Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Am I correct to assume then, that if Jankowski tops out as a good, top-six forward that your response would be something like:
"*phew*! That was lucky, but what a stupid pick!" ?
My take is a little different: When the pick was made and then explained by Flames management, it seemed more of a case in which the team had nothing to lose, but could potentially make a massive gain. With how shallow the prospect pool was heading into the 2012 draft, the Flames' fortunes were not going to be dramatically affected by the addition of any single player from that class, given that the draft class on the whole was also considerably below average in quality. The Flames were not getting a game-breaker, and possibly not even a regular top-six / top-four skater from the consensus picks. Jankowski represented a good opportunity to pick a player that could top out as an elite, top line centre. It is a long shot, but the ceiling and the circumstances made it an okay pick.
|
That logic seems backwards to me. If I'm broke, I should gamble what money I have left because that not won't mean much in the long run....?
The only time you can gamble a top pick is of you're stacked. Even then, it seems silly