Mud Turtle
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2013
- 8,158
- 21,281
This is great news.
He was the guy I really wanted to lock up. Would’ve hated to see him go elsewhere.
Prospect Info: Jets Prospects
- Thread starter Hunter368
- Start date
This is great news.
He was the guy I really wanted to lock up. Would’ve hated to see him go elsewhere.
AtomicJets
Registered User
- Dec 20, 2014
- 318
- 1,747
We are suddenly deep with forward prospects. Walton and He likely get another year in junior but the org now has Lambert, Chibrikov, Yager, Barlow, and Julien in the mix. One or more will surely be Jets next year but the Moose are getting a much-needed infusion of young talent. Zhilkin and Wagner will also have another year under their belts and hopefully take a step forward. Lucius unfortunately may no longer be in the picture.
And it's coming at a good time as Vilardi, Barron and Kupari go to RFA and Ehlers, Appleton, and Iafallo go to UFA. I don't know who will be extended but I know it won't be all six of them.
And it's coming at a good time as Vilardi, Barron and Kupari go to RFA and Ehlers, Appleton, and Iafallo go to UFA. I don't know who will be extended but I know it won't be all six of them.
- Feb 13, 2019
- 5,733
- 26,302
Barlow and Yager both have a great shot/release
Maybe someday Barlow can develop into a trigger man for Lambert
Unfortunately most of our forward prospects have middle 6 upside. I wouldn't even say one is likely to be a top line player.
We likely get some good middle 6 depth and a true top 6 player or two, but I don't see any elite talent in the system that can replace an Ehlers or even a Vilardi if they leave.
The Jets do have some good forward prospects, though none of them seem to be sure-fire top line players like Scheifele and Connor were. Maybe Yager develops into a top line C, but it seems a long shot. But they can likely fill in a strong middle 6 over the next 3-4 seasons. That won't help them immediately, and they probably still need to nail a pick or two that produces a top line C (like Hintz or Aho, etc.).
MardyBum
Registered User
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,235
- 34,038
DeBrincat and Gerard were both downgraded due to small size. There were plenty of people smart enough to not do that - or they would have gone even later. Like I said, we had posters here who really wanted those 2 specifically, in spite of size issues.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,235
- 34,038
Helle went right about where he should have, at the time. Goaltenders are a different problem, scouting them at 18-19 YO. Even harder to identify the good ones than with skaters.
Petan's issue was more than just his small size. They should have recognized that, at least in hindsight.
I don't think that was the issue. It was not about avoiding small players. It was more like seeking plus sized players.
Pro scouts and managers have their biases, just like everybody else. They need to learn to see past them.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,235
- 34,038
I remember Stanley got picked many here didn't like it. With a good track record I put my faith in Chevy. Clearly it didn't work out. But you look at 95% of the guys that were picked after him, they didn't turn into much either. That's why I laugh when people get mad about trading 2nd round picks. Even late first round is a crap shoot already.
It was funny though that we moved up four spots to get him.
It's just silly to say we could have had both DeBrincat and Gerard. You can do the same thing every year for the last 30 years. There's always going to be great players that fall down in the draft.
Here is the talk about Stanley:
(Page 30 if it doesn't work)
It's crazy pretty much everyone here didn't want him. And crazier that Jets FO saw something in him when 95% of the board hated it. I also think the same thing happened when we picked Scheif as well though.
I wonder if Chychrun and Fabbro were the who they wanted and once they were both gone they didn't want to miss out on Stanley as well so they traded up.
That was not a deep draft. The players who have turned out well after the first 16 didn't stand out from the crowd much. The players I wanted at 22 and 36 haven't even reached Stanley's level. It isn't always that much of a crap shoot though. It varies quite a bit from draft class to draft class. 2016 was a bad one.
It isn't silly to mention DeBrincat and Gerard though. They were the 2 who did stand out. I name them because I remember some posters here who touted them at the time. Not hindsight for those guys.
Naming Thompson is in that 20/20 hindsight category and I admitted as much in my post.
I agree with your last paragraph. I think that nails it.
Sure, but we tend to remember our "hits" and the GM's misses, and vice versa.
In 2017 most of our board (including me) were pining for Brannstrom or Valimaki or Liljegren. Chevy plucked a big, raw LHD (Samberg) at #43 who has turned out to be likely the 3rd best D drafted that year (behind Heiskanen and Makar). Not many of us posters have spent much time reviewing how badly we missed on that assessment, but some still remember fondly about the Girard/DeBrincat coups. Good thing Chevy didn't pick Samberg in the 1st because there would be much crow for us to eat.
We can all probably be a bit more circumspect about the draft process, since there are plenty of swings-and-misses to go around.
MardyBum
Registered User
????
I'm going to assume that most posters wanted those guys at (what was at the time) 13th OA. What does Samberg have to do with it?
Even Chevy picked Vesalainen above Samberg.
People are just upset Garret (among others) correctly called Stanley as a favourite of the Jets, pointed out all his flaws pre-draft, and then they reached, and it failed. His ceiling turned out to be on the spot. The best pre-draft critique of a prospect in 2.0 before he was drafted so far.
Everyone misses, and we're just a bunch of randoms on the internet and not scouts. Nothing quite like that 2016 first round though.
- Mar 10, 2010
- 34,908
- 36,836
My favorite combination in this reality check
Boston in 2003 in order:
1st rounder Mark Stuart
2nd rounder Patrice Bergeron
MardyBum
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2010
- 34,908
- 36,836
I would say scouts are far, far better at seeing past their biases than the average fan. They have to actually watch players play live many times over, take detailed notes of every performance and then submit them to a larger group of talent evaluators, who will also have hours of video on every prospect. After that detailed discussions take place on strengths and areas for development, before any decisions take place. Around here a fan doesn't even have to watch a player once, they can read a 1/2 page scouting report on a webpage and be an expert, arguing for their choice with a 100% certainty.
MardyBum
Registered User
Or you can show up scouting the opposing goalie and take a flyer on a guy and call yourself a genius.
Pretty clear point. We remember when we are right and forget when we were wrong. Maybe just tiring to keep hearing about Girard and DeBrincat 9 years later, but never about Brannstrom and Valimaki and Yamamoto, etc.
DEANYOUNGBLOOD17
Registered User
- May 10, 2011
- 3,413
- 1,836
2016 draft I was in attendance in Buffalo … in a VIP suite ….. free drinks and food…. I was so mad 
when Gary B-man anounced that there was a trade …….i said F*** the Jets are trading up to draft Stanley…. And that’s exactly what they did….
I was mad that U knew it was going to cost our early 2 nd round pick…
My 2 picks would have been … if we did not trade up would have
Lucas Johansen 1 st round … which was a bust anyways but my early 2nd round pick was going to be De Brincat!
when Gary B-man anounced that there was a trade …….i said F*** the Jets are trading up to draft Stanley…. And that’s exactly what they did….I was mad that U knew it was going to cost our early 2 nd round pick…
My 2 picks would have been … if we did not trade up would have
Lucas Johansen 1 st round … which was a bust anyways but my early 2nd round pick was going to be De Brincat!
