Winnipeg Jets Top 25 Under 25

[truck]

Let's look at this slightly different.

If a team wanted to trade for Lowry, what would it take to pry him from the Jets? What would it take to get Burmi? The Jets and other NHL teams, like many of us, likely value them very differently.

I'm considering that when doing a personal ranking of players. Regardless of box scores or fancy stats, teams would value these players differently. So Lowry would be ranked closer to the top, than Burmi, IMO.

I am not sure it makes sense to use an assumed 3rd party opinion to support ones own opinion.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

Just updated post with:

#7 Josh Morrissey

http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2015/9/2/9220413/winnipeg-jets-top-25-under-25-7-josh-morrissey

 

[Bob E]

I am not sure it makes sense to use an assumed 3rd party opinion to support ones own opinion.

Perhaps.

Though my thought is... it would take a lot to pry Lowry from the Jets. I'm sure most agree with that. It's also conceivable Lowry would be of interest by a number of other teams, who wouldn't mind acquiring him. He's a slightly more known NHL commodity than others the list.

Burmi is a bit of an unknown. Though, what we know is he did not produce at a level that would make him highly desirable on the trade front. And his production declined over the years.

Is it reasonable to think Burmi will produce more than Lowry, this year? Not so sure. I have many more questions with Burmi's production and value, than I do with Lowry. Burmi may surprise me and be a solid contributor at the NHL level, but I don't see him being better than Lowry at this point.

 

[Whileee]

Just updated post with:

#7 Josh Morrissey

http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2015/9/2/9220413/winnipeg-jets-top-25-under-25-7-josh-morrissey

When I see quotes like this, I just shake my head....

Flaws: Will he be able to handle bigger forwards in front of his own net at the NHL level? The jury is still out.

Do some people still believe that successful defense depends on "clearing the front of the net"? If so, Stuart and Harrison should be a dynamic pairing.

 

[Mathmew Purrrr Oh]

When I see quotes like this, I just shake my head....



Do some people still believe that successful defense depends on "clearing the front of the net"? If so, Stuart and Harrison should be a dynamic pairing.

cross-checking dudes in the back after they've gotten a deflection off is a highly effective psychological tactic....or something

 

[BrianFromAIH]

Nice write-ups!
Does Jansen Harkins remind anyone of Bo Horvat? It just seems to me he has a very mature grasp of all aspects of the game without being spectacular at any one thing. And he's big. And he can score.

He gives me that vibe as well, which is great because I really wanted Horvat back in 2013.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

When I see quotes like this, I just shake my head....



Do some people still believe that successful defense depends on "clearing the front of the net"? If so, Stuart and Harrison should be a dynamic pairing.

I think "flaws" is a poor choice of wording, maybe "concerns" would be more appropriate.

And even if its a regurgitated sentiment towards Josh, its a legit concern for smaller players, can they handle the bigger bodies that the NHL has?

Do I think its going to be a problem for Josh, most likely not, but until he shows us that it wont be a problem, it remains a concern.

 

[Whileee]

I think "flaws" is a poor choice of wording, maybe "concerns" would be more appropriate.

And even if its a regurgitated sentiment towards Josh, its a legit concern for smaller players, can they handle the bigger bodies that the NHL has?

Do I think its going to be a problem for Josh, most likely not, but until he shows us that it wont be a problem, it remains a concern.

Size and strength are important considerations, but not so that they can "clear the front of the net". It's better to have a smart player who knows which player to take and tie up a stick than someone who tries to try to run a guy out of the net front area. How many times have we seen Stuart completely miss an assignment in front of the net despite the fact that he's very active in "clearly the front".

 

[Hank Chinaski]

Size and strength are important considerations, but not so that they can "clear the front of the net". It's better to have a smart player who knows which player to take and tie up a stick than someone who tries to try to run a guy out of the net front area. How many times have we seen Stuart completely miss an assignment in front of the net despite the fact that he's very active in "clearly the front".

Bogosian was pretty bad for that as well, even though he's probably stronger than 95% of NHL defenseman. And then you look at a player like Enstrom who, even though he will inevitably get outmuscled by most forwards, is so adept at reading the play and cutting off passing lanes that it rarely comes to that.

It seems to me that the whole "crease clearing" mentality gained emphasis back in the 90s, when the entire NHL had such a collective hard-on about power forwards, and in turn, how to effectively defend them. The way the game is played now, it's really such a meaningless trait.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

Size and strength are important considerations, but not so that they can "clear the front of the net". It's better to have a smart player who knows which player to take and tie up a stick than someone who tries to try to run a guy out of the net front area. How many times have we seen Stuart completely miss an assignment in front of the net despite the fact that he's very active in "clearly the front".

I agree.

The size and strength issue for me is more of a concern on a player wearing down through the course of an 82 game season. And as a player wears down, they tend to make more mental errors that affect their decision making, positioning and reading plays.

 

[truck]

When I see quotes like this, I just shake my head....



Do some people still believe that successful defense depends on "clearing the front of the net"? If so, Stuart and Harrison should be a dynamic pairing.

I think a defender can have great success without this ability, but it never hurts to have one more tool in a tool belt. Surer and Chara do / did clear the crease we'll.

 

[truck]

He gives me that vibe as well, which is great because I really wanted Horvat back in 2013.

I like Harkins more than I liked Horvat on draft day.

 

[jetman]

These are the remaining players.

The actual order is my guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if your order is slightly different.

#8 Petan
#7 Morrissey
#6 Hellebuyck
#5 Lowry
#4 Burmistrov
#3 Ehlers
#2 Scheifele
#1 Trouba

2 for 2 so far

 

[scelaton]

I like Harkins more than I liked Horvat on draft day.

I certainly hope you are right!
I've followed Horvat closely since 2013, when he did a number on Scheifele and the Colts to win the OHL Championship and MVP award.
The other Wpg connection with Horvat is that he was essentially considered as valuable as our old friend Cory Schneider by the Canucks, who traded Cory to NJD for #9 OA. Schneider would have looked great between the pipes in Wpg for the last few years.
Oh well, guess we will have to live with Harkins and Hellebyuck instead of Horvat and Schneider.

 

[Bob E]

As a NHL defenceman, Morrissey will need to tie up the stick of the opposing player and be in good position to clear pucks. Enstrom does it. Morrissey should be fine.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

2 for 2 so far

Swap Burmi and Hellebuyck and I think you are right on the rest

 

[KingBogo]

Perhaps.

Though my thought is... it would take a lot to pry Lowry from the Jets. I'm sure most agree with that. It's also conceivable Lowry would be of interest by a number of other teams, who wouldn't mind acquiring him. He's a slightly more known NHL commodity than others the list.

Burmi is a bit of an unknown. Though, what we know is he did not produce at a level that would make him highly desirable on the trade front. And his production declined over the years.

Is it reasonable to think Burmi will produce more than Lowry, this year? Not so sure. I have many more questions with Burmi's production and value, than I do with Lowry. Burmi may surprise me and be a solid contributor at the NHL level, but I don't see him being better than Lowry at this point.

By how the organization talks about Lowry, I'd agree with you that if they had to choose between Burmi and Lowry they would choose to keep Lowry.

 

[truck]

I certainly hope you are right!
I've followed Horvat closely since 2013, when he did a number on Scheifele and the Colts to win the OHL Championship and MVP award.
The other Wpg connection with Horvat is that he was essentially considered as valuable as our old friend Cory Schneider by the Canucks, who traded Cory to NJD for #9 OA. Schneider would have looked great between the pipes in Wpg for the last few years.
Oh well, guess we will have to live with Harkins and Hellebyuck instead of Horvat and Schneider.

In his draft year, Horvat put up 31 ES points (.47 per game), accumulated a minus in ES situations and saw his team perform better with him off the ice than on (Relative ES goal percentage of -8). He did this as a 2nd line center.

Harkins put up 52 ES points (.74 per game - this is actually comparable to Domi), accumulated a plus in ES situations and saw his team fall of significantly when he stepped off the ice. His relative ES goals for percentage was second best in the league (+ 16%). He did this as a 1C.

They both have NHL size. Horvat is a little bit better of a skater and has a marginally better shot. Harkins is better in every other way. Better offense, better defense, better vision. Harkins presumably took tougher matchups too. He was his team's only option. Better player IMO. At least pre-draft.

 

[MrBoJangelz71]

Really like Horvat's game, and would be very happy if Harkin's game tranfers over to the NHL as well as Horvat's has.

 

[puck stoppa]

I like Burmi and Lowry but ahead of Connor, yikes! That will look silly in three years.

 

[KingBogo]

I like Burmi and Lowry but ahead of Connor, yikes! That will look silly in three years.

I would tend to agree. But I guess I put more weight on a higher ceiling than a higher floor? Of course I lean to the optimistic side.

 

[puck stoppa]

I would tend to agree. But I guess I put more weight on a higher ceiling than a higher floor? Of course I lean to the optimistic side.

Someone with elite qualities has a pretty high floor no?

 

[KingBogo]

Someone with elite qualities has a pretty high floor no?

That's pretty much how I see it. But you dream of the potential.

 

[puck stoppa]

• 
  

  That's pretty much how I see it. But you dream of the potential.

  
  Yup, and this kid has tons of it. He should be our #2 top prospect behind Ehlers and on this list should be much higher.

 

[truck]

I like Burmi and Lowry but ahead of Connor, yikes! That will look silly in three years.

That is the hope, but it is always just hope.

Even rock solid prospects (on draft day) have about a 20% of never making an NHL team or contributing in a meaningful way.

Also of note:
These votes we're compiled and averaged with absolutely no direction on what criteria was important. This is the average. People came up on either side.