Mark "Fricken" Jankowski (aka The Big Jankowski)

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

The thing is Montreal offered their pick a contract in his first year, which they didn't need to do as he was still in college but in that way they were able to say they had offered him a contract. If the Flames have done the same, I guess it will work the same and we'll get a 2nd if we don't sign him.

The only time a Bona Fide offer is required (as defined in the CBA) is prior to June 1 the year following the player's draft and that allows a team to continue to retain that player's rights for an additional year. That is the only thing that the phrase "Bona Fide offer" ever refers to in the CBA.

If the Habs had to do it with Fischer, the Flames would have had to do it with Jankowski. The fact that he's still Flames property implies that they did whatever was required to retain his rights.

[druetetective]

Originally Posted by getbak

The only time a Bona Fide offer is required (as defined in the CBA) is prior to June 1 the year following the player's draft and that allows a team to continue to retain that player's rights for an additional year. That is the only thing that the phrase "Bona Fide offer" ever refers to in the CBA.

If the Habs had to do it with Fischer, the Flames would have had to do it with Jankowski. The fact that he's still Flames property implies that they did whatever was required to retain his rights.

Whatever, lets just agree if the Flames really want a 2nd for Jankowski they'll be able to get it.

Anyways if there is a loophole, seems it pertains to only college players. This can be used as an advantage when picking project players like Jankowski. If they pan out, Great, if not your still compensated with a 2nd. If you select a similar player out of another league this option does not exist.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Interesting. I always thought that the league as a whole had to agree on compensatory picks on a case-by-case basis (which always seemed fair, but also a bit tedious). For instance, to gain a compensatory pick for Jankowski if the Flames offered him a contract, and he chose not to sign, the other 29 teams would have to agree to give the compensatory pick, and that it was not automatic.

Was that indeed something from that past, or did I grab that out of nowhere? Makes it much less tedious to have it happen automatically.

[devo22]

Jankowski hasn't even finished his junior year yet and still all we talk about here is a compensatory pick in 2017. If you only read the last couple pages and didn't know anything about Jankowski, you'd think the guy's flat out terrible and the biggest bust in Flames history. It's stunning, really. I have no doubt that Janko will sign next season and eventually become a Flames player in a few years.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by devo22

Jankowski hasn't even finished his junior year yet and still all we talk about here is a compensatory pick in 2017. If you only read the last couple pages and didn't know anything about Jankowski, you'd think the guy's flat out terrible and the biggest bust in Flames history. It's stunning, really. I have no doubt that Janko will sign next season and eventually become a Flames player in a few years.

What is your basis for believing he will be a Flame?

[Steve Bozek]

Originally Posted by devo22

Jankowski hasn't even finished his junior year yet and still all we talk about here is a compensatory pick in 2017. If you only read the last couple pages and didn't know anything about Jankowski, you'd think the guy's flat out terrible and the biggest bust in Flames history. It's stunning, really. ....

This.
Discussions of how the Flames might dump him for a second round pick after next season seem premature: and bemoaning his selection in the draft 3 seasons ago is getting awfully tiresome.
Can we turn this thread's focus more onto a discussion of the player's performance/progression in the here and now?

[devo22]

Originally Posted by saillias

What is your basis for believing he will be a Flame?

I think the kid has progressed well and he has all the tools to be an NHLer. People seem to write him off because he doesn't score a PPG, which is premature. There's much more to a player's progression than point production. Jankowski has bulked up 25 or 30 pounds since being drafted, he's improved on the FO dot and he's learned to play a responsible two way game. That's a great thing to have in your organisation. No, he won't be the best of his draft class and he probably won't be a superstar, but with Monahan and Bennett, he doesn't have to. But I firmly believe he can be a Stajan type - defensively responsible, can step up if necessary.

I am bringing up this comparison for about the 50th time, but Jankos path and progression reminds me a lot of Alex Killorn.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by devo22

People seem to write him off because he doesn't score a PPG, which is premature.

I dunno... I looked back at all the 1st & 2nd round picks (Forwards) that went through the NCAA dating back to 2008 of all those guys I managed to find a grand total of two that both didn't have a PPG scoring rate season in the NCAA and have managed to establish themselves as NHL'ers (Jimmy Haynes & Riley Sheahan). Is it premature?... maybe, but it certainly doesn't bode well for his chances.

[Rickbo]

If he turns into a Joel Otto type shutdown good at face offs player, everyone should be happy.

[Red Menace]

I still like the kid, but the value of both him and his acquisition partner Sieloff has dropped of rather dramatically over the past few years.
Neither seems likely to make the NHL at this point.
Of course there is still plenty of time for them to develop and here's hoping they do just that.
But I don't think anyone can now successfully argue that it was a good move to trade down and make these picks instead of drafting the likes of Teravainen, Girgensons or Maatta.

[Phil Russell]

I wonder if we can agree that while it is still too early to say that Jankowski will not develop into an NHL player, the chances of him being a top-liner have significantly diminished? That would be my take.

[Itse]

Obviously expectations on Jankowski are being lowered, but on the upside our need for him to succeed has also lowered as well. With Monahan and Bennett we should be covered for top 6 centers.

At this point we only need him to replace or improve on Stajan or Backlund to improve the team at center.

[puckedoff]

Can you imagine 3rd and 4th line centers of (estimated height b/c lazy)
Colborne (6'8"?)
Jankowski (6'6"?)

Plus both those guys have the skill to use that reach, be it shootout or in game.

[sevenarms]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

Can you imagine 3rd and 4th line centers of (estimated height b/c lazy)
Colborne (6'8"?)
Jankowski (6'6"?)

Plus both those guys have the skill to use that reach, be it shootout or in game.

Colborne (6'5")
Jankowski (6'3")

[saillias]

Originally Posted by devo22

I think the kid has progressed well and he has all the tools to be an NHLer. People seem to write him off because he doesn't score a PPG, which is premature. There's much more to a player's progression than point production. Jankowski has bulked up 25 or 30 pounds since being drafted, he's improved on the FO dot and he's learned to play a responsible two way game. That's a great thing to have in your organisation. No, he won't be the best of his draft class and he probably won't be a superstar, but with Monahan and Bennett, he doesn't have to. But I firmly believe he can be a Stajan type - defensively responsible, can step up if necessary.

I am bringing up this comparison for about the 50th time, but Jankos path and progression reminds me a lot of Alex Killorn.

An Alex Killorn breakout in his senior year is a possibility... That's true.

Faceoffs and good 2-way player is an acceptable point of pride for someone in a pro league, but if you're talking about a kid in 3rd year college drafted for his talent and that's the best you can say about him... he's probably not a player. Even a "character" guy, a grit guy, if they have any shot at an NHL career they need to be producing at this level. Bryce van Brabant had 15 goals in his 3rd year, guys like Agostino and Hanowski outscored Jankowski... It's just difficult to look at this situation and call it good progression

A 3rd line NHL centre is still a guy who dominated the junior/NCAA and the AHL too.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by getbak

The only time a Bona Fide offer is required (as defined in the CBA) is prior to June 1 the year following the player's draft and that allows a team to continue to retain that player's rights for an additional year. That is the only thing that the phrase "Bona Fide offer" ever refers to in the CBA.

If the Habs had to do it with Fischer, the Flames would have had to do it with Jankowski. The fact that he's still Flames property implies that they did whatever was required to retain his rights.

I think you're mixing things up. A bona fide offer is not required until August 15th of the player's senior year. So year over year, the Flames aren't required to offer Jankowski a contract until the summer of his senior year. Then, they ARE required to offer him a contract in order to receive the compensatory pick.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by saillias

An Alex Killorn breakout in his senior year is a possibility... That's true.

Faceoffs and good 2-way player is an acceptable point of pride for someone in a pro league, but if you're talking about a kid in 3rd year college drafted for his talent and that's the best you can say about him... he's probably not a player.

A 3rd line NHL centre is still a guy who dominated the junior/NCAA and the AHL too.

All I'm saying is that there IS progress and that it's way too early to write him off. He went from 0.53 ppg to 0.64 ppg to 0.73 ppg in his college career, it's not like he seems to regress in his overall game. But in general, I just feel that people focus too much on the point production. Baertschi ripped apart the WHL in scoring, but how exactly did that help him in pro hockey? It's not all about scoring. It's weird, you'd think that after Sven Baertschi (stellar junior career, but failed to make the next step) and Josh Jooris (mediocre college player, but now an NHL regular), people would be inclined to look at the bigger picture.

Also let's not forget that the original plan was to play a year in the USHL before going to college, but he jumped into college early (probably because of Feaster/Weisbrod wanting him to do so). Janko was always going to be a long-term project and nothing has changed in that regard. The Flames can afford to be patient, especially after drafting Monahan and Bennett and seeing Backlund step up. Let him play his 4th year at Providence and have him in the AHL for a year or two.

When it comes to faceoffs and two way play, I respectfully disagree. I think it's extremely important to have him learn that early on, especially if he's going to be a bottom six center at the NHL level. That is what I expect him to be ... and with Monahan and Bennett as 1-2, I'm perfectly fine with that. A big center with good FO skills and a good two-way game is vital in the modern NHL and him learning those traits years before his pro career is great IMO.

And finally, can we PLEASE stop bringing up his draft position? It doesn't matter any more.

[TheDebaser]

Have you considered that a second round pick is actually a really valuable asset? It's not like people want to chuck him away for nothing, but if he continues to trend with third line potential as his upside, it could be worth it to take the second rounder and try again. Not every prospect works out, look at Tim Erixon. It's important to be able to cut your losses if you need to.

Not saying he will bust, but if he doesn't seem like a prospect you would like to draft in the second round by his senior year then absolutely pull the trigger.

[TheDebaser]

nm, double post

[FlameZilla]

Jankowski is a good prospect. Still filling out, still improving and his ceiling is still high. End of. He could play in the NHL one day, maybe even 2 years from now.

Why ditch a good prospect who is nearly ready to go pro in favour of a 2nd round draft pick, which would inevitably yield a prospect a couple of years further away from playing? It's a ridiculous argument and I'm glad we won't see that happen.