot of intangibles so I don't want to count him out. But the trajectory overall is not good.

 

[Flair Hay]

I've long sense felt this org has a better pulse with regards to our forward prospects.

The Stanley project cost the team a better dmen in Kovacevik who does the same role.

I always liked Chisholm and he could have provided puck moving from the third pairing.

I'm close but not quite ready to throw in the towel on Heinola. I wonder if getting Schenn as the defensive/physical player for the third pairing might open up a spot for Ville on the third pairing next year.

I can't see why we would give up on Ville now that we have a guy who seems to match up pretty well with him in Schenn for a partner. Maybe he bolts to go back to Finland, but that seems premature.

Fleury still has the edge as I think the Jets prefer their 3rd pair guys to PK, but for regular season next year Ville could help them win games with a big strong defensive partner to help with the front of the net.

Stanley may have finally ran out of rope now that Schenn is here. Arniel changed his actions in regard to Stan rela quick once Schenn arrived...

 

[Teppo Numenor]

He has bounced back pretty well from his start. Definitely some factors working against him.

That said... probably not good he was struggling to produce when coaches are trying to use him in a two way role at the Junior level?

He has a lot of intangibles so I don't want to count him out. But the trajectory overall is not good.

The way things went for the moose this year its definitely better he had to go back to jr.

 

[lanky]

He has bounced back pretty well from his start. Definitely some factors working against him.

That said... probably not good he was struggling to produce when coaches are trying to use him in a two way role at the Junior level?

He has a lot of intangibles so I don't want to count him out. But the trajectory overall is not good.

About those intangibles... I think he learned them from Rutger.

Attack captain Colby Barlow to skip training camp in Owen Sound

The captain isn't coming — at least not yet. Owen Sound Attack GM Dale DeGray said Colby Barlow informed the team a few days before training camp that he's decided to stay and prepare in the Toronto area ahead of the Winnipeg Jets' camp next month.

www.owensoundsuntimes.com