No offensive, but I'm going to go ahead and take the opinion of professional scouts over someone who says "There's no way he makes the NHL even if he develops perfectly, but I wouldn't be surprised if he makes the NHL."
His upside is absolutely that of an NHL regular. I think it's a long shot, but to say even his upside isn't NHL bound shows you don't really pay attention to the player.
Thank you for your analysis on my analysis. No "offensive" taken.
You can take the opinion of whomever you'd like. Nobody's opinion really matters in terms of how good a player is - if he's good, he will make it.
As someone who has been around here for a long time, I encourage you to focus your energy to commenting on the player, not on a poster's perspective on the player.
I have seen him play probably 30 times in the last three years. How many have you seen him? I've also coached about a dozen players who have played against him in the last two years and spoken to all of them about their thoughts as well. Is any of this solid concrete for projection? Of course not. But still worth noting in a thread about a player, his quality, and projection.
__________________ CORNELL
National Champions: 1967, 1970
CALGARY
Stanley Cup Champions: 1989
Last edited by calgARI; 02-05-2014 at 12:55 PM.
The Following 27 Users Say Thank You to calgARI For This Useful Post:
Knowing Stanstead College quite well and having coached at that level for a long time, it is still beyond comprehension to me how anyone can project a player from there with such high confidence to select in the first round. People questioned drafting guys like Turris, Zajac, Chucko out of the BCHL and even that is questionable in my mind to project (it is a level below US College) but that league is way way better than where Jankowski was picked out of.
You make a very good point from where he was drafted from. Stanstead (as you sound much more familiar with than anyone else on this board) doesn't get scouted at all, correct? Can you think of any other instance where a player became listed by a scouting service at the midway point of his draft eligible season? Can you think of any other prospect that started drawing 50 NHL scouts to every game?
I understand what you are saying completely. However, could Jankowski not be a very good example of an exception in this case, considering the amount of investment a lot of teams were spending on him by watching his games regularly?
Todd Button mentioned exactly the same thing you did at (or shortly after) the draft. I am paraphrasing here, but it was something like:
"Not ever scout or even scouting team can properly assess a player like Jankowski considering where he was playing. His league is so far down from the standard, that it becomes tough to gauge if he really is that good of a prospect, or if he just looks better than he really is because of the talent around him. It takes a lot of experience and time in accurately scouting a player in this situation. We had every scout take a good look at him, and we were at every game from the beginning when we first started scouting him. We put in our work, and we really believe his is this good (or perhaps he said he projects this good?? Can't recall exactly)." <-- Paraphrasing from memory
I don't think at this point anyone can say with certainty that Jankowski will bust, or that he will be a depth player, or that he will even be an elite center. He is such a unique case. Now it also comes down to Jankowski playing from such a low standard of hockey, to arguably the highest in the entire NCAA, on a very defensive team where he is learning his role as a center with all the required positioning and defensive responsibilities that it entails. Is his lower production a symptom of him not being a good prospect, or a symptom of him playing on an offensively challenged team, or symptom of him being far from physically developed, or whatever other legitimate reason that goes along with this unique case?
The Hockey News also asked (20?) scouts from (20?) NHL organizations to re-rank the 2012 draft, and Jankowski was #25 on their consolidated list. This is an external scouting 'mini-report' that I believe at least goes an inch to validate what Todd Button was saying about him. Add in Million's remarks today on twitter and copied on this thread about '2 NHL Sources' confirming that they like him as a prospect - you are getting to see outside sources reaffirming this pick.
As for Todd 'towing the company line' - this would be a perfect time to distance himself from Weisbrod and Feaster, wouldn't you think? He could say the "we support Jankowski and still consider him a prospect with potential" but then temper it with "He has not developed as quickly as we envisioned" or "he has some big holes in his game that he hasn't started closing off to project him further", or whatever slight he could say without trashing the pick itself. For a guy who's job MAY be on the line this year, and rumors of Burke not liking the pick (without ever really addressing it, however), this would have been a very good time for Button to at least distance himself a little bit. The fact he chose not to leads me to believe that he really believes in this kid.
I have been very 'pro' Jankowski and I still applaud that pick as it COULD end up being the most important pick that the Flames have made since any one of their amazing 80's picks. However, I have NO IDEA on the likelihood of it panning out. I am still hoping (and have been vocal) that the Flames should take Reinhart if given the opportunity this draft, as the only way you can really get a #1 center is to draft one, and they are rarely ever found outside the top 5 picks. Is Jankowski one of those rarities that was so difficult to scout that other teams didn't know how to value him? Maybe the Flames over-valued him? I don't really think that there is any evidence at this point to say with certainty that he is going to bust, as he is progressing in the right direction, and he is such a unique case. I do think the odds were stacked against him, but he is (so far) moving past them (in my opinion).
Last season I wondered if Jankowski could keep his head above water in the NCAA. Going nearly .5ppg (or whatever it was - think it was slightly higher) shows to me that he did more than just keep his head above water.
This season, I wondered if he would actually be a competent center given his lack of experience playing the position at a high-level, and how underdeveloped he was physically. Seems like more than competent at the NCAA level thus far.
Those two things thus far make me believe he has not earned the 'bust' label, or any other label except "Legitimate prospect with size and skill". Considering scouts - both internal and external to the Flames' organization - seem to think he is progressing nicely, I will have to go by their word.
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
That would be awful. If Cam Atkinson can turn into a decent NHL player then I am fairly sure that Gaudreau will be alright. If Burke did move him I would lose what little faith I have in Burke.
I have to admit I am not an expert, but is anyone else a bit skeptical that Gudreau will transate his college success to the NHL?
First of all, Kane is not that much bigger than Gaudreau. But that really isn't important. Kane survives in the NHL because he is elusive, along with being very talented.
When you watch Gaudreau play, you quickly see that he has that same elusive ability - like Kane and Gretzky and many others, no matter how hard other teams try, they rarely hit them.
Another aspect of the elusiveness is that he manages to win puck battles with surprising regularity. He also strips players of the puck like no one this side of Datsyuk.
Yes, his size is a huge hurdle. But everything I have seen from him screams that he is a special player and will be a very good NHLer.
And little did he know that 4.5 years later he would assault a cabbie over 20 cents after making millions...
Come on man, are you really going to bring that up trying to make him look bad?
It was 30 cents. TOTALLY different.
__________________ "There will be a short outage tonight sometime between 11:00PM and 1:00AM as network upgrades are performed. Please do not panic and overthrow society. Thank you."
No offensive, but I'm going to go ahead and take the opinion of professional scouts over someone who says "There's no way he makes the NHL even if he develops perfectly, but I wouldn't be surprised if he makes the NHL."
His upside is absolutely that of an NHL regular. I think it's a long shot, but to say even his upside isn't NHL bound shows you don't really pay attention to the player.
I agree completely and think this site should only have copy-pastes of articles citing opinions of people who actually work for NHL clubs. That way we, the unwashed, can just read their opinions-from-authority and not have to say a thing!
Additional bonus is that only people with similar authority (read: other NHL players / GMs / scouts) would be allowed post comments on the pasted articles. In effect, we'd be immediately outing the GMs / players / scouts who lurk on CP.
Fun!
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Flames Fan, Ph.D. For This Useful Post:
Hard not to think the ship is at the very least headed the right way. Obviously not all will pan out but it has been a long time since the cupboards had shiny toys.
Isn't that a good feeling. Remember when Kris Chucko was our most promising prospect?
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Racki For This Useful Post:
Thank you for your analysis on my analysis. No "offensive" taken.
You can take the opinion of whomever you'd like. Nobody's opinion really matters in terms of how good a player is - if he's good, he will make it.
As someone who has been around here for a long time, I encourage you to focus your energy to commenting on the player, not on a poster's perspective on the player.
I have seen him play probably 30 times in the last three years. How many have you seen him? I've also coached about a dozen players who have played against him in the last two years and spoken to all of them about their thoughts as well. Is any of this solid concrete for projection? Of course not. But still worth noting in a thread about a player, his quality, and projection.
My issue was more so with someone who both says he won't make the NHL, and then says he might make the NHL.
Which is it, is his upside that of an NHL regular? Or is it not? If you've seen him play and feel his upside isn't even NHL calibre, then WHY would you NOT be surprised if he makes it to the NHL?
A lot of your original post criticised where he played, not the player itself. So excuse me for questioning you, but let's not pretend you were giving much in the way of insight. As someone who has been here for 6 months, I encourage you to focus on the player, not where he played or where he was scouted from or what some of his peers said about him.
Hell, if I was to say "Monahan is not going to become anything more than. 3rd liner, I've seen him play more than 30 games." I would expect to be jumped on. Janko is nowhere near the same prospect, but when you say "Janko can't make the NHL, I've seen him play 30 times" I'm going to question your credibility.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to strombad For This Useful Post:
Like how St.Louis is listed as 5"8? Kane is 5"10 max, probably smaller. However the point was if his skill translates seamlessly he has the potential of a mini Patrick Kane.
This is my hope and I would be ecstatic if he were Kane "light". That's still a premiere offensive player. Who knows, maybe he'll be better than Kane. We won't know until he's playing in the NHL, or at the very least the AHL. Possibly in a couple months?
__________________
"You know, that's kinda why I came here, to show that I don't suck that much" ~ Devin Cooley, Professional Goaltender
The Following User Says Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
I agree completely and think this site should only have copy-pastes of articles citing opinions of people who actually work for NHL clubs. That way we, the unwashed, can just read their opinions-from-authority and not have to say a thing!
Additional bonus is that only people with similar authority (read: other NHL players / GMs / scouts) would be allowed post comments on the pasted articles. In effect, we'd be immediately outing the GMs / players / scouts who lurk on CP.
Fun!
No offense, but I'm going to take the opinions of fans with a ThD over a fan with a PhD.
The Following User Says Thank You to strombad For This Useful Post:
Like I said in the Gaudreau thread- if Paul Byron, who's an inch taller than Gaudreau and probably two tiers under him in terms of natural talent can come up and make an impact on games the way he has through his speed and quick hands then why can't Gaudreau? He's one of those special few, and pretty soon people see it and will stop doubting him. Call me a believer, cause I am. He's no ordinary shorty.
Last edited by djsFlames; 02-05-2014 at 05:13 PM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to djsFlames For This Useful Post:
I'll admit right up front that I'm a big fan of Gaudreau.
That said, I think the Flames would be foolish not to keep him and see how he fits in to the NHL. He was a 4th round pick. You sign him, let him play in the AHL for awhile to see if he can deal with THAT league and if he can, you bring him up to the NHL. If you're successful, you have a 1st/2nd line winger with tremendous talent. If not... it's a 4th round pick.
Every team is going to have question marks about him until he can prove that he can play in the NHL at 5'8" and 160 lbs, or whatever he will be by this fall. A lot of teams will say, "Oh... we'll give you a 2nd round pick for him. You drafted him in the 4th so this is a great deal for you."
I personally think you try it out and see if you can turn a 5'6", 137 lb 4th round draft pick into a 1st line LWer... rather than ship him off to become a star for another team, for a 2nd round pick.
__________________
Huge thanks to Dion for the signature!
Yup, because that's how you build a winner. Sell off those players who have over-achieved and become winners at every level they have played, but sit on those players who have stalled or gone retrograde and continue to hope they turn into winners.
