Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Fool
You're right. He was a long-term prospect from the start and it'll be interesting to see how a player like him develops.
The one thing for me is that the pick was sometimes defended by saying that it was a bad draft so you could take a chance on a player that has many attributes but has only played low-level hockey. I think it's beginning to look like there were several picks available with high potential and less risk. However, Jankowski may still prove to have been a good choice.
|
Yes, I remember everything that was said at the time about it being a poorer draft, and that it was used to support the Jankowski pick. I think Weisbrod had initially told Feaster to trade the 1st pick away, until he saw Jankowski.
They scouted him intensely and liked him enough to pick him over guys that were closer to the NHL. Flames drafted him based on what type of player he could be down the road versus what type of player he is now. I think it will keep on looking like a risk pick until Jankowski makes the NHL, or at least really lights up the NCAA. Until then, there will always be arguments over how smart of a pick that was. I personally really like it - 6'4" (or whatever he is) centermen who are very good skaters, and have talent like him are very rare in the NHL, and are usually thought of as 'franchise players'. If he develops into that, then it becomes: "Philadelphia was so stupid for selecting Laughton ahead of Jankowksi".
He is the most interesting prospect (in my eyes) due to his status as a project coupled with his huge possible impact for the Flames down the road if he pans out.
