Player Discussion: Heinola Thread

[Mortimer Snerd]

And whoever gets waived will be the new mikey or kov that we don’t hear end of.

Unless it is Stanley.
Or unless none of them is claimed.

At least Mikey and Kovy are taking the pressure off of Lee. I think it was getting tough on him at his age.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Heinola’s injury should give some bigger body defence men like Capo and Chis a chance to play. I think they are the future. Nothing against Heinola, but we already have Pionk. Heinola and Pionk bring the same game to the table. We only need one of them.

And that one is not Pionk. Another year after this one and he is gone anyway.
If Heinola is not substantially better than Pionk then he is no solution either - but from what he has shown in pre-season, he is.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I'd like to see the Jets get rid of their undersized defenseman, that are highly paid, and go with bigger more physical Dmen, unless they're very talented like Morrissey, then you keep those types of smaller type defenseman. Pionk and Schmidt are the next likely to go. I'd like to see Capo in the lineup. He has a great shot.

At 6'1, 195 Capo is right in that same size barrel as Heinola, Chisholm, Morrissey, Schmidt and Pionk. All are listed as 6'-6'1, 185-195 lbs.

 

[tbcwpg]

I'd like to see the Jets get rid of their undersized defenseman, that are highly paid, and go with bigger more physical Dmen, unless they're very talented like Morrissey, then you keep those types of smaller type defenseman. Pionk and Schmidt are the next likely to go. I'd like to see Capo in the lineup. He has a great shot.

Big physical defencemen are the most overrated thing in hockey.

 

[bumblebeeman]

Big physical defencemen are the most overrated thing in hockey.

Ya, Demelo isn't big, but he plays great defense. Stanley is huge and doesn't make the team better. Buff was huge, but was a defensive liability. Enstrom was tiny but played great defensively.

Vegas doesn't have any defensemen under 6'1" and that works for them. Colorado has two under 6 feet and that works for them. It's more about the players and how they are coached, than their size

 

[Buffdog]

I'd like to see the Jets get rid of their undersized defenseman, that are highly paid, and go with bigger more physical Dmen, unless they're very talented like Morrissey, then you keep those types of smaller type defenseman. Pionk and Schmidt are the next likely to go. I'd like to see Capo in the lineup. He has a great shot.

Our top pairing could be Stanley and Bauer

That would be WAY better

 

[MardyBum]

Big physical defencemen are the most overrated thing in hockey.

Yeah, it's big physical dmen that can do everything smaller skilled dmen can do that are the unicorns everyone searches for. I'm all for filling our lineup with 6 Hedmans

 

[Jet]

Big physical defencemen are the most overrated thing in hockey.

They aren't if they come with skill.

Pretending size doesn't matter is silly.

A 6 foot 190 lb Byfuglien would have still been a very good defenseman but not legendary.

Again, people are representing one attribute as a main definition of a player.

If you could take any player in the league, keep his other attributes but make him bigger, you'd do it in a second.

 

[LowLefty]

Stan was a long shot and they knew it now - more times than not, they don't pan out
But you can see what they were hoping for and it wasn't necessarily a star dman - just better than what they got.
Does the league over value large dman? Yes they do - because they are also hoping the skill will come with it through growth / development.
Because if you can catch lightening in a bottle and get both size and skill, you are getting what every team wants.

Ville is a great example of a smaller dman that needed to get bigger / stronger to be effective as a dman - and it looks like he was able to get that sorted out over the last few yrs. He looks a lot more comfortable out there after packing on a little more muscle - and that confidence might be the most important part. Because he did not look comfortable prior to this season.

It takes a lot of guts to chase down dump in's when you have a big winger barreling down on you from behind - and a lot of the work required to defend in your end, is easier with added strength. The scrums around the net, boxing guys out, battling for loose pucks along the walls, standing guys up when backing in, fending off the forecheck when you're trying to make that outlet pass, or simply coming out on the right side of any battle - all those things are easier if you have added strength to our skill game.

Very encouraging to see Ville take that step - hope he's back ASAP and picks up where he left off.

 

[MardyBum]

They aren't if they come with skill.

Pretending size doesn't matter is silly.

A 6 foot 190 lb Byfuglien would have still been a very good defenseman but not legendary.

Again, people are representing one attribute as a main definition of a player.

If you could take any player in the league, keep his other attributes but make him bigger, you'd do it in a second.

If they came with skill no one would call them "big physical dmen". They'd be top 4 dmen and/or Norris candidates, instead of the yearly lovefest we get for any dman over 6'2 who can throw a hit and get outscored 70/30 and gets cycled out.

The issue is they don't come with skill, and their physicality generally brings negatives defensively, and they don't provide any offense. Dillon is a very good example of what might be called a "big physical dman" and he's at best a 2nd pairing dman on a fringe playoff team. The best dmen are the best because of their brains, size just adds on to their advantages.

Find 6 Victor Hedmans for this team, find anyone who complains.

 

[tbcwpg]

They aren't if they come with skill.

Pretending size doesn't matter is silly.

A 6 foot 190 lb Byfuglien would have still been a very good defenseman but not legendary.

Again, people are representing one attribute as a main definition of a player.

If you could take any player in the league, keep his other attributes but make him bigger, you'd do it in a second.

Defencemen who are described primarily as big and physical generally don't have any other talent to describe them with. I don't have a problem with size, I have a problem with size for its own sake.

 

[Jet]

If they came with skill no one would call them "big physical dmen". They'd be top 4 dmen and/or Norris candidates, instead of the yearly lovefest we get for any dman over 6'2 who can throw a hit and get outscored 70/30 and gets cycled out.

The issue is they don't come with skill, and their physicality generally brings negatives defensively, and they don't provide any offense. Dillon is a very good example of what might be called a "big physical dman" and he's at best a 2nd pairing dman on a fringe playoff team. The best dmen are the best because of their brains, size just adds on to their advantages.

Find 6 Victor Hedmans for this team, find anyone who complains.

Wait, so, Dustin Byfuglien, Chris Pronger and Zdeno Chara weren't called big, physical defensemen?

I must be living in an alternate universe.

Also, when a guy like Eric Lindros was called a big physical forward - there was no negative connotation attached to that.

To me it's a pendulum swing because big guys without talent have been heralded by hockey managers and coaches for so long.

A big, physical defenseman who isn't even offensively gifted but is great defensively is still a real asset to a team, just as a smaller skilled defenseman who is great offensively but average defensively is.

The point I'm trying to make is that a blanket statement that big physical defenseman are overrated is a real blanket statement with no real value because it's leaving a lot out of the equation.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Wait, so, Dustin Byfuglien, Chris Pronger and Zdeno Chara weren't called big, physical defensemen?

I must be living in an alternate universe.

Also, when a guy like Eric Lindros was called a big physical forward - there was no negative connotation attached to that.

To me it's a pendulum swing because big guys without talent have been heralded by hockey managers and coaches for so long.

A big, physical defenseman who isn't even offensively gifted but is great defensively is still a real asset to a team, just as a smaller skilled defenseman who is great offensively but average defensively is.

The point I'm trying to make is that a blanket statement that big physical defenseman are overrated is a real blanket statement with no real value because it's leaving a lot out of the equation.

I’d take a defense man who is great at d vs a d who is great offense. Players get paid for more, and you are still paying for a one way d.

 

[surixon]

Wait, so, Dustin Byfuglien, Chris Pronger and Zdeno Chara weren't called big, physical defensemen?

I must be living in an alternate universe.

Also, when a guy like Eric Lindros was called a big physical forward - there was no negative connotation attached to that.

To me it's a pendulum swing because big guys without talent have been heralded by hockey managers and coaches for so long.

A big, physical defenseman who isn't even offensively gifted but is great defensively is still a real asset to a team, just as a smaller skilled defenseman who is great offensively but average defensively is.

The point I'm trying to make is that a blanket statement that big physical defenseman are overrated is a real blanket statement with no real value because it's leaving a lot out of the equation.

The issue is that as you mention size is an overvalued attribute. It's to the point where imo it is the most overvalued attribute by coaches and GMs. It's how bad players like Stanley get multiple opportunities, it's why a gar inferior player like Chariot is worth a 1st at the deadline and nearly 5 million in salary while DeMelo is worth a 3rd and around 3 million in salary.

Clearly big and physical players who can play is an attribute all teams want. The issue is players get more opportunities if they are big and physical, even if that is all they are.

 

[Jet]

The issue is that as you mention size is an overvalued attribute. It's to the point where imo it is the most overvalued attribute by coaches and GMs. It's how bad players like Stanley get multiple opportunities, it's why a gar inferior player like Chariot is worth a 1st at the deadline and nearly 5 million in salary while DeMelo is worth a 3rd and around 3 million in salary.

Clearly big and physical players who can play is an attribute all teams want. The issue is players get more opportunities if they are big and physical, even if that is all they are.

Here's a question though: would you take a big player who has low skill or a small player that has low skill?

Size is but one attribute, that's the point I'm trying to make.

Bigger players are inherently more durable, harder to attack, have a longer reach, and can inflict more punishment on the opposition.

Is useless on its own, just as if Elvis Stoyko played hockey. A fantastic skater but that on its own isn't enough.

Saying big physical defensemen are overrated is in a sense true - but there is a reason for it. Any player regardless of stature needs to have other elite skill to be effective. Size is a useful bonus.

Also, to be clear, any player who makes the nhl is highly skilled in hockey. They may not translate that skill effectively at that level, or be significantly lower vs. their peers, but they are skilled.

In most cases it's whether that player can find a way to maximize their skills and minimize their deficiencies.

 

[surixon]

Here's a question though: would you take a big player who has low skill or a small player that has low skill?

Size is but one attribute, that's the point I'm trying to make.

Bigger players are inherently more durable, harder to attack, have a longer reach, and can inflict more punishment on the opposition.

Is useless on its own, just as if Elvis Stoyko played hockey. A fantastic skater but that on its own isn't enough.

Saying big physical defensemen are overrated is in a sense true - but there is a reason for it. Any player regardless of stature needs to have other elite skill to be effective. Size is a useful bonus.

Also, to be clear, any player who makes the nhl is highly skilled in hockey. They may not translate that skill effectively at that level, or be significantly lower vs. their peers, but they are skilled.

In most cases it's whether that player can find a way to maximize their skills and minimize their deficiencies.

I'd take neither. There are enough players out there that it isn't an either or question to me. When I talk unskilled it's relative to their NHL peers.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Wait, so, Dustin Byfuglien, Chris Pronger and Zdeno Chara weren't called big, physical defensemen?

I must be living in an alternate universe.

Also, when a guy like Eric Lindros was called a big physical forward - there was no negative connotation attached to that.

To me it's a pendulum swing because big guys without talent have been heralded by hockey managers and coaches for so long.

A big, physical defenseman who isn't even offensively gifted but is great defensively is still a real asset to a team, just as a smaller skilled defenseman who is great offensively but average defensively is.

The point I'm trying to make is that a blanket statement that big physical defenseman are overrated is a real blanket statement with no real value because it's leaving a lot out of the equation.

Re: your last para
You point out that there are some who are described as big, physical Dmen (or forwards) who are also skilled, either defensively or offensively, sometimes both. Quite true. That doesn't disprove the statement that big, physical Dmen are overvalued. They are, because they often lack that offensive or defensive skill. They are just big, physical players. Exceptions don't disprove the rule.

Then we have Stanley who was drafted as a big, physical Dman in the hope that skill would develop. He does have some skill, both offensively and defensively but not enough of either. And it turns out he is big but not even all that physical.

 

[Jet]

I'd take neither. There are enough players out there that it isn't an either or question to me. When I talk unskilled it's relative to their NHL peers.

Lol. I'm saying, if you HAD to take one of the two.

 

[surixon]

Lol. I'm saying, if you HAD to take one of the two.

Well it's not really a choice though because small unskilled/ineffective players are weeded out at each level. Very few of them exist at the pro ranks. Big unskilled players keep getting pushed up the ranks. There are plenty of them in the NHL.

 

[Gabe Kupari]

Stanley likely saved by Villes injury

 

[HPsauce]

Stanley doesn’t stop the puck or the play half as well as Pionk does. Let that sink in… size doesn’t mean anything. Pionk is also far more physically engaged.

 

[DRW204]

speaking of... that was one of the uncanny things that buff did really well esp. on the PP. miss that guy.

Stanley doesn’t stop the puck or the play half as well as Pionk does. Let that sink in… size doesn’t mean anything. Pionk is also far more physically engaged.

 

[Jet]

Looks like Heinola had surgery and it went well, the clock starts now. Hopefully returns to skating in early December. If all goes really well we might see him play a game with the Moose after the Christmas break?

 

[cbcwpg]

As upsetting as that night was for Heinola, he is in better spirits now but remains frustrated with his situation.

“It’s tough for me. The biggest thing is I’ve been working so hard all summer, all preseason. I put in a lot of work and then the final (preseason) game just happened. So, I just feel like there’s so much work behind it and I felt like everything went well,” said Heinola from Pearson International Airport in Toronto on his way home to Finland on Monday.

“So, it’s been tough but, you know, it’s already been over a week, so I’m kind of hoping this time goes fast and I will come back soon.”

“I mean, yeah, of course I would like to stay in Winnipeg and play hockey but right now it’s not possible. So, it’s nice to go home and for me the biggest thing is just to be around the family,” said Heinola.

“I would be in my apartment a lot (in Winnipeg) probably thinking about things too much. So, it’s nice to go back home and see the family and be around them.”

 

[Flair Hay]

As upsetting as that night was for Heinola, he is in better spirits now but remains frustrated with his situation.

“It’s tough for me. The biggest thing is I’ve been working so hard all summer, all preseason. I put in a lot of work and then the final (preseason) game just happened. So, I just feel like there’s so much work behind it and I felt like everything went well,” said Heinola from Pearson International Airport in Toronto on his way home to Finland on Monday.

“So, it’s been tough but, you know, it’s already been over a week, so I’m kind of hoping this time goes fast and I will come back soon.”

“I mean, yeah, of course I would like to stay in Winnipeg and play hockey but right now it’s not possible. So, it’s nice to go home and for me the biggest thing is just to be around the family,” said Heinola.

“I would be in my apartment a lot (in Winnipeg) probably thinking about things too much. So, it’s nice to go back home and see the family and be around them.”

Man it's hard to hear this kind of stuff. I'm sure he is feeling his bad luck harder than anyone else.

Hopefully we bring him along slowly as he gets ready to return. He looked stronger and faster this fall, wouldn't want to have him playing anywhere short of where he was in the pre season.

Silver lining is, if there is any... 82 games can be too much of a grind on rookies. He will have some catching up to do. But if he can do that, he will have young fresh legs for down the stretch other may not.