U20 tournament - Junior Evaluation Camp (Sieloff, Gillies, Monahan, Poirier & Janko)

[Enoch Root]

For perspective though, no one in the entire NCAA Div 1 managed 1.5 PPG last year. Gaudreau led all players at 1.46.

And only 24 players were over 1.00 PPG.

By the way, Knight was 9th at 1.20, Agostino was 16th at 1.11 and Arnold was just outside the top 50 at 0.92 PPG.

Most posters consider all three of those guys to be solid prospects. If Jankowski puts up similar numbers as a sophomore, I would consider that very impressive.

[Robbob]

^^
To add to that Toews was .92 ppg and 1.35 ppg in his two years (on a pretty good team). I think you also need to consider the team itself. The team leading scorer was .63 ppg for the Friars.

[opendoor]

The numbers mean less than the rankings. St. Louis was #1 in points among U19 players in the NCAA that year. Jankowski didn't even crack the top 10 in U19 scoring either in total points or points per game.

The list of players who finished outside the top 10 in U19 scoring in the NCAA and went on to become full time NHLers is pretty short. I think you can count the number of guys in the last 20 years to do that on one hand (Justin Abdelkader, Rich Peverely, Craig Adams, Brad Winchester, and Mike Greir are about the only ones I know of).

Jankowski definitely has a bit of a unique situation with his late birthday and odd career path, so only time will tell. But if he does make the NHL as a top 6 forward he'll have certainly bucked a trend.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Robbob

^^
To add to that Toews was .92 ppg and 1.35 ppg in his two years (on a pretty good team). I think you also need to consider the team itself. The team leading scorer was .63 ppg for the Friars.

People need to start focusing on the team and less on the points. The Friars play a very tight defensive game. Goal scoring is not their primary concern. This is more of a Sutter team than a Keenan team! That makes a huge difference. Stop focusing on Jankowski's statistics versus players in other systems as they are not fair comparisons.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by opendoor

The numbers mean less than the rankings. St. Louis was #1 in points among U19 players in the NCAA that year. Jankowski didn't even crack the top 10 in U19 scoring either in total points or points per game.

The list of players who finished outside the top 10 in U19 scoring in the NCAA and went on to become full time NHLers is pretty short. I think you can count the number of guys in the last 20 years to do that on one hand (Justin Abdelkader, Rich Peverely, Craig Adams, Brad Winchester, and Mike Greir are about the only ones I know of).

Jankowski definitely has a bit of a unique situation with his late birthday and odd career path, so only time will tell. But if he does make the NHL as a top 6 forward he'll have certainly bucked a trend.

Do you have a source for U19 scoring?

I would think there are more than a handful.

Schultz didn't even play in the NCAA as a U19.

Knight is going to play for the Flames this year (I know that does not make him a full time NHLer, but he is currently on the path to becoming that). Agostino could well follow him, and Arnold has a shot as well. Obviously none of them are there yet, but there is a very good chance that one of the three becomes a full time NHLer, and at least an outside chance that two do.

That's just current Flames prospects. So I am guessing there are more than a few players who have met the criteria you mentioned.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Do you have a source for U19 scoring?

You can look on eliteprospects.com to see U19 scoring by year.

I would think there are more than a handful.

Assuming we're going by the same criteria (18 year old NCAA forwards who didn't finish top 10 in U19 scoring but ended up playing 200+ NHL games), there aren't. Though I did forget Stempniak, so that's 6 in the last 20 years that I'm aware of. I certainly may have missed someone, but regardless the list is extremely short.

Schultz didn't even play in the NCAA as a U19.

Knight is going to play for the Flames this year (I know that does not make him a full time NHLer, but he is currently on the path to becoming that). Agostino could well follow him, and Arnold has a shot as well. Obviously none of them are there yet, but there is a very good chance that one of the three becomes a full time NHLer, and at least an outside chance that two do.

That's just current Flames prospects. So I am guessing there are more than a few players who have met the criteria you mentioned.

Knight was passed over in the draft once and didn't play in the NCAA until he was 19. Agostino was 8th in U19 scoring (and 5th in pts/g) so he also doesn't meet the criteria. As for Arnold, sure he might make it, but there's a much bigger chance that he won't become a career NHLer.

Like I said, Jankowski is a bit of a unique case and it's far too early to write him off, but that doesn't mean it's wrong to point out the long odds he's up against based on history.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Cory Pronman's evaluation of the camp:

-Best player of the tourney? Teuvo Tervainen.
-Mark Jankowski? Below average, couldn't keep up to the pace at this level.
-Sieloff? 2nd pairing, chance at 1st pairing, but emphasizes that's only because the US defence sucks this year.

http://flamesnation.ca/2013/8/15/fla...ocuting-report

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

Cory Pronman's evaluation of the camp:

-Best player of the tourney? Teuvo Tervainen.
-Mark Jankowski? Below average, couldn't keep up to the pace at this level.
-Sieloff? 2nd pairing, chance at 1st pairing, but emphasizes that's only because the US defence sucks this year.

http://flamesnation.ca/2013/8/15/fla...ocuting-report

Does it make you feel good to use stats and other peoples opinion to put down 18 year old kids? These guys are good enough to be considered the top echelon of players in their age groups and you want to dig into stats to show why they won't be successful. It is making it tough to read information from people who have actually seen these kids play.

Hope you're wrong so we can see you apologize in the future. And also, comparing Jankowski's stats to St. Louis for PPG and other crap. That was 20 years ago, completely different game today.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by New Era

People need to start focusing on the team and less on the points. The Friars play a very tight defensive game. Goal scoring is not their primary concern. This is more of a Sutter team than a Keenan team! That makes a huge difference. Stop focusing on Jankowski's statistics versus players in other systems as they are not fair comparisons.

Maybe the team doesn't score because its players aren't very good? Perhaps it doesn't play offensive because it doesn't have the personnel to do so? In which case, Jankowski being the 4th highest scorer on the team doesn't really say much for him.

[edslunch]

Jankowski = new whipping prospect

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by opendoor

You can look on eliteprospects.com to see U19 scoring by year.

Assuming we're going by the same criteria (18 year old NCAA forwards who didn't finish top 10 in U19 scoring but ended up playing 200+ NHL games), there aren't. Though I did forget Stempniak, so that's 6 in the last 20 years that I'm aware of. I certainly may have missed someone, but regardless the list is extremely short.

Knight was passed over in the draft once and didn't play in the NCAA until he was 19. Agostino was 8th in U19 scoring (and 5th in pts/g) so he also doesn't meet the criteria. As for Arnold, sure he might make it, but there's a much bigger chance that he won't become a career NHLer.

Like I said, Jankowski is a bit of a unique case and it's far too early to write him off, but that doesn't mean it's wrong to point out the long odds he's up against based on history.

Agree that Arnold is somewhat of a longshot.

A bit surprised at Agostino's production as a freshman - thought he was a late bloomer.

The fact that Knight and Schultz didn't even play as U19s, doesn't exactly support the stat.

As for Jankowski, he was 11th in PPG, so...

Not arguing with you, I am just looking at the stats and the comments already posted and adding some thoughts

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by SebC

Maybe the team doesn't score because its players aren't very good? Perhaps it doesn't play offensive because it doesn't have the personnel to do so? In which case, Jankowski being the 4th highest scorer on the team doesn't really say much for him.

Yup, and Jarome Iginla was a piece of crap under Sutter, but a superstar under Keenan, right. His scoring stats were not quite as strong or consistent under Sutter because he was expected to play a two way game. Under Keenan he could do whatever he wanted and his stats improved greatly. Systems affect scoring, even with great players. It is not only unfair to use stats to try and say a player who plays under a defensive system is a weak player, it is down right stupid.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by SebC

Maybe the team doesn't score because its players aren't very good? Perhaps it doesn't play offensive because it doesn't have the personnel to do so? In which case, Jankowski being the 4th highest scorer on the team doesn't really say much for him.

Sure, maybe. What do you think it is?

Jankowski is a pretty special case and it's almost impossible to compare him to other players coming up. A guy that was a relative unknown moving into juniors and basically up to his draft year. Played at a Canadian High School hockey club, made the massive jump from that league to the America College ranks, skipping prep school all together.

Looked out of place early, which is totally acceptable and started to get really comfortable as the season wore on. I don't give a crap if he "breaks out" next year (not your quote, seen it in this thread though) because it's about just improving game-to-game, month-to-month, season-to-season for Jankowski.

I don't think I've ever seen a more wide-eyed and bushy tailed kid at the draft like I did with him last year, he was very much a boy.. with fantastic hockey skill. I think it's all about maturing and keeping pace with the steep learning curve he has ahead of him.

We'll see how it plays out.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by New Era

Yup, and Jarome Iginla was a piece of crap under Sutter, but a superstar under Keenan, right. His scoring stats were not quite as strong or consistent under Sutter because he was expected to play a two way game. Under Keenan he could do whatever he wanted and his stats improved greatly. Systems affect scoring, even with great players. It is not only unfair to use stats to try and say a player who plays under a defensive system is a weak player, it is down right stupid.

Or maybe Iginla actually played worse, because of Jarome Iginla. It's not like he bounced back under Hartley. Most likely it's both. So quantify. How depressed are Jankowski's stats? If the stats don't sufficiently account for the quality of Jankowski's team, the answer is to get better stats, not to replace them with gut feelings, excuses, or "well Weisbrod said that in 10 years...". I'd rather go with the best stats we have than to simply say they're not good enough so screw it.

[sa226]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Sure, maybe. What do you think it is?

Jankowski is a pretty special race and it's almost impossible to compare him to other players coming up. A guy that was a relative unknown moving into juniors and basically up to his draft year. Played at a Canadian High School hockey club, made the massive jump from that league to the America College ranks, skipping prep school all together.

Looked out of place early, which is totally acceptable and started to get really comfortable as the season wore on. I don't give a crap if he "breaks out" next year (not your quote, seen it in this thread though) because it's about just improving game-to-game, month-to-month, season-to-season for Jankowski.

I don't think I've ever seen a more wide-eyed and bushy tailed kid at the draft like I did with him last year, he was very much a boy.. with fantastic hockey skill. I think it's all about maturing and keeping pace with the steep learning curve he has ahead of him.

We'll see how it plays out.

White power!!

[MrMastodonFarm]

Well, how about that.

[The Fonz]

I'll reserve judgement on Jankowski until after the 2013/14 season.

He needs to put up 1.00+ ppg. Both Knight and Arnold were able to do it, and while Janko's team may play a more defensive system, he was drafted 21st overall, while neither Knight nor Arnold went in the top 100, so IMO no more excuses.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I'll reserve judgement on Jankowski until after the 2013/14 season.

He needs to put up 1.00+ ppg. Both Knight and Arnold were able to do it, and while Janko's team may play a more defensive system, he was drafted 21st overall, while neither Knight nor Arnold went in the top 100, so IMO no more excuses.

Bill Arnold hasn't put up a PPG, he's come close but hasn't done it. That's also playing alongside offensive wunderkind John Gaudreau.

Knight hit exactly a point-per-game as a 19 year old. He had 14 goals that year and that's about where I'd hope Jankowski hits this season too. Knight had the added bonus of playing with 60 point senior Matt Fratin that year too, which explains his inflated assist numbers a bit.

As an 18 year old Knight put up less points, less goals and in more games then Jankowski's 18 year old season.

Entering his junior year as a 19 year old I'd love to see Jankowski hit 15 goals, around 35 points. I think he'll edge just under a PPG.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Bill Arnold hasn't put up a PPG, he's come close but hasn't done it. That's also playing alongside offensive wunderkind John Gaudreau.

Knight hit exactly a point-per-game as a 19 year old. He had 14 goals that year and that's about where I'd hope Jankowski hits this season too. Knight had the added bonus of playing with 60 point senior Matt Fratin that year too, which explains his inflated assist numbers a bit.

As an 18 year old Knight put up less points, less goals and in more games then Jankowski's 18 year old season.

Entering his junior year as a 19 year old I'd love to see Jankowski hit 15 goals, around 35 points. I think he'll edge just under a PPG.

I see where you're coming from, but point I was trying to make is that Jankowski is supposed to be the offensive wunderkind, not benefitting off of playing along side one. We drafted him 21st overall, while none of Knight, Arnold, or even Gaudreau went top 100.

While I gave him a pass in his rookie season, it's my expectation that he performs just as well or better than the above players in his sophomore season.

[Enoch Root]

as a 19 year old, Knight had 13 pts in 37 games

Arnold had 36 pts in 42 games