[Fire]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Actually I think that 1984 summed it up quite nicely.

There are only two sensible times to take a 'high risk, high reward' player. One is if you have a solid farm system that can withstand a 'miss', such as your Detroit example. The other is if you are right at the beginning of a rebuild, but still only have a middle pick. The thought being that drawing a 'B' prospect that is more of a sure thing would have minimal impact on a team not expected to contend for another 5-6 years. But picking up a potential 'A' prospect that would emerge right at the end of your rebuild could be the difference between a playoff team and a contender.

There is a lot of talk about how an unexpected emergence of a player, such as a Giordano or a Brodie, can effectively take years off a rebuild, and their value is beyond that of a 'sure thing' prospect, because they essentially were 'free'. You receive the high calibre player as well as the regular building blocks from 1st round draft picks.

The thought process in taking a Jankowski at that spot is that we can possibly attain a Bennett or Monahan level asset at a time would be most valuable to the club, without having a pick that would justify his presence on the roster.

Between Gaudreau and Jankowski, we have 2 possible top 10 calibre players without using or having a draft pick that would otherwise need to be used to acquire one.

Jankowski's progression right now seems to indicate that he may end up being a Joel Otto or Jordan Staal type of third line centre or better. That would allow the team to concentrate on the defensive positions to build. The progression of this one player could be a real indicator of whether this team will be in contention for a Stanley Cup, and that is why everyone cares about his success.

We have Bennett and Monahan as the Gilmour and Neiuwendyk, we need Joel Otto.

Jankowski might be an NHLer but he will never be compared to Joel Otto.