The Jets D

[TS Quint]

Stanley earned his opportunity? How do you figure other then being big. He was mediocre in both junior and the AHL and yet gets a spot due to the fact he's big. It's laughable to actually believe he earned anything based on play.

You don't think there is a size bias in terms of dmen integration?

Trouba 6"3 203 lbs
Chariot 6"3 232 lbs
JoMo 6" 195 lbs
Poolman 6"2 199lbs
Stanley 6"7 228 lbs
Samberg 6"3 190 lbs

So just a coincidence that every dmen sans JoMo integrated to an NHL dmen is 6"2 and up?

Pionk doesn't count from a development angle. He was not drafted, developed or integrated into the NHL by the Jets. He was traded for after being signed and integrated by the Rangers.

Stanley definitely earned his time. During that time this board actually got quite high on him during a run of heavily sheltered time. But he did not continue to pass the tests and he has been relegated as he should. Again just like Heinola, Stanley got what he deserved on his way up and his way down. There’s no conspiracy against either one.

So the Jets have a size bias when it comes to their own prospects but not to NHL players? That’s an interesting angle. Can you give more examples besides Heinola? Was Niku the same problem? He’s got the Heinola AHL accolades. Only 6’1 so he had to go? You would think with your theory Kovacevic would have been a regular on the Jets before he left. I’m surprised the Jets don’t just draft exclusively 6’3+ when that all they want on the team. Any guesses why they bother?

 

[AlaskaJet]

Looking at the xGF for Ramberg-Schmidt, I'm not sure I wouldn't keep that pairing together as our 2 second or perhaps 1st pairing... I really underestimated Samberg's impact - I'm still in favour of moving Samberg to the right side with Morrissey but...

Its still hard to see a scenario where the Jets can insert Heinola (even if he is Morrissey 2.0 into the lineup) - I don't see a Heinola/Pionk pairing working or even with Schmidt... its a real shame to get rid of Dillon instead of Pionk

2024-25
Samberg-Schmidt
Morrissey-DeMelo
Chisholm-Pionk (sheltered)
Salomondsson first callup

Agreed, for all Pionk’s good O, we need Dillon’s size and presence, for now at least.

 

[Atoyot]

Yet Samberg and Stanley got their chances over the same period. If you are going to remove the idea of proper evaluation it sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. Why are they picking on Heinola while everyone else seems to get chances?

Putting prospects in to positions to fail att the expense of the team is no way to develop prospects.

And they both were allowed to play through their numerous mistakes. Samberg wasn't an NHL defenseman for the first 30ish games last season. Stanley looked okay while being the most sheltered defenseman in the league.

Not a conspiracy, it's natural subconscious bias, as Mort said. Samberg is thought of as a good defender, so if he makes a mistake it's an anomaly. Heinola is perceived to be bad defensively, so whenever he makes a mistake it's further proof of what was already known. Samberg can make 10 mistakes and he'd be judged less harshly than Heinola making 1.

 

[surixon]

Stanley definitely earned his time. During that time this board actually got quite high on him during a run of heavily sheltered time. But he did not continue to pass the tests and he has been relegated as he should. Again just like Heinola, Stanley got what he deserved on his way up and his way down. There’s no conspiracy against either one.

So the Jets have a size bias when it comes to their own prospects but not to NHL players? That’s an interesting angle. Can you give more examples besides Heinola? Was Niku the same problem? He’s got the Heinola AHL accolades. Only 6’1 so he had to go? You would think with your theory Kovacevic would have been a regular on the Jets before he left. I’m surprised the Jets don’t just draft exclusively 6’3+ when that all they want on the team. Any guesses why they bother?

I flat out said they didn't have an issue acquiring offensive player types externally in the very first post I made on this topic. As to why, I would think they find it much easier to trust a smaller player whos already shown they can play in the league (Pionk/Schmidt) then a prospect that hasnt. My post was purely on integrating their own drafted players.

As for Kovacevik, they made an error in their judgement. Thought he'd pass through waivers and be the top call up is my guess.

As for Stanley, he had 10 points and was a -17 in 44 games in the AHL the year prior. Tell me what part of that year earned him an NHL job out of camp (especially given there was no camp to win a spot due to COVID that year).

 

[Flair Hay]

And they both were allowed to play through their numerous mistakes. Samberg wasn't an NHL defenseman for the first 30ish games last season. Stanley looked okay while being the most sheltered defenseman in the league.

Not a conspiracy, it's natural subconscious bias, as Mort said. Samberg is thought of as a good defender, so if he makes a mistake it's an anomaly. Heinola is perceived to be bad defensively, so whenever he makes a mistake it's further proof of what was already known. Samberg can make 10 mistakes and he'd be judged less harshly than Heinola making 1.

But the numbers back up that Samberg is a good defender and Heinola has not been

I'm cool with giving Ville some longer leash but he has not been good at the NHL level yet. At least since he was 18.

 

[Atoyot]

But the numbers back up that Samberg is a good defender and Heinola has not been

I'm cool with giving Ville some longer leash but he has not been good at the NHL level yet. At least since he was 18.

The numbers don't back that up for Samberg to start last year and don't back it up for Stanley in general. Fact is they were allowed to work through it and adjust to the league, Heinola has never been given that courtesy. He's definitely been good for small bursts, but he plays like he's terrified of making a mistake and for good reason.

Watching him at every step you can see what he's been told he needs to do to be successful. He's an incredibly cerebral player and he's been told ever since he's been drafted that he needs to be more physical and change how he plays in the defensive zone. When he's playing his game he sees lanes and anticipates plays and is very successful in the defensive zone, when he's trying to prove he should be given a chance he desperately tries to play physical and gets overpowered and then takes penalties. Let him play to his strengths and he'll be exploited now and then, but he'll look a hell of a lot better than he does trying to play the game he's been told to play.

 

[surixon]

But the numbers back up that Samberg is a good defender and Heinola has not been

I'm cool with giving Ville some longer leash but he has not been good at the NHL level yet. At least since he was 18.

Well yeah because he was allowed to grow into his role and he improved as the year went on. But through the first 40 games Heinola had superior defensive results then Snerg (granted only 8 game sample).

The point being Samberg was miles better the second half of the year then he was the first half after being allowed to acclimatize to the league.

 

[TS Quint]

I flat out said they didn't have an issue acquiring offensive player types externally in the very first post I made on this topic. As to why, I would think they find it much easier to trust a smaller player whos already shown they can play in the league (Pionk/Schmidt) then a prospect that hasnt. My post was purely on integrating their own drafted players.

As for Kovacevik, they made an error in their judgement. Thought he'd pass through waivers and be the top call up is my guess.

As for Stanley, he had 10 points and was a -17 in 44 games in the AHL the year prior. Tell me what part of that year earned him an NHL job out of camp (especially given there was no camp to win a spot due to COVID that year).

So now it’s not all about size?

Im sorry guys this all just sounds like an emotional attachment to prospects. There’s no real linear thinking involved with these conspiracy theories. It’s all just blaming the Jets for a prospects failures.

Anyway, I hope he comes into camp and blows them away, leaving no gray area and makes the team.

 

[surixon]

The numbers don't back that up for Samberg to start last year and don't back it up for Stanley in general. Fact is they were allowed to work through it and adjust to the league, Heinola has never been given that courtesy. He's definitely been good for small bursts, but he plays like he's terrified of making a mistake and for good reason.

Watching him at every step you can see what he's been told he needs to do to be successful. He's an incredibly cerebral player and he's been told ever since he's been drafted that he needs to be more physical and change how he plays in the defensive zone. When he's playing his game he sees lanes and anticipates plays and is very successful in the defensive zone, when he's trying to prove he should be given a chance he desperately tries to play physical and gets overpowered and then takes penalties. Let him play to his strengths and he'll be exploited now and then, but he'll look a hell of a lot better than he does trying to play the game he's been told to play.

There was nothing wrong with his defensive play last year. He posted a very respectable XGA/60 of 2.35. It was amongst the best on the team and only .07 off of Snerg's 2.28. He isn't a one dimensional player, he just needs some runway to show he belongs.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Not sure if it is accurate to say the Jets are biased towards big defensive first D Men as there hasn’t been enough of a sample size as we have drafted so few defenders that have panned out. I can think of only 4 defensemen in 12 years that we drafted that have played regularly. Trouba, Morrissey, Stanley and Samberg. Niku was given a shot and flamed out. So it is pretty much a split in styles. The Jets have also been spit on the D Men acquired in other ways.

Yes, not enough data.
I think it is more of a coaching thing. The bigger Dmen seem to be given a lot more rope. But still not enough data. 2 big guys have managed to keep their heads above water in the NHL, 2 smaller guys have struggled.

Things are not always as they appear. Heinola appears to have not been given much of a chance to adapt. The coaches' perspective is quite different from the fans'.

I see a difference between Heinola and Niku. Niku wasn't very good defensively in the AHL. His offense was his value. Heinola is similar offensively but in the AHL he has actually managed to play reasonably well defensively also. That suggests that he should be more successful in the NHL. But he has been handled much the same way Niku was with very little tolerance of rookie mistakes. He appears to play tentatively, afraid to make a mistake. If he can't get past that he isn't going to make it.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

You’re just being disingenuous now.

you want me to start listing players who excel in the AHL but aren’t NHL players? It’s not the same game.

No, not at all.

You are saying that a player hasn't earned a fair chance in the NHL. OK, fair enough. How does he earn that chance? How does any player? They earn it first by their play at lower levels coming up. Heinola has done that. At some point he needs to be given a fair run of games to get over that first transition. He hasn't been allowed that yet.

Where we are disagreeing is on the opportunity he has had. In your opinion it has been a fair chance and he has failed to win more. IMO it has been a poor opportunity with benching or press boxing for every mistake. That has lead to tentative play on his part.

I agree that he hasn't been good enough. But that goes back to the way he has been handled, IMO.

 

[surixon]

So now it’s not all about size?

Im sorry guys this all just sounds like an emotional attachment to prospects. There’s no real linear thinking involved with these conspiracy theories. It’s all just blaming the Jets for a prospects failures.

Anyway, I hope he comes into camp and blows them away, leaving no gray area and makes the team.

I'm having a hard time following your arguments now. For the record I'm not all that high on Heinola but if he integrates properly should be able to provide cost effective two/way number 4 type results. That to me is far more of an effective use of cap space then paying Schmidt and Pionk a combined $11 for third pairing results. Its not about emotional attachment for me, it's about trying to optimize the pieces on the team and for the team to improve. I feel the org has room to grow in its defensive development department.

I'm going to go back to Morrissey because I feel he is the poster boy for missed opportunity. He emerged this past year as a Norris caliber dmen after a coaching change brought in a coach that took the shackles off and encouraged him to take control of the game offensively.

Would this org not have benefited greatly had Maurice taken this same approach back in 2016-20 when we were in our contention window?
Would having two dominant offensive driving number 1 dmen not have helped pushed this team over the top? Instead we got Morrissey pigeonholed into a suppression shut down role with limited PP time. I watched JoMo a lot as junior player and how he looked last year isn't much different then how he played for PA. He didn't learn anything new, he was just encouraged and allowed to get back to playing the dominating game he played in the Dub that got him drafted high.

 

[TS Quint]

No, not at all.

You are saying that a player hasn't earned a fair chance in the NHL. OK, fair enough. How does he earn that chance? How does any player? They earn it first by their play at lower levels coming up. Heinola has done that. At some point he needs to be given a fair run of games to get over that first transition. He hasn't been allowed that yet.

Where we are disagreeing is on the opportunity he has had. In your opinion it has been a fair chance and he has failed to win more. IMO it has been a poor opportunity with benching or press boxing for every mistake. That has lead to tentative play on his part.

I agree that he hasn't been good enough. But that goes back to the way he has been handled, IMO.

You earn chances by demonstrating the skills that are needed in the NHL. Those skills are tested and evaluated. In Heinola’s case if all he can do is stand between the puck carrier and the net never threatening to cause a turnover and he loses the overwhelming majority of board battles he gets evaluated accordingly. They aren’t just sitting there stat watching his AHL games.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

You earn chances by demonstrating the skills that are needed in the NHL. Those skills are tested and evaluated. In Heinola’s case if all he can do is stand between the puck carrier and the net never threatening to cause a turnover and he loses the overwhelming majority of board battles he gets evaluated accordingly. They aren’t just sitting there stat watching his AHL games.

Yeah, IF that was all he could do. Don't know where you get the idea that that is the case.

I think we have said about all there is to say here. We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[surixon]

You earn chances by demonstrating the skills that are needed in the NHL. Those skills are tested and evaluated. In Heinola’s case if all he can do is stand between the puck carrier and the net never threatening to cause a turnover and he loses the overwhelming majority of board battles he gets evaluated accordingly. They aren’t just sitting there stat watching his AHL games.

Have you ever watched him ay in the AHL? Because he's been very good defensively there. He forces numerous turnovers, wins numerous battles and gets the puck out of his end quickly which greatly limits the actual time he spends there.

There are many ways to effectively defend, physicality is only one way, positioning, timing, smarts and effective puck management are others.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Myers wasn't on the team Trouba's rookie year. He joined partway through his second year. The year Trouba was shackled to Stuart on the bottom pairing.

Once Myers got here mid February he garnered the second most pp ice time per game at 2:55 minutes per game the rest of the way in. Trouba was 4th on dmen with 1:44 minutes per game that stretch.

2015-16: Myers 2nd with 2:16 minutes per game, Trouba 4th with 1:17 minutes per game.

16-17: Myers 2nd 1:44 per game, Trouba 3rd 1:42 per game. Morrissey 5th at 0:37 per game.

17-18: Myers (2nd) 2:04, Trouba (3rd) 1:28, and JoMo 4th at 0:20

18-19 Trouba (2nd) 2:04, JoMo 3rd 1:45


So yes the vets played over the kids on the pp. It took until Trouba's 6th year to steal away Myers role. It took JoMo until his third year to actually get a regular PP shift. He got nothing on the pp the two years prior.

As for Maurices comments im not going back 6 years to find them. I'm sure numerous posters on here can substantiate them.

Conner was drafted 17th overall and Heinola 20th overall. There isn't much difference in eithers draft pedigree. Heinola has excelled at every level below the NHL. His pre NHL pedigree isn't much different then Morrissey's (not saying he comes close to JoMo).

Are Pionk and Schmidt better players? Pionk has been absolute crap the last few years and drags down every partner he plays with. Could Ville do much worse? Sure Ville needs to be better but he hasn't been given the same runway that players like Stan and Snerg were given to make mistakes and grow into NHL players (well Snerg grew into one, tree hasn't).

Tree hasn't - but he was given every opportunity.
Snerg was not very good his first few games. He wasn't press boxed or benched after each game.

 

[TS Quint]

I'm having a hard time following your arguments now. For the record I'm not all that high on Heinola but if he integrates properly should be able to provide cost effective two/way number 4 type results. That to me is far more of an effective use of cap space then paying Schmidt and Pionk a combined $11 for third pairing results. Its not about emotional attachment for me, it's about trying to optimize the pieces on the team and for the team to improve. I feel the org has room to grow in its defensive development department.

I'm going to go back to Morrissey because I feel he is the poster boy for missed opportunity. He emerged this past year as a Norris caliber dmen after a coaching change brought in a coach that took the shackles off and encouraged him to take control of the game offensively.

Would this org not have benefited greatly had Maurice taken this same approach back in 2016-20 when we were in our contention window?
Would having two dominant offensive driving number 1 dmen not have helped pushed this team over the top? Instead we got Morrissey pigeonholed into a suppression shut down role with limited PP time. I watched JoMo a lot as junior player and how he looked last year isn't much different then how he played for PA. He didn't learn anything new, he was just encouraged and allowed to get back to playing the dominating game he played in the Dub that got him drafted high.

It doesn’t seem like you are reading or are just deflecting. I didn’t make an argument in that post, I questioned your thinking which really just sounds like you started at the answer you wanted and made excuses from there. Your reasoning isnt good.

-You aren’t high on Heinola but you think he’s a current #4? That’s pretty high.

-He has his size used against him because he’s under 6’3 AND the lethal combination of being a Jets prospect. But when applying the same logic to a 6’3+ prospect that didn’t follow you reasoning well that was just bad evaluation because look at him go as the 6D on a shit defense in Montreal? I guess there’s just no winning for the Jets, they’re just wrong. You also haven’t listed any other prospects that fit this conspiracy. You are really trying shoehorn this narrative.

- I have no idea how you think Heinola is better than Schmitt or Pionk. That’s over the top. It’s not about cap space it’s about icing the best team not handing Heinola something he has yet to show he deserves more than either player.

-I don’t know what your are going on about Morrissey for. You don’t think Morrissey learned anything from the age of 18? What? He’s a clearly better player but he was probably better than Heinola is now when he was 18 if that’s what you are getting at. HeiNola and Morrisey have very little in common. Or do you mean you want Heinola to play like how Maurice let Buff play? Again Buff, when he wasn’t out of breath was a pretty good defender and Maurice did lead the team to a conference final. No doubt Maurice stayed Too long but I don’t think you are remembering things quite right And again you are trying to shoe horn a narrative that just isn’t true.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

Stanley drafted 2016. Heinola 2019.

No shit Stanley has had more chances, he was drafted 3 years b4 ville

 

[TS Quint]

Have you ever watched him ay in the AHL? Because he's been very good defensively there. He forces numerous turnovers, wins numerous battles and gets the puck out of his end quickly which greatly limits the actual time he spends there.

There are many ways to effectively defend, physicality is only one way, positioning, timing, smarts and effective puck management are others.

Again, I never said physicality is the only way to defend. In fact I’ve never even said it is a way to defend. You are the only one bringing that up. He has not shown to use any of that effectively in the NHL. The NHL isn’t the same as the AHL.

 

[TS Quint]

Tree hasn't - but he was given every opportunity.
Snerg was not very good his first few games. He wasn't press boxed or benched after each game.

But he has been “press boxed” though right?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Stanley definitely earned his time. During that time this board actually got quite high on him during a run of heavily sheltered time. But he did not continue to pass the tests and he has been relegated as he should. Again just like Heinola, Stanley got what he deserved on his way up and his way down. There’s no conspiracy against either one.

So the Jets have a size bias when it comes to their own prospects but not to NHL players? That’s an interesting angle. Can you give more examples besides Heinola? Was Niku the same problem? He’s got the Heinola AHL accolades. Only 6’1 so he had to go? You would think with your theory Kovacevic would have been a regular on the Jets before he left. I’m surprised the Jets don’t just draft exclusively 6’3+ when that all they want on the team. Any guesses why they bother?

Not just like Heinola. Stanley didn't earn his time right from the first game. He screwed up and played again the next game for a string of games long enough for him to adapt. That is the opportunity Heinola has never had. Heinola has had a total of 35 games spread out over 4 seasons. In each of those seasons his games were interrupted by benching, press boxing and going back and forth between AHL and NHL.

Edit: Sorry, I said we should agree to disagree. I'll stop now.

But he has been “press boxed” though right?

Not after every game, 1 game at a time.

 

[surixon]

It doesn’t seem like you are reading or are just deflecting. I didn’t make an argument in that post, I questioned your thinking which really just sounds like you started at the answer you wanted and made excuses from there. Your reasoning isnt good.

-You aren’t high on Heinola but you think he’s a current #4? That’s pretty high.

-He has his size used against him because he’s under 6’3 AND the lethal combination of being a Jets prospect. But when applying the same logic to a 6’3+ prospect that didn’t follow you reasoning well that was just bad evaluation because look at him go as the 6D on a shit defense in Montreal? I guess there’s just no winning for the Jets, they’re just wrong. You also haven’t listed any other prospects that fit this conspiracy. You are really trying shoehorn this narrative.

- I have no idea how you think Heinola is better than Schmitt or Pionk. That’s over the top. It’s not about cap space it’s about icing the best team not handing Heinola something he has yet to show he deserves more than either player.

-I don’t know what your are going on about Morrissey for. You don’t think Morrissey learned anything from the age of 18? What? He’s a clearly better player but he was probably better than Heinola is now when he was 18 if that’s what you are getting at. HeiNola and Morrisey have very little in common. Or do you mean you want Heinola to play like how Maurice let Buff play? Again Buff, when he wasn’t out of breath was a pretty good defender and Maurice did lead the team to a conference final. No doubt Maurice stayed Too long but I don’t think you are remembering things quite right And again you are trying to shoe horn a narrative that just isn’t true.

You bring up one 6"3 dmen that the org got wrong but ignore the fact they integrated 5 other 6"3 dmen. Just because a dmen fits into the general trend doesn't mean the org will get everything right or integrate them. It's no different then saying the org likes and integrates smaller skilled players in the top 6 (Ehlers, Conner, Perfetti) while pointing out that Petan wasn't given a top 6 opportunity. Not every big dmen will be rated, just like not every small skill forward will be. But trends can be seen as to what attributes are more likely to be valued for certain positions.

I brought up Morrissey to show where a different development path may have lead to him becoming a dominant player quicker. JoMo clearly had this level of ability in him so why did it take until his draft plus 10 year to realize? Instead of having him play a narrowly defined role, would he not have learned quicker being allowed to translate his offense while also learning how defend?

Do you see the same development template used for other impact top offensive dmen? Were Fox, Heiskinen, Makar, Theodore etc asked to learn how to defend in a shutdown role before they were put on a PP and allowed to control the game offensively? No they were put into those roles right off the batt and developed into elite all around players following that path.

 

[TS Quint]

You bring up one 6"3 dmen that the org got wrong but ignore the fact they integrated 5 other 6"3 dmen. Just because a dmen fits into the general trend doesn't mean the org will get everything right or integrate them. It's no different then saying the org likes and integrates smaller skilled players in the top 6 (Ehlers, Conner, Perfetti) while pointing out that Petan wasn't given a top 6 opportunity. Not every big dmen will be rated, just like not every small skill forward will be. But trends can be seen as to what attributes are more likely to be valued for certain positions.

I brought up Morrissey to show where a different development path may have lead to him becoming a dominant player quicker. JoMo clearly had this level of ability in him so why did it take until his draft plus 10 year to realize? Instead of having him play a narrowly defined role, would he not have learned quicker being allowed to translate his offense while also learning how defend?

Do you see the same development template used for other impact top offensive dmen? Were Fox, Heiskinen, Makar, Theodore etc asked to learn how to defend in a shutdown role before they were put on a PP and allowed to control the game offensively? No they were put into those roles right off the batt and developed into elite all around players following that path.

Fox, Heiskenen, Makar……. Heinola……. I think you’re just messing with me now hahahaha, I’m out.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

Yup. People definitely overrated ville and still are. Does he have potential? Yup? Has he shown it? For a glimpse in his draft year but since then when he has had a chance, he's looked not good. Very unsure, very nervous looking. Perhaps the former coach and gm saw ville differently. There was times where it seemed Chevy pushed for ville to play but Maurice wouldn't play him or did and then went back to a vet. I mean, u could make the argument that ville was held back by Maurice, but I also don't think he took advantage of his opportunities when he did get a chance. 35 games spread out... I'd like to see My prospects get better with every nhl game not worse and it appears ville started off on fire and hasn't been able to reach that point again at the nhl level. Maybe he's a Niku tho

Perfect world Josh has a legit 1 RD to play with. Ville is your 2nd pair guy playing with a defensively responsible 2RD and samberg is your shutdown 3rd pairing guy. Honestly tho, samberg and ville would probably make a good pair but lhd

Pretty obvious gms job is to also bring In players his coaches will like or recommend even. Think you saw tons of vet D brought in under Maurice didn't you? Jordie Benn anyone?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

But the numbers back up that Samberg is a good defender and Heinola has not been

I'm cool with giving Ville some longer leash but he has not been good at the NHL level yet. At least since he was 18.

That is true. But very few defenders are ever that good with the amount of leash that Ville has been given. Or at least that is one opinion.

I don't think he has been handled well in his various call-ups. Whether a longer leash would have helped or not is unknown. I think it would have, at least in the last couple of years. Probably not earlier. But that is just my opinion and it is impossible to prove or disprove either way.