Jankowski/Gilmour signing watch. (Friedman: "Arm-wrestling" over bonuses)

[Enoch Root]

I agree that Jankowski isn't as tenacious as Joel Otto.

However, I can see Jankowski being another (and probably better) Backlund. If he can replace Backlund in 2 years, Backlund would bring a nice return - at least that 2nd some of you seem so hungry for.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No one is saying that Jankowski is 'ready' for the NHL. It's just the way things are done now.

Hanowski got 5 games

Agostino got 8 games

Arnold got a game.

Were any of those guys more ready or more deserving?

I agree with the assessment that, if Treliving holds firm, it is because he is happy with the compensation.

I think Arnold was part of the get Gaudreau signged campaign. Hanowski and Agostino were "get the Iginla return her stats!" angle.

So I think it's more circumstantial than anything.

Also think Jankowski does get a game, it's just not in Treliving's opening offer.

[Yamer]

Otto had way more of an edge to him than Jankowski appears to be projecting, but strangely it's the first wanted comparable that came to my mind hearing his trajectory.

I think he has the smarts and vision to be a lot like an Otto regarding positional strengths.

[Enoch Root]

Kind of a cross between Otto and Backlund.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Hackey

I thought he was suppose to be Nieuwendyk but I guess I'd take Dowd.

I have a hard time believing that anyone ever compared Jankowski to Nieuwendyk.

If I remember correctly, Joe still is the 2nd or 3rd fastest player to a 100 goals EVER.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by timbit

I have a hard time believing that anyone ever compared Jankowski to Nieuwendyk.

If I remember correctly, Joe still is the 2nd or 3rd fastest player to a 100 goals EVER.

The guys drafting him did

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Kind of a cross between Otto and Backlund.

Isn't that basically Koivu?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by timbit

I have a hard time believing that anyone ever compared Jankowski to Nieuwendyk.

If I remember correctly, Joe still is the 2nd or 3rd fastest player to a 100 goals EVER.

I recall some people making that comparison back when he was first drafted, but I think they were just fans and not anyone within actual hockey circles.

[Enoch Root]

Wasn't that what Weisbrod said?

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by heep223

Is Jankowski's ceiling higher than Backlund? We're talking about him replacing Backlund essentially.

Ceiling, yes. Both play a defensively reliable game, while Jankowski seems to have tons of offensive potential which we've seen glimpses of. Then there's the size factor which is always a concern in the centre position. Sometimes size is the only thing holding #2-3 centres from becoming #1-2 franchise players.

Chances of reaching his ceiling. Do you have a crystal ball?

We can't look into the future, but it could be a costly mistake to let Jankowski walk instead of doing everything you can to sign him at this point.

Also agreed on a 2nd round pick for players like Shinkaruk,Andersson,Kylington and Jankwoski not being worth it unless we were re-rebuilding.

As a mid-rebuild team we need to have as many of these assets as we can to see if they can progress into NHLers. If it looks like they'll fizzle out or not fit (aka Baertschi) then you take the pick and restart the development of that asset.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I recall some people making that comparison back when he was first drafted, but I think they were just fans and not anyone within actual hockey circles.

Weisbrod was the one who compared him to Nieuwendyk.

TSN said his NHL comparable was Jamie Benn.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Wasn't that what Weisbrod said?

That would explain it.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Weisbrod was the one who compared him to Nieuwendyk.

TSN said his NHL comparable was Jamie Benn.

Wow, I never heard the Benn comparisons. If I had simply had to pick between the two of them and nobody else, he is much more a Nieuwendyk than a Benn. Benn has that edge to his game that neither Nieuwendyk or Jankowski have. I see Nieuwendyk as a finesse player who took a heck of a lot of punishment around the net, but didn't exactly pound guys the way Benn does.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Weisbrod was the one who compared him to Nieuwendyk.

TSN said his NHL comparable was Jamie Benn.

It's important to remember with all of those comparisons, and the "best player in the draft" comment, is that they were all referring to absolute ceiling, if he hit his full potential, not actual expectations.

And in that light, I've never been bothered by any of the press clippings that continue to be dragged back out - Jankowski had huge potential given his physical tools and development curve in the two years prior to his draft, but everyone acknowledged that he was also a huge project, so the upside was by no means guaranteed and would take years to be realized, if ever.

[GranteedEV]

If Jankowski ends up as good as Mikko Koivu, would you guys consider him a 3C?

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by heep223

Is Jankowski's ceiling higher than Backlund? We're talking about him replacing Backlund essentially.

Backlund was a thoroughbred... He was one of the best players in Junior when he was with the Rockets as a 19 year old. 13 goals 23 pts in 19 CHL playoff games. As a 21 year old (Janko's age) he had 25 pts +4 in 73 NHL games and was being pushed off the puck way too easily.

Not even remotely close to this point in Jankowski's career compared to 21 year old Backlund.

[Lanny_McDonald]

@bandwagon in flames

Great summary of the Jankowski situation. Another bullet in the chamber for the rebuild is important, especially with the potential to have to pay Bennett and Monahan big dollars in short order. We need Jankowski and players like him to keep coming through the system and support the high end salaries and continue the cycle of players through the lower ranks.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by polak

Seems silly for a prospect that is nowhere near a surefire NHL'er to want to burn a year of his contract. It's probably more likely for a 2nd tier prospect like him to be dropped than reupped once his contract expires. Assuming some big raise in two years time seems pretty cocky. If I was in his position I'd prefer to have an extra year to try and make my case.

Not really. The options are:

15-16: $90K signing bonus and 10 days or so NHL salary ($50K)
16-17: $90K signing bonus and a $70K AHL salary
17-18: Whatever contract he can garner

or if he signs for next year:

15-16: nothing
16-17: $90K signing bonus and a $70K AHL salary
17-18: $90K signing bonus and a $70K AHL salary

So essentially he'd simply have to earn more than $20K playing hockey in 17-18 to come out ahead, and that doesn't even consider the value of money now vs. money a year from now.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

If Jankowski ends up as good as Mikko Koivu, would you guys consider him a 3C?

That would make him a lower tier 1C.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Backlund was a thoroughbred... He was one of the best players in Junior when he was with the Rockets as a 19 year old. 13 goals 23 pts in 19 CHL playoff games. As a 21 year old (Janko's age) he had 25 pts +4 in 73 NHL games and was being pushed off the puck way too easily.

Not even remotely close to this point in Jankowski's career compared to 21 year old Backlund.

Backlund was a thoroughbred?

First time I've ever heard that.