[News] With the 21st overall pick Flames select C Mark Jankowski

[Monahan For Mayor]

That pass doe. Wow!

[Cali Panthers Fan]

I want to start by saying I have no idea how any of our young players will turn out, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

BUT, seeing Monahan struggling with top line responsibilities this year, and noting how Bennett is being used a lot on the wing so far, I wonder if there's still an opening for Jankowski to come in and compete for that #1 center spot.

He's clearly developed his defensive game on a top notch defensive club at Providence. He's filled out already, but likely to fill out even more projecting to being around 210-220 and 6 foot 4. I haven't watched him enough to know, but apparently he's really good on the face-off dot. He's been relied upon in all situations by the coaching staff. He's always had great vision and good hands, not to mention being a pretty good skater, and he's now using that to put up points at a high rate. He's also had the experience of winning a national championship.

We all knew this kid was going to be a project, so it's taken some time to get here, and a lot of people were hoping he would be a 3rd line center in the NHL. I definitely wasn't overly impressed by him in the past and you could put me in the group that was skeptical of him ever being an NHL player. BUT, I think at this point you might just see this kid become a complete #1 center that does everything you need on the top line. Is it possible he becomes some version of Ryan Getzlaf? Kopitar? I really don't know. But the mere fact that it's a possibility gets me very intrigued in his progress.

[Hackey]

I think Jankowski would have to be dominating a lot more than he is to have expectations like that. I just see it as a positive that his offensive game has improved and hopefully he can continue that.

[herashak]

i Could see bennet and poirier forechecking like madmen and jankowski using his size and vision to mesh with them.

[Samonadreau]

Whats stopping Janko from putting pen to paper? Is there actually a chance he doesn't sign here?

[N-E-B]

I thought Feaster was a bit nuts at the time with his "best player in this draft" comments, but if I had to pick now between Yakupov or Jankowski, I'd probably have to take Jankowski.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Whats stopping Janko from putting pen to paper? Is there actually a chance he doesn't sign here?

Not in my view. All this potential not signing crap is stemming from Damien Cox trying to create some hockey story to continue his "Insider" career.

And, if anyone was even listening to Cox's comments, he even said that no one he spoke to has any cause for concern of Janko not signing.

Hate is in fact a strong word but I hate Damien Cox or more accurately, the fact that SN is trying to make him some sort of Bob McKenzie. It feels like SN is trying to sell No Name brand simulation cola beverage while TSN sells real coke and real Pepsi.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Whats stopping Janko from putting pen to paper? Is there actually a chance he doesn't sign here?

The stupid NCAA

A slight chance

[sureLoss]

Technically there is nothing stopping from Jankowski from signing a NHL contract right this minute.

NCAA hockey players are free to sign pro contracts at any time, they just aren't eligible to play NCAA hockey once they do.

So if Janko wants to abandon teammates he won a national championship with mid-season, nevermind they have been ranked the #1 team for weeks now and have a good chance of defending their title, he could do so. Spoiler alert: he won't though.

[sureLoss]

BTW here was what McKenzie had to say a few days ago:

http://www.tsn.ca/preds-can-do-littl...ision-1.399719

- Mark Jankowski, the 21-year-old Providence College centre who was a somewhat off-the-board first-round pick (21st overall) by Calgary in 2012.
Jankowski is off to a good start with the defending NCAA champion Friars, with seven goals and 15 points in 11 games.
At 6-foot-4 and 200 pounds, he’s starting to physically mature. Though he may not necessarily be considered NHL ready, he is a prospect the Flames plan on signing. There’s no sense, at this point anyway, the player would favour free agency over the Flames.

[Vinny01]

The thing that gets me most excited about Janko's potential is his coach staring he thinks he will be around 220 when fully developed. If that is the case he is going to be a horse.

The pick seemed strange at the time because the Flamea prospect cupboard was pretty bare when he was selected. Looking at it today though if he pans out the timing is great. Flames been able to add several young impact players over the past few years and Jankowski slides in not needing to be a star but having the size and skill set this team needs more of

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

...The pick seemed strange at the time because the Flamea prospect cupboard was pretty bare when he was selected. Looking at it today though if he pans out the timing is great...

This is exactly why I never got the line of reasoning from a handful of critics here that the Flames' situation with prospects made the pick a bad one—that they for some reason couldn't afford a "gamble" where another team would have been fine with the same pick, but under different circumstances.

At the end of the day, selecting Jankowski was a good decision. In hindsight I'm not sure it could even be characterized as a gamble. It looks more and more like due diligence on the part of Calgary's scouts, who were savvy enough to see what a lot of other observers missed.

[ComixZone]

Until Jankowski is playing at a good level in the NHL, there will always be those of us who say

But...Tomas Hertl
But...Teuvo Teravainen
But...Andrei Vasilevskiy
But...Olli Maatta
But...Tanner Pearson

regarding the 2012 NHL draft.

I never outright hated the Jankowski pick. I like boom/bust picks. "Safe picks" kill me, because there's no way to gauge whether or not a pick is actually safe.

I just want Jankowski to end up a boom, not a bust.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

If someone is going to take 5-6 years to be an NHL player, why are you burning a first round pick on him? Seems like a very long time to develop someone who may be able to contribute in a very, very long time.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Because the Flames thought he had the upside to be a top two line centre with size. That is something you usually can't find outside of the top 5-10 draft picks. If you can find someone you think has that potential outside the top 10 you take him and run regardless of how long you think he'll take...

Just by way of addition, it is also important to remember that the Flames almost certainly would not have had another opportunity to draft Jankowski with their second round pick. While he was ranked fairly consistently in the mid-second round that year, there was also a lot of talk that he would have been picked in the first round. The point being, that the Flames waited as long as they probably could to get the player they wanted the most.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This is exactly why I never got the line of reasoning from a handful of critics here that the Flames' situation with prospects made the pick a bad one—that they for some reason couldn't afford a "gamble" where another team would have been fine with the same pick, but under different circumstances.

At the end of the day, selecting Jankowski was a good decision. In hindsight I'm not sure it could even be characterized as a gamble. It looks more and more like due diligence on the part of Calgary's scouts, who were savvy enough to see what a lot of other observers missed.

I think its because when you litterally have no good prospects you'd like to hit with the opportunities you do have. Taking a kid out of high school who is a projected to take a good 4-5+ years to make the team comes with risk. Obviously all players have risk but I think its reasonable to see why some people may see this as more risk when other players are legitatemately a season or two away from the NHL. Projections a year or two away are always easier than 5 years away in anything. The way the team sits now I don't mind the pick because its basically icing on the cake. I'm happy with the team whether or not Jankowski makes it. When Jankowski was drafted though we didn't have a Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennett, Poirier, etc. I guess its just a matter of opinion. If you're down by 3 runs in the bottom of the 9th do you prefer to swing for the fences or do you want to play safe and get runners on base?

[scotty2hotty]

Originally Posted by Hackey

If you're down by 3 runs in the bottom of the 9th do you prefer to swing for the fences or do you want to play safe and get runners on base?

I literally have no idea what the right answer to that is.

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by scotty2hotty

I literally have no idea what the right answer to that is.

It all depends on how many outs there are

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Since1984

It all depends on how many outs there are

And where you are on the batting order.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by scotty2hotty

I literally have no idea what the right answer to that is.

Might not have been the greatest analogy but I guess point being there isn't exactly a right answer. One has a higher risk higher reward, one is a more safe route. Neither is a guarantee. You could make argeuments for both.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Might not have been the greatest analogy but I guess point being there isn't exactly a right answer. One has a higher risk higher reward, one is a more safe route. Neither is a guarantee. You could make argeuments for both.

I thought it was a pretty good analogy. As you said, no right answer. What ever you do, if it works you're smart and if it doesn't you "obviously" should have done the other thing.