I don't see how any guy with an HF account can really say a player sucks, because to me that's shallow criticism...most of us have never even had a sniff at pro hockey. Defensemen are tricky to judge you look at the ark of careers like Desharnais or Alexander Carrier, taking over 5 years to become pros...some guys get jobs just because they've established a rep with a coach, that another player never had the opportunity to...you have guys like Capo who are NHL d-men one year, AHL d-men the next...Capo's demotion was a promotion for Declan Chisholm, who was a #8, looks like he could be a f/t player next season. Sometimes it's just the right opportunity and seizing it, like Ben Chiarot stepping up during injury to play a big minute role with Buff...I'd say there are 300+ d-men who could play in the NHL in any given season, just depends on circumstances when you get into that 6-9 range.
It is really interesting.
We ponificate about why player A seemingly gets 1000 chances while player B gets none. We don't have enough real info to fully understand it, so the easy fallback is to say a bunch of professionals working in the best league in the world are incompetent, dinosaurs, etc.
Obviously there are biases in hockey. You see them in amateur hockey and no doubt these pros carry them into higher leagues.
However, widely held bias usually has some basis in fact, and as you move up the ladder in coaching and management a lot of the guys get weeded out. It still exists, but decisions with regards to player management, development and deployment aren't made by one person.
There are dozens of pros that weigh in on these players, and then when you see a player have the same experience with multiple orgs, you're taking about hundreds of decision makers.
It just illustrates how much of the picture fans are missing. We aren't privy to a lot of information leading into these decisions.
Of course, some of this information is beyond the players control: depth, contract, intangibles.
With Stanley in particular, I do think that bigger defensemen take longer to develop - we see examples of this all over. I know the size argument annoys a lot of peeps, here, but particularly with defenseman, size is a very valuable attribute. If you can find a way to develop a big d into a solid defender that is a prized component of a winning team.
Maybe the org is seeing enough forward prices with Stanley that that aren't ready to give up just yet.
*DISCLAIMER FOR WOLFHOUSE*
I am not a 'Stan fan'. I am not saying he will continue to improve into a top 4 defenseman. I'm not advocating for size over skill. I'm simply trying to reason why a bunch of pros in the Jets org. are holding onto Stanley.
