Mark "Fricken" Jankowski (aka The Big Jankowski)

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by JayP

Isn't that what we all do with prospects though (especially NCAA guys)?

We all gush over Gaudreau here, but how many people on this forum saw him play before the world juniors this year? 1%?

There's been opportunities to watch Gaudreau on TV this year, even outside of the WJCs.

I don't know if "we all do it" but I certainly don't draw strong conclusions on any player that I haven't watched.

I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "Jankowski only had 1 point in this blow out, didn't watch it but can someone tell us how he did" rather than jump to an immediate negative conclusion on the basis of the stat sheet.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I think people take issue with judging a player purely on stats, while at least not admitting that such a viewpoint is very limited.

Right, so when it fits a Flames prospect in a positive light that's ok - Gaudreau, Howse, Ramo and so on? I'm sure everyone who comments on those players watches them all the time. Besides that fact, who's being negative towards the kid here? I certainly don't recall ripping on Jankowski and it certainly didn't seem like the poster being scrutinized was either.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

The poster I responded to was going off the deep end because someone was surprised the kid didn't do much statistically in a blowout game. Generally top players hit the stats sheets fairly significantly in blowouts. Is this one game a sign of poor play, probably not.

I really don't get why great lengths need to be taken to ensure Jankowski is sheltered from any sort of critique? He's a first round pick. Anything short of a great second half this year would be a disappointment and hopefully based on his play of late he should be rounding into form.

As someone who was at that game and watched him intently the entire time it was certainly not a sign of poor play. People who look at stat sheets, particularly such basic stats as goals and assists, and think they say anything significant about how a player played are out to lunch.

Had there been an actual critique based upon watching a game then sure, critique away. Looking at a stat sheet doesn't give any basis to do that though.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by valo403

As someone who was at that game and watched him intently the entire time it was certainly not a sign of poor play. People who look at stat sheets, particularly such basic stats as goals and assists, and think they say anything significant about how a player played are out to lunch.

Had you made an actual critique based upon watching a game then sure, critique away. Looking at a stat sheet doesn't give any basis to do that though.

Please reference the post you are commenting on, particularly the segment you bolded, and let me know where I've passed any judgement on Jankowski as you claim? I certainly did not and in my opinion the original post being referenced did not either.

Furthermore, by your logic this thread shouldn't even exist as 99% of posters have no chance, time or ability to watch any prospects on their own. Looking at stats is really the only option yet this is somehow not a favorable method to begin discussion .

[valo403]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

Please reference the post you are commenting on, particularly the segment you bolded, and let me know where I've passed any judgement on Jankowski as you claim? I certainly did not and in my opinion the original post being referenced did not either.

Furthermore, by your logic this thread shouldn't even exist as 99% of posters have no chance, time or ability to watch any prospects on their own. Looking at stats is really the only option yet this is somehow not a favorable method to begin discussion .

I edited my post to reflect that you weren't the one making the judgement, but the rest of the post still stands.

And you're 100% right on the money with your second paragraph, talking about how it's "disappointing" that a guy "only managed one point" is not at all a favorable method to begin discussion.

I will say again, analysis based solely on stats (particularly basic stats) is garbage.

[Vulcan]

Myself, I'd rather Jankowski plays tough competition than light it up in the USHL, which is where he was planning to go. He wasn't tested in high school and probably the coaching wasn't that great either, so he's had a bigger than normal adjustment.

[Tilley]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Myself, I'd rather Jankowski plays tough competition than light it up in the USHL, which is where he was planning to go. He wasn't tested in high school and probably the coaching wasn't that great either, so he's had a bigger than normal adjustment.

There's the issue for stat watchers in my opinion. If he would have gone to Dubuque instead of Providence, Jankowski is likely lighting up the league and making the stat watchers giddy. Instead he is at a higher level of hockey, competing while continuing to develop and putting up good numbers as a freshman. The stats don't bear it out, but he is developing.

Having had the opportunity to watch him on tv and online a couple of times this season, he has improved even in my limited viewings. He has the offensive skill, but he needs to continue to develop some defensive acumen before he can be considered a legit centre prospect. If he were to get to the NHL he needs to be able to defend against other 1st/2nd line centers to be effective. While the stats don't show this development, this is the key to his NHL future as his hands, skating and creativity will remain.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

Right, so when it fits a Flames prospect in a positive light that's ok - Gaudreau, Howse, Ramo and so on? .

Not sure where I said that.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Not sure where I said that.

The thing is, you didn't. I was merely making a statement similar to the one that you made when you inferred that I/the OP were analyzing prospects "incorrectly" by your standards.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, Jiri. For some reason in your eyes its ok for posters to go off the wall when a prospect has a big statistical game (evident by your lack of concern to this pressing issue in other threads). Alas, when one has a quiet night its hush hush and unfair to mention.

I think everyone agrees that one game is not a legitimate sample size for critique but its hardly taboo to at least bring up as the poster did.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

The thing is, you didn't. I was merely making a statement similar to the one that you made when you inferred that I/the OP were analyzing prospects "incorrectly" by your standards.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, Jiri. For some reason in your eyes its ok for posters to go off the wall when a prospect has a big statistical game (evident by your lack of concern to this pressing issue in other threads). Alas, when one has a quiet night its hush hush and unfair to mention.

I think everyone agrees that one game is not a legitimate sample size for critique but its hardly taboo to at least bring up as the poster did.

It's not taboo, it's just stupid, particularly in light of the fact that someone was actually there to watch the game in question and completely reject any notion of him having a bad game.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

The thing is, you didn't. I was merely making a statement similar to the one that you made when you inferred that I/the OP were analyzing prospects "incorrectly" by your standards.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, Jiri. For some reason in your eyes its ok for posters to go off the wall when a prospect has a big statistical game (evident by your lack of concern to this pressing issue in other threads). Alas, when one has a quiet night its hush hush and unfair to mention.

I think everyone agrees that one game is not a legitimate sample size for critique but its hardly taboo to at least bring up as the poster did.

I fully admit I have more patience for opinions that are more optimistic, even when they are not well founded. I think fans should be entitled to be excited about players and prospects, and that those that try to pour cold water over everything should be questioned more harshly. Not saying that's fair, but there it is.

[Azure]

I don't get what the problem is here. He was playing in a high school league last year. He's playing at a WAY higher level right now, in a WAY more competitive and tough league. Most of us would say he's doing pretty good if you strictly want to look at point totals. I would say he's doing fabulous simply considering where he was last year.

Oh, and the Flyers won 7-1 the other night. Giroux had one point? I don't think he even scored. So there are obviously blowouts where star players don't do much in terms of getting on the score sheet.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

The thing is, you didn't. I was merely making a statement similar to the one that you made when you inferred that I/the OP were analyzing prospects "incorrectly" by your standards.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, Jiri. For some reason in your eyes its ok for posters to go off the wall when a prospect has a big statistical game (evident by your lack of concern to this pressing issue in other threads). Alas, when one has a quiet night its hush hush and unfair to mention.

I think everyone agrees that one game is not a legitimate sample size for critique but its hardly taboo to at least bring up as the poster did.

Pressing issue? Really?

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I fully admit I have more patience for opinions that are more optimistic, even when they are not well founded. I think fans should be entitled to be excited about players and prospects, and that those that try to pour cold water over everything should be questioned more harshly. Not saying that's fair, but there it is.

And where was the negative opinion put forth, Jiri? I certainly said nothing negative towards him, nor did the other poster. Personally, I'm excited about the Flames prospects and I'd like to discuss the player(s). If this involves someone posing the question as to why he/they didn't produce in a certain game I'd much rather talk about why that is instead of bickering with you or anyone else as to the merit of the question.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by valo403

It's not taboo, it's just stupid, particularly in light of the fact that someone was actually there to watch the game in question and completely reject any notion of him having a bad game.

What's stupid is you flying off the handle because I made mention that a poster need not be called out for posing a question regarding a prospect. If its your opinion that no one on this forum should be able to discuss a prospect based purely on stats then shouldn't this entire site shut down? I'm sure every player in the Flames system is watched thoroughly on a nightly basis before anyone comments on them.....

No one even said anything negative or positive about the player and yet you immediately have warped the comments into some grandiose attack on Jankowski. Get real.

[Francis's Hairpiece]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

And where was the negative opinion put forth, Jiri? I certainly said nothing negative towards him, nor did the other poster. Personally, I'm excited about the Flames prospects and I'd like to discuss the player(s). If this involves someone posing the question as to why he/they didn't produce in a certain game I'd much rather talk about why that is instead of bickering with you or anyone else as to the merit of the question.

Yes, you've certainly been the model of optimism and positive thinking up til now.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

What's stupid is you flying off the handle because I made mention that a poster need not be called out for posing a question regarding a prospect. If its your opinion that no one on this forum should be able to discuss a prospect based purely on stats then shouldn't this entire site shut down? I'm sure every player in the Flames system is watched thoroughly on a nightly basis before anyone comments on them.....

No one even said anything negative or positive about the player and yet you immediately have warped the comments into some grandiose attack on Jankowski. Get real.

Flying off the handle? Get a grip

[Flames Draft Watcher]

nm. flamesaresmokin isn't worth it

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by valo403

Flying off the handle? Get a grip

Well I'd say that making baseless claims that I've somehow slighted Jankowski qualifies.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by Francis's Hairpiece

Yes, you've certainly been the model of optimism and positive thinking up til now.

Ah yes, the realization that someone has failed to spin an argument into another debate of he said, she said on here instead of actually talking about the topic at hand.

But yes, let's continue to pretend that I somehow slighted Jankowski in any way to suit your own fractured ego.