Mark "Fricken" Jankowski (aka The Big Jankowski)

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by GrammarPolice

So would you put $1000 on Jankowski becoming a regular NHLer within a reasonable timetable?

Nope.

[GrammarPolice]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Nope.

Can't say I blame you.

As much as I think the pick was a stretch I do have to give Feaster credit for taking the chance. If Jankowski does become an impact NHL player it's probably going to take longer than the typical shelf life of a GM, so it was an unselfish move done with the best long term interests of the organization in mind.

I wonder if he still has that mindset?

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by GrammarPolice

Can't say I blame you.

As much as I think the pick was a stretch I do have to give Feaster credit for taking the chance. If Jankowski does become an impact NHL player it's probably going to take longer than the typical shelf life of a GM, so it was an unselfish move done with the best long term interests of the organization in mind.

I wonder if he still has that mindset?

God I hope so. Short-term vision is what got the Flames into this mess. Long-term vision will get them out.

[puds]

Don't really see how you can compare the two picks other than that they were both high risk picks. However, when you look at what the players prokected as, jank is high risk high reward (1st line 9) and Chucko was high risk low reward (3rd line grinder).

[Swayze11]

Originally Posted by puds

Don't really see how you can compare the two picks other than that they were both high risk picks. However, when you look at what the players prokected as, jank is high risk high reward (1st line 9) and Chucko was high risk low reward (3rd line grinder).

Sorry, but as an organization... when would you ever draft a guy that is high risk, low reward?

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Swayze11

Sorry, but as an organization... when would you ever draft a guy that is high risk, low reward?

And you just answered the question of why our drafting has been garbage for 25 years.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Chucko was not high risk! haha

Injuries derailed him, but he was a poor draft pick anyways considering his ceiling, but if it wasn't for concussions, he might be in the NHL now (though definitely in a depth role at most).

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

And you just answered the question of why our drafting has been garbage for 25 years.

That's amusing to say but the real reason (IMO) for the recent lack of success is that there were to many low-risk, low-reward guys taken at the top end of the draft where the risk part of "low-risk" actualized (Chucko, Pelech, Nemisz come to mind). I think they were largely risk adverse for the whole of the draft but doing it at the top of the draft (where you should be looking for impact players) hurt the most.

[puds]

I would say he was high risk -- he was drafted out of the BCHL.

[puds]

I can't say that it makes a whole lot of sense to draft non impact players in any of the rounds. The savings difference in signing these types of players verse having them on entry level contracts is marginal at best.

[puds]

Things I like about the Jankowski pick
-He's adapted fairly well to the NCAA -- one of the youngest players in the league, still growing into his frame, playing on a bad team and still putting up ~.5 ppg.
-Has NHL size, skating ability and hockey sense.
-The pick addressed the biggest organizational need.
-Got a second rounder from the trade and drafted a player who if he pans out will be a physical second pairing defensemen.

It's unrealistic to expect Jankowski to dominate the NCAA given his age, his team and the adjustment in skill/size from a prep league. Imo, next year will be more telling as he will have had another year to add size and adjust to his own frame and will probably have a bigger role on the team.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Parallex

That's amusing to say but the real reason (IMO) for the recent lack of success is that there were to many low-risk, low-reward guys taken at the top end of the draft where the risk part of "low-risk" actualized (Chucko, Pelech, Nemisz come to mind). I think they were largely risk adverse for the whole of the draft but doing it at the top of the draft (where you should be looking for impact players) hurt the most.

I agree with everything you've said.

If you take guys that have high end skills but have huge holes in their game, and only 1 in 6 or 7 hits their potential because of that, you have a chance at getting some legit talent despite their draft round (TJ Brodie, Gaudreau etc.).

The Flames though have opted to take guys that are have a slightly less chance of busting completely, but when they do hit their potential, they're fringe guys (Adam Pardy, Lance Bouma etc)

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by fotze

I remember when we picked Chucko. I totally followed him at Minnesota. I totally don't want to but I get the same feeling with Janko. Good player but not that special quality to be an NHLer. It is early and all that, but NHL players are dominators and he just seems middling. God I hope I am wrong. But if I had a gun put to my head and someone forced me to put $1000 on him being an NHLer I would not do it.

**disclaimer, I have not watched him play. Lie that would make my views any more learned.

Wow! It's one thing to not make the bet voluntarily but I think if there was a gun to your head you really should do it!

[neo45]

I don't think Jankowski is that high of a risk anymore, now that he has shown improvement in a good quality league. He has three more years to develop physically and improve his skills in NCAA before going pro. Just looking at what prospects need to make the NHL, and Jankowski has it:

Skating --- check, definitely a good skater
Size ---- 6'4 and still growing, check
Hockey Sense ----- check

So ya, I would say the risk factor on Jankowski has gone down considerably this year. The reason he was labelled "boom/bust" had more to do with the league he was drafted out of. He may not ever before a top center, but there is a good chance that with his skating, puck skills, and size he will be an NHLer. I really liked the pick then and I still like it now

[Vulcan]

I don't think it's fair to expect Gaudreau type first year numbers from Jankowski. Reasoning is his size needing more maturing and his previous lack of good competition and coaching. I'd give him a C+ for meeting expectations but next season I hope to see good progress and this should give us a better idea of where he'll fit. I think he'll need another 2 years of college before turning pro. One thing about him, he seems to have a good head on his shoulders and is dedicated to his hockey career.

[Mitch]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I don't think it's fair to expect Gaudreau type first year numbers from Jankowski. Reasoning is his size needing more maturing and his previous lack of good competition and coaching. I'd give him a C+ for meeting expectations but next season I hope to see good progress and this should give us a better idea of where he'll fit. I think he'll need another 2 years of college before turning pro. One thing about him, he seems to have a good head on his shoulders and is dedicated to his hockey career.

And Gaudreau played a year in the USHL while Janko did not.

[Wronskian]

I kind of wish Janko opted for the CHL route instead, it's just so hard to gauge young guys playing in the NCAA.

[Trailer Fire]

Originally Posted by Wronskian

I kind of wish Janko opted for the CHL route instead, it's just so hard to gauge young guys playing in the NCAA.

NCAA was best for him at the point he is at. CHL is a huge step in terms of opposition skillwise, and work load. In collegiate hockey you have way more time off. Time Janko needs to bulk up. The CHL would derail all of that. He has more time to develop and grow accustom to his body.

He is a long term project. If we get impatient and bump him up too fast we will definately bust him and bust him big time.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Wronskian

I kind of wish Janko opted for the CHL route instead, it's just so hard to gauge young guys playing in the NCAA.

I think the NCAA is perfect. Playing against men and has the time to add size that he desperately needs.

[neo45]

Also, the choice of NCAA over CHL can be reversed easily. The opposite can not be reversed, once you have played in the CHL the NCAA won't have you