Player Discussion: Winnipeg Jets Defense

[Buffdog]

This was Garrett’s article yesterday entitled “Monday Review: It Is Time That Logan Stanley Experiment Ends”

The Hohl article is pretty damning.

Without reading it, I'd just add that he's been anti-Stanley since before the pick itself, so there's bound to be some confirmation bias in there

 

[Flair Hay]

To me it's fascinating that Stanley is somehow a +6 on the team this year, tied for 3rd among d-men. I think it must be the Ehlers effect. +23 in his career is respectable. Maybe it's the same reason Beaulieu was a team high +15 in 2020-21 (38 games), goaltending makes up the difference. Or strong team play.

But I wonder what it is beyond the expectancy of goals that has Fleury at -5 on the other end of the spectrum. Maybe the type of chances given up? Is Stanley somehow better at limiting rush chances, which are more dangerous? Don't see it, but maybe it's relative to the players he on the ice with limiting rush chances.

I still think the Jets are willing to get outshot if Stan can be effective on the PK, because that's a one shot, one goal scenario.

The Jets losing streak coincides with Samberg going down, and that's one to watch, because there's still a clear #1 and #2 d-man on the team, but without #4, and with #3 struggling (injury?), the #5-9s on the team are struggling to pick up the slack.

I think Coghlan would be good to get in the lineup because he's not injured and he's been around all through camp and the regular season, probably more up to a game speed. Being a RD though does he get in on his offside, which he played in preseason? Miller doesn't seem to be the problem. Arniel has been conservative while things are working. He's got a bit of a test to get more out of this defense, which definitely is not among the best in the West, and maybe the freefall is a correction.

Stanley and Miller are doing well in on-ice goals department for sure.

Fleury-Miller actually has best Corsi of our d pairs in the short season, Stanley-Miller has the worst. But the actual goals are the exact opposite results wise.

As you stated, Stanley and Miller 7 GF, 1 GA while Fleury and Miller is 1 GF, 6 GA. These are still pretty small amounts of time overall, still much to learn before making any worthwhile conclusions I think.

It's reason enough to justify playing Stan I think. But not expecting those stats to stay that way.

 

[Slimy Sculpin]

Without reading it, I'd just add that he's been anti-Stanley since before the pick itself, so there's bound to be some confirmation bias in there

Here you go and you may find that he was "anti-Stanley" but only as a very early draft pick.

Monday Review: It Is Time That Logan Stanley Experiment Ends

Jets weekly review and preview, prospects update, and trending news.

thefivehohl.substack.com

 

[Flair Hay]

Without reading it, I'd just add that he's been anti-Stanley since before the pick itself, so there's bound to be some confirmation bias in there

And some reason to listen as well if he was one of the folks that saw this coming before the Jets did...

I said it was ridiculous to write him off on draft day. There is always room for things we don't know, especially in the draft. Here we are, all this time later, and they were right about not picking him.

In my mind he has earned the right to speak on this confidently as he, and a few others on this forum pegged Stanley as exactly what he has become...and what has has cost us in other players is adding to the cost.

Would you say that it might be conformation bias to have a position on someone's article before trying to read it?

 

[ps241]

As much as I like Heinola and hope he can succeed, he was thrown around a lot by the big Blues' forwards last night, and ended up taking a frustration penalty. He has some grit, but he needs to figure out how to play a more effective game given his lack of size and strength.

Throwing him onto RD with Stanley isn't a very good way to assess him, though.

I'm tired of commenting on Stanley. He just makes so many aimless passes and rims that end up in failed exits or icing and then sustained D zone pressure by opponents. The big question is whether Chevy has enough confidence in Stanley "developing" into a legit playoff option over the rest of season, given the very high stakes for the Jets in this contending window. I certainly don't have that confidence. I'm not persuaded that Heinola is the answer, either. If I were Chevy I'd be looking for another D to augment this D.

Unfortunately, if DeMelo continues is baffling plummet into mediocrity, Chevy will need to find a solution to pair with Morrissey. Right now, DeMelo is sinking that pair and eliminating Morrissey's effectiveness as teams exploit DeMelo and make the game much more challenging for Morrissey.

I think the plan this season was to make room. When they moved on from Schmidt and Dillon it opened up space for Samberg to step into the top 4 (big win so far), and it cleared up space on the bottom paring to allow two former 1st round picks to get more games. Miller, and Fleury were brought in to round our the 5 through 9 depth on D. This season its time to piss or get off the pot and find out what we have (my guess anyways).

So far Stanley is still a 7-8 type and I'll circle around on Heinola once he gets about 40 games under his belt.

With Ville last night he was showing that he wasn't scared to physically engage and he passed that test even though he ended up on the worst end of it while initiating contact. When you are the size of Morrissey or Heinola you don't need to body check larger players because it usually doesn't work out well. You need to use physical "technique" that plays to your strengths. That is the part Ville will need to get figured out. Late in the second period he had a shift where he got aggressive driving then supporting the attack. It created one of the only scoring opportunities for the Jets that period. He is fortunate to have a ring side seat to watch a guy his size play the game at the highest level night in night out. I have zero idea how it will play out for Ville this season.

The DeMelo slump/struggles make no sense to me. He has had a large sample size of playing predicable effective hockey??

 

[BoneDocUK]

Without reading it, I'd just add that he's been anti-Stanley since before the pick itself, so there's bound to be some confirmation bias in there

You should read it. I see it's now posted above.

My digested read? Stan might have become a good bottom-pairing D; perhaps even a top-4 -- but even then, the pick leaves more convincing and (then and now) useful talent on the board. Some other ideas (with my own admittedly non-expert additions)

- Big D who score low pre-draft tend not to outperform their position

- Big D do not in fact have a slower development curve, and don't peak later

- Big D like Stan who have historically required optimized protection via carefully selected partners and game states, and still do at D+7(8?) are being flattered by their poor numbers -- they're even worse than they look

- Stan's underlying numbers to date are poor, have always been poor, and are likely to get worse and not better -- he's tracking below even a Beaulieu and more like a Bitetto/ Harrison -- so a below replacement level D

- He cost the player he was supposed to become in Kovacevic and another good bottom-pairing/ to top 4 PMD in Chisholm

- He might cost still other better players coming through

- Having to rejig the lineup to accommodate him -- see last night bit also last year's playoffs -- makes the team even worse and doesn't make him better

- Whatever he brings (a big body?) can be brought by other players at less cost to the org and team

NOTE: None of this is Stanley's fault. By all accounts he's a hard worker and a team player who has always tried to do his best to help in any way he can and done what's been asked of him. The situation sucks, but it's not of his making.

How much does this matter? Maybe not much, maybe quite a bit. The Jets with a big, mobile, mostly error-free RHD in place of Stan are a better team. Does it put them over the top? No, but this is small-market team that needs to tinker at the margins more than most. Carrying a player who makes them worse through his own play and by forcing other talent to play on their offside or be scratched to make room also makes the team worse.

If the Jets management and coaching staff know this (and they must now this), why continue?

MOO, IMO, I don't know shyte about hockey, etc.

 

[Buffdog]

Would you say that it might be conformation bias to have a position on someone's article before trying to read it?

No, that's not confirmation bias at all

Maybe prejudice?

Confirmation bias is when you cherry pick data to back up your opinion. Cognitive dissonance is when you ignore data that contradicts your opinion

In order to properly evaluate Stanley as a pick and a player, the best method would be to compare him to other players historically picked in his range (15th-20th overal)

Here's a list of the last 20 picks at 18 OA. Not exactly a bunch of superstars. Some panned out better, some worse

You should read it. I see it's now posted above.

My digested read? Stan might have become a good bottom-pairing D; perhaps even a top-4 -- but even then, the pick leaves more convincing and (then and now) useful talent on the board. Some other ideas (with my own admittedly non-expert additions)

- Big D who score low pre-draft tend not to outperform their position

- Big D do not in fact have a slower development curve, and don't peak later

- Big D like Stan who have historically required optimized protection via carefully selected partners and game states, and still do at D+7 are being flattered by their poor numbers -- they're even worse than they look

- Stan's underlying numbers to date are poor, have always been poor, and are likely to get worse and not better -- he's tracking below even a Beaulieu and more like a Bitetto/ Harrison -- so a below replacement level D

- He cost the player he was supposed to become in Kovacevic and another good bottom-pairing/ to top 4 PMD in Chisholm

- He might cost still other better players coming through

- Having to rejig the lineup to accommodate him -- see last night bit also last year's playoffs -- makes the team even worse and doesn't make him better

- Whatever he brings (a big body?) can be brought by other players at less cost to the org and team

NOTE: None of this is Stanley's fault. By all accounts he's a hard worker and a team player who has always tried to do his best to help in any way he can and done what's been asked of him. The situation sucks, but it's not of his making.

How much does this matter? Maybe not much, maybe quite a bit. The Jets with a big, mobile, mostly error-free RHD in place of Stan are a better team. Does it put them over the top? No, but this is small-market team that needs to tinker at the margins more than most. Carrying a player who makes them worse through his own play and by forcing other talent to play on their offside or be scratched to make room also makes the team worse.

If the Jets management and coaching staff know this (and they must now this), why continue?

MOO, IMO, I don't know shyte about hockey, etc.

That's a great take, thanks

What i don't understand is why there's so much hate around Stan when every team whiffs on picks, even in the first round.

It sounds weird, but I actually think that there's a bias against Stanley because he's big. If he was a 6'1 defender with the same career trajectory, then i don't think we'd see the same backlash

Plus, everyone's favorite pet prospects on here have always been on the smaller side. I think of Petan, Nike, Dano, Chibs, etc... there's something alluring about cheering for the underdog I guess

 

[Romang67]

No, that's not confirmation bias at all

Maybe prejudice?

Confirmation bias is when you cherry pick data to back up your opinion. Cognitive dissonance is when you ignore data that contradicts your opinion

In order to properly evaluate Stanley as a pick and a player, the best method would be to compare him to other players historically picked in his range (15th-20th overal)

Here's a list of the last 20 picks at 18 OA. Not exactly a bunch of superstars. Some panned out better, some worse

View attachment 939927

That's a great take, thanks

What i don't understand is why there's so much hate around Stan when every team whiffs on picks, even in the first round.

It sounds weird, but I actually think that there's a bias against Stanley because he's big. If he was a 6'1 defender with the same career trajectory, then i don't think we'd see the same backlash

Plus, everyone's favorite pet prospects on here have always been on the smaller side. I think of Petan, Nike, Dano, Chibs, etc... there's something alluring about cheering for the underdog I guess

Because they are still pretending like the pick was a good one. He's not a good player, he should not be playing in the NHL, and he's not on the verge of breaking out 8 years after he was drafted.

Vesalainen, a player drafted later than Stanley, has gone through the process of being drafted, developing, being given the chance to play in the NHL, being given too much rope, and being sent to the shadow realm.

The issue with the Stanley Experiment is that the Stanley Experiment is still going. We're still losing players because of the Stanley Experiment. We aren't losing players because of the Vesalainen experiment. That was just a waste of a first round pick.

 

[WolfHouse]

Without reading it, I'd just add that he's been anti-Stanley since before the pick itself, so there's bound to be some confirmation bias in there

Ah theres the @Buffdog i know... projecting your own bias onto others and then criticizing them for it haha - we are back baby!!!

 

[Flair Hay]

What i don't understand is why there's so much hate around Stan when every team whiffs on picks, even in the first round.

I honestly think its because it is still ongoing. No one is mad we whiffed on the pick any more. It's that we are still trying to develop Stan into a top 6 regular.

 

[WolfHouse]

Anyone can argue for Stan and @Buffdog can blah blah all he wants...

The org was ready to lose DeMelo to protect Stan - that should have been enough insanity right there... imagine how bad we would be today

then look at appleton, kovacevic, chisholm and now heinola...

There isnt one other team in the league that has given a bad player this much rope - look at jiricek trade

 

[Buffdog]

Ah theres the @Buffdog i know... projecting your own bias onto others and then criticizing them for it haha - we are back baby!!!

What's my bias?

 

[Buffdog]

I honestly think its because it is still ongoing. No one is mad we whiffed on the pick any more. It's that we are still trying to develop Stan into a top 6 regular.

Fair enough... but I think he's a 7th defenseman - which is better than lots of the guys who have been picked 15-20 in the last 10 drafts

I'm not disagreeing that on a contender, he shouldn't be in the lineup regularly. They seem to be playing him ahead of guys who have proven to be better options or who could be better options. I'm not sure why, but I sure don't get my panties in a bunch about it like @WolfHouse does

Anyone can argue for Stan and @Buffdog can blah blah all he wants...

The org was ready to lose DeMelo to protect Stan - that should have been enough insanity right there... imagine how bad we would be today

then look at appleton, kovacevic, chisholm and now heinola...

There isnt one other team in the league that has given a bad player this much rope - look at jiricek trade

Teams make mistakes with players all the time. Forcing stan into the top 6 when he shouldn't be is a mistake for sure, but it's not THAT big of a deal

Imagine paying Darnell Nurse 9M a year... that's the type of shit I'd be pissed about. We're talking about a bottom pairing guy that plays in maybe half the games and gets sheltered minutes (and did quite well with them at times last season)

The reaction just seems disproportionate to me

 

[Buffdog]

I'll just leave these here for the guys who prefer stats and models to the eye test. That GF% tho

 

[voyageur]

Anyone can argue for Stan and @Buffdog can blah blah all he wants...

The org was ready to lose DeMelo to protect Stan - that should have been enough insanity right there... imagine how bad we would be today

then look at appleton, kovacevic, chisholm and now heinola...

There isnt one other team in the league that has given a bad player this much rope - look at jiricek trade

De Melo isn't really saving the day. He did for awhile. But he's anchoring Morrissey this year, and I wonder if it is the coaching change, a different style of defense, and who is profiting from it, and who is suffering from it. I think if he had been taken in the expansion draft Samberg would have jumped on to the top pairing on his offside, which isn't bad. And Kovacevic would have got more playing time.

You could argue Travis Hamonic still playing with Jake Sanderson is a lot of rope. And Erik Karlsson's defensive game is a lot of rope.

Garret was right about Mark Stuart. Stanley is probably headed to that territory. Maybe a better PKer, but the Jets problems on defense go beyond Stanley. He's the tree, maybe the easiest to knock down.

I'd like to see what Heinola and Miller do as a pairing. To have 3 d-men who can skate on the left side, which worked early in the season. But I do think the Jets are trying to keep Josh off the PK, because a shot in the foot would probably end the season on a sour note. And that might be an analytical decision.

Seems like there is a bias in the league by some coaches to playing right side defensemen on their offside, even though it can be effective. Maybe it's old school coaching, because Scott Arniel came from an era when the majority of d-men were left hand shots.

 

[Gm0ney]

I'll just leave these here for the guys who prefer stats and models to the eye test. That GF% tho

View attachment 939954


View attachment 939955

I'd say Stanley's often a case of the fancy stats looking better than the eye test.

I mean...

 

[DRW204]

Jets GA (goalie influence) will always be under their xGA (no goalie influence) bc of who is in net. With the Jets goalies probably will save more chances than average (hence large diff in xGA and GA)

GF over xGF is probably more dependent on who the fwds are for the average (and below) defenseman.

 

[WolfHouse]

De Melo isn't really saving the day. He did for awhile. But he's anchoring Morrissey this year, and I wonder if it is the coaching change, a different style of defense, and who is profiting from it, and who is suffering from it. I think if he had been taken in the expansion draft Samberg would have jumped on to the top pairing on his offside, which isn't bad. And Kovacevic would have got more playing time.

You could argue Travis Hamonic still playing with Jake Sanderson is a lot of rope. And Erik Karlsson's defensive game is a lot of rope.

Garret was right about Mark Stuart. Stanley is probably headed to that territory. Maybe a better PKer, but the Jets problems on defense go beyond Stanley. He's the tree, maybe the easiest to knock down.

I'd like to see what Heinola and Miller do as a pairing. To have 3 d-men who can skate on the left side, which worked early in the season. But I do think the Jets are trying to keep Josh off the PK, because a shot in the foot would probably end the season on a sour note. And that might be an analytical decision.

Seems like there is a bias in the league by some coaches to playing right side defensemen on their offside, even though it can be effective. Maybe it's old school coaching, because Scott Arniel came from an era when the majority of d-men were left hand shots.

stan was still ahead of samberg on depth chart

What rhd is playing their offside?

I'll just leave these here for the guys who prefer stats and models to the eye test. That GF% tho

View attachment 939954


View attachment 939955

What are you seeking to prove with these stats besides posting stats?

 

[WolfHouse]

You should read it. I see it's now posted above.

My digested read? Stan might have become a good bottom-pairing D; perhaps even a top-4 -- but even then, the pick leaves more convincing and (then and now) useful talent on the board. Some other ideas (with my own admittedly non-expert additions)

- Big D who score low pre-draft tend not to outperform their position

- Big D do not in fact have a slower development curve, and don't peak later

- Big D like Stan who have historically required optimized protection via carefully selected partners and game states, and still do at D+7(8?) are being flattered by their poor numbers -- they're even worse than they look

- Stan's underlying numbers to date are poor, have always been poor, and are likely to get worse and not better -- he's tracking below even a Beaulieu and more like a Bitetto/ Harrison -- so a below replacement level D

- He cost the player he was supposed to become in Kovacevic and another good bottom-pairing/ to top 4 PMD in Chisholm

- He might cost still other better players coming through

- Having to rejig the lineup to accommodate him -- see last night bit also last year's playoffs -- makes the team even worse and doesn't make him better

- Whatever he brings (a big body?) can be brought by other players at less cost to the org and team

NOTE: None of this is Stanley's fault. By all accounts he's a hard worker and a team player who has always tried to do his best to help in any way he can and done what's been asked of him. The situation sucks, but it's not of his making.

How much does this matter? Maybe not much, maybe quite a bit. The Jets with a big, mobile, mostly error-free RHD in place of Stan are a better team. Does it put them over the top? No, but this is small-market team that needs to tinker at the margins more than most. Carrying a player who makes them worse through his own play and by forcing other talent to play on their offside or be scratched to make room also makes the team worse.

If the Jets management and coaching staff know this (and they must now this), why continue?

MOO, IMO, I don't know shyte about hockey, etc.

Nice post

The jets had contact with garret at that point and would have seen this analysis and the girard/debrincat recommendation... someone staked their cred on stanley and needs him to pay off - is it zinger or hillie

 

[Buffdog]

stan was still ahead of samberg on depth chart

What rhd is playing their offside?


What are you seeking to prove with these stats besides posting stats?

I'm showing that despite all the hate directed towards him, the underlying stats say that he's not even our worst defenseman

Now... you're the one who trots out models that prove your point on Kova, but I'm almost positive that you'll find a reason why the stats don't reflect Stanley's play accurately. Somehow you'll justify things so that you have it both ways, which is the very definition of cognitive dissonance

 

[voyageur]

You should read it. I see it's now posted above.

My digested read? Stan might have become a good bottom-pairing D; perhaps even a top-4 -- but even then, the pick leaves more convincing and (then and now) useful talent on the board. Some other ideas (with my own admittedly non-expert additions)

- Big D who score low pre-draft tend not to outperform their position

- Big D do not in fact have a slower development curve, and don't peak later

- Big D like Stan who have historically required optimized protection via carefully selected partners and game states, and still do at D+7(8?) are being flattered by their poor numbers -- they're even worse than they look

- Stan's underlying numbers to date are poor, have always been poor, and are likely to get worse and not better -- he's tracking below even a Beaulieu and more like a Bitetto/ Harrison -- so a below replacement level D

- He cost the player he was supposed to become in Kovacevic and another good bottom-pairing/ to top 4 PMD in Chisholm

- He might cost still other better players coming through

- Having to rejig the lineup to accommodate him -- see last night bit also last year's playoffs -- makes the team even worse and doesn't make him better

- Whatever he brings (a big body?) can be brought by other players at less cost to the org and team

NOTE: None of this is Stanley's fault. By all accounts he's a hard worker and a team player who has always tried to do his best to help in any way he can and done what's been asked of him. The situation sucks, but it's not of his making.

How much does this matter? Maybe not much, maybe quite a bit. The Jets with a big, mobile, mostly error-free RHD in place of Stan are a better team. Does it put them over the top? No, but this is small-market team that needs to tinker at the margins more than most. Carrying a player who makes them worse through his own play and by forcing other talent to play on their offside or be scratched to make room also makes the team worse.

If the Jets management and coaching staff know this (and they must now this), why continue?

MOO, IMO, I don't know shyte about hockey, etc.

Logan Stanley has become the most fascinating player in Winnipeg Jets history, starting with the Cholowski debate that ran on for years and the path he became to blocking better players from getting into the lineup, to waivers losses and now the ongoing saga of why he is still here after all these years.

I don't know if Chisholm and Kovacevic as the 3rd pairing would be the elixir to bring the Jets to Lord Stanley's Cup. Did management make mistakes in their assessment? Probably have made many. They drafted Torgersson with Faber still on the board. Is there a player on the market who could improve the defense beyond Chisholm and Kovacevic, and Stanley? Conceivably there is.

 

[LowLefty]

De Melo isn't really saving the day. He did for awhile. But he's anchoring Morrissey this year, and I wonder if it is the coaching change, a different style of defense, and who is profiting from it, and who is suffering from it. I think if he had been taken in the expansion draft Samberg would have jumped on to the top pairing on his offside, which isn't bad. And Kovacevic would have got more playing time.

You could argue Travis Hamonic still playing with Jake Sanderson is a lot of rope. And Erik Karlsson's defensive game is a lot of rope.

Garret was right about Mark Stuart. Stanley is probably headed to that territory. Maybe a better PKer, but the Jets problems on defense go beyond Stanley. He's the tree, maybe the easiest to knock down.

I'd like to see what Heinola and Miller do as a pairing. To have 3 d-men who can skate on the left side, which worked early in the season. But I do think the Jets are trying to keep Josh off the PK, because a shot in the foot would probably end the season on a sour note. And that might be an analytical decision.

Seems like there is a bias in the league by some coaches to playing right side defensemen on their offside, even though it can be effective. Maybe it's old school coaching, because Scott Arniel came from an era when the majority of d-men were left hand shots.

I agree on your point about the Jets D in general - there are a lot of issues back there.
The discussions around Stanley are ongoing and will not stop - there are examples in recent comments where his decent numbers are pushed aside and his bad numbers are pure fact - and that will continue with many fans until the cows come home.

But as far as the big picture is concerned (which is all about the Jets D as a whole), the org is trying to get size into that group because it is desperately needed. And they are just as desperate to get Stan going to solve some of that issue.
Ville, OTOH, is going to have a difficult time - it would be one thing if he had at least some physicality in his game - but he doesn't - it is a complete miss in his game and the Jets are not looking for more lightweight offense on their blueline.

To make this as simple as possible: The Jets are not struggling with their dmen in the Ozone - it's the other way that is the challenge. The Jets get that - and are giving Stan a ton of rope to help with that problem. There is no doubt that Stan is struggling - the call outs are fair. But is anyone actually considering why they have him in the lineup and what the Jets need on their blueline. I don't hear much of that in the comments - there's no macro discussion on why he is there but a ton of discussion on why Ville isn't (more often). The simple answer is that they don't need more players like Ville - they need more players like Dillon.

Stan may not get there but at least there should be some discussion on why the Jets are investing heavily in this guy - it's not because they want to justify the pick or because they are stubborn, or because they can't gauge talent - you have to give a professional organization more credit than that.

 

[voyageur]

stan was still ahead of samberg on depth chart

What rhd is playing their offside?

The opposite of Stanley/Heinola would be Coghlan/Miller and not since preseason has a RD played their offside, but there was some decent results from all 3 of Coghlan, Lundmark and Salomonsson in that role.

 

[Romang67]

Miss me with the "the Jets need size on the backend, so the Stanley Experiment isn't dumb as shit" nonsense. 6'5 physical RHD Kovacevic was lost on waivers because of the Stanley Experiment. If the goal was to get a physical D-man with size, they had him right there. The goal isn't to get a physical D-man with size. It's to get Stanley to the level where he's a passable D-man. For whatever reason.

But hey, maybe with 10-15 years of development, he can develop into a passable bottom pairing D-man.

 

[snowkiddin]

Miss me with the "the Jets need size on the backend, so the Stanley Experiment isn't dumb as shit" nonsense. 6'5 physical RHD Kovacevic was lost on waivers because of the Stanley Experiment. If the goal was to get a physical D-man with size, they had him right there. The goal isn't to get a physical D-man with size. It's to get Stanley to the level where he's a passable D-man. For whatever reason.

But hey, maybe with 10-15 years of development, he can develop into a passable bottom pairing D-man.

Saw this posted elsewhere, but I think it hits the nail on the head:

“The Devils are one of the better teams in the league with Kovacevic, who we waived over Stanley, in their top 4

The wild just passed us in the standings and Declan Chisholm plays every night and quarterbacks their #1 PP on occasion.

When the Jets second pairing shutdown Dman breaks his foot, the AHL depth player we signed in the summer plays in the top 4 because Logan Stanley can’t be trusted to play top 4 minutes for 1 shift

Unfathomable incompetence”