Player Discussion: Winnipeg Jets Defense

[Gm0ney]

For long time followers of this story, he wasn’t just anti Stanley following his selection, rather Garret had heard rumblings that Chevy was considering drafting Stanley so wrote a story presenting a case to NOT draft him. This was prior to Hohl being hired by NHL teams to provide analytics, but when he was simply a hockey writer for Jets Nation.

Here is the link to that old story.


“Jets Nation Draft Preview: Logan Stanley could be a good player, so don’t draft him

And that story was a riff off of the Canucks Army post about not drafting Jake Virtanen (which the Canucks did anyway).

Jake Virtanen Is Good. So Don’t Draft Him

<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="//thenationnetwork.s3.amazona...

canucksarmy.com

 

[LowLefty]

I never saw any of Niku/Chisholm/Heinola lay a big hip check, block shot at any cost, or make hits on the boards to make plays, so that kind of comparison is a stretch.

A stretch is an understatement - those guys are not even defensemen IMO.
Defense used to be defending - now it's all about how many points can they get when they are not hemmed in their own end.

 

[Romang67]

Man, you juat won't quit

They waived Kovacevic becaue they had 3 vets on the right side and he had no chance of cracking the line up for 3 years, unless someone went down in injury

Left side was (going into the 2022-23 season)

Jomo
Dillon
Samberg (15 games NHL experience at that point)
Stanley

They didn't seven know how Samberg would turn out at the NHL level at that point. That's the one period in time where our RHD depth > LHD depth

Basically kovacevic was facing 3 years of popcorn duty if he wasn't waived.

And here we are, 2 years later, with a glaring opening on the right hand side. What are you talking about? Why would the front office have been unable to see a situation where injuries and continued regression of Schmidt made depth on the right side necessary?

Was the idea that in Stanley's draft+9 season, Dillon would walk to free agency, which means that he was much more important to keep around than Kovacevic?

We aren't talking Byfuglien, Trouba, Myers here. A trio of DeMelo, Pionk, Schmidt is neither impossible to crack, nor particularly trustworth in the long run.

A stretch is an understatement - those guys are not even defensemen IMO.
Defense used to be defending - now it's all about how many points can they get when they are not hemmed in their own end.

If only we had more players who couldn't move the puck out of their zone and we're forced to defend.

 

[DRW204]

I don't expect Pionk to carry anyone.

His numbers away from Samberg AND Fleury are also bad, but there we're down to about 75 minutes of ice time.

off quick glance they're mostly bad on the xGF side, which IMO is a bit more driven by the fwds, & the fwds have not been great lately due to ehlers out, and scheifele being injured.

i am just saying i don't think anyone should be expecting fleury-pionk to be replicating what samberg-pionk brought, b/c fleury is a massive step down.

 

[Gm0ney]

Man, you juat won't quit

They waived Kovacevic becaue they had 3 vets on the right side and he had no chance of cracking the line up for 3 years, unless someone went down in injury

Left side was (going into the 2022-23 season)

Jomo
Dillon
Samberg (15 games NHL experience at that point)
Stanley

They didn't seven know how Samberg would turn out at the NHL level at that point. That's the one period in time where our RHD depth > LHD depth

Basically kovacevic was facing 3 years of popcorn duty if he wasn't waived.

They had 4 or 5 guys who could've slotted into that 3LD spot at the time: Samberg, Stanley, Capobianco, Heinola, Chisholm.

Their right side depth after Schmidt was Kovacevic and then...I dunno, AHL nobodies like Gawanke? Lundmark?

At the time, people were saying it was short-sighted to waive Kova because there was f*** all for RD depth in the org.

 

[Romang67]

They had 4 or 5 guys who could've slotted into that 3LD spot at the time: Samberg, Stanley, Capobianco, Heinola, Chisholm.

Their right side depth after Schmidt was Kovacevic and then...I dunno, AHL nobodies like Gawanke? Lundmark?

At the time, people were saying it was short-sighted to waive Kova because there was f*** all for RD depth in the org.

Probably would have been difficult to get a mediocre #7-8 LHD if they had lost Stanley and kept Kovacevic though. Those don't grow on trees.

 

[scelaton]

For long time followers of this story, he wasn’t just anti Stanley following his selection, rather Garret had heard rumblings that Chevy was considering drafting Stanley so wrote a story presenting a case to NOT draft him. This was prior to Hohl being hired by NHL teams to provide analytics, but when he was simply a hockey writer for Jets Nation.

Here is the link to that old story.


“Jets Nation Draft Preview: Logan Stanley could be a good player, so don’t draft him

Ah yes, I remember that story well--it's worth a read for those unfamiliar.

The Cole's Notes version is that the majority of NHL-worthy defense prospects have enough pure skill to score highly in Junior hockey, even if they end up as defensive defensemen in the NHL.
Those, like Stanley, who fall below the cutoff, are unlikely to make it as a function of being less talented, regardless of other factors.

Also, there is a difference between confirmation of a hypothesis (which, in Stanley's case this is) and confirmation bias, which is looking around for shitty/low sample size evidence to just prove a point. The latter happens here in every PGT, but is not how real statisticians roll.

 

[MardyBum]

They waived Kovacevic to keep Capobianco, a guy who had never played a game for the org, and was a left shot. They went with 8 D, and we all knew Stanley was untouchable.

They had 6 of their 8 Dmen on the roster left hand shots with all their best close to ready NHL prospects(outside Kovacevic) lefties.

 

[WolfHouse]

What's my bias?

You just provided an opinion about something you didnt read based on your preconceived notion of what it would say... yet your main schtick is telling people they arent seeing the whole picture

 

[Buffdog]

And here we are, 2 years later, with a glaring opening on the right hand side. What are you talking about? Why would the front office have been unable to see a situation where injuries and continued regression of Schmidt made depth on the right side necessary?

Was the idea that in Stanley's draft+9 season, Dillon would walk to free agency, which means that he was much more important to keep around than Kovacevic?

We aren't talking Byfuglien, Trouba, Myers here. A trio of DeMelo, Pionk, Schmidt is neither impossible to crack, nor particularly trustworth in the long run.

If only we had more players who couldn't move the puck out of their zone and we're forced to defend.

It was the right decision at the time, but it turned out to be the wrong one in the long one. Is that so hard to say?

 

[Hank Chinaski]

Logan Stanley is f***ing terrible.

I’ve steered clear of the Stanley “debate” because it seems endless (and pointless). And I don’t like to invest a lot of time in bashing players that I truly want to root for. But we’re now at year 9 of this experiment and it’s so abundantly clear that he’s not an NHL defenseman. If you want to split hairs, he probably could eke out a 7D/8D spot on a tank job team that doesn’t care about winning.

Beyond disappointing to hear Arniel’s quote that he wants to keep him in the lineup, and “won’t get better sitting in the press box”. On the contrary, the Jets will be much better with him sitting in the press box, or better yet off the 23 man roster altogether.

 

[Gm0ney]

Probably would have been difficult to get a mediocre #7-8 LHD if they had lost Stanley and kept Kovacevic though. Those don't grow on trees.

They would only have had 4 themselves if Stanley got snapped up...

Like this really is embarrassing for the org - too stubborn to lose Stanley to waivers because what if he turns into a solid Top 4 defender, only to lose Kovacevic on waivers who subsequently (and basically immediately) turns into a solid Top 4 defender. Womp womp, Chevy!

 

[LowLefty]

If only we had more players who couldn't move the puck out of their zone and we're forced to defend.

Moving the puck is part of it - but I'd prefer the puck movers to be able to gain possession first - that's usually requires some defensive skills.
And that's usually the step that comes before you have an opportunity to move the puck.

The guys I'm talking about are not that great at that first step - they reply on actual dmen to do that work.

 

[Buffdog]

You just provided an opinion about something you didnt read based on your preconceived notion of what it would say... yet your main schtick is telling people they arent seeing the whole picture

But what specifically is my bias? Not what I did.... what's my bias? That Garret is "anti-stanley"?

Was I wrong?

 

[WolfHouse]

It was the right decision at the time, but it turned out to be the wrong one in the long one. Is that so hard to say?

Its not hard to say if it was true... but its not.

 

[WolfHouse]

But what specifically is my bias? Not what I did.... what's my bias? That Garret is "anti-stanley"?

Was I wrong?

Read the article then ill waste my time responding.

 

[Flair Hay]

Moving the puck is part of it - but I'd prefer the puck movers to be able to gain possession first - that's usually requires some defensive skills.
And that's usually the step that comes before you have an opportunity to move the puck.

The guys I'm talking about are not that great at that first step - they reply on actual dmen to do that work.

Stanley is one of those guys that needs others to get the puck back for him too

His reach helps on the PK, bit he is worse defensively than the guys we are scratching or overlooking for being bad defensively. That part is frustrating.

 

[Buffdog]

Read the article then ill waste my time responding.

So yes I was right

Here's the thing. Garret works in the hockey analytics industry. If he wants to procure work, the best way to do so is to write an article saying "See? I was right about this!" He has a vested in bashing Stanley

Its not hard to say if it was true... but its not.

You'd have kept redundant RHD even though he had no chance to break into the line up?

Had the pencilled Kova into thr line up instead of trading for schmidt that summer, it would be roughly equivalent to the Jets gifting Simon Lndmark a job this year on the 3rd pairing instead of signing Miller

 

[Buffdog]

They had 4 or 5 guys who could've slotted into that 3LD spot at the time: Samberg, Stanley, Capobianco, Heinola, Chisholm.

Their right side depth after Schmidt was Kovacevic and then...I dunno, AHL nobodies like Gawanke? Lundmark?

At the time, people were saying it was short-sighted to waive Kova because there was f*** all for RD depth in the org.

But what wpuld they have done with kovacevic? Sit him for 3 years, just to have him? Is that fair to him?

Once they traded for Schmidt, he was probably thrilled to be waived and claimed so he could play somewhere. That's what the waiver process is for

 

[Gm0ney]

But what wpuld they have done with kovacevic? Sit him for 3 years, just to have him? Is that fair to him?

He once they traded for Schmidt, he was probably thrilled to be waived and claimed so he could play somewhere. That's what the waiver process is for

Is it better to have 5 depth LD than 1 depth RD? Stanley got into 19 games that year despite being 4th on the depth chart.

 

[LowLefty]

Stanley is one of those guys that needs others to get the puck back for him too

His reach helps on the PK, bit he is worse defensively than the guys we are scratching or overlooking for being bad defensively. That part is frustrating.

As far as the org is concerned, they want to work with Stan - that should be obvious by now.
So it's really about what they can get from him - and less about what he is now - that was point I was trying to make in the prior posts but I guess it was missed.

 

[Buffdog]

Is it better to have 5 depth LD than 1 depth RD? Stanley got into 19 games that year despite being 4th on the depth chart.

I think at the time going into that season with Jomo, Dillon and 15 games of Samberg... yes, keeping depth on the left was a wiser choice.

 

[blues10]

I thought Stanley requested a trade out of the organization at some point in time? Chevy must have talked him in to re signing and redacting his trade request.

I actually expect Stanley to be part of the Oleksiuk deal at some point this season.

He has certainly been a polarizing player on HF since the minute he was drafted.

My eye test tells me that he is not a full time NHL d-man. His role is best suited to eating popcorn in the press box in his D+9 year.

 

[Bender Duster]

The past few pages have been a great read! It’s almost like the different views on Stanley are comparable to the stages of grief — denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.

Many are definitely going through anger. Those suggesting that he’s being showcased appear to be in the bargaining stage. Some have definitely reached depression…and a few are still in denial.

I’m almost at the point where I think he’ll retire as a Jet and be named an assistant coach so I guess I’n moving on to acceptance?!

 

[LowLefty]

I thought Stanley requested a trade out of the organization at some point in time? Chevy must have talked him in to re signing and redacting his trade request.

I actually expect Stanley to be part of the Oleksiuk deal at some point this season.

He has certainly been a polarizing player on HF since the minute he was drafted.

My eye test tells me that he is not a full time NHL d-man. His role is best suited to eating popcorn in the press box in his D+9 year.

He's a polarizing player mainly because he is one of those rare examples where there is a huge gap between the fans and the org on his use / value.
It's pretty obvious most do not want him here - but the org does (at least for now) - so expect the complaining to continue until either Stan gets better or the they move on from him.
Until that happens, you will be reading a regurgitated mess of posts all saying the same thing - over and over again. So hopefully one or the other happens soon because the Stan hate (not real hate, just hockey hate) has drifted into a lot of threads / discussions to a point where you can't avoid it.