Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Huh? Methinks you're massively underrating the fact he was a rookie and learning the NHL game. Not to mention being paired with a 4th line grinder in Hathaway for a lot of the year who was a total black hole offensively.
Jankowski finished 65th in the league for goals from a centreman with 17. As a rookie. That's very much solidly in the top 90, therefore top 3 lines. Low assist total? Look no further than being paired with a snakebit Bennett and a low skill grinder in Hathaway for a huge chunk of the year. When he gets paired with Gaudreau and Ferland late in the season he exploded.
He's definitely a work in progress. But lets say you give him Matt Tkachuk on his LW and acquire a top two line RWer I think 20g, 50 points from him would be very achievable.
GG really did not set that 3rd line up to succeed halfway through the year. Stick a struggling centre in Jankowski with a struggling winger in Bennett and a 4th line grinder in Hathaway. Not a recipe to create a scoring line at all. Bennett and Jankowski should've been split up and played with veterans IMO to help get their offensive confidence up.
Jankowski was a top two line centre for a college champion. He was a good 1st line centre for our farm team as a rookie pro. He definitely projects easily as a top 3 centre when fully developed and likely a top two centre IMO. Natural progression should see him step it up next season. I expect bigger things out of Jankowski next year, why wouldn't we expect that? Given his development and progression it should be very achievable.
|
I love Jankowski but I think he struggled as a center. Significantly moreso than Bennett ever did but it kind of gets lost in the mix for a few reasons (the fact that he never played wing, the fact that he got a linemate as solid as Bennett, and a bias towards his size). I wouldn't mind seeing Jankowski see some time higher up the lineup on the wing. I feel more comfortable with Bennett down the middle as his two-way game is more tight-checking IMO.