Who do we hope ends up GM?

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Right on schedule the "have you seen him play" argument shows up.

And how do I know it? I don't know it of course just as you don't know it was a good pick. But it's something to talk about right?

Reminds me of when people who said Nemisz was a bad pick. They were called out in the same way.

How are you going to call someone a bust or a boom pick when you haven't seen him play? Based on what are you calling him a bad pick?

I said it could end up being a bad pick just like it can end up being a good pick but there's ways to go. You're assuming it right now based on nothing.

The jury is out on him, he's developing, will take time.

What does Nemisz have anything do with it? What if I just turn around and say reminds me of people when they called "player x" a good pick and they were called out the same way.

[Husky]

Jankowski is a project plain and simple. Hes has skill, just a matter of development.

So many ways to argue either way. For example hes the highest scoring player for his age on the team. Most players are 2-3 years older than him. I would be mroe curious to see how he has progressed in non offensive areas as well.

[opendoor]

I don't know, I don't think it's out of line to point out that very few NCAA players become NHLers without distinguishing themselves as U20 players. You can count on one hand how many guys who put up Jankowski's level of offense in their 19 year old seasons in the last decade and ended up in the NHL.

On the bright side, one of those guys is Blake Wheeler who took the path Jankowski was originally going to take (i.e. USHL the year after being drafted before going into the NCAA at age 19). In his 19 year old season he put up roughly the same pace Jankowski is at right now. But other than him there's not a whole lot, with Higgins, Abdelkader, and Frattin being the only other guys I'm aware of.

[Tinordi]

That's the basis of my argument opendoor. The production just isn't there to be high on him. Sure he could beat the odds but I don't think it's out of line or overly negative to point out that the odds are heavily stacked against that happening.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by opendoor

But other than him there's not a whole lot, with Higgins, Abdelkader, and Frattin being the only other guys I'm aware of.

Alex Killorn, for example. Drafted in 2007.

2007-08 Deerfield Academy USHS 24 28 27 55
2008-09 Harvard Univ. NCAA 30 6 8 14
2009-10 Harvard Univ. NCAA 32 9 11 20
2010-11 Harvard Univ. NCAA 34 15 14 29
2011-12 Harvard Univ. NCAA 34 23 23 46

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Your logic is that because we picked a center when we needed one we can't be critical of the pick?

Why not?

What if we picked the wrong center, like I don't know, Scott Laughton? We still can't be critical?

It was a bad pick and I laid out my reasons for saying so. By all means justify why you think it was a good pick but don't try to paint the other side of the argument as whining because it sure looks like Burke agrees with me.

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Right on schedule the "have you seen him play" argument shows up.

And how do I know it? I don't know it of course just as you don't know it was a good pick. But it's something to talk about right?

Reminds me of when people who said Nemisz was a bad pick. They were called out in the same way.

Ok then, nice chat.

[Psytic]

I just think it was to risky. At the time we had nothing in the cupboard. I don't think we could afford to go off the board like that. I would of liked if we had just played it safe. Once you get a decent stable of guys you can start gambling or if you have a bottom 5 pick first rounder Imo. We could have an nhl d man right now instead of just hopes and prayers. I also didn't like the story about how wins broad drove down and that's all it took.... I don't think 1 or 2 viewings is doing your due diligence..

[EYE_Overstand]

Wasn't it Jankowski + Seiloff vs whom"we should have picked ?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by EYE_Overstand

Wasn't it Jankowski + Seiloff vs whom"we should have picked ?

Yes, for anyone picked between 14 and 20. They still could have taken Maatta, Samuelsson, or Matteau, as well as Sieloff after the trade with Buffalo.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Flames needed centre prospects. Feaster and co did what they thought they had to do to acquire one.

To say that was a bad move or overly risky is just crying over spilt milk (and the milk hasn't even spilt yet)

The Flames also needed Goalie, Defense and Winger prospects too. The organization was never in a position to get choosy with position.

[Righteous1]

Jankowski has the talent..just doesn't seem as aggressive or truculent. From what i've seen in a handful of games he can be a bit passive; but the hockey iq is there.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

The Flames also needed Goalie, Defense and Winger prospects too. The organization was never in a position to get choosy with position.

lol

All the other positions are much easier to fill. Finding #1 Cs is next to impossible, other than drafting top 3. The Flames, with no top C for the past 20 years, know this better than any team - as do the fans, as per all the conversations about it over the last several years and at the time f the Janko pick.

They took a shot and it was an intelligently calculated gamble. We'll see if it pays off. But this new hind-sight, flavor-of-the-day view that the Flames were in no position to gamble is laughable.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

lol

All the other positions are much easier to fill. Finding #1 Cs is next to impossible, other than drafting top 3. The Flames, with no top C for the past 20 years, know this better than any team - as do the fans, as per all the conversations about it over the last several years and at the time f the Janko pick.

They took a shot and it was an intelligently calculated gamble. We'll see if it pays off. But this new hind-sight, flavor-of-the-day view that the Flames were in no position to gamble is laughable.

Its not the flavour of the day. I remember over half of CP facepalming that we went off the board. Then the other half jumping to Jank's defense since many of us "didn't actually know who he was so how could we be angry." He may still pan out and I hope he does but if it was me I think I would of played it safe that draft. Still could work out for us though i'm not mad either way tbh.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

lol

They took a shot and it was an intelligently calculated gamble. We'll see if it pays off. But this new hind-sight, flavor-of-the-day view that the Flames were in no position to gamble is laughable.

That's a load of garbage and you know it. They were in absolutely no position to gamble. During that time they certainly didn't draft a franchise winger or goalie either. They were pretty poor all around.

Were the Flames oozing prospects or something at the time that I'm not aware of? I mean considering this happened a year and a half ago, those prospects must be graduating to the NHL or something soon.

The Flames had one of the weakest systems at the time and it is the reason that people were critical of the pick. Then and now.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I don't know, I don't think it's out of line to point out that very few NCAA players become NHLers without distinguishing themselves as U20 players. You can count on one hand how many guys who put up Jankowski's level of offense in their 19 year old seasons in the last decade and ended up in the NHL.

On the bright side, one of those guys is Blake Wheeler who took the path Jankowski was originally going to take (i.e. USHL the year after being drafted before going into the NCAA at age 19). In his 19 year old season he put up roughly the same pace Jankowski is at right now. But other than him there's not a whole lot, with Higgins, Abdelkader, and Frattin being the only other guys I'm aware of.

Rene Bourque is another.

The thing is, a lot of these types of players (like Bourque) start off undrafted. Jankowski was taken in round one.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

lol

All the other positions are much easier to fill. Finding #1 Cs is next to impossible, other than drafting top 3. The Flames, with no top C for the past 20 years, know this better than any team - as do the fans, as per all the conversations about it over the last several years and at the time f the Janko pick.

They took a shot and it was an intelligently calculated gamble. We'll see if it pays off. But this new hind-sight, flavor-of-the-day view that the Flames were in no position to gamble is laughable.

Evidently Brian Burke would disagree with you.

When asked why he let Feaster and Weisbrod go he mentioned poor trading value and drafting. Using the powers of deduction what could he have meant? He said that the Flames did the best in 2013 and certainly likes both Monahan and Klimchuk at least. 2011 looks like a great draft but that's on Todd Button almost entirely. So what we're left with is the 2012 draft that Weisbrod stated he had more or less control over. To the point that he scouted Jankowski personally.

If Burke thinks that drafting was a problem there's really only one culprit and that's the first round pick in 2012 (and likely the trade down as well which has Weisbrod all over it).

So if Burke citing the 2012 draft as a reason for letting Feaster go clearly he disagrees with almost all of the above. That the Flames weren't in a position to take a gamble like that and it wasn't intelligent. Now sure, you can disagree with Burke all you like but it seams that it wasn't just Burke that disagreed with it. Burke arrived to this conclusion by polling other NHL execs to get their thoughts. Evidently they must not have been too supportive either.

To wrap it up, it was a gamble yes, certainly, a stupid gamble that is only looking stupider as Jankowski treads water and other prospects we could have easily picked with a Mckeen's draft guide bought the day of the draft are in the NHL playing games or captaining the Team Canada Junior squad.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Two opposing views on the "position to gamble" aspect.

Flames had 'depth prospects', but few bluechippers, and none are harder to come by than centers.

There were (and still with hindsight) no 1st line center ceiling prospects available at 14 or lower. TT is projected to be a winger in the NHL now.

One could argue very well that Maatta is doing better than expected. He dropped somewhat in the draft.

Many fans (myself included) were really happy that the Flames actually took a 'risk' to get a prospect with such a high ceiling, rather than draft another 3rd liner with possible 2nd line upside. Risky? Yes. I absolutely still love the pick - even more now as Jankowski has been improving, rather than regressing or showing complete incompetence at the NCAA level.

Will he ever become a #1 center? Will he ever be even a top 3 center? Jury will be out until he ever makes the NHL. However, I think the Flames made the right choice with hindsight even. #1 centers are expensive to acquire, if they are ever even offered to begin with. I think the risk is worth it from that standpoint.

Also, Jankowski is only now starting to fill into his frame. If you watch him play, you notice he does have skill, he does skate very well, he is nearly 6'4" (or is he taller now?), and he does have pretty good IQ. I would bet at this stage that he at least becomes a player on this team - a team that even under Burke can appreciate a big player, even if he doesn't play physical (though he is increasingly more physical as he fills in, and seems to be adding that component into his game slowly).

I don't know why people are mentioning Hertl now. During the draft, all the angst was against not picking Teravainen, and he will forever be the guy I compare him to. I would still prefer Jankowski over Teravainen at this stage. I fully expect TT to start in Chicago next year, but I also expect Jankowski to start on the Flames the year after. I bet he doesn't finish all 4 years.

Jankowski is such a difficult player to compare anyone to, as his development arc is vastly different from 99% of prospects out there - both physically and experience-wise. What he has not shown is regression in any capacity.

Last year, he was brought into the NCAA and was simply asked to learn how to play in systems, and against much better competition than he ever has been - as a winger. This year, he moved to center at a lower line to develop his position and systems play - on a defence-first team with wingers that have no finish at all. Next year he moves up, and it will be more telling as to how he does. He is just being brought about very slowly, but he has met every challenge so far and is showing improvement. There is no reason to be down on this kid right now.

Yes, it would be nice to have a Maatta or a Hertl on the team right now. My bet is that it will be nicer to have a Jankowski on the team in 2-3 years, when it matters even more.

[bucksmasher]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

lol

All the other positions are much easier to fill. Finding #1 Cs is next to impossible, other than drafting top 3. The Flames, with no top C for the past 20 years, know this better than any team - as do the fans, as per all the conversations about it over the last several years and at the time f the Janko pick.

They took a shot and it was an intelligently calculated gamble. We'll see if it pays off. But this new hind-sight, flavor-of-the-day view that the Flames were in no position to gamble is laughable.

So you're saying it was unintelligent?.....

[Enoch Root]

1) assuming Burke was referring to Jankowski when he said 'drafting' is more than a stretch

2) when a team has NO prospects and is facing a long rebuild, I would consider that as good of a time as any to gamble. What does it cost them? They are going to suck for the duration of his college career regardless.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

1) assuming Burke was referring to Jankowski when he said 'drafting' is more than a stretch

2) when a team has NO prospects and is facing a long rebuild, I would consider that as good of a time as any to gamble. What does it cost them? They are going to suck for the duration of his college career regardless.

Maata and TT... seems to be what people are arguing...