[News] With the 21st overall pick Flames select C Mark Jankowski

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

lol that's who he was talking about.

If we had picked a goalie in the first round that year, a Russian goalie at that, the fury on this board would have been much worse then it was about Jankowski. That's his point.

So what's his point other than saying some posters would have been outraged, he still would have been the better pick. When three years later you can say a goalie would have been the better pick along with at least 5 other players we could have chosen, you know something's wrong.

[dieHARDflameZ]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

So what's his point other than saying some posters would have been outraged, he still would have been the better pick. When three years later you can say a goalie would have been the better pick along with at least 5 other players we could have chosen, you know something's wrong.

I could make a very strong argument that if and when Jankowski does play in the NHL, he'll be a more well rounded player than any of those five guys you're referring to.

[JohnnySkittles]

Originally Posted by dieHARDflameZ

I could make a very strong argument that if and when Jankowski does play in the NHL, he'll be a more well rounded player than any of those five guys you're referring to.

Lets hear it

[MrMastodonFarm]

lol nvm, too many afternoon sun beers to even care about this tired old debate with the same loonies!

[GGG]

I'm surprised we didn't sign him this year and hope it was his choice not the organizations. Going into year 4 gives him lots of flexibility on who he chooses to play for next year and our roster isn't he easiest to crack for a young center.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

lol nvm, too many afternoon sun beers to even care about this tired old debate with the same loonies!

There you go again with your personal insults over a matter of opinion. How about we leave the emotions out of it.

[FBI]

Hey JohnnySkittles if you are looking for some fun reading on a Sunday afternoon about Jankowski, here ya go: 2200 responses..
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=118910

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

There you go again with your personal insults over a matter of opinion. How about we leave the emotions out of it.

Ha! I'm fully in the loonie group, you big silly.

[Superfraggle]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

So what's his point other than saying some posters would have been outraged, he still would have been the better pick. When three years later you can say a goalie would have been the better pick along with at least 5 other players we could have chosen, you know something's wrong.

Jiri's point was that the poster he was quoting was using 20/20 hindsight to criticize decisions made without that knowledge (Using Vasilevskiy as a specific example). He pointed out that people would have been pissed if we'd picked a goalie in the first round. The person you quoted just added the fact that he was Russian to how pissed people would have been at the time.

All this confusion could have been avoided if you had bothered to read the posts that were being quoted.

[dieHARDflameZ]

Originally Posted by JohnnySkittles

Lets hear it

I think a lot of people focus to much on the fact player 'x' has played in the NHL, while player 'y' still hasn't three years after being drafted, therefore x is better than y.

Girgensons plays on the Sabres. They're not exactly the deepest team in the NHL and quite frankly if Jankowski was a part of that organization, he very well may have some time in the NHL at this point as well.

Teravainen is pretty well a top six or bust style of player. I certainly don't see him sticking long term in the NHL unless he's putting up 40+ points a season and at this juncture he's not there yet. Pretty much the same can be said for Hertl who suffered a major sophomore slump last season.

Tom Wilson plays an entirely different game all together from Jankowski. He is a hard-nosed, rugged winger who plays the body every chance he gets. Sure, he's played a season or two in the NHL, but he's a third line checker.

As I said in my lengthy post above, Jankowski plays PP, PK and is often relied upon to help protect leads in the dying moments of 1 goal games. He's excellent in the face off dot and he plays a very well rounded 200 foot game. When he comes out of college after playing for a strong defensive program like Providence he'll be far more competent at both ends of the ice. I'm not saying he's going to be a future all star, but I do see him as the kind of player that can slot in anywhere in the lineup and produce in a variety of ways, not just scoring points.

When a player commits to playing college hockey, it's very rare they leave school before their third or fourth years. It should not be a complete shock that Jankowski hasn't played a game in the NHL three years after being drafted. A player like Jack Eichel who more than likely will be leaving after one year, is an exception, not the norm.

Like I said above, I'll take the wait and see approach, but until he plays a game of professional hockey, it's ludicrous to be guaranteeing that Girgensons, Wilson, Hertl, TT, Ceci and Maata were better picks just because they have NHL experience.

[dammage79]

But Hertl scored the goal of the year two seasons ago! That has to count for something no? /sarasm

Hertl hasn't done much since his rookie year. Not a great comparable player. Could very well be another victim of the Thornton/Marleau curse where you suck forever after.

Maata and Ceci I can see a solid regret/argument but looking at the Flames' biggest most dire need at the time, Jankowski/Seiloff made the most sense.

[JohnnySkittles]

Originally Posted by dieHARDflameZ

I think a lot of people focus to much on the fact player 'x' has played in the NHL, while player 'y' still hasn't three years after being drafted, therefore x is better than y.

Fair point.

Girgensons plays on the Sabres. They're not exactly the deepest team in the NHL and quite frankly if Jankowski was a part of that organization, he very well may have some time in the NHL at this point as well.

Disagree. They're not the deepest team in the NHL but there's no way Jankowski would've seen any time with the Sabres. Also are taking away what Girgensons' done, he's been great for Buffalo this season despite the shameful tank season they had. He's a special player, future #2C all situations guy IMO.

Teravainen is pretty well a top six or bust style of player. I certainly don't see him sticking long term in the NHL unless he's putting up 40+ points a season and at this juncture he's not there yet. Pretty much the same can be said for Hertl who suffered a major sophomore slump last season.

He's not there yet no, but way too early to doubt him. Top 6 or bust yes, but he's an incredibly skilled player and being on a team like Chicago I can't see him busting. He's their replacement for Sharp.

Tom Wilson plays an entirely different game all together from Jankowski. He is a hard-nosed, rugged winger who plays the body every chance he gets. Sure, he's played a season or two in the NHL, but he's a third line checker.

True, they're very different players and hard to compare. But Wilson has been great for Washington, look for him to take off next season. Lucic esque. If Jankowski pans out well it's a wash.

As I said in my lengthy post above, Jankowski plays PP, PK and is often relied upon to help protect leads in the dying moments of 1 goal games. He's excellent in the face off dot and he plays a very well rounded 200 foot game. When he comes out of college after playing for a strong defensive program like Providence he'll be far more competent at both ends of the ice. I'm not saying he's going to be a future all star, but I do see him as the kind of player that can slot in anywhere in the lineup and produce in a variety of ways, not just scoring points.

Good points, no disagreement.

When a player commits to playing college hockey, it's very rare they leave school before their third or fourth years. It should not be a complete shock that Jankowski hasn't played a game in the NHL three years after being drafted. A player like Jack Eichel who more than likely will be leaving after one year, is an exception, not the norm.

I'm not surprised at all that he hasn't seen the NHL, I fully expect him to do with full four years. It's usually only the top college prospects that leave after a year or two.

Like I said above, I'll take the wait and see approach, but until he plays a game of professional hockey, it's ludicrous to be guaranteeing that Girgensons, Wilson, Hertl, TT, Ceci and Maata were better picks just because they have NHL experience.

As of today, they're better. They are helping/contributing to their Clubs. In a few years when we actually see how Jankowski will do is a better time to really compare them, but as of right now they are the better picks IMO.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Superfraggle

Jiri's point was that the poster he was quoting was using 20/20 hindsight to criticize decisions made without that knowledge (Using Vasilevskiy as a specific example). He pointed out that people would have been pissed if we'd picked a goalie in the first round. The person you quoted just added the fact that he was Russian to how pissed people would have been at the time.

All this confusion could have been avoided if you had bothered to read the posts that were being quoted.

I read the posts although I missed where the Russian reference came from although you seemed to have missed the point that I was making, that despite the outrage which is just another emotional reaction, the truth is the Russian goalie would have been the better pick. I found it interesting because I've previously compared the Jankowski pick with picking a goalie because they both are predicted to take about the same time to see any results. The advantage with a goalie is you get an extra year before they need to pass through waivers.

In the long run though, I'm a Flames fan so I hope all our prospects do well, including Jankowski.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I read the posts although I missed where the Russian reference came from although you seemed to have missed the point that I was making, that despite the outrage which is just another emotional reaction, the truth is the Russian goalie would have been the better pick. I found it interesting because I've previously compared the Jankowski pick with picking a goalie because they both are predicted to take about the same time to see any results. The advantage with a goalie is you get an extra year before they need to pass through waivers.

In the long run though, I'm a Flames fan so I hope all our prospects do well, including Jankowski.

You're the classic example of someone who decided to take a stance about something a long time ago and out of stubborn pride you feel compelled to beat a drum about it. Any time it's brought up you're here like you're on the campaign trail for your view of this being a negative pick.

Really odd.

The players continuously mentioned might have played a handful of NHL games / gotten a few points in the pros as it sits now. If it makes anyone feel more confident to proclaim them better pics - at this stage - (no matter how futile and premature that notion is) that's great. Either way, it's still way too early to be making any kind of concrete opinions about players picked in the teens and 20s of that draft.

Everyone knew Jankowski was going to be a project pick that would be years away, and he had a great season this year and has been making strides in several areas. Those playing the hindsight game are really wasting their own time. The guy is in our system for better or for worse, and good on the bump for this thread as he's definitely trending toward the better right now.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by JohnnySkittles

As of today, they're better. They are helping/contributing to their Clubs. In a few years when we actually see how Jankowski will do is a better time to really compare them, but as of right now they are the better picks IMO.

This is the crux of what I disagree with. Saying they are better picks because they are in the NHL and Janko isn't just doesn't make sense - because he hasn't had the opportunity to be in the NHL.
So it isn't apples to apples in the least.

[saillias]

Yes people value a prospect playing in the NHL. That is the express purpose of a prospect and the ultimate goal of your draft and development. Get the player to the NHL. Careers are short, an athlete's window of competition can be short, so yes it matters how quickly they make it, and how quickly they contribute. Nathan Horton is/was done at 28, 29. Mike Richards and Dustin Brown are not far behind, from the same draft class. You absolutely hold guys from a draft class in higher regard who have made it over the guys who haven't.

Originally Posted by GGG

I'm surprised we didn't sign him this year and hope it was his choice not the organizations. Going into year 4 gives him lots of flexibility on who he chooses to play for next year and our roster isn't he easiest to crack for a young center.

So is there a window to do that, and it has closed? He's going back to Providence for sure?

I was hoping there was a chance he would turn pro next year.

[saillias]

Edit: delete n/m

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

You're the classic example of someone who decided to take a stance about something a long time ago and out of stubborn pride you feel compelled to beat a drum about it. Any time it's brought up you're here like you're on the campaign trail for your view of this being a negative pick.

Really odd.

The players continuously mentioned might have played a handful of NHL games / gotten a few points in the pros as it sits now. If it makes anyone feel more confident to proclaim them better pics - at this stage - (no matter how futile and premature that notion is) that's great. Either way, it's still way too early to be making any kind of concrete opinions about players picked in the teens and 20s of that draft.

Everyone knew Jankowski was going to be a project pick that would be years away, and he had a great season this year and has been making strides in several areas. Those playing the hindsight game are really wasting their own time. The guy is in our system for better or for worse, and good on the bump for this thread as he's definitely trending toward the better right now.

I wasn't the one who brought up his draft position so yeah I'm guilty of getting drawn into that discussion again but so are you and you continue to as you say 'beat the drum', but I should stop, right?

As for everyone knowing he was a project, that doesn't make the pick reasonable, it just means he was more of a gamble. What you find odd about my opinion I find the opinion of a couple of other posters odd.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by saillias

So is there a window to do that, and it has closed? He's going back to Providence for sure?

I was hoping there was a chance he would turn pro next year.

There is no window, technically, but it is almost assured that he will be going back for his senior year.

Flames would have likely signed him at the same times as Gillies and brought him to Calgary during the playoffs if he was going to go pro.

Providence's recruitment pipeline doesn't seem to indicate that they are preparing for his departure either. Most college players by now have indicated to their head coaches whether they are planning on going pro next season or not, so that their programs can prepare the best they can for the loss of the player.

Its been suggested by some that the Flames may wait until development camp to sign him, but that doesn't make any sense to me. Not sure what development camp playing against prospects (many of which may be touching ice for the first time in months) will tell the Flames that playing in the NCAA tournament will tell them.

[FlameZilla]

Originally Posted by saillias

Yes people value a prospect playing in the NHL. That is the express purpose of a prospect and the ultimate goal of your draft and development. Get the player to the NHL. Careers are short, an athlete's window of competition can be short, so yes it matters how quickly they make it, and how quickly they contribute. Nathan Horton is/was done at 28, 29. Mike Richards and Dustin Brown are not far behind, from the same draft class. You absolutely hold guys from a draft class in higher regard who have made it over the guys who haven't.

No. The ultimate goal (of a good franchise's) draft and development is to supply the team with impact players. Players who can contribute to making the team as a whole more competitive. Sometimes that involves taking risks, or being patient with longer term projects.

Previous regimes in Calgary (Sutter *cough*) were fixated on drafting guys who they thought they could guarantee would make the NHL in any capacity. To me that is why our drafting stunk for so long. Pelechs and Chuckos were drafted because Sutter thought they were safe bets to make The Show, even if it was only in a 4th line capacity. That policy breeds mediocrity. You set the bar that low and you're bound to be disappointed.

I liked the Jankowski pick at the time (loved it, actually) because they took a risk. They thought Janko had the highest ceiling of the players that were available to them. They were also well aware that Janko was at least 5 years away from stepping onto an NHL ice surface.

Of all the players we missed out on by drafting Jankowski, Maata is the only one I would remotely consider picking if we had a mulligan. Though Maata was a highly-touted prospect, NHL ready, his ceiling was never deemed to be very high. I doubt anyone will ever be nominating him for a Norris, or describe him as a game-breaker. He's just a steady NHL D-man who happened to be ready to go straight out of the tin. Jankowski could still be a gamebreaker, only he needs more time on the boil.

Most importantly, Jankowksi is a complete player who has great playmaking skills on top of being excellent defensively and at faceoffs. By the time he's fully developed he might be the piece of the puzzle that pushes this team into contention. A player like that could slot in on any line and make an impact. Players like that are gold dust. Steady top 4 D like Maata are a little bit easier to find.