Calgarypuck Prospect Ranking 2016 - Round 1

[automaton 3]

Went with Tkachuk for his upside.

Jankowski is next for me, would not be surprised if he makes the big club out of camp.

[chopper89]

Originally Posted by Bingo

for fun ...

here is the 2009 process from Calgarypuck as well, comparing to the 2006 rankings.

http://www.calgarypuck.com/future-flames-prospect-list/

The old lists are great- and just goes to show you how important good old luck is to determining the success of a 'prospect'.

Some of those Sutter picks, especially Dmen, may have made it if they'd had a better opportunity (Negrin, Aulie, Pelech, etc.) but Flames kept grabbing a veteran or two to fill up the empty spots.

Guys like Jooris or Granlund would never get a chance back then, because they'd have signed Jeff Friesen or Tony Amonte or Owen Nolan or Freddy Modin (Feaster, I know) at the last minute.

One undersold aspect of the salary cap era is the need for teams to give kids more chances to play.

[The Yen Man]

I remember I was actually pretty high on Negrin. I thought for sure he would have turned out ok. Guess injuries kind of tanked whatever chance he had.

[DiracSpike]

I think we all need to pump the brakes on Jankowski until we see him play against people that aren't 2-3 years younger than him on average. It's nice to see him start to show potential given how controversial he's been but IMO he doesn't have the pedigree of a Tkachuk or even a Kylington.

[Yamer]

I would have said Bennett because I still consider him a prospect, but the majority consensus in the hockey world is that once you play a full season in the NHL you are no longer.

In that case, Tkachuk.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

I think we all need to pump the brakes on Jankowski until we see him play against people that aren't 2-3 years younger than him on average. It's nice to see him start to show potential given how controversial he's been but IMO he doesn't have the pedigree of a Tkachuk or even a Kylington.

Um, you mean like his entire 4 year college career and then a stint in the AHL a few months ago?

I think people who are excited about Janko are putting more weight into that body of work as opposed to the recent 4 days here at development camp.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

I think we all need to pump the brakes on Jankowski until we see him play against people that aren't 2-3 years younger than him on average.

You should really read up on the average age of College Hockey players. You're so off base.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Um, you mean like his entire 4 year college career and then a stint in the AHL a few months ago?

I think people who are excited about Janko are putting more weight into that body of work as opposed to the recent 4 days here at development camp.

His college career didn't start off very well, definitely got a lot better by his jr and sr year but yes, by then he was older on average than most players.

I'll give you the stretch in the AHL however.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

His college career didn't start off very well, definitely got a lot better by his jr and sr year but yes, by then he was older on average than most players.
.

No, he wasn't. The average age of an NCAA hockey Freshman is 20, Jankowski was a 21 year old senior. He was routinely playing against 23, 24 year olds.

The average age falls into the 21-22 year old range, and Mark wasn't 23.

[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

No, he wasn't. The average age of an NCAA hockey Freshman is 20, Jankowski was a 21 year old senior. He was routinely playing against 23, 24 year olds.

The average age falls into the 21-22 year old range, and Mark wasn't 23.

This is an important point routinely missed by detractors. Jankowski was the same age as most of the sophomores on his team as a senior. Two seasons as one of the youngest in his league if I recall correctly.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Well that was very unanimous

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

No, he wasn't. The average age of an NCAA hockey Freshman is 20, Jankowski was a 21 year old senior. He was routinely playing against 23, 24 year olds.

The average age falls into the 21-22 year old range, and Mark wasn't 23.

Fair enough, I was looking at the ages of the players on the Providence team. It seems the better teams in NCAA skew to younger average ages, with Minnesota, BU, and BC averaging 20 and lesser known teams averaging 22. So point to you guys, I'm just looking forward to seeing him play against NHLers before we start penciling him on to the opening day roster.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Maybe Bingo should change the rules to forbid all posters from explaining why they picked a certain player

[Hey Connor, It's Mess]

Tkachuk winning by a landslide, and rightfully so. On a personal level, however, I find Kylington to be the prospect I'm most excited about. His ceiling is sky high and he has the perfect skill set for today's NHL (his skating is even more impressive live). Naturally, as a young D-man he's very raw right now, but I think he'll be the best player from this list in 5-7 years.

[Sylvanfan]

Jankowski wI'll be 22 when the season starts. He should have been the best forward at that camp. At his age most guys have played enough pro to no longer attend these camps.

Tkachuk by far should be the best prospect here. Big drop off from here too in my opinion. Gillies might be close had he played last year.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Hey Connor, It's Mess

Tkachuk winning by a landslide, and rightfully so. On a personal level, however, I find Kylington to be the prospect I'm most excited about. His ceiling is sky high and he has the perfect skill set for today's NHL (his skating is even more impressive live). Naturally, as a young D-man he's very raw right now, but I think he'll be the best player from this list in 5-7 years.

I agree with that. He is an amazing skater and has great all round skill. I watched him a few times in the A and he does not look out of place. In fact, he was one of the better players. (As an aside, Nakladal was the best player on the Heat). His only issue now is too young and too small, but that is not an issue in a reality. If he puts on some mass and matures a little, he has the potential to be a top pair d-man.

The danger though is he turns into a Bouwmeester instead of a Brodie. Which still isnt' the end of the world, but Bouwmeester always left you wanting more since it appeared he had all the tools to be a dominant D-man.



The danger I foresee is that he turns into a Bouwmeester instead of a Brodie.

[Enoch Root]

First of all... thanks Bingo - these prospect ranking polls are great stuff.

To the issue at hand... I am as big on Jankowski as anyone, but I look at it this way: Tkachuk has a better chance of making the team for opening day than Jankowski does, IMO, despite being more than 3 years younger.

On those grounds, it isn't close. Tkachuk easily.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I agree with that. He is an amazing skater and has great all round skill. I watched him a few times in the A and he does not look out of place. In fact, he was one of the better players. (As an aside, Nakladal was the best player on the Heat). His only issue now is too young and too small, but that is not an issue in a reality. If he puts on some mass and matures a little, he has the potential to be a top pair d-man.

The danger though is he turns into a Bouwmeester instead of a Brodie. Which still isnt' the end of the world, but Bouwmeester always left you wanting more since it appeared he had all the tools to be a dominant D-man.



The danger I foresee is that he turns into a Bouwmeester instead of a Brodie.

Sorry for going off topic, but Kylington is nothing like Bouwmeester. Bou was always a top pair, 200 ft defenseman. He should have been able to control games but he never did. And that always left you wanting more.

Kylington is not a control-the-game kind of defenseman. He is pure offense and should be utilized accordingly (#3-4 with offensive zone starts and easier defensive responsibilities.

[#-3]

I pick Tkachuk, but I'm surprised it's a land slid.

I try to think about a mix of top end potential and how certain we can be that they will reach. The closer they are the more certain we obviously are.

I thought the past few years that #1 spot was pretty clear this year I feel like there's a pretty even top 5 that could all easily be the top guy with a good September.

Tkachuk
Gillies
Kylington
Jankowski
Hickey

It's too bad Poirier and Anderson can't be lumped in there, I think they both have to tools to be in that group, but will need more than 1 good training camp to prove themselves at this point.

[Gaskal]

#1 is Tkachuk.

When I do these things I just make up some bull metric and personally rank them that way.

Score/50 (NHL ceiling) + Score/50 (Likelihood of reaching ceiling)