Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Man I hope you're right!
I see more of a two way Joel Otto type, a guy with great value, but not a core piece or a top six. Both are good results, but I'm hoping you win this argument!
|
Why do you feel that though? I feel like Nieuwendyk is a closer comparable in terms of style. I dunno every time I've seen Jankowski his skill is obvious. The skating, the skill, the face-offs. He just needed time to mature and fill out. His AHL year was tremendous and certainly showed him to be a skill centre. Otto wasn't really a super skilled guy from what I remember of him. More of a grinding, defensive centre. That isn't really Jankowski from what I've seen of him. He's a skilled, playmaking, offensive centre.
I think the good teams in the NHL don't have a top 6/bottom 6 differentiation. I think the best teams in the league roll their top 3 lines fairly equally at even strength and basically have two 1st lines and a 2nd line, or two 2nd lines and a 1st line. So I don't think Bennett and Jankowski have a huge roadblock with Monahan/Backlund in front of them because I see us being able to construct 3 scoring lines to make a tremendous top 9.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Assigning players to a definition is clearly pretty subjective. I have a tight line for the term blue chip. I like Valimaki, and I think his selection was spot on by the team but a) at 16th overall I don't see him a bluechip and b) I think he needs to do something in his 19th year first
|
I have a tight definition for it as well. I just think you may be putting a bit too much stock in his draft position and perhaps underrating the depth from last year. This is a kid that the Flames had top 11, in a pretty good draft year in terms of depth. So basically a borderline top 10 pick. Flames were crossing their fingers hoping he would fall. Are you suggesting only top 5ish guys can be blue-chippers? Tod Button said he has top two defenseman upside. He seems to be pretty comparable to Juolevi who went top 5 the year before. It all adds up to bluechip to me. Not even debatable for me. The scouts and GM have gushed about him. People were impressed by him at development camp, at the WJC summer camps.
In the end I think he's underhyped because we're asset rich. People don't need to be pinning hopes and dreams on him because he was drafted right as we're leaving the rebuild. Seems like he's been underrated in our prospect poll and by you IMO. I'd say he's our most hyped defense prospect since Phaneuf. Total blue-chipper. He can defend, rush the puck, join the attack, shows leadership, eats minutes. What more does he have to do to be considered bluechip? He put up over a point per game in his draft year. I couldn't believe Andersson was voted ahead of him in our prospect poll, to me that shows a shocking underrating of Valimaki's upside. I see Valimaki as having top pairing upside and I don't think Andersson has that upside.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
He's a goalie, they're bat#### crazy to project. Looks amazing so far and if I had to pick I'd say he's the goalie of the future but I need to see what he does this season first.
|
Yeah but we've never had a goalie prospect this highly thought of in my time of following the team. The press on him from outside scouts and people who follow the OHL is pretty wild. I tend to think if the majority of people outside of Calgary consider him one of the most bluechip goalie prospects outside the NHL we probably should follow suit even though we're a bit wary of ranking them highly. All this kid does is win. And after Dvorak/Marner/Tkachuk left he still wowed. He's impressed at every level. Sure pro is going to be a new challenge but this guy is hyped.
As I said I think you're being super, super conservative to say we have no blue-chippers. Cause in my mind we have 3 guys who are no question blue chippers. Not even close or debatable to me. I see Valimaki, Jankowski and Parsons as not being that far behind Monahan, Tkachuk and Bennett in terms of prospect status before making the NHL.