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

[Peggy]

The jets traded 2 non NHL ready assets for 2 non NHL ready assets.

Two for one for a player who's not gonna be ready for a few years is a bad deal

Don't scouts have him reported as a 3rd pairing dman?


A defenseman who can't skate and not a great scorer... yes give up your 2nd and 1st for him

 

[JetsFan815]

The bolded is factually incorrect. And I'll add that the main problem is that fans believe every Draft Pick will become a bona fide NHL player; when in fact, the Organization realizes that only 1.5 players per draft (per team) will succeed to any significant level (200+ NHL games). However, the rest of a draft crop can become integral members of an organization in other capacities (AHL players, mentors, future exec.'s etc.).

Obviously when drafting; the purpose is to find NHL talent, but it's done with the reality of that likeliness in the forefront (not a fan's strong suit ). To each his own.

So use a high pick(s) to draft someone to "fulfill the needs of your AHL team, become a 'mentor' and a future exec". Is that really what you are arguing here? The conversion rate of the draft a function of teams trying to find their best to get NHL players with each pick and the number of NHL players born in the birth year of the draft. No team goes in thinking "oh well we are only going to get ~2 NHL players, lets focus some energy on finding 'integral members of an organization in other capacities (AHL players, mentors, future exec.'s etc.)', if a team did that they'd be batting much below the NHL average at the draft. That is not the purpose of the draft, there are more effecient ways of finding people to run your organisation in the future than drafting 18 year olds in hopes that some day they will fulfill that role. How many non-NHL pieces drafted by successful teams are part of their organisational core? How many such pieces do Blackhawks, Kings, Red Wings, Habs have? Would love to hear a concrete number

I have no idea how Stanley will turn out. I do vividly recall that halfway through Schiefele's first full season with the jets - 2.5 years after being drafted - most on here wanted him sent down to the Moose and were still questioning the first pick for Jets 2.0...

It's been less than a year since we drafted Stanley. Patience, grasshoppers...

As has been pointed out multiple times in these threads, Scheifele comparison is bad. Statistically, Scheifele was a top 15 pick in that draft esp when you consider the context of it being his first OHL year. Realistically, he could have been drafted within 5 spots of where the Jets drafted him and not been a reach. Stanley would have been a decent pick a couple of rounds from the spot where the Jets drafted him. He is a completely different ballpark compared to Scheifele.

I think too many of us want instant gratification from our draft picks.

This has literally nothing to do with why people didn't like this pick. The guys that people wanted with this and #36 are similarly far away from making it to the NHL. Most people who are complaining about this pick didn't want "instant gratification", the objection was as has been stated multiple times- he was just not good enough a value at #18 (and downgrading a#36 to #79). Every single of the Jets 1st round picks has spent multiple years in the minors, if fans were motivated by "instant gratifcation" then every single one of the Jets picks would have been panned routinely, that is clearly not the case. Literally no one would be complaining if the Jets had just stood pat with their picks and drafted Rubstov and Clague instead and these guys are a few years away from the NHL as well

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Two for one for a player who's not gonna be ready for a few years is a bad deal

Don't scouts have him reported as a 3rd pairing dman?


A defenseman who can't skate and not a great scorer... yes give up your 2nd and 1st for him

They gave up two picks, and received two picks in return. The value of those picks is generally considered a wash.

Players selected mid to late 1st round usually have some gestation time, so the bit about "who's not going to be ready" is generally true of all but the top 1st round selections.

Note: I did not like the pick at the time, but I also think it's important to be accurate regarding those picks.

 

[Peggy]

They gave up two picks, and received two picks in return. The value of those picks is generally considered a wash.

Players selected mid to late 1st round usually have some gestation time, so the bit about "who's not going to be ready" is generally true of all but the top 1st round selections.

Note: I did not like the pick at the time, but I also think it's important to be accurate regarding those picks.

I'm not criticising Stanley for not being NHL ready btw

 

[ffh]

So use a high pick(s) to draft someone to "fulfill the needs of your AHL team, become a 'mentor' and a future exec". Is that really what you are arguing here? The conversion rate of the draft a function of teams trying to find their best to get NHL players with each pick and the number of NHL players born in the birth year of the draft. No team goes in thinking "oh well we are only going to get ~2 NHL players, lets focus some energy on finding 'integral members of an organization in other capacities (AHL players, mentors, future exec.'s etc.)', if a team did that they'd be batting much below the NHL average at the draft. That is not the purpose of the draft, there are more effecient ways of finding people to run your organisation in the future than drafting 18 year olds in hopes that some day they will fulfill that role. How many non-NHL pieces drafted by successful teams are part of their organisational core? How many such pieces do Blackhawks, Kings, Red Wings, Habs have? Would love to hear a concrete number



As has been pointed out multiple times in these threads, Scheifele comparison is bad. Statistically, Scheifele was a top 15 pick in that draft esp when you consider the context of it being his first OHL year. Realistically, he could have been drafted within 5 spots of where the Jets drafted him and not been a reach. Stanley would have been a decent pick a couple of rounds from the spot where the Jets drafted him. He is a completely different ballpark compared to Scheifele.



This has literally nothing to do with why people didn't like this pick. The guys that people wanted with this and #36 are similarly far away from making it to the NHL. Most people who are complaining about this pick didn't want "instant gratification", the objection was as has been stated multiple times- he was just not good enough a value at #18 (and downgrading a#36 to #79). Every single of the Jets 1st round picks has spent multiple years in the minors, if fans were motivated by "instant gratifcation" then every single one of the Jets picks would have been panned routinely, that is clearly not the case. Literally no one would be complaining if the Jets had just stood pat with their picks and drafted Rubstov and Clague instead and these guys are a few years away from the NHL as well

Really. Lots of draft rankings had stanley as a 1st rounder but according to you he should have been ranked in the later rounds. Lets look at mckenzies final ranking that year . He askes several scouts from different teams how they rank the prospects. Stanley was ranked 22. Thats 4 spots higher then he was taken. Hardly a bloody reach.Yet the player you suggest the jets should have taken instead of stanley rubstov was actually ranked lower by these group of nhl scouts. You may not like it but stanley was a legit 1st round selection.

 

[Sixty Minute Man]

Really. Lots of draft rankings had stanley as a 1st rounder but according to you he should have been ranked in the later rounds. Lets look at mckenzies final ranking that year . He askes several scouts from different teams how they rank the prospects. Stanley was ranked 22. Thats 4 spots higher then he was taken. Hardly a bloody reach.Yet the player you suggest the jets should have taken instead of stanley rubstov was actually ranked lower by these group of nhl scouts. You may not like it but stanley was a legit 1st round selection.

You're ignoring the lists that had him outside the first round, including, at least in one case, in the third round.

 

[Imcanadianeh]

Two for one for a player who's not gonna be ready for a few years is a bad deal

Don't scouts have him reported as a 3rd pairing dman?


A defenseman who can't skate and not a great scorer... yes give up your 2nd and 1st for him

The jets traded two draft picks (22 & 36) for two draft picks (18 & 79)

This wasn't a two for one deal like you keep saying it was.

All 4 players drafted with these 4 picks were not NHL ready.

 

[ffh]

You're ignoring the lists that had him outside the first round, including, at least in one case, in the third round.

The poster i was responding to suggested the jets reached to draft stanley. They most certainly did not.

 

[Peggy]

They gave up two picks, and received two picks in return. The value of those picks is generally considered a wash.

Players selected mid to late 1st round usually have some gestation time, so the bit about "who's not going to be ready" is generally true of all but the top 1st round selections.

Note: I did not like the pick at the time, but I also think it's important to be accurate regarding those picks.

I'm not criticising Stanley for not being NHL ready btw

 

[Say What]

So use a high pick(s) to draft someone to "fulfill the needs of your AHL team, become a 'mentor' and a future exec". Is that really what you are arguing here? The conversion rate of the draft a function of teams trying to find their best to get NHL players with each pick and the number of NHL players born in the birth year of the draft. No team goes in thinking "oh well we are only going to get ~2 NHL players, lets focus some energy on finding 'integral members of an organization in other capacities (AHL players, mentors, future exec.'s etc.)', if a team did that they'd be batting much below the NHL average at the draft. That is not the purpose of the draft, there are more effecient ways of finding people to run your organisation in the future than drafting 18 year olds in hopes that some day they will fulfill that role. How many non-NHL pieces drafted by successful teams are part of their organisational core? How many such pieces do Blackhawks, Kings, Red Wings, Habs have? Would love to hear a concrete number

Reading comprehension my friend. Don't try to use a false narrative to state something I clearly said was not the intent (Obviously when drafting, the purpose is to find NHL talent). What or where these individuals end up, is impossible to forecast. Yet I assume you're saying you know.

Let's say Logan Stanley only ever reaches the AHL level, of success. And as a member of TNSE he helps win a Calder Cup; does he still hold no value to you? This notion that every/most first round player(s) is going to make it, is unrealistic. If that's not how you feel (they all make it), then allow the kid to mature into what he will become.

Not liking the pick is irrelevant to the value that was attained by the Jets. Some picks eventually become a trade asset etc., that's the business of hockey. TNSE like the 30 other franchises, are supplied with 7 guaranteed assets per year (to spend as they wish). Your assessment of a particular asset's value (Stanley in this case) is compiled with incomplete and inaccurate information; and IMO, a personal dislike of the player (even though you've never met him), and that's your prerogative. Will Logan become what the scouts projected him to be? Time will tell.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

I'm not criticising Stanley for not being NHL ready btw

Then what are you doing?

Two for one for a player who's not gonna be ready for a few years is a bad deal

The rest of your message is incorrect, BTW: it wasn't a 2 for one - it was a 2 for 2, with the picks generally being perceived as having close to equal value.

 

[Sixty Minute Man]

The poster i was responding to suggested the jets reached to draft stanley. They most certainly did not.

On some scouting lists he was a huge reach, by others a modest reach and by some not at all.

What makes you right and the other poster wrong? You're making a huge assumption that the list(s) you've seen are more valuable than other lists.

 

[Daximus]

On some scouting lists he was a huge reach, by others a modest reach and by some not at all.

What makes you right and the other poster wrong? You're making a huge assumption that the list(s) you've seen are more valuable than other lists.

And that the Jets scouts have him pegged right because they've been right on 1st rounders since 2011.

 

[Whileee]

On some scouting lists he was a huge reach, by others a modest reach and by some not at all.

What makes you right and the other poster wrong? You're making a huge assumption that the list(s) you've seen are more valuable than other lists.

McKenzie and THN compile their lists from a panel of NHL team personnel. Both had Stanley ranked around 20, so it's very unlikely that the Jets were the only NHL team that liked him. It also suggests that those who might have had him as a third rounder were in the minority.

 

[Zhamnov5GoalGame]

This has literally nothing to do with why people didn't like this pick. The guys that people wanted with this and #36 are similarly far away from making it to the NHL. Most people who are complaining about this pick didn't want "instant gratification", the objection was as has been stated multiple times- he was just not good enough a value at #18 (and downgrading a#36 to #79). Every single of the Jets 1st round picks has spent multiple years in the minors, if fans were motivated by "instant gratifcation" then every single one of the Jets picks would have been panned routinely, that is clearly not the case. Literally no one would be complaining if the Jets had just stood pat with their picks and drafted Rubstov and Clague instead and these guys are a few years away from the NHL as well

Ummm what?

Scheifele was played slowly - 2 years Junior and then full time NHL
Trouba - 1 year back in college and then full time NHL
Morrisey - 2 years Jr & 1 year AHL
Ehlers - 1 year Jr and then full time NHL
Connor / Roslo - 1 year college then NHL / AHL split & AHL for Jack
Laine - Straight to full time NHL

So that's 1 guy with 3 years, 3 guys with 2 years after the draft, 2 guys with one year and 1 with 0. Stanley is at 1 year Jr and I'm fine if he needs another plus a year in the A.

So no not all of our draft picks have spent multiple years in the minors.
If we didn't get Laine then Connor likely gets a better shot at sticking with the Jets this past season. Luckily for us and him he got the extra time in the AHL to grow his game.

When it comes to the opinions of fans on these boards and our scouts. I'm going to give the scouts the benefit of the doubt 1000 times out of a 1000 over the fans. I wasn't a fan of the move at the time but realized that my limited knowledge of these prospects from trolling hockey websites really isn't relevant.

Lots of sure fire picks are busts.
Go back to Jets 1.0 or even the Thrashers and see all the bad picks that were made in the first rounds. (by just about any team)

Complaining about our drafting record is a "first world problem" in comparison to other aspects of the organization.

 

[Whileee]

Ummm what?

Scheifele was played slowly - 2 years Junior and then full time NHL
Trouba - 1 year back in college and then full time NHL
Morrisey - 1 year Jr & 1 year AHL
Ehlers - 1 year Jr and then full time NHL
Connor / Roslo - 1 year college then NHL / AHL split & AHL for Jack
Laine - Straight to full time NHL

So that's 4 guys with 2 years after the draft, 2 guys with one year and 1 with 0. Stanley is at 1 year Jr and I'm fine if he needs another plus a year in the A.

So no not all of our draft picks have spent multiple years in the minors.
If we didn't get Laine then Connor likely gets a better shot at sticking with the Jets this past season. Luckily for us and him he got the extra time in the AHL to grow his game.

When it comes to the opinions of fans on these boards and our scouts I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt 1000 times out of a 1000 to the scouts over the fans. I wasn't a fan of the move at the time but realized that my limited knowledge of these prospects from trolling hockey websites really isn't relevant.

Lots of sure fire picks are busts.
Go back to Jets 1.0 or even the Thrashers and see all the bad picks that were made in the first rounds. (by just about any team)

Complaining about our drafting record is a "first world problem" in comparison to other aspects of the organization.

Morrissey had two years in junior and an AHL season.

 

[Zhamnov5GoalGame]

Morrissey had two years in junior and an AHL season.

I edited my post almost immediately to reflect that but you beat me back in.

 

[ffh]

On some scouting lists he was a huge reach, by others a modest reach and by some not at all.

What makes you right and the other poster wrong? You're making a huge assumption that the list(s) you've seen are more valuable than other lists.

I guess the list that had him going at 22 and not in the 3rd round was a little more valuable. The only people that bring up lists are those who are unhappy with a pick. I love the pick can't wait till he is playing across from buff in 2 years.

 

[csk]

This has literally nothing to do with why people didn't like this pick. The guys that people wanted with this and #36 are similarly far away from making it to the NHL. Most people who are complaining about this pick didn't want "instant gratification", the objection was as has been stated multiple times- he was just not good enough a value at #18 (and downgrading a#36 to #79). Every single of the Jets 1st round picks has spent multiple years in the minors, if fans were motivated by "instant gratifcation" then every single one of the Jets picks would have been panned routinely, that is clearly not the case. Literally no one would be complaining if the Jets had just stood pat with their picks and drafted Rubstov and Clague instead and these guys are a few years away from the NHL as well

Only Morrissey, Connor and Roslovic have seen AHL time

 

[csk]

I guess the list that had him going at 22 and not in the 3rd round was a little more valuable. The only people that bring up lists are those who are unhappy with a pick. I love the pick can't wait till he is playing across from buff in 2 years.

I distinctly remember many people bringing up lists to prove how fantastic it was that Connor fell to us

 

[Daximus]

I distinctly remember many people bringing up lists to prove how fantastic it was that Connor fell to us

Yeah honestly we bring up lists to prove points. I wanted Johansen and Clague badly at the draft as they were on my list and we ended up with Stanley and Green. I'd still make that deal to get those two to this day without any hesitation.

 

[Sixty Minute Man]

I guess the list that had him going at 22 and not in the 3rd round was a little more valuable. The only people that bring up lists are those who are unhappy with a pick. I love the pick can't wait till he is playing across from buff in 2 years.

Just because you agree with it, doesn't make it more valuable.

You're the one who brought up lists!

You can't use evidence to support your opinion while dismissing evidence that opposes it. That just being obstinate.

I don't think anyone here is hoping Stanley to fail, but the chances of him playing with Buff in two years is VERY unlikely.

 

[Sixty Minute Man]

McKenzie and THN compile their lists from a panel of NHL team personnel. Both had Stanley ranked around 20, so it's very unlikely that the Jets were the only NHL team that liked him. It also suggests that those who might have had him as a third rounder were in the minority.

I'm aware of how McKenze and THN compile their lists. I'm not arguing that other teams didn't like him. I'm simply pointing out the existence of other qualified opinions. It's also very likely that some in the Jets (and other teams) organization valued Stanley less. Being in the minority doesn't make one incorrect. Simply stating that a list had Stanley at 22 so he's not a reach is ignoring evidence.

 

[Peggy]

Then what are you doing?



The rest of your message is incorrect, BTW: it wasn't a 2 for one - it was a 2 for 2, with the picks generally being perceived as having close to equal value.

2 for 2 is okay then

Only saying if they offered up their 1st and a 2nd for a player who's not nhl ready isn't a good trade
Since you could get a 3rd pair defenseman who would make your team better sooner instead

 

[DEANYOUNGBLOOD17]

Yeah honestly we bring up lists to prove points. I wanted Johansen and Clague badly at the draft as they were on my list and we ended up with Stanley and Green. I'd still make that deal to get those two to this day without any hesitation.

I am with you with this statement.

Pre-draft I had pencilled these 2 players as our best option at 22 and 36.

I have multiple pre draft posts stating my desire for these players to be selected by the Jets.

It was not a BPA but a fill a big need in our organization picks. 50 % chance that one works out really well.

It was tough watching Clague play well for Canada in the WJC . .. knowing he should have been a Jet prospect if we had not traded up for Stanley. Stanley of course was not even highly considered for a roster spot on Canadas WJC roster.

With hind sight we could have taken Sam Steel at 22nd and had the leading scorer (centre) in the WHL last year ......