View Single Post
Old
07-10-2013, 12:25 AM
  #38
Reinhart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Azores
Posts: 638
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
When did I write him off? I just think you should take a safer pick in the 1st round and see what a player like Jankowski can do later on.
I think it was a great pick because of his ceiling, size and skating.

Todd Button - Flames director of amateur scouting - put it this way:

"Jankowski is someone that is difficult to scout because of the level of competition he was playing at. You need experienced scouts who have scouted at this talent level before to more accurately gauge the quality. Our entire scouting department was involved in scouting him continuously, and we are confident with this pick."

Now, if this was the Flames drafting from 10 years ago - I would wholeheartedly agree he has a big bust potential. However, the Flames have been adding a lot to their scouting department, and it is STARTING to pay off.

Most 'busts' end up happening because of:
1) Poor work ethic (Jankowski is gaining weight and seems very focused on developing - he is a definite hard-worker)
2) Poor hockey IQ - Flames have been emphasizing this as a 'must-have' trait. Players with higher hockey IQ can transition better into the NHL into different roles, even when they come nowhere close to their ceilings)
3) Size - Obviously harder (but not impossible) for smaller players to make it. Jankowski has size.
4) Poor skating - even then, some players can be taught to skate better. Jankowski is actually a really smooth skater with very good mechanics.

After his first season in the NCAA, I would argue the Flames did a good job in scouting him. He didn't look out of place after his first 5 or so games for the most part. You can tell he had very little experience playing in systems, but by the end of the season he was doing much better. His stat line is nothing to sneeze at for one of the youngest players in the NCAA, making probably one of the biggest jumps getting to the NCAA, playing out of position on the wing, and being very under-developed (6'3" and only around 170 or so?).

If anything this showed, was that he is LESS likely to bust. This year will show more of what his potential (and ceiling) really is. I think very few people on this site (including myself) can accurately gauge what his ceiling is. Flames scouting seem to think he has the ceiling of a #1 center. The re-ranking from (I think) TSN had him in the first round still. He is a project though.

So, would Teravainen have been a 'safer pick'? He was available when the Flames traded down (and I was furious), but he is still a bit of a project and now a lot of posters feel he will most likely be a winger due to his size (though this is arguable). Flames were definitely swinging for the fences on this pick - but how much of a gamble was he when they had their entire scouting staff scouting him?

Also, contrary to this board - Jankowski was not ranked first on the Flames' list. Weisbrod was quoted as saying Galchenyuk was first on their list. They really loved Jankowski, but also mentioned he is a bit of a project. They felt strongly enough that he has a very high ceiling, but also a decent enough floor to make the pick worth it. He is not 'boom or bust' - just a guy who is a bit of a project. I don't think that is a risk of a pick - as long as you believe that Flames' scouting department is competent in their ability to scout at that level properly.

Reinhart is offline   Reply With Quote