Mark "Fricken" Jankowski (aka The Big Jankowski)

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Husky

People need to relax on the PPG thing. He plays on an extremely low offensive team. The last time there was a player who was at least a PPG was 2002-03 season, over 10 years ago.

And going back over those last 10 years, they've produced zero impact forwards in the NHL.

His offensive production is a very real and important stat line to follow. He has to be better than the Providence players of the last decade if we want him to be an NHL player.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

And going back over those last 10 years, they've produced zero impact forwards in the NHL.

His offensive production is a very real and important stat line to follow. He has to be better than the Providence players of the last decade if we want him to be an NHL player.

Okay that's probably fair... But has Providence had/recruited anyone the previous decade that were expected to be NHL'ers, much less impact ones?

This is head coach Nate Leaman's third year as head coach and he's been responsible for turning the program around. They hadn't been in the NCAA tournament since 2001. They still aren't the destination obviously but they seem to be a program on the rise.

If the Friars had recruited guys expected to be NHL'ers prior to Leaman arriving I'd be agreeing with you, but they haven't had those quality guys before. Don't know if 19 year old Jankowski outpacing random 22-24 year old senior matters all that much.

[Street Pharmacist]

Any way you slice it, it's incredibly hard to pin down his development unless you've watch a reasonable amount of games. The only things we can say is he isn't terrible or dominant

[Enoch Root]

Looking forward to seeing how he compares at development camp this summer.

Also, I agree with those that say we need to see some progression offensively next year to the PPG range. Transition to C, low-scoring team, etc is all fine. But next year, it's time for him to start being a dominant player.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Jankowski was named to the east-conference all-tournament team, over the BMOC, Mauermann. He continues to impress hockey people with his complete game. Will everyone please relax and recognize this kid continues to draw praise as a top player in the role he's asked to play.

The book on him in prospects camp last summer was that he was behind guys like Monahan in playing within a system and reading plays on the defensive side of the puck. The Dude has gone to college and learned his lessons well, garnering high praise for his over-all game. He's done exactly what was asked of him and still produced points. He played the Stephane Yelle role for the Friars and still finished second in goal scoring and third in point production. What more do people want?

Just to add to those who are expecting a PPG season next year. Mauermann, the top scorer on Providence, didn't score a PPG pace and he was given every offensive opportunity to do so. Temper the expectations for guys that play in a defense first system.

[Street Pharmacist]

This thread is full of people saying relax when they're the only ones who are flipping out. Haha

Edit: Wrong their/they're

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

This thread is full of people saying relax when their the only ones who are flipping out. Haha

This.

I was optimistic about him in my post, and just added I'm excited to see his progression next season, while expecting him to get to ppg.

[Vulcan]

Though I honestly don't know if I want this for his development or just as ammo to shut some people up. No idea if games like that even matter for a prospects career path.

and here I thought you were a smart guy but you want to bring up an old argument that wasn't really being argued about. Just to refresh, it isn't that Jankowski isn't a reasonable prospect, it's just that he was too much of a gamble for our first round pick.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

and here I thought you were a smart guy but you want to bring up an old argument that wasn't really being argued about. Just to refresh, it isn't that Jankowski isn't a reasonable prospect, it's just that he was too much of a gamble for our first round pick.

I'm sorry - who's trying to bring up an old argument?

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

and here I thought you were a smart guy but you want to bring up an old argument that wasn't really being argued about. Just to refresh, it isn't that Jankowski isn't a reasonable prospect, it's just that he was too much of a gamble for our first round pick and that hasn't changed.

You're a sensitive guy if you focused solely on that line and not the entire thought of my post. I wasn't bringing anything else up, if anything I was taking a shot at myself for why I want him to have a big game.

Grow up.

[TheDebaser]

I can't wait for Jankowski's next season. Another offseason to pack on muscle will do wonders for this kid. He's big, fast, smart and talented as hell, if given a little patience I really have a hard time seeing how this kid won't be a great player. It's not going to be a long time before this kid is for real.

He was still the second youngest player on his team this year and he's still just a month older than Monahan. I would bet money that Jankowski still has a lot more to show us.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

And going back over those last 10 years, they've produced zero impact forwards in the NHL.

That's an irrelevant point. This is a very new hockey program that was completely overhauled in 2011 when they hired Nate Leaman. Providence College was a punching bag on the Hockey East schedule before the arrival of Leaman. Now they have a very reputable program and building something long term.

His offensive production is a very real and important stat line to follow. He has to be better than the Providence players of the last decade if we want him to be an NHL player.

The players before him are just as irrelevant as the players after him. The only thing that matters is Jankowski's performance and achieving the goals of the team he is playing on. What you're saying is that Monahan is likely to be a failure because Corey Locke outscored him by 32 goals and 73 points for the 67's, exactly a decade previous.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

You're a sensitive guy if you focused solely on that line and not the entire thought of my post. I wasn't bringing anything else up, if anything I was taking a shot at myself for why I want him to have a big game.

Grow up.

LOL

Though I honestly don't know if I want this for his development or just as ammo to shut some people up. No idea if games like that even matter for a prospects career path.

It sure doesn't sound like it was self directed. Who are these "some people"?

As for my response, I replied with my case, why don't you try as well instead of your attempt at misdirection.

[MrMastodonFarm]

We're not going to rehash this, again, for the 1000th time. That wasn't my point, you seem to be the only one who took it that way. We've stated our cases a billion times on this topic. I don't care anymore, it's done, it's over. The last several pages have been actual excellent discussion about his current play and that's all I'm interested in.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by New Era

What you're saying is that Monahan is likely to be a failure because Corey Locke outscored him by 32 goals and 73 points for the 67's, exactly a decade previous.

It'd be like me saying... in recent times, the Ottawa 67s have produced NHL players Logan Couture, Jamie McGinn, and Tyler Toffoli. In their draft years, they were in the .88 - 1.44 ppg range. Monahan was 1.34 ppg in his draft year.... so his offence is not an area to be concerned over, as he is producing just as well as previous NHLers had for Ottawa.

Providence on the other hand has not produced any regular NHL players in recent memory, and so it'd be foolish to use their offensively challenged players from years past as justification for why Jankowski doesn't need to display a high offensive game. Those past players for Providence weren't good enough to make the NHL, so we can not set Jankowski's bar at their level.



I'm not asking for Janko to put up Gaudreau-like offense next year. I'm expecting a ppg... which is what should be expected of his 3rd college season. I challenge anyone to find an impact player in the NHL that went the college route, and was not able to record a ppg-ish pace in their 3rd college season.

[The Fonz]

Jesus Murphy, I was positive about the kid and the season he just had! Why all the negative comments to follow? I'll say it again...

"Finished the year very strong offensively. Must have been a ppg over his last 10? I haven't got the actual stats.

I'm really looking forward to next season. Increased role, strength, and progression, I expect him to be ppg."

[Lanny_McDonald]

nvm

[Calgary Highlander]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I challenge anyone to find an impact player in the NHL that went the college route, and was not able to record a ppg-ish pace in their 3rd college season.

Blake Wheeler was also a project pick. Never really close to a PPG in any season. His numbers even regressed slightly from his sophomore to his junior year. I think he'd qualify as an "impact player."

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Calgary Highlander

Blake Wheeler was also a project pick. Never really close to a PPG in any season. His numbers even regressed slightly from his sophomore to his junior year. I think he'd qualify as an "impact player."

Yeah, I go to Wheeler a lot too. It's really hard to find comparables to Jankowski. As a 19 year old Wheeler had 9 goals and 23 points. At 19 Mark had 14 goals and 25 points. Both were raw project type picks, Jankowski more so.

Wheeler was close to a PPG, which if Jankowski hits close to I'd be fine with. Especially when you compare the quality of players a guy like Wheeler has compared to Jankowski.

For now I'm sticking with 35 points in 40 games.

Thrilled if he hit 20-20 though.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Calgary Highlander

Blake Wheeler was also a project pick. Never really close to a PPG in any season. His numbers even regressed slightly from his sophomore to his junior year. I think he'd qualify as an "impact player."

That's a good example, but his 2nd season (same age as Janko's 3rd), he was .86 ppg.

I'll be happy if Janko gets there.