Prospect Info: Jets Top Prospects Poll: #3 Prospect

Who is the Jets #3 Prospect?


  • Total voters
    130
  • Poll closed .

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,132
Predicting Niku has a breakout year. Ends up playing with Buff and good minutes. Learns to play good defense too.

Just a hunch.
I think that all Niku really lacks is the intensity and urgency to play defensively. Morrissey lacked it when he first made the jump to the NHL. Without that, opponents have too much time and space to make plays and can get to high danger areas too often. It's more an attitude than anything and Niku still lacked that last season. I hope the Jets can drill that into him through good role models and coaching.

Niku's skills with the puck are sublime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ocdaddy

heilongjetsfan

Registered User
Jul 4, 2011
3,591
1,578
Toss up between Heinola and Niku. Seems like Heinola has the higher potential, but Niku is closer.

Add Nikkanen. He's #5.
 

Holden Caulfield

Eternal Skeptic
Feb 15, 2006
22,877
5,473
Winnipeg
A fan you are not. I think you have to rank players where they fit. If Stanley can replace Kulikov, he is playing more minutes than any of the others players in this conversation, after Heinola and Niku. I don't think any of our forwards project in the top 9, outside of Veselainen. Although I am pretty high on this Skyler Mc Kenzie kid, as a goal scorer, with a nose for the net, that battled through injury, and getting above the vets on the Moose in the lineup last year. I expect a big jump from him and Suess if they start on the Moose. Appleton might develop into a checking line role. Spacek had a pretty weak camp, but I read that he finished stronger. Has some skilled hands, but learning the pace of the game is the key. We're probably not in agreement but that's ok.

I dont really have anything against Stanley but he isn't in conversation for top 7 prospect of the Jets. No matter how you rank them Vesailainen, Niku, Samberg, Appleton, Gustafsson, Heinola, Berdin are just better prospects. All have better upside and most are closer to NHL.

Stanley is coming along but his skating is far too poor yet to be considered a NHL option and the jury is really out if it will ever develop enough. If it does he might one day be a bottom pairing guy with a small chance of more than that. Hes a fine depth prospect (like a Spacek) but depth prospects are toss ups. He doesnt belong in the conversation with the Jets top 7 prospects just yet.
 

ps241

The Ballad of Ville Bobby
Sponsor
Mar 10, 2010
34,904
31,384
Predicting Niku has a breakout year. Ends up playing with Buff and good minutes. Learns to play good defense too.

Just a hunch.

I hope you are right because that would be a huge plus.
 

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,460
29,308
I dont really have anything against Stanley but he isn't in conversation for top 7 prospect of the Jets. No matter how you rank them Vesailainen, Niku, Samberg, Appleton, Gustafsson, Heinola, Berdin are just better prospects. All have better upside and most are closer to NHL.

Stanley is coming along but his skating is far too poor yet to be considered a NHL option and the jury is really out if it will ever develop enough. If it does he might one day be a bottom pairing guy with a small chance of more than that. Hes a fine depth prospect (like a Spacek) but depth prospects are toss ups. He doesnt belong in the conversation with the Jets top 7 prospects just yet.

Are you sure Gustafsson belongs there? He has skating deficiencies similar to Stanley's. Also like Stanley, he could jump up the list if he fixes that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heilongjetsfan

ps241

The Ballad of Ville Bobby
Sponsor
Mar 10, 2010
34,904
31,384
At least second. The more I see the better I like him. He may turn out to be the best D from this draft.

That is a very strong statement......To me Byram seems like a blue chip stud in a different class with this D crop but after that all bets are off. What are you seeing specifically that you really like about Heinola?
 

kittiecarlyle

Registered User
Nov 1, 2016
1,768
884
Are you sure Gustafsson belongs there? He has skating deficiencies similar to Stanley's. Also like Stanley, he could jump up the list if he fixes that.
When is the last time you've seen Gustafsson play a real game?

He doesn't have skating deficiencies period. Of course if one bases evaluations on out dated and poor pre draft posts by bad on line posters than all you're doing is blindly buying in to bad misconceptions.

Maybe if you wanted to actually be semi informed you'd check to see if that erroneous "fact" was still accepted by on line scouts and if it has actually been corrected by most who were wrong with that take. Or simply watch several games or him in person to see he has no skating issues. David Gustafsson doesn't have skating issues period.
 

Holden Caulfield

Eternal Skeptic
Feb 15, 2006
22,877
5,473
Winnipeg
Are you sure Gustafsson belongs there? He has skating deficiencies similar to Stanley's. Also like Stanley, he could jump up the list if he fixes that.

Gustafsson's deficiencies are different and less serious than Stanley's, IMO. Stanley's problem is that he struggles mightily pivoting, moving side to side, turning. Basically he lacks quickness. The is critical for a defenseman, particularly one that does not necessarily position himself very well like Stanley. NHL level forwards would expose this hard. Foot speed is not the easiest thing to improve. It can happen though.

For Gustafsson's problems were more in the an awkward skating stride. He was choppy. This is easier to correct with proper skating coaches, IMO. Speed is more his weakness, which is less neccessary as a forward than quickness for a D, IMO. He also brings far greater skills to the table outside of skating. Which is an important distinction. He has worked on it as well to it's not really an issue. There is skating which is easy to improve like Gustafsson, there is skating that is hard to improve like Stanley (stride v foot speed).

I find overall skating to be overrated as a attribute, particularly if you can bring other things the table. This is particularly for forwards. D it's more critical to be able to skate. Still though poor skating can be overcome by elite skills elsewhere. Gustaffson has signs of that. Stanley does not have signs of elite skill elsewhere, just signs of good skill elsewhere. That does play a part. And of course while I find it overrated, it is obviously important as the game is played on ice.
 

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,460
29,308
Gustafsson's deficiencies are different and less serious than Stanley's, IMO. Stanley's problem is that he struggles mightily pivoting, moving side to side, turning. Basically he lacks quickness. The is critical for a defenseman, particularly one that does not necessarily position himself very well like Stanley. NHL level forwards would expose this hard. Foot speed is not the easiest thing to improve. It can happen though.

For Gustafsson's problems were more in the an awkward skating stride. He was choppy. This is easier to correct with proper skating coaches, IMO. Speed is more his weakness, which is less neccessary as a forward than quickness for a D, IMO. He also brings far greater skills to the table outside of skating. Which is an important distinction. He has worked on it as well to it's not really an issue. There is skating which is easy to improve like Gustafsson, there is skating that is hard to improve like Stanley (stride v foot speed).

I find overall skating to be overrated as a attribute, particularly if you can bring other things the table. This is particularly for forwards. D it's more critical to be able to skate. Still though poor skating can be overcome by elite skills elsewhere. Gustaffson has signs of that. Stanley does not have signs of elite skill elsewhere, just signs of good skill elsewhere. That does play a part. And of course while I find it overrated, it is obviously important as the game is played on ice.

OK, informative. Thanks.

So Gus belongs ahead of Stanley. What about Kovacevic? Might he also be ahead of Stanley, or is he still too much of an unknown?
 

Holden Caulfield

Eternal Skeptic
Feb 15, 2006
22,877
5,473
Winnipeg
OK, informative. Thanks.

So Gus belongs ahead of Stanley. What about Kovacevic? Might he also be ahead of Stanley, or is he still too much of an unknown?

Kovacevic is probably in the tier with Stanley. I haven't hardly seen Kovacevic so take it with a grain of salt, but I'd likely rate Stanley higher based on playing at a higher level and having a better than expected rookie year in AHL. We'll get a better idea this year with them both in MB. Despite it being Kovacevic's rookie year though he is nearly a year older.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mortimer Snerd

ps241

The Ballad of Ville Bobby
Sponsor
Mar 10, 2010
34,904
31,384
Kovacevic is probably in the tier with Stanley. I haven't hardly seen Kovacevic so take it with a grain of salt, but I'd likely rate Stanley higher based on playing at a higher level and having a better than expected rookie year in AHL. We'll get a better idea this year with them both in MB. Despite it being Kovacevic's rookie year though he is nearly a year older.

I am expecting a solid season from Kovacevic. He plays a pretty strait forward game but he has skill and carried a huge work load on his College team. Time will tell but he has been my dark horse prospect for a while and I think he will be ready for his pro debut.
 

lomiller1

Registered User
Jan 13, 2015
6,409
2,967
That is a very strong statement......To me Byram seems like a blue chip stud in a different class with this D crop but after that all bets are off. What are you seeing specifically that you really like about Heinola?
The efficiency with which he moves the puck out of his own zone, even playing against men in a means league. Furthermore, he’s not just falling on skill or overpowering people with size or speed to do it. To me this suggests a very high hockey IQ and decision-making ability. It’s not like he lacks skill either. He may go under the radar (which isn't bad either) but IMO he'll be a #1 D-man 5 years from now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ps241

Holden Caulfield

Eternal Skeptic
Feb 15, 2006
22,877
5,473
Winnipeg
The efficiency with which he moves the puck out of his own zone, even playing against men in a means league. Furthermore, he’s not just falling on skill or overpowering people with size or speed to do it. To me this suggests a very high hockey IQ and decision-making ability. It’s not like he lacks skill either. He may go under the radar (which isn't bad either) but IMO he'll be a #1 D-man 5 years from now.

I don't even disagree but I think while this all may be true he still won't be the best D-man in this draft. Byram is too good. Absolutely elite potential. IMO Niku/Heinola/Vesailainen are really close in terms of this list, but only for different reasons. Heinola has the upside easily, but the lowest floor. Vesailainen has great potential and is close, but still presents a fairly high bust factor due to inconsistency (playing across so many teams last year didn't help that). Niku has the least top end potential of the 3, but is an NHL player right now with still plenty of upside.

I wouldn't have had Samberg in the top 3, even though he is a good prospect.
 

lomiller1

Registered User
Jan 13, 2015
6,409
2,967
I don't even disagree but I think while this all may be true he still won't be the best D-man in this draft. Byram is too good. Absolutely elite potential.

Byram certainly has elite talent belonged at the top of the draft, but the same was true of Zach Bogosian. The CHL isn’t a difficult enough league to really test the thinking and decision making part of a D-mans game. Players can get by on using size/speed/skill to overwhelm the players around them which can cover up holes in their decision making. They may not have any such hole in their game, but it’s more difficult to evaluate.

IMO thinking and decision making is the biggest factor in how a D-man will progress and it’s a little unusual to have a prospect where you can see it on display in an 18 year old the way you can with Heinola.
 

Holden Caulfield

Eternal Skeptic
Feb 15, 2006
22,877
5,473
Winnipeg
Byram certainly has elite talent belonged at the top of the draft, but the same was true of Zach Bogosian. The CHL isn’t a difficult enough league to really test the thinking and decision making part of a D-mans game. Players can get by on using size/speed/skill to overwhelm the players around them which can cover up holes in their decision making. They may not have any such hole in their game, but it’s more difficult to evaluate.

IMO thinking and decision making is the biggest factor in how a D-man will progress and it’s a little unusual to have a prospect where you can see it on display in an 18 year old the way you can with Heinola.

Always possible, but I don't quite see the same with Bogo as Byram. Bogo physically dominated the junior game. We can see this often that players that bull their way through junior can often struggle to adapt at the next level. Some do adapt (ie Ekblad) some don't. Byram depends on skating, passing, shooting and IQ. He also has a smart positional defensive game, which is more transitionable to NHL than a physical one. I mean Thomas Hickey happened as well which might work better for your example (of Hickey was a big reach as well but still). But Byram I think has legitmate Norris potential and I have a hard time seeing him bust to be honest. I have been really high on him all year dating back to last year. I was really hoping the Kings could get him cause Doughty would have been the perfect mentor for him.

We'll see though. It's foolish to rule anything out with 18 year olds.
 

Atoyot

Registered User
Jul 19, 2013
13,859
25,271
I miss when we had great prospects.
Later round great prospects don't reveal themselves as immediately. Overall our pool is worse for sure, but it's fun to see the prospects that we have develop. I'm very interested to see Wong and Smith take the step into the NCAA.
 

Whileee

Registered User
May 29, 2010
46,075
33,132
I dont really have anything against Stanley but he isn't in conversation for top 7 prospect of the Jets. No matter how you rank them Vesailainen, Niku, Samberg, Appleton, Gustafsson, Heinola, Berdin are just better prospects. All have better upside and most are closer to NHL.

Stanley is coming along but his skating is far too poor yet to be considered a NHL option and the jury is really out if it will ever develop enough. If it does he might one day be a bottom pairing guy with a small chance of more than that. Hes a fine depth prospect (like a Spacek) but depth prospects are toss ups. He doesnt belong in the conversation with the Jets top 7 prospects just yet.
I would also rank Kovacevic ahead of Stanley, but he's a bit of a dark horse for me...
 

Tommigun

Registered User
Jan 5, 2018
4,822
4,960
At least second. The more I see the better I like him. He may turn out to be the best D from this draft.

I had him at #1.

Think Vesalainen who topped that list is going to bust, been thinking so from the beginning. It’s the smirk I tell you.
 

Adam da bomb

Registered User
May 1, 2016
12,770
9,698
Wow, we were wrong. It would also be interesting if Samberg is still 2nd or if it's now Gus after Heinola.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad