Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe
In an effort not to further derail the "Flames Sign Russell" thread on the main board, I will reply to this post here.
I see this argument a lot when talking about the Jankowski pick.
Why does it matter so much that whomever the Flames drafted would make the NHL right away? Doesn't drafting like that 'feel' like picking Pelech and Nemisz? How do you feel about the Gaudreau pick (though it was a 4th, it was a project pick nonetheless).
That's where a project pick should go, in the later rounds.
I would prefer that the Flames continually pick BPA regardless of how quickly said player can make the NHL. What matters most is to what level will that prospect play - how big of an impact and how good of a career will that prospect have.
BPA needs to consider the progress of that player. The longer he takes to progress, the more chances to fall off the schedule.
Also, considering where the Flames were when picking Jankowski (nowhere near contending) and where they are now (nowhere near contending in year 1 of the rebuild), does it matter? Isn't it more important that the Flames draft the best possible prospect who they feel will develop into the best possible player?
Yeah, that has nothing to do with it, our poor prospect pool at the time, though does.
Nothing is guaranteed. Jankowski is not guaranteed to ever make the NHL, much less be a 1st line center. However, Maatta is not guaranteed anything either, and there have been prospects who made the NHL, and fizzle out, or just never develop any further.
I disagree strongly, Maatta has already shown as much as we can hope Jankowski shows in another three years.
As long as the Flames did their due-diligence (and by all accounts, they have with regards to scouting him not only thoroughly, but intensively), then I choose to look positively at that pick and agree with the theory behind the selection.
Also, you mention the other point that I see being brought up with regards to Jankowski:
You can look at it that way, sure. Because a team is thin on prospects, they should try and get as many prospects that are less of a 'gamble'? Two things here - Flames scouting felt that Jankowski is not a gamble, just a longer-term project.
I don't think the Jankowski pick had much to do with our scouts. It had everything to do with Weisbrod convincing Feaster how smart they are. As I've said a long term project is a gamble.
Secondly, and just as importantly (imo of course) is that you can look at it the other way. Look at the Flames prospects today. How many are of the 'high-end' variety? Would you agree that today, the Flames have loads of depth? I would say that the statement: "Flames are booming at depth prospects" to be fairly accurate. I would definitely not argue that statement.
Now how many 1st line potential players are there in the system? How many 'high-end' prospects are there? Not very many at all.
Depth is easy to acquire for the most part - through drafting it, through signing as free agents, or from trading a 'high end player' for many depth ones (Phaneuf trade). What is very difficult to acquire are 1st line players, 1st pairing defenders, with 1st line centers being the very hardest of all to acquire.
Yeah true but this goes back to, were we in a position to gamble? We weren't.
If the Flames felt (after their exhaustive scouting efforts) that Jankowski can very well develop into the next Joe Nieuwendyk, I say good for them for sticking to their guns. IMO (not being a Feaster apologist at all), this was one of the few bright altruistic moves Feaster has made in his tenure here (though I did notice that he pushed the "Weisbrod fell in love with him", and "Wesibrod told me not to trade the pick", etc., which felt like he was setting up Weisbrod in case it didn't work out). It would have been easier for Feaster to select a more NHL-ready prospect and throw him on the team sooner, and say: "Hey, look how good I am" than listening to his scouting staff, and letting them pick who they thought was the best pick down the road.
I think this pick was the, "Hey, look how good (smart) I am".
Finding a 1st line player in the mid-first round and lower (especially centers with size) is about as common as finding Leprechauns and Unicorns. I am tempering my expectations here, but I do agree on the logic with them.
I would much rather the Flames continue to choose the best player available regardless of position and regardless of NHL-readiness, as it seems like the best way to continually build an NHL club towards that of becoming a contender. In light of the Flames seemingly improved drafting (that seemed to really turn around in 2010), it personally gives me more reason to give them the benefit of the doubt. If I still hated the way the Flames were drafting, I would probably be siding more on your thoughts actually, as I would trust the scouts less (and thus, be more likely to evaluate picking Jankowski as just a big 'mess' of a pick).
As said NHL readiness is an indication of BPA. Anyways this BPA mantra is over stated and is a big criticism of that special team up north.
I am cautiously optimistic on this pick, and think he will make the NHL, but if he doesn't I still won't fault the logic behind the pick, but rather the projection being inaccurate or the development environment not being enough (or both), but will still look positively on the Flames for sticking with their guns and placing the long-term future of the organization square in its' sights when they decided to select Jankowski, rather than trying to appease fans, 'win-now', or as a job preservation tactic.
|