[News] With the 21st overall pick Flames select C Mark Jankowski

[oldschoolcalgary]

hey, if he does well in the CHL, then I think a lot of naysayers, including myself, will eat crow...until he faces the grind of playing other NHL caliber players on a consistent basis, it's very difficult to see how those skills will hold up.

[SOMBRI2]

based on what the press has and various opinions. i am cautiously optimistic. but we find something money can't buy: good hockey IQ in this kid...

hope it turns out.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Was wondering when you'd show up.

I'm neither overrating nor spinning the pick. The spin is coming from guys like flamesaresmokin and Lt.Spears who, as usual, don't let their own ignorance get in the way of a good negative spin.

You guys are so completely off the rails that you actually think a neutral opinion of "I don't know him so I'll reserve judgement at this time" constitutes overrating the pick or applying a positive spin.

Stupid is as stupid does.

What are you talking about?

I never stated that you were one of the people spinning. I don't think that I'll wait to see how he turnsout is spinning.

I think "he will be a number 1 center in two years" is certainly not a neutral view. I think the high reward comments in regards to others around him is a bit of spin as well.

As usual you don;t read what is written and go off on some useless personal rant that has nothing to do with what I posted.

[Roof-Daddy]

Mark 'Fricken' Jankowski

Was sad when they traded away #14, but I love the high risk, high reward pick they ended up making.

Can't wait to see who they sang with #42 tomorrow.

[Lt.Spears]

Originally Posted by Lobotroth

Guess I'll get in on this ######ation:

Why "call out" people who are just being optimistic? That's like telling someone who is smiling to stop smiling.

Why call out people for being pessimistic?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Dorkmaster

Isn't the draft about getting the best player not the best player in the next 2-3 years?

Not for me. To me it's first about getting a guy who can outperform his ELC, and then after that who will excel before UFA.

Who cares if Jankowski will be the best player from the draft in 10 years when he'll be UFA in 7?

I want guys who can play in the AHL in ELC year one, adjust to the NHL in ELC year two, and make an impact in ELC year three. Then hopefully you still have some good RFA years after that.

[dino7c]

what are the chances that Feaster is still the GM by the time this kid plays

[moon]

Originally Posted by Captain_Obvious

I'm surprised you'd show up and be negative. That's just as much a shocker

Where am I being negative?

Show one negative thing I have said about the kid.

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

I feel somewhat cheated with the Flames passing over so many ranked skilled players. I do no like the idea of the Flames having the 14th pick in thie hands and instead end up selecting a very unproven player ranked middle of he 2nd round

Reminds me of Sutter taking another project playing not against whl, ohl, qmj talent. Chucko.

Nobody in the draft is proven.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Mark 'Fricken' Jankowski

It has a certain ring to it, let's hope that thread to be flourishes in the next year or two.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Was wondering when you'd show up.

I'm neither overrating nor spinning the pick. The spin is coming from guys like flamesaresmokin and Lt.Spears who, as usual, don't let their own ignorance get in the way of a good negative spin.

You guys are so completely off the rails that you actually think a neutral opinion of "I don't know him so I'll reserve judgement at this time" constitutes overrating the pick or applying a positive spin.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Are you actually so batty that you think we're questioning neutral opinions? If you could read properly you'd realize that the only thing in question as far as I'm concerned is that we passed up a ton of solid talent for a very high risk. Posters like resolute and co seem to take exception with the mere suggestion that the Flames should not have rolled the dice.

This is another fantastic piece of posting material for the resolute bulletin board of delusion.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Well I for one find baseless negativity more irritating than baseless optimism. Nothing wrong with being positive instead of whining when you really have no clue about something

How is one any different than the other?

Most of the alleged baseless negativity is in regards to not picking certain guys at #14 as opposed to disliking the pick at #21. There was more proven high ceiling guys available, but we chose an extra second rounder over them. Was it worth it? That's a perfectly valid argument, IMO, and one that shouldn't be brushed over in favor of the baseless positivity that apparently constitutes good discussion.

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by moon

Where am I being negative?

Show one negative thing I have said about the kid.

This thread ain't about you moon. Just stop!

[Pierre "Monster" McGuire]

Put me down in the "cautiously optimisic" group.

Keeping in mind Jankowski is going to be a big time project, I think this upcoming season will be very telling.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by SebC

Not for me. To me it's first about getting a guy who can outperform his ELC, and then after that who will excel before UFA.

Who cares if Jankowski will be the best player from the draft in 10 years when he'll be UFA in 7?

I want guys who can play in the AHL in ELC year one, adjust to the NHL in ELC year two, and make an impact in ELC year three. Then hopefully you still have some good RFA years after that.

Tell me why Jankowski couldn't do exactly that after playing a year or two with Dubuque (or in the the CHL)? You do realize he doesn't need to sign his ELC tomorrow, right?

[flames_1987]

Originally Posted by moon

He certainly seems more high risk but not sure what makes him more high reward than other guys at his draft position.

What about him makes him more likely to be a #1 center than say Gaunce or Teravainen? What makes him more likely to be an impact player than Maata?

Because he's still at such a young age, and still has such a strong skill set to begin with, that he has so much time to still grow with it. He graduates from high school tomorrow. He has such natural ability and still this unknown about how far he can take this talent.

Those players can all still be list line centers and good hockey players. According to the draft boards, Button, the TSN Panel and the people who actually follow and watch these kids, he has the chance to be one of the top players in this entire draft class. I choose to listen to them when the say things like this, when they call him a project player with a high risk and high reward. Those players mentioned have a much higher probability of making an impact, and a strong one at that. This kid sounds like he has the potential to go above and beyond that.

Again, I'm going with what I've read. I know nothing about these players, and I assume neither do you.

[moon]

Originally Posted by calumniate

Aww moon did you have to moon up this thread really?

By that I mean just try to stay on topic plz

Originally Posted by calumniate

This thread ain't about you moon. Just stop!

Seriously do you read the thread or just see my name and make stuff up?

[Hatter]

This may not mean much, as obviously every kid is different, but Jankowski has so far followed a very similar growth pattern to myself. At 15 I was 5'5 and 130 pounds. By 18 I was 6'1 and 175 pounds. The day of my 20th birthday four years ago I was up to 6'3 and 200 pounds even. Granted, I'm no professional athlete, but I take very good care of myself. Hopefully he continues to grow and pack on the muscle. I know from experience it's not impossible.

[FiftyBelow]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

The OHL, WHL and the Q are not good enough for the Calgary Flames.

Passing up on someone from the Q Continuum would be a huge mistake...

[Dion]

We need a poll on this pick.