wow.....what a thread......can you imagine if this was the first thread that all new members was exposed to on CP....
I think it's time this thread moved on from arguing the merits of a "woulda, coulda, shoulda" analysis of the 2012 draft, and focused on the player and how he's doing.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Steve Bozek For This Useful Post:
I've picked up a couple of games on the net. To tell you the truth I don't go out of my way to watch though after seeing him not do much. CBSS also has NCAA hockey and I have that.
I don't know where you got the idea I was a hand wringer. I don't expect much from Jankowski but it seems a lot of people get their panties in a knot when I criticize the pick. By the way, I'm aware of his situation on his team. I don't need any back ground lessons unless you've got inside information.
[QUOTE=Bandwagon In Flames;4620559]The fact that Jankowski was so 'raw' and undeveloped makes him a gamble pick. Someone projected to be 4-5 years away from being a possible NHLer compared to many others who were further developed at the time of the draft and 1-2 years from making the NHL based off scout projections.
“A real late bloomer, he skates well, has great vision with the puck and tremendous playmaking understanding and potential. He comes from a great hockey family and really just looks to giving only a small glimpse of what he could progress to be at this point.” - See more at: http://thehockeywriters.com/mark-jan....qUuBsJM5.dpuf
His sudden spike in development is a healthy sign for NHL clubs. This year he dominated the MPHL and helped his draft stock considerably with a strong end of season showing at the Beanpot Classic playing against better players. Jankowski has the potential to be a top six scoring centre at the NHL level. ” - See more at: http://thehockeywriters.com/mark-jan....qUuBsJM5.dpuf Please keep replying to any loosely based comments and ignore any hard facts. /sarcasm[/QUOTE]
Exactly what hard facts have you been providing here that have been getting ignored? Sorry, your opinions are not 'facts'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames
Vulcan you're on your own, I've brought up my points and don't feel like spending any more time defending my posts. Some people are too close minded and stubborn to admit they are wrong. They'll spend hours trying to find ways of skewing words and be oblivious to several solid points against their stance.
That is really rich. Anyone that doesn't agree with your 'facts' (err.. opinions) is closed-minded, stubborn and wrong. I have been proven wrong on these boards in the past, but have changed my mind on my initial stance. You have done nothing to make me waver from my stance yet. I will be more than happy to do so when you present real facts and figures for me that prove your point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan
As BIF said, no sense in arguing. I've found that even if some posters opinion has been proven wrong multiple times, a week later they'll still be repeating their bogus thoughts.
What have you proven? What has either side proven here? There are legitimate prospects that take a few more years to develop and enter the NHL. The NHL is full of these examples. Why can't Jankowski be one of these examples? What makes you so sure that it was a terrible pick, when history does dictate that there are in fact many players that excel in the NHL after having to further develop for 'x' amount of years. The fact is that Jankowski is positively developing at providence in a defensive system. If he was stalled or regressing, I would then agree with you. That is not the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan
The thing is I don't disagree with you but knowing that Jankowski would take this long path to the NHL, which I firmly believe makes him more of a gamble, was he a good choice by Feaster? I say he wasn't and I stand by that opinion.
I'm not making any judgment now, that he won't make the NHL as I've argued before that he is on track. So far, he's been a little slow in developing but he is sort of what he was expected to be. Next season will be big for him and we'll know a little better what we have.
I think being Flames fans takes away from having an unbiased view of the Jankowski pick. Here's a far more scathing opinion.
Checking out other articles from the draft, they all seem to have one theme in common, gamble. I don't see why this is such a contentious word when referencing this pick as all picks are gambles, it's just that this pick seems more so.
Nice article. This is neither a scouting report, nor is it an 'unbiased' look at the pick. How hard did you have to search for it? HILARIOUS!!! You go and search an article trying to blast the Flames as much as possible (Ryan Lambert, of all people) and try to use it as 'evidence' that you are right? Grasping at straws!!
You keep pointing it as 'gambling' and ignoring EVERYTHING people are saying. All picks are 'gambles', and the ONLY way to limit the gambling portion and draft the best players is to actually scout them, and scout them thoroughly. Would you agree here? Do you disagree with this???
Here is some 'unbiased' scouting reports on Jankowski. They list him all over the draft ranking, and have positive and negative reviews. This is actual scouting reports pre and post draft.
Now he's got another connection. He joins Philadelphia Flyers star Claude Giroux as having the distinction of being completely passed over in the Ontario Hockey League priority selection draft in his home province before finding at home in Quebec and becoming a first-rounder. Giroux did so in major junior with the Gatineau Olympiques. Jankowski did so far from the madding crowd.
"It's a honour to be in the same breath as Claude Giroux," Jankowski said. "He's a role model of mine, to never give up even if you're not drafted in the OHL draft."
More than 25 schools expressed an interest in Jankowski, but he selected Providence because he was impressed with coach Nate Leaman, who was coaching at Union College in Schenectady, N.Y., when he first contacted Jankowski.
“He reminds me of John LeClair. I talked to people in the OHL and they liked his skill set, but he was 5-8. Since then, he’s gone through a growth spurt where he’s gained 6 or 7 inches in 18 months, and I think he’s still growing.” He’s also said, “Mark Jankowski is superbly skilled with great size & potential.”
He’s a raw talent who skates well and is a good playmaker ... skating is fast, quick and agile ... a rangy skater with a long, smooth stride ... superb natural athleticism and balance ... size and reach are big assets ... not afraid to get physical ... has a deadly accurate shot ... super soft, quick hands ... one of the best distributors of the puck I've seen ... can also put the puck in the net ... great vision and awareness ... is able to make plays that very few can ... high-end hockey sense ... a two-way player who's good in his own zone ... has an ease to his game yet is very determined and competitive ... very unselfish
His sudden spike in development is a healthy sign for NHL clubs. This year he dominated the MPHL and helped his draft stock considerably with a strong end of season showing at the Beanpot Classic playing against better players. Jankowski has the potential to be a top six scoring centre at the NHL level. ” - See more at: http://thehockeywriters.com/mark-jan....qUuBsJM5.dpuf
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
I wasn't able to compile any more for some reason - copy/pasting didn't work, and neither did editing. Maybe it was too long of a post? lol
Anyways, there are lots and lots of scouting reports on Jankowski pre and post draft: Just type in "Mark Jankowski scouting report".
As for how he is doing now - he is progressing in a positively linear fashion. As long as he keeps progressing and regressing, that is a good thing in regards to him.
As for him being a 'terrible pick' - employed NHL scouts of all 30 teams (not just the Flames' scouts) have a consensus of him being a 1st round pick. Gives credence that so far, this was a 'good pick', not a 'stupid one'.
The Following User Says Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
You can't put absolutes like that on guys who are not in the league.
At worst, Jankowski never plays an NHL game.
You did the same thing a few days ago in saying "at worst, Poirier becomes a Cogliano/Lombardi/Glencross". No, he does not play 500+ NHL games at worst. There's a chance he never manages to play a full season.
We had this conversation at the beginning of the season, so I didn't say anything after your Poirier comment. But you just continue to do it.
I'm don't want anyone to be a pessimist, but to say that worst case scenario, any NHL prospect becomes an NHL player, is just bizarre.
I have said that in the past. Yes. And looking at how each of them has progressed, something would have to go seriously wrong for them to not hit the low end water mark that I said. Nothing is guaranteed. Sam Reinhart could be the next Alexandre Daigle. Gaudreau could suffer a career ending injury tomorrow. Who knows. However, watching thousands of players and how they've progressed, the two guys (Poirier and Jankowski) should be what I said.
I never said that Janko would be a long term NHLer. I don't know if Colborne is going to be in the NHL in 5 years. However, players that are big, play center, and are fast for their size will always be given the benefit of the doubt because if they hit, they are great pieces to have.
With Poirier, someone that's as fast as him and plays as defensively responsible as him will be a long term NHLer even in a primarily PK role as he has breakaway speed and can be a weapon on the PK. Just because someone is trending towards being an NHLer doesn't mean that they will be a great player. Also, predicting a 1st round pick to be an NHLer in some capacity isn't really much of a reach, especially in a very deep draft like last years'.
If I was saying Eric Roy or Ryan Culkin are guaranteed to be NHLers, then I could see the criticism. Saying that our 3rd/4th and 8th best prospects are going to be in the NHL at some point is not really a reach. It would be shocking if they don't.
__________________ Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
The Friars are pretty much exclusive on Cox. Their only other appearances this season have been on NESN and SNY. For Canadian based fans it's a bit of challenge to get any games, but if you're south of the border and you have the right service provider games are easy to come by and worth the time to watch. Some really good exciting hockey being played, especially in HE!
The Following User Says Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
The fact that Jankowski was so 'raw' and undeveloped makes him a gamble pick. Someone projected to be 4-5 years away from being a possible NHLer compared to many others who were further developed at the time of the draft and 1-2 years from making the NHL based off scout projections.
“A real late bloomer, he skates well, has great vision with the puck and tremendous playmaking understanding and potential. He comes from a great hockey family and really just looks to giving only a small glimpse of what he could progress to be at this point.” - See more at: http://thehockeywriters.com/mark-jan....qUuBsJM5.dpuf
His sudden spike in development is a healthy sign for NHL clubs. This year he dominated the MPHL and helped his draft stock considerably with a strong end of season showing at the Beanpot Classic playing against better players. Jankowski has the potential to be a top six scoring centre at the NHL level. ” - See more at: http://thehockeywriters.com/mark-jan....qUuBsJM5.dpuf Please keep replying to any loosely based comments and ignore any hard facts. /sarcasm[/QUOTE]
Exactly what hard facts have you been providing here that have been getting ignored? Sorry, your opinions are not 'facts'.
That is really rich. Anyone that doesn't agree with your 'facts' (err.. opinions) is closed-minded, stubborn and wrong. I have been proven wrong on these boards in the past, but have changed my mind on my initial stance. You have done nothing to make me waver from my stance yet. I will be more than happy to do so when you present real facts and figures for me that prove your point.
What have you proven? What has either side proven here? There are legitimate prospects that take a few more years to develop and enter the NHL. The NHL is full of these examples. Why can't Jankowski be one of these examples? What makes you so sure that it was a terrible pick, when history does dictate that there are in fact many players that excel in the NHL after having to further develop for 'x' amount of years. The fact is that Jankowski is positively developing at providence in a defensive system. If he was stalled or regressing, I would then agree with you. That is not the case.
Nice article. This is neither a scouting report, nor is it an 'unbiased' look at the pick. How hard did you have to search for it? HILARIOUS!!! You go and search an article trying to blast the Flames as much as possible (Ryan Lambert, of all people) and try to use it as 'evidence' that you are right? Grasping at straws!!
You keep pointing it as 'gambling' and ignoring EVERYTHING people are saying. All picks are 'gambles', and the ONLY way to limit the gambling portion and draft the best players is to actually scout them, and scout them thoroughly. Would you agree here? Do you disagree with this???
Here is some 'unbiased' scouting reports on Jankowski. They list him all over the draft ranking, and have positive and negative reviews. This is actual scouting reports pre and post draft.
I don't think I've argued that Jankowski isn't a first round pick, although that could be debated. I've argued that he was a poor choice for the Flames as his length of development into a NHL player is too long and coming out of a poor high school league, trying to rank him was too much of a gamble. Let other teams with a strong base of prospects take the chance, especially when there were other strong choices available, so basically I'm being attacked for a position I haven't taken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan As BIF said, no sense in arguing. I've found that even if some posters opinion has been proven wrong multiple times, a week later they'll still be repeating their bogus thoughts.
I was being sloppy when I posted this as I was referring to past arguments on this board where some posters have ignored links I've provided and gone on repeating their false claims.
I am not trying to blast the Flames, although I have no problem blasting Feaster and Weisbrod.
I've stated my opinion on this pick multiple times and I don't see any need to repeat it over and over. You and some others disagree, that's fine but I don't enjoy the attacks so I'm going to resume watching the Swede- Swiss game and enjoy some hockey. I hope everyone else is able to do the same.
Why is the length of his development a concern. This team is not contending in the next 3-4 years - if it takes him 3 years beyond now to make the NHL and then another couple years to be an impact player - that actually fits the timing fairly well.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to JiriHrdina For This Useful Post:
Interesting to note is that Burke can opt to just not sign Jankowski. If it's really this move that got Weisbrod fired, why would he bother signing him at all?
Maybe we should consider his relationship with the Flames basically diminished to nothing at this stage?
Most likely Burke puts Jankowski on the back burner for his college career, lets him ripen, and then ships him for a pick after his senior year a la Knight.
Of course, that is if the Flames continue with this great new management style where Burkie is Pres. of Hockey Ops, GM, AGM, and head of scouting...
Interesting to note is that Burke can opt to just not sign Jankowski. If it's really this move that got Weisbrod fired, why would he bother signing him at all?
Maybe we should consider his relationship with the Flames basically diminished to nothing at this stage?
Most likely Burke puts Jankowski on the back burner for his college career, lets him ripen, and then ships him for a pick after his senior year a la Knight.
Of course, that is if the Flames continue with this great new management style where Burkie is Pres. of Hockey Ops, GM, AGM, and head of scouting...
Is there anything to support this? Or is this all just mindless drivel? Have we seen anything from the Calgary Flames would indicate that this is the way they feel about Mark Jankowski? Seems nothing but a lot of handwringing when there is nothing to support any of what you just said.
Is there anything to support this? Or is this all just mindless drivel? Have we seen anything from the Calgary Flames would indicate that this is the way they feel about Mark Jankowski? Seems nothing but a lot of handwringing when there is nothing to support any of what you just said.
Based on Tod Button's interview it sounds like the Flames are happy with Jankowski's progress. Next year will obviously be huge for him as he'll be counted on to be a top guy.
If he doesn't show much progress in the next two years we can choose to not sign him and get a 2nd rounder for compensation unless they changed that in the CBA. Or Burke could shop him. Personally I don't think either of those will happen.
I like Jankowski's progress so far. Liked the pick then, still like it now. The whining about that pick is a bit silly at this point. As many have said, it's still way too early to say it was a bad pick. Jankowski keeps improving so I'm not sure what else you could ask for. Expecting him to dominate college right away after moving from prep school and being physically underdeveloped was and is unrealistic. And yes, the people writing him off already are the closed minded ones.
Last edited by Flames Draft Watcher; 02-14-2014 at 02:19 PM.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Flames Draft Watcher For This Useful Post:
Interesting to note is that Burke can opt to just not sign Jankowski. If it's really this move that got Weisbrod fired, why would he bother signing him at all?
Maybe we should consider his relationship with the Flames basically diminished to nothing at this stage?
Most likely Burke puts Jankowski on the back burner for his college career, lets him ripen, and then ships him for a pick after his senior year a la Knight.
Of course, that is if the Flames continue with this great new management style where Burkie is Pres. of Hockey Ops, GM, AGM, and head of scouting...
Because no matter how bad the pick is, you don't just waste a first round asset. Gain control of the player's rights and then if you're in total disagreement with the philosophy that picked him, move him for something.
Interesting to note is that Burke can opt to just not sign Jankowski. If it's really this move that got Weisbrod fired, why would he bother signing him at all?
Maybe we should consider his relationship with the Flames basically diminished to nothing at this stage?
Most likely Burke puts Jankowski on the back burner for his college career, lets him ripen, and then ships him for a pick after his senior year a la Knight.
Of course, that is if the Flames continue with this great new management style where Burkie is Pres. of Hockey Ops, GM, AGM, and head of scouting...
You bring a great deal of incite and perspective to the Heat conversation, which I appreciate. So I hope you won't take it personally when I say that this ^ is complete garbage.
College players cannot be signed or they lose their eligibility. Jankowski will continue to develop and the Flames will continue to watch his development - which is progressing just fine.
And then the Flames will make a rational decision about whether or not to sign him at the appropriate time (in another year or two).
Attempting to add drama and/or biases to the process is just silly.
Based on Tod Button's interview it sounds like the Flames are happy with Jankowski's progress. Next year will obviously be huge for him as he'll be counted on to be a top guy.
If he doesn't show much progress in the next two years we can choose to not sign him and get a 2nd rounder for compensation unless they changed that in the CBA. Or Burke could shop him. Personally I don't think either of those will happen.
I like Jankowski's progress so far. Liked the pick then, still like it now. The whining about that pick is a bit silly at this point. As many have said, it's still way too early to say it was a bad pick. Jankowski keeps improving so I'm not sure what else you could ask for. Expecting him to dominate college right away after moving from prep school and being physically underdeveloped was and is unrealistic. And yes, the people writing him off already are the closed minded ones.
Even in hindsight I don't mind the pick. In fact I think this is the perfect timing to allow a player like him develop. The Flames are really in no rush putting him in the lineup. Being in the first phase of the rebuild (honestly we are still tearing down) if he needs more time then so be it. If he continues to progress then having a player like him slot into the 3rd center spot can't hurt. If there is one thing we know is that with Providence's scheme he will be a 200' player.
I may be over optimistic but if he pans out then he adds another option down the center to go with Monahan and possibly a center out of one of the next two drafts. My dream is he slots in as the Flames version of Joe Pavelski.
The Friars are pretty much exclusive on Cox. Their only other appearances this season have been on NESN and SNY. For Canadian based fans it's a bit of challenge to get any games, but if you're south of the border and you have the right service provider games are easy to come by and worth the time to watch. Some really good exciting hockey being played, especially in HE!
Interestingly I just got a promoted tweet about the streaming the Providence/Notre Dame game tonight. Costs $5 though.
