Winnipeg Jets Prospect Thread

[YWGinYYZ]

Continued from here:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2045519

Click to read more...

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Originally Posted by Mortimer Snerd View Post
No. Sigh.
It was a simple statement to the effect that we have filled our need for a large quantity of NHL calibre Fs and that in future we need to concentrate on higher quality. Period. Simple. Straightforward. Apparently easily misunderstood.

That could take any of many forms. It could be done by trading up in the draft, for one example. It could mean bundling some assets together to acquire a more skilled player for another.

There was no criticism either stated or implied of our drafting, our trading or our prospect pool. The only thing said about our roster is that we have a large quantity of good young players.

I can't say it any more clearly than that.

@Sweech

That to me sounds blatantly obvious though.

Were you hearing people saying, "let's get a whole bunch of medium caliber players"? What brought you to go on that rant?

The whole lets package up some players and get something "elite" is an idea that permeates the entire league. Except no teams ever really tend to trade young elite prospects or picks where that level prospect is thought to be available without nearly equal "elite" level potential or ability going back in return.

The idea that "middle six" talent can be packaged up to return elite level players or top 3 picks is a myth.

OK, at least this is discussing the merits of what was said.

I'm not sure I remember exactly how it started. Another poster made a comment to that effect which was dismissed by a couple of replies. I stepped in to defend the point, as I understood it. My comment was taken for something very different than what I had intended. I tried re-framing it several times. And so on.

To some extent it is blatantly obvious and difficult to attain, but not impossible. The point is that our condition has changed. A few years ago we had a lot of gaping holes. We needed quantity. We now have real NHL players or prospects of appropriate talent levels for every position. The 3rd line can be filled by 3rd line players not 4th liners playing above their skill. You could argue that statement. If it is wrong then the conclusion that follows it is going to be wrong but I believe that is our situation.

It is difficult but not impossible to trade quality for quantity. We traded Kane and Bogo for 5 pieces in return. Those 5 pieces are contributing to the change in our needs. We have 3 of them playing mow and 2 more on the horizon. We now have some excess of assets that could be used to upgrade the talent level at some positions. Upgrading all the way to elite level is tough but we should still be trying. A higher overall talent level is still what we need. I used the elite word to make the point. So we need to try to move in that direction. Look for opportunities to trade quantity for quality wherever possible. The blatantly obvious part comes in because everybody wants that. 2-3 grade C players won`t get you a grade A but maybe they get you a grade B and maybe 2-3 grade B assets eventually get you a grade A. There are always teams with a lot of holes who may be interested in quantity. Maybe it can be done by acquiring picks or trading up in the draft.

If it is impossible then there is no point trying. If the only way to acquire top level players is through the draft we just have to wait until we get lucky in the lottery. Even tanking will not do it anymore. That isn`t very satisfying.

 

[Deif]

Wheat Kings vs Red Deer game 3 is on tv tonight.

Spacek has had a lot of scoring chances, but a couple of posts.

edit: He just potted one. Also had an assist earlier in the game.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Brandon Red Deer GM 4 on right now

 

[Deif]

Brandon Red Deer GM 4 on right now

Yikes. That Clague giveaway was something..

 

[surixon]

Yikes. That Clague giveaway was something..

Yeah he had a rough game in his own end. That no look backhand pass he tried to make all game always ended up on a Rebel players stick. I like his offensive skills but he has a lot of wrinkles to polish in his own end.

Patrick is an exceptional player, too bad I don't think we will be in the running for him next year.

Spacek made a couple of real nice moves. I think he will be much better next year now that he has a year under his belt.

 

[Daximus]

Point me to a single case of a players development being helped by continuing to play at a lower level. (add proof)

How good are junior coaches? How good are defensive systems in the CHL?

I think Parayko, Klingberg and Gostisbehre are proof enough. Unless you think they would have come into the NHL in their draft +1 and would be doing what they are doing now. By next season Parayko and Ghost will likely be in the top tier of defencemen of their class outproducing Severson, Dumba, Murray, Ceci, Maatta and likely catching up to the Trouba, Reilly, Lindholm tier.

Depends on the team. We get the vast majority of our NHL coaches from the junior systems so they must be doing something right.

 

[nobody important]

Patrick is an exceptional player, too bad I don't think we will be in the running for him next year.

Any team not in the playoffs will be in the running for Patrick. It is my belief that the Jets will again miss the playoffs next year. If I was an optimist, I would actually be thinking we could be the new Oilers, and win the lottery two years in a row. Maybe we just need to start the tank thread earlier. I mean, it worked on Chicago, right?

 

[surixon]

I think Parayko, Klingberg and Gostisbehre are proof enough. Unless you think they would have come into the NHL in their draft +1 and would be doing what they are doing now. By next season Parayko and Ghost will likely be in the top tier of defencemen of their class outproducing Severson, Dumba, Murray, Ceci, Maatta and likely catching up to the Trouba, Reilly, Lindholm tier.

Depends on the team. We get the vast majority of our NHL coaches from the junior systems so they must be doing something right.

Well both Ghost and Paranko were not asked to carry the load as Trouba has been asked to do the last few years. It's far easier to look impressive when your being sheltered as those two where. I think your overly impressive views on them are a bit premature. Ghost was put in the optimum situation to put up points, number 1 pp minutes and his zone starts where pushed heavily to the offensive zone. Even then he posted - rel possesion stats. I think his point totals have blinded people to defensive short comings in his game.

 

[EpicGingy]

A players most valuable production typically comes after 22 years of age so unless you have a guy down in the minors until hes 27 I don't think you are wasting valuable production years. You are only wasting valuable development years.

I don't think being 1 point over PPG in your draft year automatically qualifies you NHL ready. The funny thing is Pietrangelo did piss away another 2 years in the minors and went through injuries as well and ended up heads and shoulders the better defencemen when at the time the two of them were considered to be pretty close. Heck Bogo was in conversations to be better than Doughty at the time of their drafting.

Yeah were a draft and develop team, except when it comes to the development part because it's not important to a players overall abilities as they age. Just toss em' in the lineup and hope for the best.

I don't care where a players most valuable production years come from as long as they can provide production at any time. Otherwise we would have just left players like Ehlers, Trouba, and Scheifele in the minors for a longer period of time for the sake of "over ripening" (ie keeping them in a lower league after they've already proven themselves). In every over context people have always told me to challenge myself if I want to get better, why should developing players be any different.

As for your final paragraph I never said anything remotely resembling that. I'm saying if a player proves they're ready to handle the minutes at the NHL level in any fashion, even if they didn't dominate an earlier league, you give them that opportunity the same as others. Because being challenged at the highlest level you are capable of is the best way to improve. Not dangling around players who can't hold a candle to you.

 

[Gil Fisher]

Can't see Spacek going back to Red Deer. He'll either be with the Moose or in Europe.

 

[Daximus]

I don't care where a players most valuable production years come from as long as they can provide production at any time. Otherwise we would have just left players like Ehlers, Trouba, and Scheifele in the minors for a longer period of time for the sake of "over ripening" (ie keeping them in a lower league after they've already proven themselves). In every over context people have always told me to challenge myself if I want to get better, why should developing players be any different.

As for your final paragraph I never said anything remotely resembling that. I'm saying if a player proves they're ready to handle the minutes at the NHL level in any fashion, even if they didn't dominate an earlier league, you give them that opportunity the same as others. Because being challenged at the highlest level you are capable of is the best way to improve. Not dangling around players who can't hold a candle to you.

We did send Ehlers back after he dominated a junior league once so I think that just proves the point. Ehlers was by any account already over ripened. Scheifele was sent back twice so that again just lends to the argument of developing players.
This entire arrgument started over me sinoly stating that just because Chychrun has a mans body in absolutely no way means he's ready for the NHL and that by letting him develop in the minors he can learn to drvelop his finesse and IQ so he can be ready to shoulder a bigger load when he hits the NHL. Longer development has never ever hurt anyone in fact there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Can't see Spacek going back to Red Deer. He'll either be with the Moose or in Europe.

Not sure why he'd go back to Europe unless he's giving up his NHL dream.

 

[EpicGingy]

We did send Ehlers back after he dominated a junior league once so I think that just proves the point. Ehlers was by any account already over ripened. Scheifele was sent back twice so that again just lends to the argument of developing players.
This entire arrgument started over me sinoly stating that just because Chychrun has a mans body in absolutely no way means he's ready for the NHL and that by letting him develop in the minors he can learn to drvelop his finesse and IQ so he can be ready to shoulder a bigger load when he hits the NHL. Longer development has never ever hurt anyone in fact there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

Yeah but Ehlers was clearly not NHL ready after the first year anyways, if we're going with the "over-ripening" analogy he wasn't even ripe in the first place. In my mind (and this is probably where the difference of opinion comes from) if we were to over-ripen Ehlers we would have let him play in Europe this last year. Also Scheifele and Trouba would have played a year in the AHL (people thought Scheifele should have been there anyways). You're hyping up other players in Trouba's draft class but do you think they would be as highly regarded as Trouba if they were in the same situation as him here? If anything has held Trouba backs it's dragging Stuart and getting minimal PP time which isn't a player readiness issue but a usage issue.

For clarification, if Morrissey were to make the Jets out of training camp next year and play well, would you consider him over-ripened? Because in my mind that's just waiting until he's ready and giving him the opportunity.

 

[CaptainChef]

I think Parayko, Klingberg and Gostisbehre are proof enough. Unless you think they would have come into the NHL in their draft +1 and would be doing what they are doing now. By next season Parayko and Ghost will likely be in the top tier of defencemen of their class outproducing Severson, Dumba, Murray, Ceci, Maatta and likely catching up to the Trouba, Reilly, Lindholm tier.

Depends on the team. We get the vast majority of our NHL coaches from the junior systems so they must be doing something right.

I guess I remained unconvinced that these guys really benefitted that much if any by being held back as well. As long as a player isn't tossed into a situation where his confidence is totally destroyed, I'm also unconvinced it helps to have them playing at a lower level. As mc states, the coaching is often a lot worse & they are often allowed to develop bad habits that will need to be broken.

It varies greatly from one individual to another, but generally players develop more in a situation where they are challenged to reach higher than when they are allowed to coast and score goals with ease. Sure it may take D-men Parayko, Klingberg & Gost a few years to make it & now they look good, but for every one of those there's prospects who were rated high that never develop (whether they are in the minors and held back, or promoted too early).

Really, have to wonder if this business of ruining a player by promoting them too early isn't just a pile of hogwash. In some cases, it may in fact be true, but in more cases a prospect that is asked to play in the NHL before he's maybe fully ready (think of Scheif or Ehlers, maybe), take a half season or more to really get it & look pretty bad through some of that development, but can you really say there would have been a better way to get these guys acclimatized to the NHL.

 

[Daximus]

Yeah but Ehlers was clearly not NHL ready after the first year anyways, if we're going with the "over-ripening" analogy he wasn't even ripe in the first place. In my mind (and this is probably where the difference of opinion comes from) if we were to over-ripen Ehlers we would have let him play in Europe this last year. Also Scheifele and Trouba would have played a year in the AHL (people thought Scheifele should have been there anyways). You're hyping up other players in Trouba's draft class but do you think they would be as highly regarded as Trouba if they were in the same situation as him here? If anything has held Trouba backs it's dragging Stuart and getting minimal PP time which isn't a player readiness issue but a usage issue.

For clarification, if Morrissey were to make the Jets out of training camp next year and play well, would you consider him over-ripened? Because in my mind that's just waiting until he's ready and giving him the opportunity.

No because he hasn't proven in any capacity that he is "too good" for the AHL but hard to fault that on him entirely as that team was junk last year. If he went back next season and had a breakout year in the AHL and then the season ater that made the tean I'd consider that over ripened.
Everyone loves to tote the detroit model as the be all end all around here except for the part of actually following it to any degree.
Most high draft picks and come in and contribute on some level that doesn't in any way necessarily mean they should be here otherwise we could have likely put a number of guys in post draft year and let them learn the game because they won't learn anything in the minors.. but we don't do that. Because we know that merely treading water isn't necessarily good for a players development.

 

[Daximus]

I guess I remained unconvinced that these guys really benefitted that much if any by being held back as well. As long as a player isn't tossed into a situation where his confidence is totally destroyed, I'm also unconvinced it helps to have them playing at a lower level. As mc states, the coaching is often a lot worse & they are often allowed to develop bad habits that will need to be broken.

It varies greatly from one individual to another, but generally players develop more in a situation where they are challenged to reach higher than when they are allowed to coast and score goals with ease. Sure it may take D-men Parayko, Klingberg & Gost a few years to make it & now they look good, but for every one of those there's prospects who were rated high that never develop (whether they are in the minors and held back, or promoted too early).

Really, have to wonder if this business of ruining a player by promoting them too early isn't just a pile of hogwash. In some cases, it may in fact be true, but in more cases a prospect that is asked to play in the NHL before he's maybe fully ready (think of Scheif or Ehlers, maybe), take a half season or more to really get it & look pretty bad through some of that development, but can you really say there would have been a better way to get these guys acclimatized to the NHL.

Really you just have to look at any team that has rushed players to the NHL compared to teams that over ripen or ease guys in and the picture paints itself.
Were those players bound to be busts had they been developed more? Maybe.
But it obviously wouldn't have hurt anyone if they did. I mean if pkayer development in lower levels is as pointless as you guys say it is than I suppose might as well force every player into the league post draft and if they sink, then it was because they didn't have what it takes and if they rise to the top well then that'sgood because we weeded out the crap early.

 

[EpicGingy]

No because he hasn't proven in any capacity that he is "too good" for the AHL but hard to fault that on him entirely as that team was junk last year. If he went back next season and had a breakout year in the AHL and then the season ater that made the tean I'd consider that over ripened.
Everyone loves to tote the detroit model as the be all end all around here except for the part of actually following it to any degree.
Most high draft picks and come in and contribute on some level that doesn't in any way necessarily mean they should be here otherwise we could have likely put a number of guys in post draft year and let them learn the game because they won't learn anything in the minors.. but we don't do that. Because we know that merely treading water isn't necessarily good for a players development.

I know you're not specifically referring to me but personally I find the Detroit model to be incredibly overrated and wouldn't tout it as the end all.

There are no other post draft players that I would have considered bringing up this season and meet my personal expectations for what they should be able to do at an NHL level (taking into account projected NHL role). I'm sure Morrissey could have came in and played better than Stuart but I didn't consider him ready this year.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I think Parayko, Klingberg and Gostisbehre are proof enough. Unless you think they would have come into the NHL in their draft +1 and would be doing what they are doing now. By next season Parayko and Ghost will likely be in the top tier of defencemen of their class outproducing Severson, Dumba, Murray, Ceci, Maatta and likely catching up to the Trouba, Reilly, Lindholm tier.

Depends on the team. We get the vast majority of our NHL coaches from the junior systems so they must be doing something right.

What league did Parayko dominate before breaking into the NHL? He was drafted, went off to the NCAA where he was successful but not near dominant. Then a short, unremarkable stint in the AHL before breaking into the NHL out of his first TC.

Klingberg stayed in Sweden after being drafted, playing in a pro league but not excelling for a couple of years. His last 2 years in Sweden he was very good so was brought over to NA. He started in the AHL and excelled there so was quickly brought up to Dallas. He never dominated anywhere unless you count 10 games in the AHL. Short sample and he was immediately brought up when he started to 'dominate'.

The same goes for Gost. He did well in the NCAA but nothing I would call dominant. His arrival was highly anticipated but I don't know if a rookie season like he had was anticipated by anyone.

They all just arrived after a normal development period for D men, neither rushed nor over ripened.

They do nothing to prove your point. Each player is an individual and there is no magic formula that works for all.

We suspect that some players are harmed by being rushed. We can all think of examples. Usually with teams that are under pressure to produce something quickly. But there is no way of knowing how they would have turned out if handled differently. They may just be individuals who were overrated to begin with. Or they may have had attitudes that were going to lead to failure no matter how they were 'developed'.

The same applies to over ripening. We can find players who stayed in the minors a year or two longer than what might have been necessary and then succeeded. There is no way to prove that they would or would not have done just as well a year or two earlier.

 

[Daximus]

What league did Parayko dominate before breaking into the NHL? He was drafted, went off to the NCAA where he was successful but not near dominant. Then a short, unremarkable stint in the AHL before breaking into the NHL out of his first TC.

Klingberg stayed in Sweden after being drafted, playing in a pro league but not excelling for a couple of years. His last 2 years in Sweden he was very good so was brought over to NA. He started in the AHL and excelled there so was quickly brought up to Dallas. He never dominated anywhere unless you count 10 games in the AHL. Short sample and he was immediately brought up when he started to 'dominate'.

The same goes for Gost. He did well in the NCAA but nothing I would call dominant. His arrival was highly anticipated but I don't know if a rookie season like he had was anticipated by anyone.

They all just arrived after a normal development period for D men, neither rushed nor over ripened.

They do nothing to prove your point. Each player is an individual and there is no magic formula that works for all.

We suspect that some players are harmed by being rushed. We can all think of examples. Usually with teams that are under pressure to produce something quickly. But there is no way of knowing how they would have turned out if handled differently. They may just be individuals who were overrated to begin with. Or they may have had attitudes that were going to lead to failure no matter how they were 'developed'.

The same applies to over ripening. We can find players who stayed in the minors a year or two longer than what might have been necessary and then succeeded. There is no way to prove that they would or would not have done just as well a year or two earlier.

So what your saying is its entirely random? If so then there really is no point to development. If thats the case than why do we be patient with any of these kids? Stick them in the deep end first if they sink we can cut them early and not have to worry about wasting time with development and move onto the next one. After all there is no way to say for sure that developing their games at a lower lever does any good anyways right?

 

[Gil Fisher]

Not sure why he'd go back to Europe unless he's giving up his NHL dream.

Yes. So if given the choice between playing with the Moose and the Rebels, I think he'd take the Moose. But I don't see him riding the bus for another year.

 

[KoopaTrouba]

Can't see Spacek going back to Red Deer. He'll either be with the Moose or in Europe.

Is he eligible to play for the moose next year? Hell be 19 when the season starts, I thought you had to be 20 coming from CHL?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

No because he hasn't proven in any capacity that he is "too good" for the AHL but hard to fault that on him entirely as that team was junk last year. If he went back next season and had a breakout year in the AHL and then the season ater that made the tean I'd consider that over ripened.
Everyone loves to tote the detroit model as the be all end all around here except for the part of actually following it to any degree.
Most high draft picks and come in and contribute on some level that doesn't in any way necessarily mean they should be here otherwise we could have likely put a number of guys in post draft year and let them learn the game because they won't learn anything in the minors.. but we don't do that. Because we know that merely treading water isn't necessarily good for a players development.

What is this Detroit model you refer to? Is it getting lucky with Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the 6th and 7th rounds? Is it bringing Larkin in right out of the draft? They leave some players in the minors and they bring others up quickly. Seems to depend on the individual player to me.

 

[EpicGingy]

Is he eligible to play for the moose next year? Hell be 19 when the season starts, I thought you had to be 20 coming from CHL?

He was drafted out of Europe and only went to the CHL last season so that rule doesn't apply.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Really you just have to look at any team that has rushed players to the NHL compared to teams that over ripen or ease guys in and the picture paints itself.
Were those players bound to be busts had they been developed more? Maybe.
But it obviously wouldn't have hurt anyone if they did. I mean if pkayer development in lower levels is as pointless as you guys say it is than I suppose might as well force every player into the league post draft and if they sink, then it was because they didn't have what it takes and if they rise to the top well then that'sgood because we weeded out the crap early.

Nobody has said the bolded, or anything like it. Some players need more development time than others. Especially players with lower skill who need to compensate with experience and practice.