Prospect Info: Logan Stanley - Part III

[ps241]

Two steps forward this week then one big step back yesterday. It will be interesting to see who team Canada selects?

 

[Aavco Cup]

Two steps forward this week then one big step back yesterday. It will be interesting to see who team Canada selects?

For this board's rollercoaster of expectations

 

[JetsUK]

obviously, you want a player excelling now vs hoping he'll do so in 2-3 years. but i also am cutting him some slack.
post-knee surgery, you wonder how much he worked on his skating this summer. odds are, very little.
will he work on it for the rest of august? who knows.
he will get some work done during the Jets' training camp. still doubt he suits up for more than 1 pre-season game.
you can't teach hockey smarts or brains. so making a good pass, etc? that makes me happy. but some of these D gap issues do make me a bit nervous.

for those posting that blow by: i remember some Raymond Borque dude getting schooled.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR6ITTkmDqQ

Not to mention all the bonafide NHL D-men that Ehlers and other speedsters blow by 6 times a game.

He's going to have to improve his skating, positioning, and gap control, for sure. A month spent working with JMo's dad wouldn't go amiss. But he also played confidently and well for the most part, IMO, showed he can play with some of the best in his age group and built up some valuable experience. Hard to be disappointed with his showing overall I'd say (though many here will be).

 

[ps241]

For this board's rollercoaster of expectations

Well a rollercoaster ride represents a significant upgrade from the drop of doom ride he use to be on.

 

[garret9]

Not to mention all the bonafide NHL D-men that Ehlers and other speedsters blow by 6 times a game.

He's going to have to improve his skating, positioning, and gap control, for sure. A month spent working with JMo's dad wouldn't go amiss. But he also played confidently and well for the most part, IMO, showed he can play with some of the best in his age group and built up some valuable experience. Hard to be disappointed with his showing overall I'd say (though many here will be).

Getting schooled by one of the fastest skaters in the game != getting schooled fairly regularly in junior, and not just this show case.

I still hope for the best for Stanley but I remain skeptical that he was remotely worth his draft position.

 

[ps241]

Getting schooled by one of the fastest skaters in the game != getting schooled fairly regularly in junior, and not just this show case.

I still hope for the best for Stanley but I remain skeptical that he was remotely worth his draft position.

Yup he remains a long shot. Skating can be improved but the question really is how much, I guess we'll see?

 

[Joe Hallenback]

Poor game overall by Stanley and pretty much for everyone on Canada's defense.

Players get burned all the time nowadays since you can't grab anyone. Happens to best D men from time to time. Just can't happen ALL the time

 

[Daximus]

Getting schooled by one of the fastest skaters in the game != getting schooled fairly regularly in junior, and not just this show case.

I still hope for the best for Stanley but I remain skeptical that he was remotely worth his draft position.

Yeah for anyone who has been watching him enough this isn't some one off type occurrence from him. He gets danced fairly regularly in Windsor as well the last two seasons. There's a reason Windsor fans aren't all that thrilled with him when he's in the dzone. Similar to how we usually weren't all that thrilled when Stuart was pinned in the dzone. I'm pulling for the kid for sure, even though I despised the pick itself. He has a long long way to go. I refuse to be optimistic for the sake of homerism about him. I'd prefer people tell it like it is. There are still a lot of question marks surrounding him that he needs to prove to himself and all of his critics.

Samberg on the other hand has looked really good these last few days. He may be our best D prospect already.

 

[garret9]

I just wanted to add, since I was one of the first on the "don't draft Stanley at 22" train, that I've always thought Stanley was still a legitimate NHL prospect...

About a week before the draft:

One day and two years ago, Rhys Jessop (with some input from Josh Weissbock and Cam Lawrence) wrote one of the best prospect articles I have ever read: Jake Virtanen is Good, So Don’t Draft Him. In the article Jessop discussed how fans (and ultimately the organization) were making a mistake with their willingness to pass on the better statistical player when trying to use the draft to fill team need. He also also showed the importance of statistical analysis in drafting.

There’s a lot of talk out there about the Jets needing to go after a left hand defender, and there has been some I’ve seen pushing for the big 6’7 defender Logan Stanley.

The Jets, however, would be wise to avoid Stanley at 22 and here is why.


Before I continue, I would suggest reading the Jessop piece linked above, as there is no point in me rehashing everything that’s already been said. I will note some key points though and how they apply here.

This is nothing against Stanley, despite what some of this article may make it look like. The truth is that Stanley is still a legitimate NHL prospect that would be a welcomed addition to the Jets’ prospect cupboard. The issue is the opportunity cost in there likely still being better options available at pick number 22 and Stanley’s numbers need to be considered when taking player’s ceiling, floor, and likelihood of making the NHL as a regular contributor.

I get why there is the appeal. Stanley’s size balances out Jets’ top left-hand prospect Josh Morrissey. Even without knowing anything else, the thought of a 6’7 left hand defender playing in a top-four that includes Morrissey and Jacob Trouba is quite alluring. If Morrissey, Trouba, and Stanley all hit their potential ceilings, the Jets would be a hard team to play against for years.

The biggest issue with all this is that there is the need for a conditional qualifier with “if” which means there is a chance that it could not come to pass. Now, there is always chance with any prospect that they could become great or totally bust, but the chance is not equal in each case.

…and there are many signs that Stanley won’t be the best chance available.

Source: https://jetsnation.ca/2016/06/19/je...ey-could-be-a-good-player-so-don-t-draft-him/

 

[DK59]

I just wanted to add, since I was one of the first on the "don't draft Stanley at 22" train, that I've always thought Stanley was still a legitimate NHL prospect...

About a week before the draft:

Source: https://jetsnation.ca/2016/06/19/je...ey-could-be-a-good-player-so-don-t-draft-him/

I am not disagreeing with you about there being better players (or players with greater potential) available where the Jets picked Stanley but what does seem to be apparent looking back at the latter part of that first round is the absence of players that really stood out as being obvious choices. I think where we were picking at 18 there was the beginning of a tier of similarly ranked players that probably extended into the second round. None of these players available seemed to be close to sure fire NHL players from what I can see. I think the resulting void of difference maker type players allowed a player like Stanley, with his unique attributes, to stand out.

 

[CorgisPer60]

I'm still on board with saying that if Stanley becomes an adequate 3rd pair defender on the regular, I'll consider that pick worth it.

 

[puck stoppa]

http://www.tsn.ca/talent/charging-into-buffalo-canada-s-projected-roster-for-the-2018-wjc-1.823639

Button has Mahura getting last spot over Stanley.

 

[Daximus]

I am not disagreeing with you about there being better players (or players with greater potential) available where the Jets picked Stanley but what does seem to be apparent looking back at the latter part of that first round is the absence of players that really stood out as being obvious choices. I think where we were picking at 18 there was the beginning of a tier of similarly ranked players that probably extended into the second round. None of these players available seemed to be close to sure fire NHL players from what I can see. I think the resulting void of difference maker type players allowed a player like Stanley, with his unique attributes, to stand out.

What throws people off more is we used a 2nd rounder to move up to get him. They should have just waited to see if he was available and if not take someone else. Keep the 2nd rounder and take another guy.

 

[Whileee]

What throws people off more is we used a 2nd rounder to move up to get him. They should have just waited to see if he was available and if not take someone else. Keep the 2nd rounder and take another guy.

For what seems like the thousandth time, they didn't trade a second straight up to move up, they swapped a second for a third, and based solely on pick value they came out about even. The picks that were exchanged turned into Laberge (#36, Phi) and Green (#79, Wpg).

The Stanley pick was ill-advised, in my view, but the cost to move up wasn't a second.

On a somewhat related note, does anyone have an updated perspective on Cholowski? Is he in the running with Stanley for a spot on Canada's world junior team?

 

[Zhamnov5GoalGame]

What throws people off more is we used a 2nd rounder to move up to get him. They should have just waited to see if he was available and if not take someone else. Keep the 2nd rounder and take another guy.

I agree with this.
Two shots at players with similar ceilings or better instead of just one.
Plus one of those players may still have been Stanley. Even if it wasn't there was a cluster of D in that range and we could have 2 of them incubating instead of one.

But now we have our "one" and all we can do is hope that the faith our scouts had in him pays off.

 

[Daximus]

For what seems like the thousandth time, they didn't trade a second straight up to move up, they swapped a second for a third, and based solely on pick value they came out about even. The picks that were exchanged turned into Laberge (#36, Phi) and Green (#79, Wpg).

The Stanley pick was ill-advised, in my view, but the cost to move up wasn't a second.

On a somewhat related note, does anyone have an updated perspective on Cholowski? Is he in the running with Stanley for a spot on Canada's world junior team?

You might think it was a wash but many do not. The value of that 2nd rounder was worth more than the value of the 3rd rounder.

You can't just assume we would have drafted the same player at that spot. Maybe we take Mascherin, DeBrincat, Dahlen, Girard, Clague, Dube, Raddysh or a number of other guys who are tracking better.

Maybe instead of Stanley we get Howden or Steel.

Could have played out much differently. You can just point at the guys who aren't tracking as well and say see it could have been worse but then I can point to the guys tracking better and say see it could have been better. Really gets us nowhere.

 

[Daximus]

I agree with this.
Two shots at players with similar ceilings or better instead of just one.
Plus one of those players may still have been Stanley. Even if it wasn't there was a cluster of D in that range and we could have 2 of them incubating instead of one.

But now we have our "one" and all we can do is hope that the faith our scouts had in him pays off.

Whileee is right we did get Green to but we could have had two guys better than either of them. Just as much as it could have gone worse. Actually I think the odds of the Jets scouts picking two better players would have been much higher had they not traded up for Stanley and just let Detroit have him.

 

[Grind]

I still feel the jets moved up for Stanley because they unfortunately had mistaken him as being in that "tier" of dmen (cholwski? Chychrun,...I can't remember the names, all those dmen that went from 10-17).

The mistake is that they thought there was six good dmen, when there were only five, and they'd all already gone when we moved up

 

[Grind]

Also: ironically (maybe not the right word) laberg was exactly who u wanted with our second and Philly used it on him

 

[Whileee]

You might think it was a wash but many do not. The value of that 2nd rounder was worth more than the value of the 3rd rounder.

You can't just assume we would have drafted the same player at that spot. Maybe we take Mascherin, DeBrincat, Dahlen, Girard, Clague, Dube, Raddysh or a number of other guys who are tracking better.

Maybe instead of Stanley we get Howden or Steel.

Could have played out much differently. You can just point at the guys who aren't tracking as well and say see it could have been worse but then I can point to the guys tracking better and say see it could have been better. Really gets us nowhere.

I didn't say it was a wash, based on players selected. I said that purely on pick value, it was a wash.

 

[Daximus]

I still feel the jets moved up for Stanley because they unfortunately had mistaken him as being in that "tier" of dmen (cholwski? Chychrun,...I can't remember the names, all those dmen that went from 10-17).

The mistake is that they thought there was six good dmen, when there were only five, and they'd all already gone when we moved up

Bean, McAvoy, Chychrun, Fabbro were in the middle crop. I had Chychrun right up there with Sergachev and Juolevi was in the middle tier for me though. We all look to have slept on McAvoy a bit as I had him in the back of the 2nd tier.
I had Johansen, Clague, Girard, Dineen, Mete, Day in the 3rd tier. Cholowski Hajek, Krys, Green, Stanley and Hronek made up the next tier.
My rankings of dmen in order at draft day...

Sergachev
Chychrun
Fabbro
Juolevi
Bean
McAvoy
Johansen
Clague
Girard
Dineen
Mete
Day
Cholowski
Hajek
Krys
Green
Stanley
Hronek

I definitely slept hard on Fox, Mahura, Sambrook and Zaitsev. Hard to say if my pick of Chychrun as 2nd best dmen will pan out yet. Especially now that he is out indefinitely.

 

[Daximus]

I didn't say it was a wash, based on players selected. I said that purely on pick value, it was a wash.

I disagree.

 

[Whileee]

You might think it was a wash but many do not. The value of that 2nd rounder was worth more than the value of the 3rd rounder.

You can't just assume we would have drafted the same player at that spot. Maybe we take Mascherin, DeBrincat, Dahlen, Girard, Clague, Dube, Raddysh or a number of other guys who are tracking better.

Maybe instead of Stanley we get Howden or Steel.

Could have played out much differently. You can just point at the guys who aren't tracking as well and say see it could have been worse but then I can point to the guys tracking better and say see it could have been better. Really gets us nowhere.

....or Hajek, or Cholowski or Dineen, right?

 

[Joe Hallenback]

I liked Bellows,Jones and Howden where the Jets originally were. I also heard they like Tufte and I thought that was who they actually moved up for originally.

The 2nd rounder is what a 10 percent chance at a solid NHLer? Its meh territory and we have a deep prospect pool anyways so why not take that chance and move up

 

[puck stoppa]

I liked Bellows,Jones and Howden where the Jets originally were. I also heard they like Tufte and I thought that was who they actually moved up for originally.

The 2nd rounder is what a 10 percent chance at a solid NHLer? Its meh territory and we have a deep prospect pool anyways so why not take that chance and move up

I liked Howden, Steel and Clague as I watched them a lot in whl that year. I thought Jets moved up to take Bellows. And like Dax I really liked Chych that draft.