Thoughts about Jankowski?

[Johnny Hoxville]

I guess I'm mostly referring to the fact that he's an offensive center as in, that's his playing style. It's the same as saying a defender is a PMD vs a Stay-at-home style. A defender being a PMD does not necessarily constitute that's going to put up a lot up of points, simply that is his style. Again, I compare Janko to a Spezza (based on what I've seen), but I have no idea on where he will end up or in what capacity.

 

[Lunatik]

I guess I'm mostly referring to the fact that he's an offensive center as in, that's his playing style. It's the same as saying a defender is a PMD vs a Stay-at-home style. A defender being a PMD does not necessarily constitute that's going to put up a lot up of points, simply that is his style. Again, I compare Janko to a Spezza (based on what I've seen), but I have no idea on where he will end up or in what capacity.

Right now he is closer to Gaustad, but with more offensive upside.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Right now he is closer to Gaustad, but with more offensive upside.

Honestly, I wouldn't at all be surprised to see him become Colborne 2.0. Good middle 6 player with some offensive ability.

 

[Lunatik]

Honestly, I wouldn't at all be surprised to see him become Colborne 2.0. Good middle 6 player with some offensive ability.

Yeah, except at centre

I wonder if we could see a line of Klimchuk - Jankowski - Smith in prospect camp

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

I don't buy this at all. If he was already a good offensive player, he wouldn't have thoroughly mediocre numbers in his third year of college, regardless of who he's playing with.

How many minutes does Jankowski play? He plays 3rd line minutes to my eye, even when he's the best player on the ice.

How many chances does he create? I saw him creating grade A chances consistently and his 3rd-line-in-college teammates just not having the hands to finish.

How often do his teammates set him up? I don't think it's often, at all. In fact none of his teammates have the size to really even cycle with him.

Until we see Jankowski play often, we can't judge him by his numbers - it's foolish to do so. We can only speculate about numbers. See also: Jonathan Drouin, who's only about 6 months older and plays with actual NHLers. Now, that does mean he's probably not wired to be a true goal-scorer. Neither are guys like Niklas Backstrom and Johnny Gaudreau.

 

[Calculon]

If Jankowski isn't playing much, it's because he's not earning it. He's been given every opportunity; he just hasn't seized it. If he's not putting up points it's because he's simply not good enough, etc, etc.

that's how this works, right

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

View attachment 83843

You know if you really look at this draft, it was really soft. Jankowski was not a bad pick.

 

[Taranis]

This link provides some NHL stats for comparison.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2012e.html

 

[AgeOfBennett]

View attachment 83843

You know if you really look at this draft, it was really soft. Jankowski was not a bad pick.

i mean obviously he still isn't first round worthy but damn I wish we took Maatta (((((

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

i mean obviously he still isn't first round worthy but damn I wish we took Maatta (((((

1)I would take a high ceiling forward like Jankowski every time in the first round when half the Norris candidates in the league were found in the 2nd round or later, or if in the first round then in the top ~7 or so. I thought we took some defensive serious studs in the later rounds that year in Ryan Culkin and Brett Kulak anyways.

2) No, it is and was not obvious at all. Never take the most "ready" prospect, always take the one with the highest projection, even if it's the first round. Obviously with his slow progression you're gonna get a bit nervous, but watching him I still feel like we've got a stud top 6 center on our hands here.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Obviously some guys are further ahead than others, but really no one has stepped up and separated themselves apart from the pack especially out of the forwards. Really, Janko still has every opportunity to still be one of the better forwards from this class. I wouldn't trade Janko for Grigorenko or Faska. Teravanien is just breaking into the league now. Yak and Galchenyuk have played, but neither have lived up to expectations. Hertl did have stud written all over him, however he did regress last season. Maybe Janko can be a poor mans Ryan Johansen.

 

[Lunatik]

Obviously some guys are further ahead than others, but really no one has stepped up and separated themselves apart from the pack especially out of the forwards. Really, Janko still has every opportunity to still be one of the better forwards from this class. I wouldn't trade Janko for Grigorenko or Faska. Teravanien is just breaking into the league now. Yak and Galchenyuk have played, but neither have lived up to expectations. Hertl did have stud written all over him, however he did regress last season. Maybe Janko can be a poor mans Ryan Johansen.

Best player in the draft in 10 years

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Best player in the draft in 10 years

Could you imagine?

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Maybe Janko can be a poor mans Ryan Johansen.

Come on man, just because he can't afford ProActiv® doesn't mean you have to make fun of his financial situation. He's slumming it in college, not a pro making millions.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Come on man, just because he can't afford ProActiv® doesn't mean you have to make fun of his financial situation. He's slumming it in college, not a pro making millions.

Slumdog millionaire.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

View attachment 83843

You know if you really look at this draft, it was really soft. Jankowski was not a bad pick.

Between 14 and 23 I like every player available better than Jankowski, aside from Laughton (although Maatta's health issues might unfortunately mess his career up pretty badly). Hopefully he still has a good NHL career (and he's doing decently in college) but I do think the trade down and selection of him is going to turn out to be a poor value move.

 

[WeegarUnderwood]

1)I would take a high ceiling forward like Jankowski every time in the first round when half the Norris candidates in the league were found in the 2nd round or later, or if in the first round then in the top ~7 or so. I thought we took some defensive serious studs in the later rounds that year in Ryan Culkin and Brett Kulak anyways.

2) No, it is and was not obvious at all. Never take the most "ready" prospect, always take the one with the highest projection, even if it's the first round. Obviously with his slow progression you're gonna get a bit nervous, but watching him I still feel like we've got a stud top 6 center on our hands here.

I always thought the key to drafting was to draft the best player available and Maatta was definitely that at pick #21. I remember the TSN panel explicitly saying that.

 

[Anglesmith]

I always thought the key to drafting was to draft the best player available and Maatta was definitely that at pick #21. I remember the TSN panel explicitly saying that.

Yes, but when people say "best player available," they don't mean best currently, they mean the player that projects to become the best player. And that's why no one's lists are exactly the same. It's a subjective thing.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

Yes, but when people say "best player available," they don't mean best currently, they mean the player that projects to become the best player. And that's why no one's lists are exactly the same. It's a subjective thing.

That's true, but at least amongst media and HFBoards, consesus was that Maatta was the guy, and it looks like they were right this time.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Between 14 and 23 I like every player available better than Jankowski, aside from Laughton (although Maatta's health issues might unfortunately mess his career up pretty badly). Hopefully he still has a good NHL career (and he's doing decently in college) but I do think the trade down and selection of him is going to turn out to be a poor value move.

Really Teuvo and Laughton are the only ones who seem like pretty safe bets to be top 6 players. You could say that about Hertl, but personally I think he could just as easily end up being a Joe Colborne type of player. Saying you like all those guys over Janko is definitely fair, and most of them are going to play. But I also think that Janko will play I don't think the gap necessarily will be much, if any in some cases.

My main point was the draft was not great. It was not loaded with high end talent. Was it wrong to trade down, maybe and only time will tell. But the decision to move down to take a guy who's a project but has a higher ceiling makes more sense now in hindsight. None of us on here are pro scouts and over time decisions like that become more understandable.

 

[CraigsList]

1)I would take a high ceiling forward like Jankowski every time in the first round when half the Norris candidates in the league were found in the 2nd round or later, or if in the first round then in the top ~7 or so. I thought we took some defensive serious studs in the later rounds that year in Ryan Culkin and Brett Kulak anyways.

2) No, it is and was not obvious at all. Never take the most "ready" prospect, always take the one with the highest projection, even if it's the first round. Obviously with his slow progression you're gonna get a bit nervous, but watching him I still feel like we've got a stud top 6 center on our hands here.

Maatta was definitely the better pick at the time. But we went a different route.

 

[Anglesmith]

That's true, but at least amongst media and HFBoards, consesus was that Maatta was the guy, and it looks like they were right this time.

Well, Maatta certainly hasn't done anything to disprove that. But until they get to a similar point in their development, it isn't really a fair comparison. Maatta is on track with respect to his projection, and Jankowski hasn't deviated at all from what we were told to expect from him.

 

[Volica]

Well, Maatta certainly hasn't done anything to disprove that. But until they get to a similar point in their development, it isn't really a fair comparison. Maatta is on track with respect to his projection, and Jankowski hasn't deviated at all from what we were told to expect from him.

another 6 years for that

I truly, truly hope he does something worthwhile this year.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Maatta was definitely the better pick at the time

That's an opinion, not a fact. There's still two years left before you can begin to judge the draft. Drafting is a marathon, not a sprint.

 

[Anglesmith]

Picking the consensus BPA is also how you arrive at a guy like Trevor Kidd over Martin Brodeur. So it's not like going with the flow is always the best idea. You pay your scouts because you trust their judgement, so if they say that Player B is going to be better than Player A, then you should either listen or fire them.