Prospect Info: Logan Stanley - Part III

[Whileee]

he was a 1st rounder on most teams boards. not a 3 or 4th rounder. why cant you come to grips with this.

Yup.

Bob McKenzie's survey of actual NHL scouts had him at #22 in his final consensus rankings. His rankings have tended to be quite accurate in terms of the actual draft order of selection, so more than a few teams had Stanley ranked as a 1st rounder.

Other independent draftniks also had him as a 1st rounder, including ISS (#25) and Hockeyprospect.com (#30). The overall consensus mock draft had him at #24.

I know that some thought he was a 3rd round talent, but most draftniks and NHL scouts had him as a late first round talent.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Didn't like the pick at the time at all (nor do I now), but I was pleasantly surprised that he rose to #11 among OHL D in even-strength points/game by his D+2 season. He has a lot of issues to iron out in his game, but he seems like a good kid who is working hard to make it. That's all you can really ask of a prospect. If he makes the NHL as a regular, that would be a huge bonus, all things considered.

His progress last year was encouraging. The improved skating reported from DC was more encouraging.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

This. A lot of anger has been directed at the wrong person with regards to this pick.

I've never directed it at Stanley personally. I hated the pick from before they made it. But I don't know Stanley at all. I hear second hand that he has some good attributes and I have no reason to doubt that.

TBH, I don't think most other critics were angry with Stanley either. Why would anyone blame him? By all reports he is working hard to live up to his draft position.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

you just said he belonged in the 4th round. how do you know this, did you watch every draft eligible kid play all year to conclude this like the scores of scouts did who concluded he should have been drafter around where he was.

There was pretty wide disagreement among scouts according to what we have been told. Many rated him in the first round. Many others rated him 3rd or 4th round. But even if it had been unanimous, I would have disagreed. I have opinions of my own. Sometimes I'm right, sometimes I'm wrong - just like the so-called experts.

 

[Joe Hallenback]

There was pretty wide disagreement among scouts according to what we have been told. Many rated him in the first round. Many others rated him 3rd or 4th round. But even if it had been unanimous, I would have disagreed. I have opinions of my own. Sometimes I'm right, sometimes I'm wrong - just like the so-called experts.

No there was maybe a very few who had him ranked lower and when someone suggested that the knives came out pretty quick. But last year erased a lot of doubts from skeptics about what Chevy can do as a GM. I had him as a late 1st/early 2nd rounder. I also not a fan of that draft. I don't think it will be a very good one long term

All Stanley has to do this year is get his first step quicker and play sound,safe hockey in the AHL. I would be happy with 15 to 20 points and him learning to be a safe effective puck mover

 

[StatisticsAddict99]

Hate the pick, not the play. But just a year a ago I didn’t mind it that much but now that we have Niku and Samberg(one of them will be our future 2nd Pairing LD and the other will likely either be 3rd or on there off side) realize we could had picked a position that we need today(that said LD was a huge positional need at the time), if Stanley is gonna make it someone is gonna have to play on there off hand side and that is really hard to imagine that in Maurices system.

 

[Whileee]

No there was maybe a very few who had him ranked lower and when someone suggested that the knives came out pretty quick. But last year erased a lot of doubts from skeptics about what Chevy can do as a GM. I had him as a late 1st/early 2nd rounder. I also not a fan of that draft. I don't think it will be a very good one long term

All Stanley has to do this year is get his first step quicker and play sound,safe hockey in the AHL. I would be happy with 15 to 20 points and him learning to be a safe effective puck mover

Yup. Beyond Laine, I am not very happy with the 2016 draft. If the Jets had nailed another pick or two, the Jets' future would be that much stronger. I'm hoping that Green has a strong development year, along with Stanley, and at least show some NHL potential. Berdin is a wild-card, so maybe he'll turn into something down the road. But I think the draft was as disappointing as 2014. At least the Jets got stars at the top of each of those two drafts in Ehlers and Laine.

I think the 2017 draft could be sneaky good, with Vesalainen and Samberg becoming core players, and Kovacevic with a chance to be an NHL contributor.

 

[garret9]

I know a team that had him top 10 in the draft. I know a couple of teams that had him after the 2nd. I even know a team that took him off their list.

I also know scouts that were on the team that ranked him top 10 that don’t like him... and I’ve heard of scouts that did that on teams that didn’t rank him.

Just nature of the beast.

 

[ps241]

I had singled him out as the one guy I didn’t want us to draft in the 1st round going into that evening so you would be hard pressed to find anyone more dissapointed with that pick than me then or now.

However, I have seen Stanley in interviews and I saw a bio on him and Logan seems like a really good kid. He is also our prospect so I desperately want to be wrong on this one.

If you look at the scouting reports about Stanley in the Black Book you get a good idea of how divided that group of scouts were on him that season.

 

[Whileee]

His development will still depend largely on how hard he works at his game. So much of development depends on attitude and effort. Stanley might not make it, but at least he appears to be putting in the effort.

 

[garret9]

I know a team that had him top 10 in the draft. I know a couple of teams that had him after the 2nd. I even know a team that took him off their list.

I also know scouts that were on the team that ranked him top 10 that don’t like him... and I’ve heard of scouts that did that on teams that didn’t rank him.

Just nature of the beast.

I will also note that I was the leader of the don’t draft Stanley in the first round crowd but I specifically said that Stanley would be welcomed addition to the Jets prospect cupboards and I ranked him as a 3rd-ish round talent in most drafts.

I still think he makes the nhl and ends up being a better and bigger Chiarot.

 

[Whileee]

I will also note that I was the leader of the don’t draft Stanley in the first round crowd but I specifically said that Stanley would be welcomed addition to the Jets prospect cupboards and I ranked him as a 3rd-ish round talent in most drafts.

I still think he makes the nhl and ends up being a better and bigger Chiarot.

It's early, but I tend to agree. Chiarot made it through hard work and developed into a borderline NHL player. I think Stanley will work as hard and starts with better tools and more moxie with the puck on his stick.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

No there was maybe a very few who had him ranked lower and when someone suggested that the knives came out pretty quick. But last year erased a lot of doubts from skeptics about what Chevy can do as a GM. I had him as a late 1st/early 2nd rounder. I also not a fan of that draft. I don't think it will be a very good one long term

All Stanley has to do this year is get his first step quicker and play sound,safe hockey in the AHL. I would be happy with 15 to 20 points and him learning to be a safe effective puck mover

At this point, I don't care about any scoring in the AHL. I would be happy if he learns to be a safe, effective puck mover. If he achieves that, adequate scoring will come.

I think it is minimizing the hill he has to climb to say that "All Stanley has to do this year is get his first step quicker and play sound,safe hockey in the AHL". He needs to get quite a bit quicker generally. That is no small feat. Neither is learning to play sound, safe hockey in the AHL.

I'm not saying those things are out of reach. We are told he is very committed and a very hard worker. We have seen encouraging signs of progress over the last year.

What was it that you saw in him that lead to your late 1st, early 2nd ranking?

Even though that may turn out to be a weak draft class, the question is, why go out of your way to pick a project player when there were still plenty of strong prospects left on the table? Some of them may have been a little hard to pick out of the crowd at that time but there were plenty of them. And isn't finding the less obvious ones the reason for paying scouts? Anybody can pick the easy ones just by watching box scores.

Maybe Stanley turns out to be one of those harder to find, less obvious picks but 2 years later the only thing that makes him stand out is still his size.

 

[Weezeric]

At this point, I don't care about any scoring in the AHL. I would be happy if he learns to be a safe, effective puck mover. If he achieves that, adequate scoring will come.

I think it is minimizing the hill he has to climb to say that "All Stanley has to do this year is get his first step quicker and play sound,safe hockey in the AHL". He needs to get quite a bit quicker generally. That is no small feat. Neither is learning to play sound, safe hockey in the AHL.

I'm not saying those things are out of reach. We are told he is very committed and a very hard worker. We have seen encouraging signs of progress over the last year.

What was it that you saw in him that lead to your late 1st, early 2nd ranking?

Even though that may turn out to be a weak draft class, the question is, why go out of your way to pick a project player when there were still plenty of strong prospects left on the table? Some of them may have been a little hard to pick out of the crowd at that time but there were plenty of them. And isn't finding the less obvious ones the reason for paying scouts? Anybody can pick the easy ones just by watching box scores.

Maybe Stanley turns out to be one of those harder to find, less obvious picks but 2 years later the only thing that makes him stand out is still his size.

Just curious, how many complete games have you watched Stanley play? I don’t mean that in an antagonistic way. Just curious

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Just curious, how many complete games have you watched Stanley play? I don’t mean that in an antagonistic way. Just curious

Complete games? Just 1. A couple of part games and some highlights/lowlights.

How many do you think it takes?

 

[ffh]

Complete games? Just 1. A couple of part games and some highlights/lowlights.

How many do you think it takes?

Alot more if you are going to say what round he should have drafted in

 

[Whileee]

Just revisited this nice highlights package. I recommend it for those who want to see some positive attributes. I realize that it doesn't show defensive play, which is his particular weakness, and focuses only on successful plays, but it's hard not to notice the development of some positive attributes to his game. He has a very good shot, both a slapper and an accurate and hard wrister. You can see why he was #5 among OHL defensemen in even-strength goals / game. He also has good hands and can make a variety of passes. He really plays with his head up when he has the puck and anticipates well, allowing him to find seams in the D and have good timing with his passes and shots. If he can get some better mobility and faster reads defensively, he has puck skills and hockey sense with the puck that should translate. As an example, you can see already that he has a lot more to work with in terms of vision and puck skills than Chiarot. That's not a high standard, but it's a familiar standard for Jets' fans.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Alot more if you are going to say what round he should have drafted in

There was plenty of information behind my opinion.

 

[Conflicted Habs fan]

I can see Stanley developing into a veteran defenseman in the same cast as Tyler Myers.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

His development will still depend largely on how hard he works at his game. So much of development depends on attitude and effort. Stanley might not make it, but at least he appears to be putting in the effort.

Give him credit for that effort.

Some here seem to think that enough hard work can overcome anything. I'm skeptical. Its the nature or nurture question. IMO, no amount of hard work can overcome a lack of inborn talent. It can get the most out of what a person was born with, but no more.

Stanley was born to be 6'7. He also must have at least some talent to have made it as far as he has. Whether or not that talent will be enough when combined with hard work remains to be seen.

 

[truck]

I know that some thought he was a 3rd round talent, but most draftniks and NHL scouts had him as a late first round size.

Emphasis mine.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Just revisited this nice highlights package. I recommend it for those who want to see some positive attributes. I realize that it doesn't show defensive play, which is his particular weakness, and focuses only on successful plays, but it's hard not to notice the development of some positive attributes to his game. He has a very good shot, both a slapper and an accurate and hard wrister. You can see why he was #5 among OHL defensemen in even-strength goals / game. He also has good hands and can make a variety of passes. He really plays with his head up when he has the puck and anticipates well, allowing him to find seams in the D and have good timing with his passes and shots. If he can get some better mobility and faster reads defensively, he has puck skills and hockey sense with the puck that should translate. As an example, you can see already that he has a lot more to work with in terms of vision and puck skills than Chiarot. That's not a high standard, but it's a familiar standard for Jets' fans.

Thanks Whileee. You can see the improvement in his offense over the last 2 years. I tried to get some feel for his skating from that. It is a little hard from a highlight reel but he was managing to skate well enough to get himself into good positions. His scoring was more than just blasting from the point. He was moving around in the O zone pretty well and making some nice passes.

It is still his defensive play that I am concerned with but I can see cause for optimism.

 

[Whileee]

Emphasis mine.

Size factored in, no doubt, but the point is that the Jets were certainly not alone in rating him as a 1st round pick. Others that rated him in the 1st round included...

McKenzie (based on 10 NHL scouts)
Hockeyprospect.com ("Black Book")
ISS
TSN
Central Scouting (NA)
Craig Button
Hockey News
Damien Cox

That doesn't make it a good pick, of course.

 

[Whileee]

Thanks Whileee. You can see the improvement in his offense over the last 2 years. I tried to get some feel for his skating from that. It is a little hard from a highlight reel but he was managing to skate well enough to get himself into good positions. His scoring was more than just blasting from the point. He was moving around in the O zone pretty well and making some nice passes.

It is still his defensive play that I am concerned with but I can see cause for optimism.

Agree.

At least now I'm not cringing at the prospect of watching him in an NHL camp, or trying to make an impression at the AHL level. He has some translatable attributes.

Also, the Jets now have Niku and Samberg in their pipeline on LD, which will likely give Stanley a longer runway for development. Give him 2-3 years in the AHL and then we'll know much more about his potential.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Agree.

At least now I'm not cringing at the prospect of watching him in an NHL camp, or trying to make an impression at the AHL level. He has some translatable attributes.

Also, the Jets now have Niku and Samberg in their pipeline on LD, which will likely give Stanley a longer runway for development. Give him 2-3 years in the AHL and then we'll know much more about his potential.

I never expected him to be rushed. That would have required desperation. I wouldn't even think of him as an injury replacement this year but he could be ready for that by the '20 season. He will certainly be given every opportunity to succeed.

If he can learn to anticipate the play well enough his lack of quickness may become less of an issue.