HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Logan Stanley - Part III

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-13-2017, 06:44 PM
  #301
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 19,373
vCash: 500
Now, to project what would be a "successful" D+2 season, a big OHL season, we can again look at the same group.

Four of the previously mentioned defenders made the NHL for their D+2 season: two that scored a pt/gp in their D+1 season, one who went on to win the Calder as best rookie (Myers), and one weird one (Schultz). This leaves us with a small sample of 7.

Two players (Fistric and Foster) showed no improvement and scored just over a 0.4 p/gp rate.
Three players (Coburn, Staal, and Weber) scored over a 0.7 pt/gp rate.
Two players (Hamonic and Phaneuf) scored over a pt/gp rate.

I don't see Stanley having the skillset or tools to be Weber, Hamonic, Myers, or Phaneuf, but if he produces over 0.7 P/GP, we got somewhat of a better chance.
A tall Schultz, Fistric, Foster, or --if lucky-- a Coburn I guess is possible.

garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2017, 06:47 PM
  #302
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 27,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
I tracked some early round defenders from the CHL who were above average-to-above-average size and didn't score much in their draft+0 season but still made the NHL. So, CHL D that made the NHL, drafted in 1st two rounds, 6'1 or taller, <0.6 unadjusted pt/gp.
I had to tone down the size a bit, otherwise Stanley doesn't really have almost any NHL cohorts to compare against.

Stanley would rank 3rd lowest in draft+0 scoring. The two below were Mark Fistric and Shea Weber (Weber is actually above though if you adjust for league+era).

But, we all knew his D+0 year was meh. We also all knew that his D+1 year was much better... but how much better? We can use the same group to compare.

One made the NHL for their D+1 season (Luke Schenn, lol), so this reduced the sample to 11 skaters.

Stanley ranked 3rd lowest in draft+1 scoring and was 4th last in % improvement from D1->D2.
The two below were Marc Fistric (injured and only played 15 games) and Nick Schultz (scored more in his D+0 than D+2). Weber had past Stanley in raw scoring (and well past in adjusted scoring) relative to Stanley's D+1 season. The only other that was not above the 0.6 pt/gp mark in their D+1 season was Braydon Coburn.
Do you have scoring rates stratified by strength (PP vs. even)?

Whileee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2017, 06:49 PM
  #303
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 19,373
vCash: 500
Another thing I noticed, a good chunk of these comps, like Weber, were during what's known as the "WHL scoring drought". A period where the WHL hit historically low scoring rates, which is why so many of these players leap tiers ahead of Stanley once you adjust for era.



Last edited by garret9: 07-13-2017 at 07:10 PM.
garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2017, 07:09 PM
  #304
ps241
.915 please Steve
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 21,415
vCash: 50
One thing to remember about Weber is in his draft +2 season he made team canada U20 team and was part of that dream group that was the best Junior team I have seen in my life. Shea was really good playing on the top pair with Dion down in Grand Forks. Not a scorer but just rock solid defensively.

ps241 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2017, 07:11 PM
  #305
mazmin
Go! Jets! Go!
 
mazmin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
Now, to project what would be a "successful" D+2 season, a big OHL season, we can again look at the same group.

Four of the previously mentioned defenders made the NHL for their D+2 season: two that scored a pt/gp in their D+1 season, one who went on to win the Calder as best rookie (Myers), and one weird one (Schultz). This leaves us with a small sample of 7.

Two players (Fistric and Foster) showed no improvement and scored just over a 0.4 p/gp rate.
Three players (Coburn, Staal, and Weber) scored over a 0.7 pt/gp rate.
Two players (Hamonic and Phaneuf) scored over a pt/gp rate.

I don't see Stanley having the skillset or tools to be Weber, Hamonic, Myers, or Phaneuf, but if he produces over 0.7 P/GP, we got somewhat of a better chance.
A tall Schultz, Fistric, Foster, or --if lucky-- a Coburn I guess is possible.
Nice work man. I'm feeling his D+2 season will be right around the 0.7 PPG mark that you outlined while playing a very mean brand of hockey. I trust he's taking this off season seriously and is looking to round out his game before going pro.

mazmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 12:24 AM
  #306
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 27,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazmin View Post
Nice work man. I'm feeling his D+2 season will be right around the 0.7 PPG mark that you outlined while playing a very mean brand of hockey. I trust he's taking this off season seriously and is looking to round out his game before going pro.
It'll depend on PP time. If he gets plenty, he'll probably get a nice bump.

Rasanen is another big D that some seem to like more than Stanley due to scoring had a grand total of 9 points even strength. The team basically had him hammering from the point on the PP, which is how he got over 70% of his points (on the PP). I don't think that necessarily translates. With data now easily available, at the very least comparisons based on point production should be stratified by PP vs. even strength, especially for D.

Whileee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 01:32 AM
  #307
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 19,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
Do you have scoring rates stratified by strength (PP vs. even)?
In this case no. It does slightly improve things in some ways, but also does not go back very far. So there is some trade offs.

There's also value to being good enough to earn PP TOI.

However, this would not really effect things much. Stanley's not the only defender to not play on the primary power play. Those are mostly the guys Stanley matched with.

It's common enough that while not adjusting for usage, like we do with SEAL scoring, is less optimal, it isn't out of place.

So maybe Stanley is a 10% probability instead of 7%.

garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 02:25 AM
  #308
Jets4Life
Registered User
 
Jets4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hellebuyck County
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
My worst fear is Stanley will be the Boris Valabik of 2016.

Jets4Life is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 06:25 AM
  #309
ps241
.915 please Steve
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 21,415
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life View Post
My worst fear is Stanley will be the Boris Valabik of 2016.
My worst fear was drafting him. Anything positive now is an unexpected surprise. I did have fun watching him win the memorial cup and was really happy for the kid.

ps241 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 07:41 AM
  #310
JetsFan815
It can't be done :(
 
JetsFan815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 7,925
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puck stoppa View Post
Be curious to look at 18th overall picks to see where they are. Just starting 2014 down here is what we have; we got Tuch, Mueller, Teraveinen, Mcneill, Watson, Chet Pickard and Ian Cole.

So as you see in those 7 drafts we have one good scorer, some NHL regulars and then guys who had not much impact or never made it.
So let's not pretend it's easy to find sure Nhlers there that can play top 6 or 4.. STANLEY would fall in the middle of that group if he's a bottom pair so I don't see it as a loss if he an NHL career.
This is irrelevant. Teams get a mediocre success rate at 18 because of the drop off in the quality of players. The only reason teams are able to hit on players in mid 1st round is because they are (mostly) drafting the best prospects available at that spot. Inspite of drafting the best prospect possible there's a high bust rate, why do you think a team would improve their success rate by drafting players who should be going a round later? That doesn't make any sense. Just because the success rate at particular spot isn't great doesn't mean you have the licence to be blase your assets. By that logic Chevy should draft his family members in the 5,6,7th rounds and point to the list of players drafted at that spot to justify that the selection was not going to amount to anythng anyways

JetsFan815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 08:05 AM
  #311
puck stoppa
Registered User
 
puck stoppa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsFan815 View Post
This is irrelevant. Teams get a mediocre success rate at 18 because of the drop off in the quality of players. The only reason teams are able to hit on players in mid 1st round is because they are (mostly) drafting the best prospects available at that spot. Inspite of drafting the best prospect possible there's a high bust rate, why do you think a team would improve their success rate by drafting players who should be going a round later? That doesn't make any sense. Just because the success rate at particular spot isn't great doesn't mean you have the licence to be blase your assets. By that logic Chevy should draft his family members in the 5,6,7th rounds and point to the list of players drafted at that spot to justify that the selection was not going to amount to anythng anyways
I was responding to the point about expecting to get a top 4 or 6 in that spot.

puck stoppa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 08:49 AM
  #312
Whileee
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 27,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
In this case no. It does slightly improve things in some ways, but also does not go back very far. So there is some trade offs.

There's also value to being good enough to earn PP TOI.

However, this would not really effect things much. Stanley's not the only defender to not play on the primary power play. Those are mostly the guys Stanley matched with.

It's common enough that while not adjusting for usage, like we do with SEAL scoring, is less optimal, it isn't out of place.

So maybe Stanley is a 10% probability instead of 7%.
PP usage is also dependent on who else is on the team, which a player doesn't control. It's not that I think Stanley's assessment should be bumped, but that it can result in overvaluing other D who get an inordinate amount of PP time relative to skill, like Rasanen.

Whileee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 09:38 AM
  #313
CorgisPer60
Barking at the net
 
CorgisPer60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Please Understand
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,989
vCash: 279
The nice thing about Logan Stanley is that the Jets overvalued him, so quite likely somebody else over values him. It's not like we're stuck with him until he retires, after all.

CorgisPer60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 09:38 AM
  #314
Joe Hallenback
Registered User
 
Joe Hallenback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,032
vCash: 777
Stanley will play a lot this year and probably a lot on the PP. Windsor won't be horrible either as they should return Villardi and Brown up front. Whatever his numbers are going to be I don't think it is going to matter if he scores at .5 ppg,.6 ppg or .7ppg. I think that is all academic at this point.

What will matter is if he can rebound from his injury,log top minutes and improve his skating for the pro game because what is going to make him successful here is if he can transition to the pro game.

He is never going to be this 40 point guy in the NHL. What I want him to do is in 3 years time be pushing out a guy like Kulikov because we will want cheap replacements who can play at same level hopefully in a top 4 spot along side an aging Buff

Joe Hallenback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 10:22 AM
  #315
TheDeuce
Registered User
 
TheDeuce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: 205
Posts: 1,143
vCash: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorgisPer60 View Post
The nice thing about Logan Stanley is that the Jets overvalued him, so quite likely somebody else over values him. It's not like we're stuck with him until he retires, after all.
I seriously doubt another team will take a flyer on him until we've established what he brings to the table. And if he's Chara 2.0 he's not going anywhere.

Who knows; maybe this is what the Jets are using for their draft guide:






m.

TheDeuce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2017, 11:13 AM
  #316
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 19,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whileee View Post
PP usage is also dependent on who else is on the team, which a player doesn't control. It's not that I think Stanley's assessment should be bumped, but that it can result in overvaluing other D who get an inordinate amount of PP time relative to skill, like Rasanen.
Again, it's not always that clear cut.

Green had elite EV numbers last year with little PP usage. This season he had very poor EV numbers despite his PP production improving dramatically.

Also, as you noted, PP usage is in part opportunity and talent. But, Stanley isn't the only one to historically not receive much PP TOI. So, he has lots of others to potentially be compared to, and so do others in similar situations, yet these cohorts still do not make the NHL commonly.

It's not like we don't already look into these splits or this is a new idea. We already do and it is the case why many people like myself were so low on Rasmussen this past season and why I was skeptical on Lemieux back in the day.

garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:09 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.