Winnipeg Jets select D Logan Stanley (1/18) Part II (Mod warning in OP)

[Whileee]

Umm no it's not. He is far more likely to be a Valabik than a Chara.

You could say that about the vast majority of prospects.

If Stanley busts (seems likely), the Jets and their scouting staff deserves the inevitable criticism. What will be more interesting will be if he turns out to be good. Should be interesting to see how that influences perspectives about the scouting staff.

 

[Daximus]

You could say that about the vast majority of prospects.

If Stanley busts (seems likely), the Jets and their scouting staff deserves the inevitable criticism. What will be more interesting will be if he turns out to be good. Should be interesting to see how that influences perspectives about the scouting staff.

They should get the accolades that come with identifying a high risk/high reward player, especially since they traded up to get him. But they should get the criticism that comes with a 1st round bust, especially since they traded up to get him. It will change my perception of them. But it doesn't change the fact that they've been lucky with most of our young potential impact players outside of Scheifele.

 

[BrianFromAIH]

Our future Sustr.

That's not too bad. Better than a lot of comparables we're seeing. Like Valabik.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

They should get the accolades that come with identifying a high risk/high reward player, especially since they traded up to get him. But they should get the criticism that comes with a 1st round bust, especially since they traded up to get him. It will change my perception of them. But it doesn't change the fact that they've been lucky with most of our young potential impact players outside of Scheifele.

I disagree with this characterization of the pick. He is high risk. If he pans out he is probably a decent 3rd pairing D, maybe a 2-3 pair tweener. That is not high reward. His absolute highest possible ceiling is well above that but that applies to every pick. Buff was taken in the 8th round. That made him low risk/high reward. Sami Niku probably has as much chance of becoming a top pair D as Stanley does. Stanley is high risk because he was drafted above where his performance to date warranted. He is no more high reward than any other pick.

 

[Daximus]

I disagree with this characterization of the pick. He is high risk. If he pans out he is probably a decent 3rd pairing D, maybe a 2-3 pair tweener. That is not high reward. His absolute highest possible ceiling is well above that but that applies to every pick. Buff was taken in the 8th round. That made him low risk/high reward. Sami Niku probably has as much chance of becoming a top pair D as Stanley does. Stanley is high risk because he was drafted above where his performance to date warranted. He is no more high reward than any other pick.

I can agree with that assessment.

 

[Whileee]

They should get the accolades that come with identifying a high risk/high reward player, especially since they traded up to get him. But they should get the criticism that comes with a 1st round bust, especially since they traded up to get him. It will change my perception of them. But it doesn't change the fact that they've been lucky with most of our young potential impact players outside of Scheifele.

I'll take consistent "luck" in drafting, since all drafting involved some chance. I don't like the Stanley pick because the odds are lower.

 

[Whileee]

I disagree with this characterization of the pick. He is high risk. If he pans out he is probably a decent 3rd pairing D, maybe a 2-3 pair tweener. That is not high reward. His absolute highest possible ceiling is well above that but that applies to every pick. Buff was taken in the 8th round. That made him low risk/high reward. Sami Niku probably has as much chance of becoming a top pair D as Stanley does. Stanley is high risk because he was drafted above where his performance to date warranted. He is no more high reward than any other pick.

I like Niku but I think it's a stretch to put him above Stanley, all things considered.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

What if Detroit didn't trade the Datsyuk contract and took Stanley at 16. ?? Stanley is a few years away and he's a project but so is every d man drafted after him.

 

[TS Quint]

Honest question: how did all you guys get to be experts on this kid? Sorry I didn't read the whole thread if that was included.

 

[Daximus]

I'll take consistent "luck" in drafting, since all drafting involved some chance. I don't like the Stanley pick because the odds are lower.

The chances of a player always falling to us or us winning the lottery is highly unlikely. So our scouts have to be able to identify the good players amongst the middle or late 1st round crop. So far they have Morrissey, Roslovic and Stanley out of those kinds of picks.

 

[Channelcat]

What if Detroit didn't trade the Datsyuk contract and took Stanley at 16. ?? Stanley is a few years away and he's a project but so is every d man drafted after him.

I'd be very interested to know if they wouldve taken Chychrun, Fabbro or Stanley. Also curious how the Jets had those 3 ranked.

 

[Romang67]

The chances of a player always falling to us or us winning the lottery is highly unlikely. So our scouts have to be able to identify the good players amongst the middle or late 1st round crop. So far they have Morrissey, Roslovic and Stanley out of those kinds of picks.

We took Connor at 17.

 

[JetsFan815]

We took Connor at 17.

Which falls in the category of a player "falling to us".

I like the Morrissey and Roslovic picks. It's just that the trade and the entire situation for pick 18 was so bad that it makes me nervous about everything. Plus that fact that Hillier apparently championed it is very concerning

 

[Gabe Kupari]

Look who was picked after Stanley tho. A bunch of guys who are 3 4 years away. If Jets feel that Stanley has the highest upside of the remaining D left... then I can't say it's a bad pick. We will see in 3 or 4 years.

 

[Whileee]

The chances of a player always falling to us or us winning the lottery is highly unlikely. So our scouts have to be able to identify the good players amongst the middle or late 1st round crop. So far they have Morrissey, Roslovic and Stanley out of those kinds of picks.

Lowry, Hellebuyk, Petan, Copp... I like those picks too.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I like Niku but I think it's a stretch to put him above Stanley, all things considered.

I didn't put him above Stanley at all. Lets say Stanley has a better chance of becoming a good 3rd pairing D. But neither has more than extremely long odds of ever becoming Top pair D. No one can calculate the odds for either of them doing that because it is beyond their reasonably expectable level. It isn't impossible for either. It is lightning striking though. Both are approximately the same reward. I'll give you slightly higher for Stanley but the reward is essentialy the same. Stanley's chance of achieving it is a little higher, perhaps. But a lot less was risked on Niku. He is low risk/low reward. Stanley is high risk/low reward. Unless there is a high probability of him becoming a high reward player in which case he is not high risk.

 

[Daximus]

We took Connor at 17.

He's a faller. Not clue who we would have taken if Boston didn't blow it. I lump Ehlers into that category as well because if Vancouver had any brains we likely end up with one of Virtanen or Ritchie. Laine ends up in the lottery category. Scheif is a reach but not a huge one, he was a late riser into the top 10 and he's definitely not a mid/late 1st pick. Trouba falls just into the early round and was BPA all the way. So that leaves Morrissey, Roslovic and Stanley.

 

[Daximus]

Lowry, Hellebuyk, Petan, Copp... I like those picks too.

All solid picks that go along with Green and Comrie as well but not 1st round picks.

 

[Daximus]

Look who was picked after Stanley tho. A bunch of guys who are 3 4 years away. If Jets feel that Stanley has the highest upside of the remaining D left... then I can't say it's a bad pick. We will see in 3 or 4 years.

Stanley is likely just as far away as the rest of them. It matters not how far away they are but how well they play when and if they get here.

 

[Whileee]

He's a faller. Not clue who we would have taken if Boston didn't blow it. I lump Ehlers into that category as well because if Vancouver had any brains we likely end up with one of Virtanen or Ritchie. Laine ends up in the lottery category. Scheif is a reach but not a huge one, he was a late riser into the top 10 and he's definitely not a mid/late 1st pick. Trouba falls just into the early round and was BPA all the way. So that leaves Morrissey, Roslovic and Stanley.

No evidence that the Jets would have taken Virtanen or Ritchie over Larkin or Fiala.

My view is that there weren't really any sure bets at 22 this year. There were higher probability picks, certainly, but I wasn't overly excited about anyone left except maybe Rubtsov, though he has question marks too. Jets took a big swing, probably erroneously. I don't like what it says about our scouting approach. I am a bit more encouraged that he doesn't look like a stiff based on a first live viewing at development camp. Let's check back in a year or two.

 

[scelaton]

Honest question: how did all you guys get to be experts on this kid? Sorry I didn't read the whole thread if that was included.

I don't think anyone is claiming to be an expert, although there are a number of students of the game here, who have done their homework.

No one knows for sure how Stanley will turn out, although he has a tough hill to climb based on his numbers. And while size is helpful to a degree, in the new NHL "truculence" is not necessarily an advantage and having your shoulders at your opponents' head-height is an ever-present risk to both of you...

Bottom line is this: No GM and no scouting department gets them all right. Chevy is inevitably going to fail on some picks so it shouldn't be considered high treason to opine on picks that appear patently riskier than others.

 

[JetsFan815]

No evidence that the Jets would have taken Virtanen or Ritchie over Larkin or Fiala.

For whatever it's worth during the 2014 draft Lawless said that the Jets intend to take one of Nylander or Ehlers if they fall to them or "take a flyer on Alex Tuch". Depending on how much inside info you think Lawless had, Tuch might have been the Jets guy if not for Nylander or Ehlers falling to them.

 

[PhilJets]

IMO

JETS don't need Stanley to point scoring machine.
That's Josh and Jacob and maybe LUKE GREEN's Job.

I'm going to be happy for him to turn out as 2nd pairing, shut down D.
That has some nasty edge.
He will put in a situation that needs physical force.
Don't expect him to be Chara but if he becomes more, that's a home run already.

Jets future D core
Trouba < hope to be CLEAR #1 D >
Morissey < 2 - 3 D man >
Stanley < 3 - 4 D man >
Poolman< bottom pairing >

So JETS actually need 1 more top pairing to be safe.
That can be Josh or maybe Stanley ( long shot ).

But who else in the Defense-men prospect group picked after Stanley has the potential to be a 1st pairing?

 

[Daximus]

IMO

JETS don't need Stanley to point scoring machine.
That's Josh and Jacob and maybe LUKE GREEN's Job.

I'm going to be happy for him to turn out as 2nd pairing, shut down D.
That has some nasty edge.
He will put in a situation that needs physical force.
Don't expect him to be Chara but if he becomes more, that's a home run already.

Jets future D core
Trouba < hope to be CLEAR #1 D >
Morissey < 2 - 3 D man >
Stanley < 3 - 4 D man >
Poolman< bottom pairing >

So JETS actually need 1 more top pairing to be safe.
That can be Josh or maybe Stanley ( long shot ).

But who else in the Defense-men prospect group picked after Stanley has the potential to be a 1st pairing?

I honestly think Green has a higher ceiling than Stanley.

 

[Whileee]

For whatever it's worth during the 2014 draft Lawless said that the Jets intend to take one of Nylander or Ehlers if they fall to them or "take a flyer on Alex Tuch". Depending on how much inside info you think Lawless had, Tuch might have been the Jets guy if not for Nylander or Ehlers falling to them.

I don't believe Lawless had the scoop on this for a second. He was also the guy who kept suggesting that the Jets were strongly thinking about Puljujarvi over Laine.