Not when those stats tell half the story. Not every player that achieves NHL success, had major statistical success in their amateur days.
If stats are all that matters, reduce your scouting staff to minimal, in lieu of scouring stat sheets to determine the BPA.
Done a bit of research on Stanley, and he does fit a player whose role heavily influenced his output, not his skill. He rates average to well in skating and puck handling, has solid defensive IQ, and when his role increased in the offensiveness, he handled it well and showed he is capable of producing.
Size and strength are his key attributes, but ya, if he fully develops he could be a really solid big tough NHL Dman that we need on our left side.
The point is you could do that and beat half the teams, but that's an old argument here we probably shouldn't get Into.
Stats, including underlying ones that account for usage such as ppm etc, are generally more predictive then scouting reports.
It's IMO closer to 70%-30%
And when the numbers get farther apart, they become even more important.
I think stanly has a chance. I think he's a good prospect. I do not not believe he is I one of the top 36 prospects.
That said I wouldn't absolutely hate him at 36 depending who was left but there's likely to be a lot of guys I'd be far more excited to get.
It's likely there are guys I like as top 25s available at that pick , and passing on one of those for a guy Id out in the 45-50 range is my main issue fear
If magic my exact top 35 is gone at 36 then I don't hate that pick so much (as then it's reach of 10 as opposed to 20 in my rankings)
