A final college update on Mark Jankowski

Earlier this week, Mark Jankowski signed his entry-level deal with the Calgary Flames and an ATO for the AHL Stockton Heat, fulfilling the wishes of both player and club to arrive at a deal before the end of the regular season.

This came just a few days after the end of Jankowski’s college career, a double-overtime loss to Minnesota-Duluth in the NCAA tournament as his Providence College Friars pursued their second straight national title. It was not to be.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

That, then wrapped up the frankly very odd career of Jankowski, who is already receiving considerable “Please ignore the draft position at which he was selected” talk from Flames brass. I think that’s a reasonable position for the organization to take, given that it wasn’t until this year that Jankowski really established himself as any sort of considerable force in most games he played, and even then, he was hardly as overwhelming as you’d like a first-round pick to be in his draft-year-plus-4.

The broad strokes

Let’s start with a big-picture assessment of Jankowski’s career. He finished with 110 points in 148 games, which isn’t a bad number or anything, but it was second on the team in his senior class behind winger Nick Saracino, who is admittedly two-and-a-half years older. Moreover, 40 of those points came in his senior season, meaning that he was a marginally effective depth scoring forward for the bulk of his career (70 points in 110 games).

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Moreover, though, it’s important to look at the fact that there was never really a point at which he was dominant for a whole season, even if you accepted that he could have theoretically been unlucky in terms of production.

Screen Shot 2016-04-01 at 1.20.20 PM

Look, a career-high season of 2.26 shots on goal per game is very much not-good. Among even just drafted or draft-eligible college players this season, it’s tied for 66th in NCAA hockey, a number that is behind a number of younger defensemen. We talk at length about how young Jankowski is — even after four years of college hockey he won’t be 22 until September — but he’s 11 months younger than Johnny Gaudreau. Over his last two seasons, Gaudreau reliably put four shots on goal per game, and that’s a number that was always near the top of the nation.

Of course, no one would say that these are comparable players, but shouldn’t they at least be in the same neighborhood in terms of their ability to generate offensive chances? Certainly, you’d expect a fourth-year first-round pick to have that much of an impact.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

But again, this is a guy who finally broke 40 points in a season, which is an important threshold for any college player because it all but ensures they’d have put up roughly a point a game for the season. However, just among drafted players (and again, Jankowski would be older than most of them) his point total is just 14th in the nation, tied with UConn rookie and Arizona pick Maxim Letunov, who finished with more goals but slightly fewer shots on goal per game (2.11) on a much worse team that played fewer games.

Getting granular

But this is all stuff you can glean from the numbers if you know where to look. Actual in-game viewing is important at the college level, as it is for any prospect. But here too I found nothing with which to be particularly impressed, because as I’ve said before, Jankowski is used in a largely third-line role and occasionally takes important faceoffs because he is in fact pretty good at that (52.1 percent, and plus-48).

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

So yes, he did pretty well in possession and production this season, continuing and improving upon a trend from last season, but it was against down-the-lineup competition. I’d wager there wasn’t a senior picked in the first round in the entire nation who was used in such a fashion.

But before we get too deep into the numbers here, I should note something that I said which was a bit controversial from Jankowski’s final game. It was, again, a double-overtime thriller against Minnesota-Duluth, but he played just 2:14 of that time. As the game was going on, I noted on Twitter that this was evidence the player didn’t exactly have the full trust of the coaching staff in high-leverage situations, but after the game it turned out he was ill, to the point that he had to receive IV bags to recover.

That was my mistake, to some extent. I said that, though, because it was the second straight multiple-overtime game in which Providence had played, and the second-straight multiple-overtime game in which Jankowski was stapled to the bench for long stretches. A week prior, against UMass Lowell in the Hockey East semifinals, the Friars went deep into the third overtime, playing more than 52 additional minutes of hockey. In that more than 52 minutes, Jankowski played about 10:46 by my count, about 20.5 percent of the team’s TOI. That’s not a lot, and the fact that he was on the ice for the Lowell game-winner I thought might have played a role in the apparent decision to further curtail his ice time. It appeared to be more of a trend than it actually was, especially because prior to the overtimes, Jankowski had been taking a regular shift in both games.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Against Minnesota-Duluth, he played 11:39 of 46 minutes at 5-on-5 (25.3%) and against Lowell it was 13:33 of 58 (23.3%). Neither was wholly out of line with the observed season average I saw over nine games of Jankowski playing 24.6 percent of Providence’s full-strength minutes. So I was making an educated guess. Sorry if that made you mad.

Now, nine games of observation isn’t exactly the hugest sample — less than a quarter of his games — but I can say that all of them were against NCAA tournament teams (Lowell three times; Boston College and Boston University twice each; Northeastern and Duluth once each), so the quality of competition was fairly high. And again, he acquitted himself well, albeit against third-liners on NCAA tournament teams. He posted big relative margins at 5-on-5 in everything, especially goals, but also benefited from an on-ice PDO of more than 105, compared with 97 percent when he was off.

And again, this is competition he should have been pushing around pretty hard anyway, just given the existing disparity in quality between his skill level (high) and that of his on-ice competition (generally low).

Here’s all the data I have for you on what I saw this season:

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Screen Shot 2016-04-01 at 1.51.31 PM

(You’ll note that his non-goal events against per 60 were all above the team’s averages when he was off. That should be further concerning given that college third-liners were doing it to him.)

Break it down

So basically, I don’t see a lot of pro prospects for Jankowski. “Maybe the occasional NHL call-up” seems to be about his ceiling for me. Centers who shy away from contact, don’t appear to be trusted by coaches to reliably play against higher-level amateur competition (the average NCAA third-liner is probably an ECHLer at best, I would think), and can’t post more than two-and-a-quarter shots a night don’t strike me as being particularly to be impactful at the AHL level, let alone in the NHL.

I really just don’t see it. Maybe I’ll be wrong, but I’ve seen enough college players (this being my 23rd season watching the game closely at this level) to know what NHLers look like. Unfortunately for the Flames, Mark Jankowski ain’t it. And they might have been better off getting the compensatory mid-second-round pick.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

  • brodiegio4life

    how can you already predict he’s just a career ahler… he’s played one freakin pro game. People are so quick to read some numbers and instantly predict a kids future

    • Stud Puffin

      By using comparables. They look at the history of players that put up similar numbers and see how their careers went. Can’t remember if this has been done for Janko, but I think it has and it isn’t pretty.

    • Southern_Point

      Because he has actually watched him play, numerous times, unlike yourself.

      This is a seriously dumb comment, attempting to predict what a player will be at the NHL level based on junior and college games is literally what scouting is.

      • Stu Cazz

        So then Flames scouts have seen him play every game during the last many years and a knowledgeable hockey guy like BT decided to sign him rather than take a late 2nd rounder…..

        • Stud Puffin

          To get the pick they have to offer a contract. If Janko signs it, what can BT do? Maybe he did prefer the 2nd? Who knows for sure. He sure isn’t going to say.

          • Stu Cazz

            You a real piece of work stud muffin…your comment to WW says it all…a closet embarrassed Oiler fan defending what is perhaps the worst franchise in pro sports history who are about to get another first overall and destroy another young prospects career…..you say “watch to for the Oilers”…haha

        • Southern_Point

          I don’t understand your point. At this stage he probably has about as the same chance of making the show as your historical second rounder.

          Teams spend a lot of organisational resources on development, even though it’s a bit less on college players. If Janko has roughly the same chance of making the NHL as any guy they would draft with the compensation pick you may as well go with the guy you’ve already spent money on who is probably a little closer.

        • Tanner

          Another important thought to keep in mind is that Treliving represents an organization, which has sunk many years into Jankowski. Sure, Brad wasn’t there for all of the years, but his organization was. Therefore, he probably was biased towards making the decision to sign Jankowski because of the organization’s desire to recoup something from their investment. Also, 6’4″ 200 pound centres with some skill are apparently a rare and valuable commodity; if Treliving lets that go for nothing and then Jankowski becomes a good player, he looks very bad. My point is that Treliving probably had other factors other than observation of the player, which influenced him to sign Jankowski.

          All that being said, I am not at all ruling out that Lambert could be wrong and Jankowski might turn into something at the NHL level. A lot of his numbers do look very strong, albeit in apparently limited circumstances.

          I hope Jankowski has a positive impact on the organization and last night was a good start, but only time will tell.

      • brodiegio4life

        yup cause some random guy on flamesnation is definitely where I go to get my scouting from. And if you watch someone a lot whatever you say about their future is now guaranteed? Lot of people watched gaudreau in college and said oh he’s too small he projects as the next Nathan gerbe. You don’t believe everything you read on the interwebs do you?

  • Stud Puffin

    It is baffling to me how someone can read an article like this and come away with the opinion that Janko will replace Backlund which some people seem to think might happen. Just because he is a first round pick doesn’t mean he has first round talent. All it means is that Feaster is an idiot.

    I agree with Lambert in that we probably would have been better off with the 2nd rd pick, but not by much. Probably a 20% chance the 2nd rd pick plays 200 games. What’s the chance Janko does? Probably about 5%.

    Great read Lambert. Appreciate the insight, even though most FN readers are probably about to slay you.

    • piscera.infada

      It’s hard to disagree with your position about Jankowski. We can create all the narratives we want, or spout all the platitudes we can think of to praise his “two-hundred foot game” or how he “plays the game the right way”. The truth is, his cohort in terms of scoring at the NCAA level over a 4-year sample size does not flatter Jankowski. He might be an outlier, but at some point, you want to see something exceptional.

      Now, I don’t mean any of that negatively towards the player–and perhaps this is where everyone needs to take a deep breath and agree–Jankowski did not go off the board and draft himself, he didn’t proclaim himself “the best player in the draft”. He simply played hockey. I, for one, hope he works out. I really do. His size, his “skills” (the one you hear about, but rarely see), sound very intriguing. At this point, it’s best to just allow him to develop and see where he settles. Again, I personally have no issue with this. I don’t feel a compelling need to post on this board and tell everyone “I told you” if he either fails or becomes something.

      I will, however, take exception to your “probably would have been better off with the second round pick”. Maybe, in the long term, that would prove correct. However, I still firmly believe that with Jankowski, you might as well just ride it out. Turning the player into a late second round pick, with a “20% chance of making it” (that being a completely arbitrary number), who is likely 3-5 years away from even being able to tell if he’s an NHL player, just seems like prolonging the inevitable–and I’m no sadist.

  • This is a more realistic look on what Janko will be than you’ll hear from most other sources. There’s a lot of red flags in Janko that need to be considered.

    I agree with Stud Puffin. To see this guy usurping Backlund anytime soon looks asinine

  • Tanner

    I watched the highlights from last night’s game against Ontario. Jankowski had an assist and almost set up two more. In the highlights, he certainly seemed to have some skill. It was just one game (tiny sample size), but it was his first game and he did pretty well in it. Hopefully this is a sign of good things to come!

  • Stu Cazz

    No mention in the article of his AHL debut last night where he got an assist and if he was playing with line mates that could score he would have had a few more assists…

  • ChinookArchYYC

    Thanks for the insights and the eye-test, Ryan. The numbers are interesting, but for the most part we’re not getting in-depth reviews on his style of play and effectiveness and I appreciate you’ve provided this. I wonder if he can turn into a good 2-way forward, but time will tell.

    I’m sure Mark “the Lightning Rod” Jankowski will continue to divide this blog and others for a few more years to come. As always it will be the hyperbole on both sides to drive the comment section wild. At this point, I can’t imagine anyone is looking for Jankowski to be the best player drafted in 2012, and if he becomes a depth bottom 6 forward in the NHL, I’ll be satisfied.

  • The GREAT Walter White

    Hey Lambert, why don’t you write an article about how your present day Oilers are mathematically the worst team in the history of the NHL.
    As in; they have the worst winning % over a decade of any team in NHL history.

    Or how the Oilers are in fact WORSE with McDavid in the lineup then when he is not playing.

    I love stuff like that…….


    • Stud Puffin

      Wow, what a dumb comment. I am a Flames fan through and through, and it pains me to defend the Oilers, buuut they are a better team this year. Goal differential is down, have more points than last year. Solidified center and goaltending. If they can fix the D, watch out!

      McDavid is a wizard. Get over it.

      • cberg

        Talk about dumb comments… Didn’t you watch the game tonight? They haven’t solidified anything this year. Don’t be taken by a few worthless stats. Until they dump 3-4 of their rotten core they won’t be going anywhere, except down as they continue to infect new core players with their losing mentality. And that won’t happen.

        As for Lambert, what a tool of a commentary. Couldn’t resist one last kick at the Flames. Typical.

  • Kevin R

    What a bunch of [email protected]**@# drivel. Obviously some team would have signed Jankowski come August. He is simply just another prospect the organization is hoping will translate to a useful NHL player. Flames management have said that, have made no expectations & are simply just going to give him a chance. What more do you want? Instead lets write a long windy narrative spewed with charts saying how this player sucks & will never make it. There is a reason they play the games & not just award the Stanley Cup based on your charts & historical analytical prowess. It’s why they let these kids play games at the pro level to see what they can do. To say to not give the kid a chance & take a compensatory pick instead is simply disrespectful.

  • Jumping Jack Flash

    Ok…I think it is time to give this a rest. There are far too many variables to consider than past performance on a highly defensive college team. It is time to move on, objective journalism would have researched Jankos last game before making the conclusion of the player to match a pre-conceived view point. We get it you don’t think the player will amount to anything.

    The one thing this player shows is a determination to get better, you can tell a player he needs to get better but you can’t force him to put in the work… This comes from within. The kid seems to have the ” I’ll show you attitude” which is huge.

    I realize the kid is never going to get out from under the microscope but these type of articles are never going to allow people to move on, these articles will only resonate with people that already share your opinion and does little for people that are cheering for the kid. I was one of the many who refreshed my browser for news on Jankos signing.

    I actually thought this article was a recap of his first pro game, and I was looking forward to hearing how the kid looked… I thought there would be some mention of his assist last night. One point in one pro game….and that is just the beginning.

  • Kristian Huselius

    Obviously you sign Janko. Sure you could be real fortunate and draft another guy like Rasmus with that compensatory pick, but the more likely outcome is a Hunter Smith. I’ll take the chance with Janko. Maybe he amounts to nothing, I personally think he could be a solid complimentary player to Monny and Bennett. We don’t need him to be a first liner. We’ve been apart of this ridiculous journey for 4 years already, I’d rather see it out than have it abruptly end. Might work out!

  • freethe flames

    The truth is that the next few years will determine what Janko is. Nothing else matters; not what Feaster said nor what Lambert puts out here. Janko gets to determine his fate; as it should be. Good luck to him; seize the opportunity.

  • RKD

    If he was used on a third line role taking faceoffs and playing a defensive style like Backlund then his numbers are probably where they should be in terms of sog/gm. However, if a third line guy put up 110 points in 148 games that’s good for 0.74 ppg and if he put up 40 points in his senior year he’s still at 0.63 ppg. If he was used on the first two lines we probably see a higher sog/gm %.

  • OKG

    Joke blogpost and even more joke comments.

    I’ve seen my share of career AHLers like Kris Chucko, Joe Colborne and Greg Nemisz, my share of #3/#4Cs like Matt Stajan, Matthew Lombardi, and Carl Soderberg, my share of #2 / #1B centers like Sean Monahan, Craig Conroy, Daymond Langkow.

    I’ve seen my share of Jankowski’s career and all the context that it entails.

    Mark Jankowski will be a #1C or at worst a #2C in the NHL. He is every bit as innately talented as Sean Monahan albeit not the goal scorer (but better passer). In fact they are two players who were almost meant to play together, a Getzlaf and Perry if you will. Or perhaps more accurately, a poor mans’ Henrik and Daniel Sedin

    I know he has crappy stats and I know Leaman didn’t play him often.

    I also know he will be a very good NHL hockey player. 25G / 45A is not out of the question for him at the NHL level.

    It will take time, he STILL has less NCAA experience on his resume than our NHL centers had accumulated junior experience as 19 year olds. His body has not filled out yet which is unusual for 21 year olds.

    That’s NBD. He was not only the correct pick at #21 in 2012, he would have been the correct pick at #14 in 2012 and at #3 assuming we’re not drafting a D-man. The only forwards from that draft with as much talent are Filip Forsberg and Alex Galchenyuk and I would limit that phrase to “as much” not “more”.

    I look forward to the day Lambert, Ctibs, Stud Puffin, Claybort, SmellofVictory at al eat crow. And I am a guy who does not blindly dismiss NHLe and such statistics.

    • ClayBort

      Yet you blindly dismiss every piece of objective analysis assuming the writer must have a personal beef with the kid.

      Newsflash: We all want the Flames to be good, we are just realists who don’t blindly believe a story a bad management team sold us.

      Would love it if Janko is a top sixer. Odds are extremely low however.

    • Stud Puffin

      We all want and hope Janko succeeds and you are right. Some of us are more realistic and realize that his play over the last 4 years show that he is not on track for that to happen. Do we hope we are wrong? Absolutely. Are we afraid we re right? Absolutely.

      • Johnny Goooooooaldreau

        Justin thinks he can make the world a safer place by kissing and cuddling the terrorists.

        Some people think he is right.

        Guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

        The same goes for Jankowski. We’ll just have to wait and see.

        You can go ahead and believe what you want, but I think he will be up by this time next year.

    • ChinookArchYYC

      Because you said so?

      I’m not trying to provoke you, but at least Lambert provides reasons for his conclusions. I’m also genuinely interested in what makes you believe that Jankowski will be. Top #1 or #2 center in the NHL?

      Looking at Joe Colborne as a comparison. Colborne’s college results were better, and he’s bigger, yet despite being provided prized minutes and linemates this season, he has proven he’s no more than a bottom 6 forward.

      Again, I’m not fighting you here. I’d just like to understand your position better.

      • freethe flames

        I don’t know what Colborne weighed coming out of the NCAA but I do know he has put on a bunch of weight and strength this year. He said he knew he needed to be bigger and stronger and maybe this has contributed to him having a better season.

        Janko is now at the age where weight gain and strength really begin to happen; hopefully the Flames strength and conditioning coach gets after all the 21 -23 year olds to put on 10lbs of muscle. It’s their job to do this. We often complain that we get pushed around by LA, the Ducks and SJ; the truth is that Perry, Geztlaff, Jumbo Foe, Kopatar are all men and are top forwards are still not. A really good year of off season training and these guys will be harder to play against. But the work like I said earlier about Janko is up to them.

      • OKG

        We can start with Jankowski’s ability to read what the opposition is doing and react accordingly with the puck on his stick. Whether that’s passing, deking, or the basic reset to the point, his feel for decision-making is very good. I don’t want to exaggerate and call it Crosby-esque because he’s not generational, but his reaction in tight spaces is top line NHLer-esque. His vision and puck skills likewise are already some of the best I’ve seen out of any hockey player to don a Flames Jersey… not quite Gaudreau level but he’s right up there ahead Sam Bennett, Kristian Huselius, Jarome Iginla in that regard.

        Carrying the puck through the neutral zone he has a feel for getting the puck to the best open space. An ability that’s similar to Mikael Backlund. It’s a repeatable skill and a very important one in an NHL where transitioning the puck is the single most important difference maker between winning and losing. His skating is nothing short of superb, he’s already more mobile than Backlund but he does need to develop his explosiveness which will happen in Stockton as we use the same skating coach that John Tavares used.

        Defensively, most would already agree he projects to be our top defensive center. No point in my touching that. Though I don’t see him as a primarily shut down guy as that’s a waste of his offensive ablity.

        Lastly, if you think Colborne’s college results were better, you’re wrong. The year Colborne was PPG his team had three other 16+ goal scorers. Jankowski’s Friars have only ever had one 16+ goal scorer in his four years there, and he was Jankowski’s linemate that year getting slick tape to tape feeds (and was also terrible every other year when not on Mark’s line). You just can’t compare these stats apples to apples due to the nature of the coaches’ deployment. These aren’t pro leagues where precocious players get handed 25 minute games and underperforming vets are benched. This is college hockey, winning is important but there are other politics at play and Leaman’s deployments make that obvious.

        Lambert isn’t wrong that Jankowski’s ice time is best described as sporadic. Where he’s wrong is his assumption of “why” that’s the case (that he’s a glorified 3rd liner due to “trust”). Making excuses for Jankowski’s past is boring so I’m not interested in going back and forth with “But the percentages say this 5’11” guy who can’t even skate didn’t make it, and he put up similar stats as a 22 year old freshman to Jankowski’s 18 year old freshman season, therefore the evidence shows Jankowski is a bust” people. Jankowski was ineffective at times in college. Was that because he lacked the skill and talent to be effective? Or was it because he was barely ever on the ice and when he was he was outmuscled? If the latter, then his prior stats mean zilch. He’s a pro now with a different coach. He projects to be one of the strongest players in the entire league.

        I am probably sitting at 1000+ trashes on FN for Jankowski-related posts. And you know what? I don’t care because he can do things that make taking every trash worth it. I don’t like my posts getting trashed but some things are worth getting trashed over, like the single best forward prospect the Flames have. A player who if he were to realize his absolute upside, would be even better than Monahan, Bennett, and Gaudreau (though I’m projecting him to be our third best forward behind Bennett and Gaudreau).

          • Christian Roatis

            I don’t want to throw gas on what is already a fire out of control…

            But why are you the only person in North America who thinks Mark Jankowski is a sure-fire 1C, and at worst 2C?

          • Stud Puffin

            Unfortunately he isn’t. For giggles view CP’s forums. They make OKG look like a skeptic. According to them he will be a 1C because he signed an ATO and shows good character doing so. Can’t argue with that level of stupid.

          • OKG

            *views CP forums to verify*

            *sees nothing close to what you claim*

            *Realizes you’ve outed yourself as an Oilers troll as only they manufacture this kind of propoganda about CP*

          • Stud Puffin

            Pasted from CP post #54 on Jank signing. “This shows that Jankowski is thinking long-term and because he is negotiating bonus clauses it means he can end up being an impact player in the NHL.”

            Find me on twitter and you will see I am not an Oiler troll, just objective. Sorry.

          • OKG

            Because the other people who think that either

            A) Reserve their opinion at risk of looking like “overly optimistic homers like OKG”

            B) Are treated as total idiots like Jay Feaster. A guy who has a Stanley Cup ring as a GM, who was with the organization when they saw beyond stats the skill of guys like Killorn and Martin St. Louis.

            I have no problem being labelled as an idiot, a homer, any of that. I make my assessments based on the information I have, and I realize the risk that is carried of looking like I’m out to lunch because a more limited set of information (the stats) disagrees. I’ve never called anyone an idiot for trusting the stats they see on Jankowski. I admit they’re a true red flag if that’s the only information you have. But I have pointed out that not all stats are apple-to-apple comparable.

            People inherently want to err on the side of caution. And that’s fair. I err on that side of caution with many prospects including Kylington, Poirier, Mangiapane, and I err on the side of “lol” with Keegan Kanzig, a true precedence-following case for where NHLe is absolutely predictivie. But the context of everything Jankowski is unique and I will stick to what I believe based on what I’ve seen, knowing that it disagrees with the subset of data that tells you he’s worth less than a compensatory pick.

          • ClayBort

            Dudley acquired St Louis

            The only Feaster adds of value on that cup team were Stillman and Fedotenko. Fedotenko was for Joni Pitkanen, the team may have been even better with Pitkanen.

            Richards, Lecavalier, Andreychuk, Boyle, St Louis, Kubina, Khabibulin, etc etc etc were all acquired by Dudley. Jay was in the right place at the right time.

          • OKG

            As I posted my previous response, here’s what a Red Wings fan on HF who’s seen Mark live posted:

            “His developmental curve is that he has become an incredibly good two way forward with size and skating. I really don’t think he is that far away from suiting up in the NHL at all. Players that have size, speed and accountability get to and stay in the league at a quicker clip than you’re describing. The debate between third line guy or Top 6 is what will take more time to figure out.

            Jankowski has more upside [than Sheahan]. What I have said a couple times here when you see him person you get why some scouts were transfixed. He has a lot of Top 10 draft pick tools. Not sure his offense will translate like Couturier or Zibanejad but there is more there than what Sheahan has. He is an intriguing package still, even if his profile is a little dimmer the same this kids ceiling is huge applies. Curious to see how he does as a pro. “

            That’s as unbiased an assessment as you can get coming from someone who unlike me has no investment in the player’s success. However I’m willing to bet he’s had less viewings of the player than I have.

          • OKG

            I cited an in-person viewing of a 3rd party who watched the player. Whether it was posted on HF or BBC News does not matter. What matters is that there is no bias in that opinion. I am responding to Christian whom I respect unlike you, and I am showing Christian whom I respect unlike you, how an unbiased third party holds an opinion closer to mine than to the Ryan Lambert / Ctibs / Claybort consensus.

          • Christian Roatis

            I appreciate the respectful response.

            I’m in the group that’s extremely skeptical of your prediction but you’re certainly entitled to it. And I guess there’s some around hockey who agree with you too.

            At this point, I’m far more inclined to sit back and watch him develop into whatever it is he’ll develop into than argue about potential. He is what is, he’ll be what he’ll be. Nothing we can do to influence that.

          • Johnny Goooooooaldreau

            OKG wrote:
            As I posted my previous response, here’s what a Red Wings fan on HF who’s seen Mark live posted:

            “His developmental curve is that he has become an incredibly good two way forward with size and skating. I really don’t think he is that far away from suiting up in the NHL at all. Players that have size, speed and accountability get to and stay in the league at a quicker clip than you’re describing. The debate between third line guy or Top 6 is what will take more time to figure out. Jankowski has more upside [than Sheahan]. What I have said a couple times here when you see him person you get why some scouts were transfixed. He has a lot of Top 10 draft pick tools. Not sure his offense will translate like Couturier or Zibanejad but there is more there than what Sheahan has. He is an intriguing package still, even if his profile is a little dimmer the same this kids ceiling is huge applies. Curious to see how he does as a pro. ”

            That’s as unbiased an assessment as you can get coming from someone who unlike me has no investment in the player’s success. However I’m willing to bet he’s had less viewings of the player than I have.

            Because the fan isn’t in charge of the Wings.

            Just like none of us is in charge of the Flames.

  • L13

    What I’m getting out of this factual and not-at-all-misleading article is that not only did Jankowski lead Providence in goals, assists and points and get named to the Hockey East and New England All-Star teams while playing third-line minutes and struggling to gain his coach’s trust, which is extremely impressive but makes his coach sound like an idiot, but he also hypnotized the Providence beat reporter into believing Jankowski played on Providence’s top line, like for example–

    Here: https://twitter.com/MarkDivver/status/708420035170201600

    Here: https://twitter.com/MarkDivver/status/713428008250511360

    And here: https://twitter.com/MarkDivver/status/710910229756641281

    Surely it can’t be the case that Leaman distributes ice time roughly equally among his four lines. No, the author has watched nine games this season and would certainly notice such a thing and mention it. It’s much more likely Jankowski and Mingoia, Providence’s two top scorers, constitute 2/3rds of its “third line” and can’t be trusted to play against other teams’ best players.

    I also learned, as the author implies somewhat coyly here and in his previous piece about Jankowski, that a player’s PDO could make his CF% look deceptively good and needs to be controlled for when looking at possession statistics. This changes my opinion of Joe Thornton completely! Jumbo Joe, what a fraud. Let’s see him do it with a lower on-ice shooting percentage!

    Finally, I learned that when you take an upward-trending prospect’s average point production over the last several years, his PPG average is lower than his PPG average in his most recent season, and that’s a cause for concern.

    All that remains to be seen is how long the author will continue to insist Jankowski is worth less than the 51st pick in next year’s draft. I’m going to bet on another couple of years, until Jankowski has played a full season in the NHL and the player drafted with that pick posts an impressive 38 points in 68 OHL games, at which point I expect the author will simply drop the subject rather than acknowledge he was wrong.

    By the way, a question for the audience: If Treliving was secretly and ardently hoping Jankowski would turn down the Flames’ contract offer, as some are trying to convince themselves, why did he offer Jankowski the league-maximum ELC (2x925K, 92K signing bonus) and make sure the Flames were in near daily communication with him throughout his senior season? Seems a little counter-productive to me as a strategy for getting rid of worthless prospects.

    • Baalzamon

      a player’s PDO could make his CF% look deceptively good

      huh? PDO has nothing–nothing whatsoever–to do with Corsi. It could make his Goals, assists, and +/- look deceptive, but Corsi has literally nothing to do with shooting and goaltending luck (which is what PDO is; on ice shot% + on ice save%)

      • L13

        I was being facetious. Rick Lambert has cited Jankowski’s PDO as evidence that Jankowski’s good performance this season should be mistrusted twice already, and both times he’s mentioned it shortly after grudgingly acknowledging that Jankowski is a great possession player (as a third liner, against competition he is supposed to dominate as a first-round pick anyway, etc. etc. etc.). He hasn’t gone as far as to draw an explicit connection between the two, but I see no reason for him to place such a heavy emphasis on Jankowski’s PDO as opposed to his shooting percentage only, which is high but not outrageously high this season–certainly not higher than that of many young players this blog likes better, like for example Mangiapane and, well, Connor McDavid–and still doesn’t invalidate his impressive possession numbers in any way.

        By the way, there are several ways in which a player’s PDO and CF% could potentially act on each other, like for example through score effects, which I haven’t seen investigated anywhere. I’m sure these effects are extremely weak, however.

        As for my reference to Thornton, he is notorious as a player who confounds many analysts, who tend to treat the notion of shot quality with scepticism but acknowledge that Thornton’s superb playmaking skills drive up his on-ice shooting percentage and thus his (and his team’s) PDO.

        • Baalzamon

          I was being facetious.

          Fair enough. I, somewhat foolishly, did not pick up on that.

          By the way, there are several ways in which a player’s PDO and CF% could potentially act on each other, like for example through score effects, which I haven’t seen investigated anywhere. I’m sure these effects are minuscule, however.

          Score effects are frequently addressed. Ever heard of score-close and score-adjusted Corsi/Fenwick?

          As for my reference to Thornton, he is notorious as a player who confounds many analysts, who tend to treat the notion of shot quality with scepticism but acknowledge that Thornton’s superb playmaking skills drive up his on-ice shooting percentage and thus his (and his team’s) PDO.

          Actually, the shot% driver is a recognized player type; they’re just extremely rare (and, with some exceptions, tend to be possession drivers too). Alex Tanguay, the Sedin twins, Jiri Hudler and the aforementioned Thornton are examples.

          • L13

            What I meant was that a high PDO could mean you’re ahead more often and opposing teams are trying harder to score against you for longer stretches of time, which could affect your CF%.

            On the other hand, a very low CF% could lead to your goalie facing a dangerously high volume of shots, thus exhausting him and driving his .SV% down.

            etc. etc. etc.

            There are many ways in which you could imagine the two interacting, but as I said, I don’t expect any of them are significant on a macro level.

            I do know what score-adjusted possession metrics are. You’ll notice that I only ever mentioned basic CF%.

    • RedMan

      Wow, that Treliving IS sneaky! putting on such a convincing show of staying in contact and communicating regularly with Janko, and then signing him to the max – all while secretly hoping he buggars off. brilliant observation regarding our tricky ol’ GM.

      But this all negative take about a player barely old enough to drink who has played one pro game – this surprises me. especially coming from Labert, who is never negative!

      I’m still waiting for the stat that shows the NHL-CORSI-equivelant. because, god, how can we evaluate a player without the one stat that matters. please! what’s Janko’s NHL-CORSIe????

      I guess i’ll just have to accept that our management is stupid enough to let Janko develop and wait to see what he becomes, because they are not smart enough to dump him based on his college corsi.

  • FireScorpion

    Is anyone excited for the final boa in rexall/northland? $hit watch your videos. Watch the old corral video on the site, the George Johnson write up. Theo absolutely shredding the oilers in talking about his game 6 winner. What a laugh. Love this team
    Yeah I’m drunk coming off nights

  • The Real Slim Brodie

    After watching the highlights although it is a limited viewing and doest show the full picture. I am optimistic that jankowski will atleast be a good pro he gained the zone quite easily and didn’t seem to just throw the puck away like most nervous guys in there first game would do. I think he has a lot to prove but can step up to the task he has the skill and just has to put in the work and learn from his vets.

  • Truculence

    “So basically, I don’t see a lot of pro prospects for Jankowski.”

    But, you’re telling me there’s a teeny-weeny chance? I guess that’ll have to do.

  • T&A4Flames

    I usually enjoy the ‘other side’ view point that Lambert gives but I’m getting quite tired of his constant negative outlook at our team and players. He has certainly become known as a writer that uses only the facts and #’s that support his opinions and perhaps throws in a few not-so-important positives to try to avoid looking like a real single minded douche-bag.

    The positive facts of Jankowski he conveniently left out? Jankowski is still only 21, just 1 month older than Monahan. and where Mony is the exception amongst 21 year olds, Janko may simply be the norm in terms of development. He’s 6’4″ with good hands, speed and hockey IQ. He also played for a very defensive oriented system and coach in Providence. People like to say playing in that system hurt his offensive ability or took away from the shine of this prospect but we should be grateful that he was forced to become a good 200 ft player. His offensive skills are still there; we’ve all seen the sick moves and hands he displays from time to time.

    What ever view or facts you want to hear and support, you can’t just toss aside a 21 year old who is 6’4″ 205lbs that has shown excellent skating for a guy that size with great hands and an ability (again at 21) to show great play making ability and hope that you find something better in a late 2nd rounder. Even if those other offensive abilities don’t grow much further, Jankowski has already shown excellent face off ability and defensive acumen.

    Best of luck to those thinking you’ll find more or better in a late 2nd round pick.

  • JKG

    As much as I love to hate on big joe, he’s been finding another gear this year, and if Janko can be close to what Colburne is, with better possession, I’ll be happy. I think based on his frame he earns a long look and will hopefully be a late bloomer (4 years maybe). Confidence goes a long way with these gentle giant types.