Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Stain
Those guys all saw zero AHL games and jumped directly into the NHL with the exception of Krieder who played in the NHL playoffs first and then saw some time in the AHL.
They aren't really accurate comparables. I did a post on this before. Its hard to find college guys who had a good season in the AHL at the age of 22 and didn't see any real NHL time.
|
And that helps my argument lol. Those guys jumped from college to the NHL. Jankowski had a full extra year of development in the minors. Therefore he should be even more ready to contribute than they were. So to suggest he's less ready is a bizarre stance to take. I'd argue he's more highly touted than Drury or Reinprecht at the same stage in their development.
You know why it's hard to find examples like Janko? Because he's a unique prospect on his own unique development path. Guess how many guys drafted in the 1st round out of Canadian prep school, played 4 years in college and then a year in the minors are there? 1, Jankowski. Trying to use his unique development path as a reason why he's unlikely to step in is a pretty weak argument.
Closest comparables are really Wheeler and Colborne. But both were persuaded to leave college early. It didn't hurt Wheeler but arguably Colborne might've developed into something a lot better if he had cooked longer in college and the minors.
Let's not forget Jankowski actually went to college a year early. Originally he was going to go to the USHL for a year before going to college. He's actually a younger 4 year grad than most hockey players are. Many don't take this into account when hlooking at his development trajectory. If he had gone to the USHL he would have ripped it up. Then going into college a year later he would have been more of an impact player right away. If he had gone to the USHL first he would only have just graduated.