Why does anyone need to be blamed for the Jankowski pick? We can argue forever (and have) about whether there would have been a better pick, but right now, it's looking like a pretty good pick.
The way drafting works, is that there's almost always, in hindsight, someone you should have rather picked. That doesn't mean that a pick wasn't good.
Weisbrod was a bad AGM not because of the Jankowski pick but because he advised Feaster to trade the pick for immediate help. His vision of team building is clearly questionable given the state of the team at the time.
But he should not be shouldering all the blame for the Jankowski pick. There is a reason why most NHL teams are structured in a way where you have more than one AGM. If Feaster is only listening to Weisbrod, that is on him. Weisbrod's job is to go out and scout, give Feaster his opinion, and be another voice in the room. That's what Feaster directed Weisbrod to do. It's a fact that scouts disagree on player rankings. They are suppose to fight and argue their choice of player selection. Weisbrod ended up winning the fight.
Apparently, Burke wanted to draft Jack Johnson instead of Bobby Ryan and fought with his scouts. It was on Burke to make the decision. Similarly, it was on Feaster to make the decision.
I recall the player we were heavily rumored to be in the mix for that year was Turris. I assume Weisbroad wanted Feaster to trade their first at that time. I recall Feaster saying they didn't at the time because they were 14th in the west and trending to a top 5 pick.
I also remember Feaster going out of his way to credit Weisbroad for the pick several times. Saying he was the driving force to pick the player.
At the end of the day Jankowski is only 21 and will turn pro at 22 with 4 years of college played. He always was a project and a controversial pick. At the time it was a head scratcher to many because the Flames were starved for young talent and did not seem to be in a position to swing at a potential boom-bust player.
This will be the 3rd draft since the janko draft and the Flames have picked 2 centers that are already on the team and making an impact. There have also been several prospects at forward who have taken big steps and made the team. Where the Flames are at now they can afford to be patient with Jankowski. He will be a topic of discussion until he makes or breaks it in the league
The Following User Says Thank You to Vinny01 For This Useful Post:
Sure. it's not that serious to me. Somehow me stating that if we had a rookie with 8pts in 13 playoffs we would be excited is controversial. If that rookie just put up 2pts in the third period for a comeback win in the Stanley Cup finals we would be excited without a doubt.
We will have to be content with a rookie who scored 9 points in 11 PO games.
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
At the end of the day Jankowski is only 21 and will turn pro at 22 with 4 years of college
*20.
He should be a pro at 21 in April. Might even play in the playoffs like Bennett did. He is nine months younger than Gillies despite being same draft class. He is one month older than Monahan.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
Last edited by GranteedEV; 06-05-2015 at 10:05 AM.
"Faksa is a big, strong, young center that has pro size and strength. An all-around talent with a good head for the game he has value all over the rink and at any forward position. He thinks the game very well and it makes up for his overall lack of flash. He’s an adept passer that finds seems in the defense. He has a good selection of shots that he can use from anywhere, including the point on the power play. Faksa is a useful penalty killer with terrific anticipation skills. His overall commitment to the game is noteworthy and he’s a good, smart worker on the rink. Faksa uses his body and dishes some punishing hits but doesn’t do it as often as his ability would dictate. He uses his big body to shield off would-be defenders but doesn’t have breakaway speed. His first step or two could use some work and his overall top speed is no better than slightly above average. His technique is not poor, so with strength and experience he should be able to improve somewhat"
Almost could do a change all Faska to Jankowski in this Hockey futures analysis.
Do any CPers think that Faska is tracking to be top 6 for Dallas in a couple of years??
He was picked 13th in 2012..... The first pick ever by Jim Nill as GM.
Best advice in the thread. We're at the point of arguing how good one player would have been if they played on the Flames and comparing them to how good another player might be if they play for the Flames in a few years. Kinda pointless, regardless which side you take.
GranteedEV brought up this scenario and it was so irrelevant and random so that's why I said let's just agree to disagree. I was never arguing this. The only arguement I was ever making was that New Era is a hater and a hypocrite.
GranteedEV brought up this scenario and it was so irrelevant and random so that's why I said let's just agree to disagree. I was never arguing this. The only arguement I was ever making was that New Era is a hater and a hypocrite.
I was commenting on the whole thread, not you specifically. Agree to disagree fits a number of the arguments here.
The Following User Says Thank You to edslunch For This Useful Post:
He could have picked Nishuskin who was listed before Monahan on the TSN NHL prospects tracker to the right of the screen as he walked to the podium. I'll give credit where credit was due on his tenure but I still feel he should have been fired after the ROR debacle.
I have to agree with you. Everyone now thinks Monahan was a no brainer pick at no. 6. The fact is, if Feaster was as bad a GM as some people make him out to be then he could have easily cocked up and picked someone else. He still had to make that choice.
Thanks for posting that draft day video, by the way. I could watch that a few times dunning. TSN pretty much nailed his scouting report, and nailed his ETA as well.
Didn't Nichushkin have a lot of question marks though? Perhaps the Russian factor. He ended up sliding to 10 so obviously there were some doubts with him. I still think Monahan was the obvious choice. Even Mackenzie in that clip says Monahan is the logical choice. Plus if your scouts tell you this is the guy we think we should select I don't see why you would go against them. I'm just so thankful that the teams who did the choosing (Carolina and Edmonton) both seemed to leave us with the better player.
Didn't Nichushkin have a lot of question marks though? Perhaps the Russian factor. He ended up sliding to 10 so obviously there were some doubts with him. I still think Monahan was the obvious choice. Even Mackenzie in that clip says Monahan is the logical choice. Plus if your scouts tell you this is the guy we think we should select I don't see why you would go against them. I'm just so thankful that the teams who did the choosing (Carolina and Edmonton) both seemed to leave us with the better player.
I could see it being a toss-up between Monahan and Nurse. Nichushkin was a risky option, but BPA & organisational needs were fairly clearly favourable to those two.
If 2013 were re-done I imagine it would be Jones/Mackinnon/Monahan as top 3. You could make a pretty convincing argument that Monahan is the best player from that draft so far... [/homer]
At the time of the 2013 draft, Nichushkin could have been a defensible BPA pick for the Flames.
There was a consensus top "elite" 4 for that draft: MacKinnon, Jones, Barkov and Drouin. A lot of draft pundits also said you could probably include Nichushkin in that group. The Russian factor was a concern. There was a decent sized group of posters that wanted the Flames to take Nichushkin.
IIRC he interviewed poorly at the combine, which probably scared a few teams off. His KHL club also made it a condition that if he were to play in North America it would have to be NHL only (i.e. no AHL) or else he would have to be returned to Russia.
All things considered, picking a Russian, non-fluent English speaking RWer over a potential Canadian #1 center, might have been disastrous given that the Flames were essentially at the start of a rebuild. Nichushkin would have been the face of the franchise with no established core and under a microscope without a Seguin and Benn equivalent players to help shelter him. Throw in the fact he has been injured for a good chunk of his NHL career so far...
In 2015, with a core established you could probably argue that now is a time the Flames could take a risk on a player like Nichushkin.
Last edited by sureLoss; 06-05-2015 at 06:00 PM.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
At the time of the 2013 draft, Nichushkin could have been a defensible BPA pick for the Flames.
There was a consensus top "elite" 4 for that draft: MacKinnon, Jones, Barkov and Drouin. A lot of draft pundits also said you could probably include Nichushkin in that group. The Russian factor was a concern. There was a decent sized group of posters that wanted the Flames to take Nichushkin.
IIRC he interviewed poorly at the combine, which probably scared a few teams off. His KHL club also made it a condition that if he were to play in North America it would have to be NHL only (i.e. no AHL) or else he would have to be returned to Russia.
All things considered, picking a Russian, non-fluent English speaking RWer over a potential Canadian #1 center, might have been disastrous given that the Flames were essentially at the start of a rebuild. Nichushkin would have been the face of the franchise with no established core and under a microscope without a Seguin and Benn equivalent players to help shelter him. Throw in the fact he has been injured for a good chunk of his NHL career so far...
In 2015, with a core established you could probably argue that now is a time the Flames could take a risk on a player like Nichushkin.
Great post.
I think now that Calgary has 3 of 6 top six forward spots essentially locked in, they can utilize some of their depth picks on players who are higher risk if it means higher, or quicker, reward.
I think you'll see the Flames overall will pick guys heavy on the 'ready now' body type in the first few rounds. Guys who can maybe step onto the roster after their 19 year old junior year, that sort of thing.
Or maybe they are even more on board than my cautious optimism and they use their depth of picks to get a higher quality pick hoping that player can step onto the roster this coming season.
I'm not sure if there's a defender in this draft that matches that description, but it wouldn't surprise me if Calgary were to trade up to the pick where they think that guy will go.
The team is desperate to find a top 4/top 2 defender that will be playing meaningful minutes for the club as soon as next season. It will be expensive to do it in free agency, so if you can get it at the draft attached to an ELC, I think it's a price worth paying.
The Following User Says Thank You to Flash Walken For This Useful Post:
Didn't Nichushkin have a lot of question marks though? Perhaps the Russian factor. He ended up sliding to 10 so obviously there were some doubts with him. I still think Monahan was the obvious choice. Even Mackenzie in that clip says Monahan is the logical choice. Plus if your scouts tell you this is the guy we think we should select I don't see why you would go against them. I'm just so thankful that the teams who did the choosing (Carolina and Edmonton) both seemed to leave us with the better player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackey
Well thank god Monahan isn't in a Oiler jersey. Not sure where Nurse was ranked but he is below Ristolainen in that TSN ranking in the clip.
I'm a bit confused about how you imagine Edmonton had anything to do with Calgary's selection of Monahan, since he was the #6 draft pick, and the Oilers first pick in 2013 was #7. They took Nurse right after the Flames, so I don't see how that had any effect on what the Flames did that afternoon.
As I recall, when the Flames were making their selection the seemingly obvious choice was between Monahan and Nichushkin. I don't remember many other players entering the conversation. Was there much appetite for the Flames to pick one of the "tier two" defensemen (Nurse, Ristolainen) ahead of one of the "tier two" centres (Monahan, Lindholm)?
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I'm a bit confused about how you imagine Edmonton had anything to do with Calgary's selection of Monahan, since he was the #6 draft pick, and the Oilers first pick in 2013 was #7. They took Nurse right after the Flames, so I don't see how that had any effect on what the Flames did that afternoon.
As I recall, when the Flames were making their selection the seemingly obvious choice was between Monahan and Nichushkin. I don't remember many other players entering the conversation. Was there much appetite for the Flames to pick one of the "tier two" defensemen (Nurse, Ristolainen) ahead of one of the "tier two" centres (Monahan, Lindholm)?
Lindholm was gone at that point, so I believe most of the posters on CP were hoping for Monahan (except for one who was comparing him to some 4th liners from the 70s ).
If the Flames were going to pass on Mony I think they may have picked Nurse. He was ranked around there and had a lot of upside in a position we were lacking prospects. There is also the rumour floating around that Feaster would have dealt that pick + Gaudreau to Boston for Seguin.
Point is, people who don't give Feaster credit for picking Monahan because it was a 'no-brainer' don't realise how easily he could have effed it up.
I'm a bit confused about how you imagine Edmonton had anything to do with Calgary's selection of Monahan, since he was the #6 draft pick, and the Oilers first pick in 2013 was #7. They took Nurse right after the Flames, so I don't see how that had any effect on what the Flames did that afternoon.
As I recall, when the Flames were making their selection the seemingly obvious choice was between Monahan and Nichushkin. I don't remember many other players entering the conversation. Was there much appetite for the Flames to pick one of the "tier two" defensemen (Nurse, Ristolainen) ahead of one of the "tier two" centres (Monahan, Lindholm)?
There was a 1000 post thread before the 2013 draft with the poll Lindholm or Monahan or other.... Lindholm 333, Monahan 311 other 31...
I would suggest that with Lindhom picked at #5 CP would have been pretty united in hating any pick other than Monahan.
I argued for Monahan because he was bigger than Lindholm.....and Lindholm had only 1 minor penalty the whole year in the SEL.
Now Lindholm had 108 hits over the regular season to Monahans 39.
Happy that we got Monahan rather than Lindholm even though Lindholm turned out to be a more aggressive/physical presence.
).
