Speculation: Jets General Rumour, Trade, Free Agent and Waiver Speculation 16-17 Part XVIII

[puck stoppa]

Career .917 and 395 games played. I'd take that.

I'm not opposed to him. Just mad we never grabbed him for free on waivers last year.

 

[Gil Fisher]

If we can sign Elliott, I'd like to move a winger for Haydn Fleury to address defence depth.

 

[Whileee]

If we can sign Elliott, I'd like to move a winger for Haydn Fleury to address defence depth.

Fleury is unproven at the NHL level and will be expensive.

 

[Gil Fisher]

Fleury is unproven at the NHL level and will be expensive.

Cheaper than Hanafin. About where Morrissey was a year ago.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Cheaper than Hanafin. About where Morrissey was a year ago.

Morrissey had a solid track record. Fleury has a real spotted record. I doubt he will be much of an NHL player, I'd only be willing to trade a fringe prospect for him.

 

[Gil Fisher]

Morrissey had a solid track record. Fleury has a real spotted record. I doubt he will be much of an NHL player, I'd only be willing to trade a fringe prospect for him.

I don't know much around the context, but Fleury had one of the best 20-year-old seasons ever in the AHL by 5v5 GF% on the ice versus off the ice.

I think he might be worth a punt. If he has a spotty track record, trade them Lemieux. If he's got a better than spotty reputation, something better (Petan, Armia, Dano...the usual suspects).

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Disagree on this assessment 100% Mort. I thought this draft really started filling the d prospect cupboard. Most pundits seem very high on Samberg. Big and athletic. Strong skater and moves the puck well. I think he would have gone higher if he didn't play high school hockey. I like that he is going to the NCAA next season. Kovacevic may be an overagger, but produced extremely will as a NCAA freshman last season. As well as you could hope even for highly drafted d. He was rising fast and it looks like we caught him just in time.

I think you also miss the value of Vesalainen to the Jets. In a couple years he will be a very nice middle 6 winger on an ELC. At that point all our young core will be on much bigger contracts. Allows you to keep bringing in good cheap players. The guy was an absolute beast at the U18. Top forwards at that tourny have a very strong track record of doing well in the NHL. And the only was we got Virtanen in the 4th as he basically had a 2 week season due to injury. Likely much higher playing a full season. The more I read up on these guys the happier I am with the outcome.

The next 4 are all long-shots but really nice haul at the front end.

Looking at the rankings services' assessments of our picks in rounds 2-4 is like looking at those for Detroits picks. I'm not saying they are bad players. I'm saying there were better available where we picked.
Josh Brook > Samberg
Evan Barrat > Kovacevic
Noel Hoefenmayer > Virtanen
2 D and a C all rated higher than the players we got. All available when we picked. No high school player risks. No overage risks.

Its hard to knock Vesalainen. He was BPA. But he is a horrible fit for our needs and as a LW will have relatively low trade value. I would have taken Timmins there. That might have been a mistake given Vesalainen's potential. OTOH the high opinions of Vesalainen are based mostly on a 6 game sample at the U18's.

Samberg might turn out well but he sounds an awful lot like Bogosian. Nobody talks about his skill or his IQ. It is all big, strong, good skater - for a big man. Samberg is the worst.

Kovacevic also might turn out well but why are we taking an overage player in the 3rd round? If we had taken him 3rd last year and he had a D+1 like his last year in NCAA I'd be happy enough. But I don't think he has higher probability of being good in the NHL than Barrat does. I had Hoefenmayer in the next round but I'd take him over Kovacevic let alone Virtanen.

It wasn't necessary to go off the board and reach for surprise long shots. There were good, high probability picks available.

The last 4 picks were as good as any could be that late.

Hope I'm wrong. We will sure have a big D if these guys work out.

 

[KingBogo]

Looking at the rankings services' assessments of our picks in rounds 2-4 is like looking at those for Detroits picks. I'm not saying they are bad players. I'm saying there were better available where we picked.
Josh Brook > Samberg
Evan Barrat > Kovacevic
Noel Hoefenmayer > Virtanen
2 D and a C all rated higher than the players we got. All available when we picked. No high school player risks. No overage risks.

Its hard to knock Vesalainen. He was BPA. But he is a horrible fit for our needs and as a LW will have relatively low trade value. I would have taken Timmins there. That might have been a mistake given Vesalainen's potential. OTOH the high opinions of Vesalainen are based mostly on a 6 game sample at the U18's.

Samberg might turn out well but he sounds an awful lot like Bogosian. Nobody talks about his skill or his IQ. It is all big, strong, good skater - for a big man. Samberg is the worst.

Kovacevic also might turn out well but why are we taking an overage player in the 3rd round? If we had taken him 3rd last year and he had a D+1 like his last year in NCAA I'd be happy enough. But I don't think he has higher probability of being good in the NHL than Barrat does. I had Hoefenmayer in the next round but I'd take him over Kovacevic let alone Virtanen.

It wasn't necessary to go off the board and reach for surprise long shots. There were good, high probability picks available.

The last 4 picks were as good as any could be that late.

Hope I'm wrong. We will sure have a big D if these guys work out.

You just believe these are better players as I'm guessing neither one of us has watched them play. I lot of my opinion is coming from the strong support from guys like Garret and Joe who know a little bit about these kids. But that is why you have scouts to separate otherwise closely grouped consensus players. I like that the Jets scouts look for extra value. Samberg a guy who chose high school to win 2 state championships with his friends in his hometown when he could of just looked to up his draft ranking going to the USHL. Kovacevic a real late bloomer on a meteoric rise, putting up real impressive numbers as a NCAA freshman. Virtanen a guy who likely goes as high as the 2nd round playing a full season but drops due to basically only playing a couple weeks at the end of the season. But when he did he was one of the top players at the U18.

 

[VictoriaJetsFan]

If Detroit's picks in rounds 2 to 4 are so wonderful

someone explain choosing Rasmussen in the first round..

 

[puck stoppa]

If Detroit's picks in rounds 2 to 4 are so wonderful

someone explain choosing Rasmussen in the first round..

Im not a fan of the Wings picks whatsoever.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

I don't know much around the context, but Fleury had one of the best 20-year-old seasons ever in the AHL by 5v5 GF% on the ice versus off the ice.

I think he might be worth a punt. If he has a spotty track record, trade them Lemieux. If he's got a better than spotty reputation, something better (Petan, Armia, Dano...the usual suspects).

GF% isn't worth that much, IMO. Fleury is a guy who has been overrated because of his size his whole career. I have never liked him and literally LOLed when Carolina took him where they did. He brings nothing special to the table. I really dislike Lemieux and that's the absolute most I would offer. If they tossed in a 2nd they could maybe consider Armia. Straight up Fleury is worth about a 3rd or 4th, IMO.

 

[nobody important]

If Detroit's picks in rounds 2 to 4 are so wonderful

someone explain choosing Rasmussen in the first round..

I let out an evil cackle when that was announced.

 

[JetsFan815]

Looking at the rankings services' assessments of our picks in rounds 2-4 is like looking at those for Detroits picks. I'm not saying they are bad players. I'm saying there were better available where we picked.
Josh Brook > Samberg
Evan Barrat > Kovacevic
Noel Hoefenmayer > Virtanen
2 D and a C all rated higher than the players we got. All available when we picked. No high school player risks. No overage risks.

Its hard to knock Vesalainen. He was BPA. But he is a horrible fit for our needs and as a LW will have relatively low trade value. I would have taken Timmins there. That might have been a mistake given Vesalainen's potential. OTOH the high opinions of Vesalainen are based mostly on a 6 game sample at the U18's.

Samberg might turn out well but he sounds an awful lot like Bogosian. Nobody talks about his skill or his IQ. It is all big, strong, good skater - for a big man. Samberg is the worst.

Kovacevic also might turn out well but why are we taking an overage player in the 3rd round? If we had taken him 3rd last year and he had a D+1 like his last year in NCAA I'd be happy enough. But I don't think he has higher probability of being good in the NHL than Barrat does. I had Hoefenmayer in the next round but I'd take him over Kovacevic let alone Virtanen.

It wasn't necessary to go off the board and reach for surprise long shots. There were good, high probability picks available.

The last 4 picks were as good as any could be that late.

Hope I'm wrong. We will sure have a big D if these guys work out.

I like the Kovacevic pick, there were other D's like Farrance or Heofenmayer that I liked at that spot but I don't mind the pick they made. Think of it this way, if the whatever d-man the Jets drafted in the 3rd round posted ~.53PPG in two seasons in his draft+2 years in the NCAA, that would be seen as a decent pick (none of the Jets drafted d have done that, Trouba would have but he left early). So we should not let that "he's an overager" cloud that the numbers he posted in d+2 year are pretty respectable for a 3rd round pick.

I somewhat share your skepticism with the Samberg pick (I wanted us to grab Salo). But I am somewhat comforted by the fact that Mark Edwards and his group were really high on him as well and they don't generally share TNSE's size biases. Excerpt from his scouting report from the Black Book which point to there being more to his game than "big and can skate well for his size":

Samberg finished up this season with Waterloo (USHL) after leading Hermantown HS to the class A
Minnesota State High School championship, where he scored the winning goal in overtime in typical Dylan
Samberg Fashion, with a quick wrist shot from the point, through traffic. Samberg made a smooth transition
to the USHL where at times looked more dominant than in High School.
Samberg plays a big, strong defensive style. He doesn�t hesitate to step up on players at either blue line
and separate them from the puck. Dylan�s timing and footwork are key to how effective he can be with his
physical play. In some instances, especially in front of his own net he can tend to get too focused on the
physical play and miss some stick checks and plays on the puck.
Samberg is good at executing breakouts, whether it using his size and reach to skate the puck away from
pressure or excellent passing ability to stretch the ice. Dylan displays good patience and vision so he
doesn�t have to panic or force many plays. He doesn�t allow himself to get trapped and will settle for the
simple 10-15-foot pass to relieve pressure. In the offensive zone Samberg can walk the blue line very well
and get shots through to the net. He possesses a heavy slap shot from the point that is fairly accurate and
he tries to get in a one-timer position on the Power Play. Samberg can take some risks at the offensive
blueline in an effort to keep plays in the zone and will need to improve his decision making with his pinches
down the wall.
Samberg�s combination of size, skating, puck moving ability and physicality will make him highly coveted in
this year�s draft. With that said, like a lot of young defensive prospects he still needs to improve his decision
making and play without the puck. Samberg will be off Minnesota Duluth in 16/17 where he should easily fit
into their top 4 on the back end.

Some quotes from scouts:

I like Samberg. When I watched he played a pretty simple game, but that�s ok.
He was just getting his feet wet in the USHL. He�s big, can skate and can shoot. I was
trying to figure out his hockey sense. It was tough to evaluate when I watched a high
school game. In the USHL he kept it pretty vanilla, so that it didn�t make for a slam dunk
evaluation either. I don�t think he�s a dumb player, but he�s didn�t scream elite hockey
sense either...I think he�s just very raw or I�ll call it green. One scout told me he�s not
dumb but he�s not smart and it and it made perfect sense to me at this point. (he also
included a player he thought was dumb for comparison) Regardless, I like Samberg�s
upside. because I think he�s just tipping the iceberg so far...I think there is some good
stuff ahead for him. - HP Scout, Mark Edwards

Quotable: �Has made considerable strides in the last 12-18 months, really impressive
finishing the season with Waterloo (USHL) NHL top pairing potential� - HP Scout,
Dusten Braaksma

Quotable: �He�s a 6�3� 200 pound kid who skates great. I know guys who don�t think he�s
even a draft (worth selecting) but I like him a lot. His floor is not that bad. He can both
defend and move pucks.�- NHL Scout - October 2016)

Quotable: �If you want to take a big swing (in the first round)Samberg is the kid to do it
with.� NHL Scout (December 2016)

Quotable: �He�s big, he can skate and he�s got some juice. He�s a second rounder all day
long.� - NHL Scout (January 2017)

Quotable: �Has an NHL caliber shot right now� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �He�s raw. Not sure about his hockey sense. He looked overwhelmed. He�ll
probably go late 3rd or the 4th. - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �The thing that Waterloo (stint in Waterloo) did for me is it solidified for me
that he is smart. He also didn�t run around as much...he defended fine with good gaps and
a good stick.� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �In the USHL he got some coaching and he showed me that he is ascending. It
was big to see him there, (in USHL) he solidified himself as a prospect Once I saw him
there.� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �I saw the �Boom� watching him in high school and now that I�ve seen him in
the USHL I don�t see any �Bust�.� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �He had a good finish to his year in Waterloo and I think that probably did him
some good. I like the kid a lot.� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �He�s one of my favorite players in this draft. I�m not saying I�d take him top
20 or anything...I just like his upside... I like what he brings to the table and I like the
kid. If we draft him I�d be pretty happy.� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �He�s not dumb but he�s not smart. There�s a big difference for me....but don�t
forget...inexperienced too....he�s got lot�s of room to grow. � - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �He was a bit overwhelmed in my USHL viewings...obviously a lot more than
when I saw him in Hermantown, but Hermantown isn�t even the highest division there. I
guess I�m sounding like I don�t like him but I actually do.� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

Quotable: �He plays simple, he�s not creative. He�s not going to hook the net and find all
three options. He�s going to look for his left winger....if that winger isn�t there or if
there�s an opponent in his way, he�s going to keep skating and flip it out. I like him
though. He has jam to his game and has a ton of upside.� - NHL Scout (May 2017)

There definitely seems to be potential there justifying drafting him in 2nd judging by these scouting reports. Seems to be a very "boom or bust" type. I would have been happier if we had grabbed Salo but I am not outraged at this pick as I was at some last year as it seems there is a higher cieling here.

 

[nobody important]

I'm quite comfortable in admitting that I don't know sweet **** all about any of these players beyond the little sound bites I read in the online reviews. And I really don't care enough to go beyond the players projected to be first rounders. So, I refuse to get into thinking, we should have picked so-and-so instead of our actual pick cause then I'm just going to come across as a pretentious dilettante. Granted, I did this a bit regarding our first rounder but that had more to do with having a preference for taking a highly rated goalie instead of a winger, since I have my concerns about our goalie pipeline.

And I really like Samberg for his personality. He sounds like a great kid that you just want to root for. Which is not to say I wouldn't be happy if we had picked Brooks instead, being a Manitoba boy. But we picked who we picked, and let's hope things work out.

The big question I have is, why are we talking about this in the Jets General Rumour, Trade, Free Agent and Waiver Speculation thread?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

You just believe these are better players as I'm guessing neither one of us has watched them play. I lot of my opinion is coming from the strong support from guys like Garret and Joe who know a little bit about these kids. But that is why you have scouts to separate otherwise closely grouped consensus players. I like that the Jets scouts look for extra value. Samberg a guy who chose high school to win 2 state championships with his friends in his hometown when he could of just looked to up his draft ranking going to the USHL. Kovacevic a real late bloomer on a meteoric rise, putting up real impressive numbers as a NCAA freshman. Virtanen a guy who likely goes as high as the 2nd round playing a full season but drops due to basically only playing a couple weeks at the end of the season. But when he did he was one of the top players at the U18.

Other side of the coin. Glass half full or half empty? Of course there is another way to see it or else they would not have been picked. Looking at it from the information I have available, I don't like it. It has all the appearance of reaching. Each of them has an excuse, or an explanation if you prefer for why they didn't achieve more, or sooner or at a higher level. I would have preferred to pick players who don't need explanations. Drafting is such an uncertain process that I think you go for as much certainty as possible. Like I said, hope I'm wrong. I'm starting to be persuaded to some extent. None are near as bad as Stanley so maybe I'll warm up to them.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

If Detroit's picks in rounds 2 to 4 are so wonderful

someone explain choosing Rasmussen in the first round..

Who said Detroit's were wonderful? If you mean my reference to them, I used it because the consensus seems to be that they had an epically bad draft. If that is not the consensus then I used the wrong reference.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I like the Kovacevic pick, there were other D's like Farrance or Heofenmayer that I liked at that spot but I don't mind the pick they made. Think of it this way, if the whatever d-man the Jets drafted in the 3rd round posted ~.53PPG in two seasons in his draft+2 years in the NCAA, that would be seen as a decent pick (none of the Jets drafted d have done that, Trouba would have but he left early). So we should not let that "he's an overager" cloud that the numbers he posted in d+2 year are pretty respectable for a 3rd round pick.

I somewhat share your skepticism with the Samberg pick (I wanted us to grab Salo). But I am somewhat comforted by the fact that Mark Edwards and his group were really high on him as well and they don't generally share TNSE's size biases. Excerpt from his scouting report from the Black Book which point to there being more to his game than "big and can skate well for his size":



Some quotes from scouts:


There definitely seems to be potential there justifying drafting him in 2nd judging by these scouting reports. Seems to be a very "boom or bust" type. I would have been happier if we had grabbed Salo but I am not outraged at this pick as I was at some last year as it seems there is a higher cieling here.

Those quotes are a mixed bag. Some are encouraging but many just reinforce my doubts. A lot of emphasis on 'big' 'shot' 'skates well'. 'Not dumb' isn't encouraging. OTOH making a lot of progress in a short stint in the USHL is encouraging. The quality of competition is what concerns me. I hope he does well in NCAA. If he doesn't, its too late.

 

[Gil Fisher]

I feel like with Lawless gone, we have zero local media with club connections. Pathetic state of affairs. Reynolds and Weibe are our only hope. Give us a rumour FFS!!!

 

[puck stoppa]

I feel like with Lawless gone, we have zero local media with club connections. Pathetic state of affairs. Reynolds and Weibe are our only hope. Give us a rumour FFS!!!

Ya it's funny when Wyman is the guy I'm checking now.

 

[boydkc]

jrumours

Ya it's funny when Wyman is the guy I'm checking now.

Will not happen for this team they are all sworn to secrecy.

Fired if they do.

 

[Swiftt]

Teams have till 4pm today to qualify their RFA's. Jets have 7 RFA's at the moment (Helle, Copp, Tanev, Lipon, Kosmo, Howden and Olsen). Anyone think 1 or 2 wont get offered? Or will we just qualify them all.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Teams have till 4pm today to qualify their RFA's. Jets have 7 RFA's at the moment (Helle, Copp, Tanev, Lipon, Kosmo, Howden and Olsen). Anyone think 1 or 2 wont get offered? Or will we just qualify them all.

I think, no offers to Olsen and Lipon. Lipon may be offered an AHL contract.

Howden is on the bubble. I would keep him. Decent depth F but he may be due for an AHL contract too.

Kosmo gets another year. I think he is not far from NHL level.

 

[DEANYOUNGBLOOD17]

Olson is the only R.F.A that does not get a Q.O.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Teams have till 4pm today to qualify their RFA's. Jets have 7 RFA's at the moment (Helle, Copp, Tanev, Lipon, Kosmo, Howden and Olsen). Anyone think 1 or 2 wont get offered? Or will we just qualify them all.

Hellebuyck, Copp, Kosmachuk should certainly get QO's. I think the org will QO Tanev. There's no need to QO Lipon and Howden but they probably will. Olsen will not receive a QO.

 

[Huffer]

With Vegas and the expansion draft, I really thought there would have been an opportunity there to add a player. But Vegas didn't play the draft that way, as they choose to get mainly get value from the teams directly to keep their own players, rather than draft good players to flip. C'est la vie.

The D that Vegas now as that I would like, I really don't see them moving. McNabb, Theodore, and Schmidt. I could be happy with getting Merill for depth, but it would have to be for cheap because I think our next option could be to look to UFA.

We're not usually big players in UFA (and for good reasons), but at the cost of no assets I would love to offer a contract to Del Zotto or Smith. Neither of them am I HUGE fans of, but for depth they are the best out there IMO. Just depends on the term and salary.

On the goaltending front I was hoping going into the XD to possibly end up with Rantaa or Grubauer. The reasoning was that hopefully one of those could really challenge Helle and be options going forward. I still hope we inquire about Grubauer, but it really depends on the cost, especially when a guy like Elliott could be had for no assets. I'd rather have Grubauer, but if the cost to acquire is high I would be happy with Elliot for a season or two.

Not saying he's available, or that we're looking for more winger help in the bottom 6, but if we're looking to get better next year and add some depth, a guy that could help the PK, doesn't cost much, and probably wouldn't mid coming here might be Jannik Hansen. I would pay half of what they did to the Canucks, but he could be a solid add in the bottom 6.

Truthfully doubt any of that happens (with the exception of probably signing Elliott), but that's where I hope we're at right now.