Mark “Janko” Jankowski

[rickross]

I couldn’t find an active thread for the guy so here goes!

 

This guy is one of our most important prospects ever. From high school to college to the AHL and now a full time NHLer. He’s unique in the sense that we got to watch his entire come up and I feel he’s still one of the most underrated players on the roster this year. We’ve seen him put up 17 goals in a season already but I feel he’s really becoming a complete player this season. It’s been really cool watching him become a valuable asset to the Flames after so much uncertainty after his draft year

 

[420since1974]

I feel that Jankowski has become a decent Bottom 6 C who can play in the Top 6 on LW in a pinch.

Even If he never becomes more than that, I'm still happy with the choice of the draft pick.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

26 minutes ago, rickross said:

I couldn’t find an active thread for the guy so here goes!

 

This guy is one of our most important prospects ever. From high school to college to the AHL and now a full time NHLer. He’s unique in the sense that we got to watch his entire come up and I feel he’s still one of the most underrated players on the roster this year. We’ve seen him put up 17 goals in a season already but I feel he’s really becoming a complete player this season. It’s been really cool watching him become a valuable asset to the Flames after so much uncertainty after his draft year

 

 

5 minutes ago, 420since1974 said:

I feel that Jankowski has become a decent Bottom 6 C who can play in the Top 6 on LW in a pinch.

Even If he never becomes more than that, I'm still happy with the choice of the draft pick.

Yet when you look at the trade threads theres some who feel he should be the first to be put on the block. Cant please everyone I guess.

[The_People1]

I think Jankowski is trending 2nd line C and if he can up his defensive zone coverage, should definitely be our second line C.

 

He's got that shot we've seen on PK chances.  He can generate something out of nothing.  He can be tough to handle along the boards and can pull to the front of the net quick.  He's got a sweet finish so he shows confidence scoring. 

 

That said, he's already 24 so he's older than Monahan and Lindholm and for him to be so far behind them, you've got to conclude he will never reach that first line level.  Janko probably peaks at 25/26 and if he can improve just a bit, then thats about what we get.

 

Good player.

[conundrumed]

3 hours ago, rickross said:

I couldn’t find an active thread for the guy so here goes!

 

This guy is one of our most important prospects ever. From high school to college to the AHL and now a full time NHLer. He’s unique in the sense that we got to watch his entire come up and I feel he’s still one of the most underrated players on the roster this year. We’ve seen him put up 17 goals in a season already but I feel he’s really becoming a complete player this season. It’s been really cool watching him become a valuable asset to the Flames after so much uncertainty after his draft year

 

Very cool thread.

My own comment is that he's getting edgy, which is good for us. He's showing some snarl.

Need that from him imo.

Work in progress, making progress.

 

People, 2C might be a little ambitious.

[MP5029]

He’s never been given the operation that Lindholm and Mony has, but he’s excelled at the operattunities he has been given 

 

I don’t think he’s gonna get any better chances unless Backlund faded or he exceells past Backlund ina big way, but he’s not getting a chance to do that here it’s a good problem for the team but not the players development 

 

 

[cross16]

Jankowski deserves a lot of credit for sure. The amount of media attention and crap he had to put up with ridiculous was, especially because he never did anything wrong he just unfortunately got drafted by a team run by idiots at the time. Give him credit for putting it all aside. 

 

I like Jankowski and always have, but at the same time I do think he isn't having the season people seem to think. His excellent work on the PK has really overshadowed the fact that 5on5 he's one of their worst forwards, especially in the D zone. The biggest knock I have on Jankowski is he doesn't make others around him better because he lacks that upper end hockey IQ to get to the right spots and he tends to lag behind the play. 

 

So yes im one that would be willing to deal him for the right return and try and look for a center who has more playmaking ability. Coming up, Jankowski always reminded me of Martin Hanzel. I think that's his upside and even then I'm not sure he'll get there because at 24 the clock is ticking a bit for more improvement to happen. I dont personally see a number 2 center and don't think he's be taking over for Backlund anytime soon.

 

this is probably going to be received as negative but it really shouldnt be. I'm not saying Jankowski has to go or should be traded tomorrow, nor am I saying he doesn't help the team. I'm just not there on his future upside. 

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

I think Jankowski is trending 2nd line C and if he can up his defensive zone coverage, should definitely be our second line C.

 

He's got that shot we've seen on PK chances.  He can generate something out of nothing.  He can be tough to handle along the boards and can pull to the front of the net quick.  He's got a sweet finish so he shows confidence scoring. 

 

That said, he's already 24 so he's older than Monahan and Lindholm and for him to be so far behind them, you've got to conclude he will never reach that first line level.  Janko probably peaks at 25/26 and if he can improve just a bit, then thats about what we get.

 

Good player.

 

He was a sneior coming out of college, so he lost those years to a short schedule.

He developed as a defensive player first, which is what his coach was all about.

Think of him as a bigger version of Backlund who was never a Swedish scoring threat like Backlund.

His shot is pretty deadly now.

He's got a bigger wingspan.

He's not confident enough in his own abilities.

If he was playing with two guys that could motor and take and pass the puck better, he could finish.

That's not a shot at Bennett and Neal, but the number of chances those guys miss on is perplexing.

 

I would not be thinking of trading him any time soon.

He's a late deveoper.  Give him 3 years and he could be a very good player.

[MAC331]

On ‎2019‎-‎01‎-‎26 at 7:46 AM, cross16 said:

Jankowski deserves a lot of credit for sure. The amount of media attention and crap he had to put up with ridiculous was, especially because he never did anything wrong he just unfortunately got drafted by a team run by idiots at the time. Give him credit for putting it all aside. 

 

I like Jankowski and always have, but at the same time I do think he isn't having the season people seem to think. His excellent work on the PK has really overshadowed the fact that 5on5 he's one of their worst forwards, especially in the D zone. The biggest knock I have on Jankowski is he doesn't make others around him better because he lacks that upper end hockey IQ to get to the right spots and he tends to lag behind the play. 

 

So yes im one that would be willing to deal him for the right return and try and look for a center who has more playmaking ability. Coming up, Jankowski always reminded me of Martin Hanzel. I think that's his upside and even then I'm not sure he'll get there because at 24 the clock is ticking a bit for more improvement to happen. I dont personally see a number 2 center and don't think he's be taking over for Backlund anytime soon.

 

this is probably going to be received as negative but it really shouldnt be. I'm not saying Jankowski has to go or should be traded tomorrow, nor am I saying he doesn't help the team. I'm just not there on his future upside. 

You know I saw a quote from Gelinas on Gaudreau and Monahan that applies to most young players and it was in regards to " maturing into their talents and purpose" which also comes with experience. I disagree that Jankowski lack "upper end hockey IQ" as a matter of fact I think he is very smart. He reminds me of Joel Otto and as a bigger, lanky player may not get to spots as quick as some but with experience is responsible. A number of situations could evolve with our C position over the next 3 seasons especially if two things occur such as trading Backlund and putting Bennett back at C. I wouldn't be in any hurry to deal Jankowski.

[rickross]

It will be hard to trade Janko...if only because of the massive investment the Flames have put in him already and his development has steadily progressed year after year. 

 

Cross16....I think you might be referring to  his limited experience/ice time as opposed to his level of IQ. The fact that he’s an effective PK already proves he can think the game at a high level. U can’t be successfull on the PK if you don’t have a high sense of anticipation,positioning, speed and skill under pressure. He’s doing that AND scoring goals at the same time. He’s definitely growing as a player, i think with better line mates he could take another step with more opportunity to play at a higher level. I get that he’s 24 but  let’s keep in mind he was drafted knowing he was a late bloomer. He’s got good size now and will only get stronger, I’m not saying he’s outplayed Backs but you could argue he could trend as a top 6 C in a few years...he’s always been compared to Nieuwendyk so fingers crossed!

[conundrumed]

5 hours ago, cross16 said:

Jankowski deserves a lot of credit for sure. The amount of media attention and crap he had to put up with ridiculous was, especially because he never did anything wrong he just unfortunately got drafted by a team run by idiots at the time. Give him credit for putting it all aside. 

 

I like Jankowski and always have, but at the same time I do think he isn't having the season people seem to think. His excellent work on the PK has really overshadowed the fact that 5on5 he's one of their worst forwards, especially in the D zone. The biggest knock I have on Jankowski is he doesn't make others around him better because he lacks that upper end hockey IQ to get to the right spots and he tends to lag behind the play. 

 

So yes im one that would be willing to deal him for the right return and try and look for a center who has more playmaking ability. Coming up, Jankowski always reminded me of Martin Hanzel. I think that's his upside and even then I'm not sure he'll get there because at 24 the clock is ticking a bit for more improvement to happen. I dont personally see a number 2 center and don't think he's be taking over for Backlund anytime soon.

 

this is probably going to be received as negative but it really shouldnt be. I'm not saying Jankowski has to go or should be traded tomorrow, nor am I saying he doesn't help the team. I'm just not there on his future upside. 

Count me as 1 who hated what happened at that draft. I took it out on Janko, but that 2nd rd pick, wassisname really floored me. Who tf scouted him and decided he's a 2nd rder?

Plus, I was really interested in drafting Vasilevsky. Not sure why he was ranked so low.

 

I agree with you on Jankowski. His D zone play has to improve. It's always been poor. Moving him to LW and letting Bennett be the responsible C seems like something that would work better.

Janks backchecks well, but he fades away in his own end, when a C has to be the 3rd dman. He has to be aggressive in his own end. Definitely something he has to learn.

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, conundrumed said:

Count me as 1 who hated what happened at that draft. I took it out on Janko, but that 2nd rd pick, wassisname really floored me. Who tf scouted him and decided he's a 2nd rder?

Plus, I was really interested in drafting Vasilevsky. Not sure why he was ranked so low.

 

I agree with you on Jankowski. His D zone play has to improve. It's always been poor. Moving him to LW and letting Bennett be the responsible C seems like something that would work better.

Janks backchecks well, but he fades away in his own end, when a C has to be the 3rd dman. He has to be aggressive in his own end. Definitely something he has to learn.

 

Given that the guy Buffalo took was Girgenson, and we drafted a goalie in the 3rd, I doubt we we getting anything good otherwise.

[conundrumed]

7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Given that the guy Buffalo took was Girgenson, and we drafted a goalie in the 3rd, I doubt we we getting anything good otherwise.

Always a problem if your team is simply going to follow consensus rankings. We didn't with Jankowski, but why trade down to get a 2nd that was a throwaway?

Oh right, because Feaster and Wiesbrod were smarter than everyone else...thanks kk, we were a laughingstock.

[cross16]

24 minutes ago, rickross said:

It will be hard to trade Janko...if only because of the massive investment the Flames have put in him already and his development has steadily progressed year after year. 

 

Cross16....I think you might be referring to  his limited experience/ice time as opposed to his level of IQ. The fact that he’s an effective PK already proves he can think the game at a high level. U can’t be successfull on the PK if you don’t have a high sense of anticipation,positioning, speed and skill under pressure. He’s doing that AND scoring goals at the same time. He’s definitely growing as a player, i think with better line mates he could take another step with more opportunity to play at a higher level. I get that he’s 24 but  let’s keep in mind he was drafted knowing he was a late bloomer. He’s got good size now and will only get stronger, I’m not saying he’s outplayed Backs but you could argue he could trend as a top 6 C in a few years...he’s always been compared to Nieuwendyk so fingers crossed!

 

No im referring to his IQ. PK is simplified and read and react, much different 5 on 5. 

18 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Count me as 1 who hated what happened at that draft. I took it out on Janko, but that 2nd rd pick, wassisname really floored me. Who tf scouted him and decided he's a 2nd rder?

Plus, I was really interested in drafting Vasilevsky. Not sure why he was ranked so low.

 

I agree with you on Jankowski. His D zone play has to improve. It's always been poor. Moving him to LW and letting Bennett be the responsible C seems like something that would work better.

Janks backchecks well, but he fades away in his own end, when a C has to be the 3rd dman. He has to be aggressive in his own end. Definitely something he has to learn.

 

Pat Seiloff. One of the many picks the flames wasted in the last decade. Pick made me furious. 

[conundrumed]

15 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Pat Seiloff. One of the many picks the flames wasted in the last decade. Pick made me furious. 

That was a pretty sound pick for rd 6. lol

I recall seeing Seiloff was ranked high, saw him a few times and going, why?

Post draft he was with the Spits so I thought it good I can see him more maybe I'm missing something.

No. I wasn't.

I know some scouts, so this isn't unexpected for me anymore.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Always a problem if your team is simply going to follow consensus rankings. We didn't with Jankowski, but why trade down to get a 2nd that was a throwaway?

Oh right, because Feaster and Wiesbrod were smarter than everyone else...thanks kk, we were a laughingstock.

 

Well, at least you can thank them for Johnny.

Early enough to get.

Not too late to miss.

We haven't done that well with others, yet we seem to hear about beng in on Kucherov.

Yet, we didn't go for Point.and Arviddson.

 

[robrob74]

The pick right after Jankowski was Olli Matta. 

 

[conundrumed]

56 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

The pick right after Jankowski was Olli Matta. 

 

By listing. The Einstein bros knew different.

Glad they hung around for the bad Iginla and JBo trades, though. And pushing Kipper to retire.

That was well thought out. *sarcasm*

[Khrox]

On 1/26/2019 at 4:36 PM, conundrumed said:

And pushing Kipper to retire.

That one was a little different. They wanted to trade Kipper (he was going to retire at the end of the year anyways) and Kipper outright told them if you trade me I'm not reporting to the other team (meaning we would most likely not get the picks anyways).

[The_People1]

7 hours ago, Khrox said:

That one was a little different. They wanted to trade Kipper (he was going to retire at the end of the year anyways) and Kipper outright told them if you trade me I'm not reporting to the other team (meaning we would most likely not get the picks anyways).

 

That's what I remember too.  Kipper invented his own NTC on the spot.

[cross16]

Tough argument to have but I honestly don't have a problem with Janko over Matta. I don't think Matta is that great a dman, he's a pretty avg 2nd pairing LS dman. This is easier to say now that the Flames have such great LS dmen and sure they could have used Matta over Janko a few years ago but in the grand scheme of things I don't think they made the wrong call. I saw this elsewhere, but i'm pretty sure if you look at PPG I think Janko is 10th or 12 best out of that draft class. With name like Flip Forsberg, Morgan Reily, Tervainen, and the Ghost I will be shocked if Fesaster/Weisbrod will ever be right about the whole "best player in the draft" rhetoric but at the same time I think it's also clear that the heat they got was not justified. 

 

To clarify as well, Kipper actually had a full NMC. The story i recall is that he was a bit wish washy on whether or not he was going to waive it but when push came to shove he refused but I am fairly certain it was in his contract. Kipper also stated when he signed his deal that it was unlikely he would every play it out. His was actually the first contract, if i recall correctly, that was truly cap circumvention as his lat year called for a salary of 1.5 million. 

[Cowtownguy]

14 hours ago, Khrox said:

That one was a little different. They wanted to trade Kipper (he was going to retire at the end of the year anyways) and Kipper outright told them if you trade me I'm not reporting to the other team (meaning we would most likely not get the picks anyways).

That would have been an excellent trade because so many people in Toronto would have been disappointed when he failed to report. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Tough argument to have but I honestly don't have a problem with Janko over Matta. I don't think Matta is that great a dman, he's a pretty avg 2nd pairing LS dman. This is easier to say now that the Flames have such great LS dmen and sure they could have used Matta over Janko a few years ago but in the grand scheme of things I don't think they made the wrong call. I saw this elsewhere, but i'm pretty sure if you look at PPG I think Janko is 10th or 12 best out of that draft class. With name like Flip Forsberg, Morgan Reily, Tervainen, and the Ghost I will be shocked if Fesaster/Weisbrod will ever be right about the whole "best player in the draft" rhetoric but at the same time I think it's also clear that the heat they got was not justified. 

 

To clarify as well, Kipper actually had a full NMC. The story i recall is that he was a bit wish washy on whether or not he was going to waive it but when push came to shove he refused but I am fairly certain it was in his contract. Kipper also stated when he signed his deal that it was unlikely he would every play it out. His was actually the first contract, if i recall correctly, that was truly cap circumvention as his lat year called for a salary of 1.5 million. 

 

The other thing though, the other players the Flames could’ve had if they didn’t trade down for Jankowski are:

 

Zumgus Girgensons

Codi Ceci

Tom Wilson

Thomas Hertl

Tuevo Teravainen

Andrei Vasilevskiy

Scott Laughton 

 

we can say and stop at Girgensons because that’s what the actual Flames original pick netted, and we'll never know if the Flames saw any of the others as who they’d take off of their list. But the Flames could’ve had any of those players with the original pick.

 

i just thought I’d put that out there for food  for thought. It’s a quiet break...

[cross16]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

The other thing though, the other players the Flames could’ve had if they didn’t trade down for Jankowski are:

 

Zumgus Girgensons

Codi Ceci

Tom Wilson

Thomas Hertl

Tuevo Teravainen

Andrei Vasilevskiy

Scott Laughton 

 

we can say and stop at Girgensons because that’s what the actual Flames original pick netted, and we'll never know if the Flames saw any of the others as who they’d take off of their list. But the Flames could’ve had any of those players with the original pick.

 

i just thought I’d put that out there for food  for thought. It’s a quiet break...

 

I hear you but I love discussion like this so i'm happy to discuss. 

 

Hard to know for sure because it can be lip service but i'm pretty positive that the Flames were taking Janko at 12. Weisbrod himself said he wanted Feaster to trade the pick until he saw Janko play and I also read elsewhere the Flames were not a fan of the 2102 draft and in fact many players that went in the first round the Flames had no draft grades on. They felt it was a pretty weak draft, which is part of the reason they were ok to bet on Janko. I don't think they moved down because they wanted the 2nd, they moved down because they felt they could get Janko later AND pick up the 2nd. Same result, but different process.There is also the story that some of their scouts were getting nervous about having Janko so high but they had a software system where they inputted their independent grades and it spat out the results and Jankowski actually moved up.

 

I think Janko was their guy and they would have taken him at 12, but that is obviously if you take what they say at face value. My guy was Ceci and i'm still a little dissapointd they didn't take him but even out of that list the only guy I think is a clear miss is Vasilevky (who I highly doubt they would have taken) and probably Tervaninen. Depending on where you stand on Janko you may feel he could reach Tervainen levels but i'm not one of those guys. So for me the only guys taken after that are potentially "misses" ( I very loosely use that term) would be those 2. 

 

Hindsight on this, Imagine if the Flames had hired Burke before the 2012 draft. NO question I think Tom Wilson would be a Flame considered he actually asked the Flames scout to try and find him a Tom Wilson. 

[Cowtownguy]

12 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

The other thing though, the other players the Flames could’ve had if they didn’t trade down for Jankowski are:

 

Zumgus Girgensons

Codi Ceci

Tom Wilson

Thomas Hertl

Tuevo Teravainen

Andrei Vasilevskiy

Scott Laughton 

 

we can say and stop at Girgensons because that’s what the actual Flames original pick netted, and we'll never know if the Flames saw any of the others as who they’d take off of their list. But the Flames could’ve had any of those players with the original pick.

 

i just thought I’d put that out there for food  for thought. It’s a quiet break...

No, it's a quiet break when someone starts up a thread on aliens in August, and you actually read it.