I don't think it's fair to expect Gaudreau type first year numbers from Jankowski. Reasoning is his size needing more maturing and his previous lack of good competition and coaching.
I'll give him a mulligan this year (and this year only) but not for any of those reasons. I'll give him a pass this year because he's young for his level and his whole team is inexperienced (and consequently not very potent). If he shows no significant improvement next year though?... when he and his team will be older and more experienced then I'll be really concerned. I think at minimum our expectations should be a .75PPG player next year and 1.00PPG the year thereafter... that is what Kreider put up and he and Jankowski were drafted around the same slot, came from roughly comparable backgrounds (HS League), and were both drafted on "tools" for lack of a better term. Kreider put forth a better freshman year (asuming no change in what remains) but I'll chalk that up to playing for BC and the 7 month age gap.
I'll give him a mulligan this year (and this year only) but not for any of those reasons. I'll give him a pass this year because he's young for his level and his whole team is inexperienced (and consequently not very potent). If he shows no significant improvement next year though?... when he and his team will be older and more experienced then I'll be really concerned. I think at minimum our expectations should be a .75PPG player next year and 1.00PPG the year thereafter... that is what Kreider put up and he and Jankowski were drafted around the same slot, came from roughly comparable backgrounds (HS League), and were both drafted on "tools" for lack of a better term. Kreider put forth a better freshman year (asuming no change in what remains) but I'll chalk that up to playing for BC and the 7 month age gap.
I'm not sure about you, but when I hit my big growth spurt (9 inches in a year) it took me a while to get remotely used to my new limbs. The fact that I kept growing after that (3 inches over the next year) didn't help. Once everything calmed down, it took me another year or so to be able to fully trust and understand myself. I put it all together and it worked out pretty well. I still grew a bit after that, but much slower.
I'm very impressed with his point pace thus far, and if he keeps it up next year I'll be equally thrilled. The real deciding point is going to be his 4th year of collegiate hockey. If he isn't producing around a PPG pace or so (depending on the team around him) then we might have trouble. I'd say we can't really guage him until he's done with the NCAA.
__________________
Disregard any and all THANKS I give. I'm a dirty, dirty thanks-whore.
I think it was a decent move as it should help the Flames in the future. My only problem with the pick is the Flames are not really in the position to be drafting guys that will not be ready for 5 years. In saying that hopefully its a Detroit type of thing where they let there picks mature for quite awhile. Like a fine wine .
Really interested in seeing who Providence College is able to recruit next year.
I think if they can get a high skilled player to play on the same line with Jankowski, it will really help jankowski explode offensively
It's a bit difficult for anyone they get to play with Jankowski (I assume he'll be on the top line). They'd have to be able to beat out a lot of more experienced players. This is the composition of the Friars this year...
6 seniors
4 Juniors
5 Sophmores
13 Freshmen
... so next year the freshmen will have to beat out 22 players with more NCAA experience.
That's amusing to say but the real reason (IMO) for the recent lack of success is that there were to many low-risk, low-reward guys taken at the top end of the draft where the risk part of "low-risk" actualized (Chucko, Pelech, Nemisz come to mind). I think they were largely risk adverse for the whole of the draft but doing it at the top of the draft (where you should be looking for impact players) hurt the most.
Add Nystrom and Erixon to this list.
Nystrom when drafted was considered a grinder, who is big, but needed to work on his skating and had the potential to develop into a second liner if his offensive skills developed.
Erixon was considered a jack of all trades type player no great strengths and no glaring weaknesses. High floor low ceiling type defender was was considered to be a good top 4 D man.
Kind of frustrating when mangement drafts like this in my opinion, I will take 2/3 busts in a row to get that one star on the 3/4th try, then drafting 3-4 good third liners in a row.
Imagine if we had Iggy in his prime and got him an elite center or a player who could anchor the second line? Rather then hitting on 3/4 bottom 6 forwards in a row.
So would you put $1000 on Jankowski becoming a regular NHLer within a reasonable timetable?
Not with you or anyone on a message board for that matter, but if I had to bet a friend $100 that he's on this team full time in 2 years, I'd do that in a heartbeat.
__________________ ”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”
I think it was a decent move as it should help the Flames in the future. My only problem with the pick is the Flames are not really in the position to be drafting guys that will not be ready for 5 years. In saying that hopefully its a Detroit type of thing where they let there picks mature for quite awhile. Like a fine wine .
He's not five years away. He's a big, skilled kid who was young for his draft year. Which means he will probably require an extra year of development. So in two years, he should be almost assured a spot on the big club, and if he takes big strides next season, then he could make the jump after that.
I'll say again, that if he were two days younger, he would be a top 10 pick this year. And just because Feaster said that in ten years he's going to be considered the best player of this draft, it doesn't mean it will take him until he's 23 to make the NHL roster.
__________________ ”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”
He's not five years away. He's a big, skilled kid who was young for his draft year. Which means he will probably require an extra year of development. So in two years, he should be almost assured a spot on the big club, and if he takes big strides next season, then he could make the jump after that.
I'll say again, that if he were two days younger, he would be a top 10 pick this year. And just because Feaster said that in ten years he's going to be considered the best player of this draft, it doesn't mean it will take him until he's 23 to make the NHL roster.
He's not five years away. He's a big, skilled kid who was young for his draft year. Which means he will probably require an extra year of development. So in two years, he should be almost assured a spot on the big club, and if he takes big strides next season, then he could make the jump after that.
I'll say again, that if he were two days younger, he would be a top 10 pick this year. And just because Feaster said that in ten years he's going to be considered the best player of this draft, it doesn't mean it will take him until he's 23 to make the NHL roster.
I'm not down on Jankowski by any means but to say he will be assured a spot in two years is nuts!!
You simply do not go from Quebec High School hockey to the NHL in 2-3 years, it would be developmental suicide. I agree that five years is too long, if he hasn't made it to the show by then he will likely be a bust. Quickest path for him would be another year of Providence (90% chance of him going back in 14/15 as well) + another full year in the AHL. That third year is MAYBE when he begins to push for an injury call-up.
No matter how you slice it, I don't see how there is any chance in hell that he pushes for a spot on the Flames until late 15/16 at the earliest.
I think he'll spend all 4 years in college, but if he's not ready after that, he's a lost cause.
He needs to gain weight. He admitted on Twitter that he's not even 170 yet. I don't even know how that's possible at his height. It's amazing he can play hockey at all at that weight.
NCAA was best for him at the point he is at. CHL is a huge step in terms of opposition skillwise, and work load. In collegiate hockey you have way more time off. Time Janko needs to bulk up. The CHL would derail all of that. He has more time to develop and grow accustom to his body.
He is a long term project. If we get impatient and bump him up too fast we will definately bust him and bust him big time.
I was under the impression that the NCAA is actually a better league than the CHL. The players are older and more developed.
There certainly are argument to be made about which league develops players better, but I thought that skillwise the NCAA is hands down better than the CHL. It really comes down to the age of the players (18-24 vs. 16-20)
I was under the impression that the NCAA is actually a better league than the CHL. The players are older and more developed.
There certainly are argument to be made about which league develops players better, but I thought that skillwise the NCAA is hands down better than the CHL. It really comes down to the age of the players (18-24 vs. 16-20)
NCAA players are older, bigger, more mature. But CHL attracts more top end talent so it's not clear cut which is the better league.
The Following User Says Thank You to edslunch For This Useful Post:
.
