Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio
Look at it analytically. Gillies has put up stellar numbers since hes been drafted. Jankowski has finally started putting up expected numbers. Gillies has always been a starter since his draft. Jankowski wasn't his team's number one centre until his 4th year of NCAA, arguably his 3rd. Relative to goalie prospects, Gillies has always been a top prospect. Relative to centres, Jankowski has always been controversial.
Hell, Jankowski wasnt even highly touted by Flames fans until after his 4th year and AHL stint. Gillies has always ranked high amongst Flames fans.
Edit: Jankowski won by less than 2% over Gillies. He received a minority victory, since less than 50% of those who voted had him as #2. That's not "hands down" aggregate consensus.
|
I am not even getting into an argument that defends Jankowski, or any other prospect. I just don't get why you have to try and constantly argue that Jankowski is too highly rated and that somehow people are wrong for having him that high. You don't know that. You may have a different opinion, and of course you should voice it and create discussion of the like on this board, but you are repeating yourself ad nauseum. This is a Kylington thread.
As for people not being high on Jankowski until after his 4th year - I don't think you have been paying attention. Just look up my posts since he was drafted, or Mastadon's posts, or a number of other posters who followed his development closely. He had quite the number of 'fans' here from the start, so blanket statements don't hold much water and aren't gospel.
I am not high on Shinkaruk at all - I personally don't think he will amount to very much in the NHL - but I don't repeat myself and try to change people's opinions. Why? Because way too many prospects go out and make NHL scouts, GMs and other experts fools.
Just even looking at the Flames it is plain as day:
Loob in the 9th round
Suter in the 9th round
Hull in the 6th round (and already twice passed over in the draft, ffs!)
Fleury in the 8th round
How about an undrafted St Louis
Our currently undrafted captain
How about a 4th round 5'6", 135lb forward becoming one of the most talked about players in the entire NHL due to his success thus far?
Did you have Gaudreau ranked ahead of Baertschi his draft year?
Point is, why go to great lengths to continually beat a drum that a prospect you don't like as much is too highly regarded by other people on this forum? It is one thing to defend a prospect you like from posters prematurely calling said prospect a bust, and pointing out the strengths and coming up with compelling arguments as to why some people are being premature with bust statements. It is something else to tell people that they are wrong to like a prospect.
I don't like Shinkaruk much as a prospect - but that doesn't mean that Shinkaruk is going to be a bust. Heck, he could end up being a completely awesome player for Calgary who becomes regarded as not only a core piece, but that 'franchise changing' player. Sure, I would bet money against it, but why would I go on this forum and continually criticize people for liking him?
Do you get where I am going with this? Your easy response is that this is a forum and you are simply having a discussion, and so on. You are 100% right with that argument. What you could very well be wrong with is your own projections and rankings of prospects that you won't stop about. This isn't terrible in itself, but what rubs people the wrong way is when focus on a prospect negatively over and over.. and over. You are not 'more right' for being down on a prospect like Jankowski if you keep it up and actually sway some people into doubting him, just like I will not be more right by firing off 10 posts in short order extolling his virtues and swinging people back.
It wasn't long ago that Baertschi was heralded as the next face of the franchise who just couldn't miss with his hard working nature and skill level. He flopped. Barely anyone beating the drum for Brodie as a sure-fire NHL player, much less reaching this level. It is not wrong to be very high on Jankowski because, you know what? He has been developing positively every year without stagnating, and though his sample size was short, he looked pretty good in the AHL and instantly gained the coach's trust. Why is it wrong to have him ranked anywhere?
You are not wrong for ranking him lower, as I am not wrong for ranking him higher - at least not at this point, because nobody here knows where any prospect will develop into with time. No need to tell people they were wrong, as it could just as easily be you that is wrong in time and needlessly throwing around a cold bucket of negativity - at least not as often as you are doing, imo.