What will Jankowski's next contract look like?

[DJones]

http://corsica.hockey/line-stats/

Take a look at Bennett's line combo's here if anyone is interested. Before Jankowski came he wasn't on a line consistently enough to really get a good read. Versteeg and Jagr looked good from a corsi perspective. Consistency is probably one of the reasons why it's jumped up more than anything as well.

Last year was much the same. A putrid 44% with Brouwer in 205 TOI

[rhino]

Likely 8-10 pages roughly 11x14 in size with a bunch of legal wording.

[GioforPM]

[Calgary4LIfe]

I would expect a bridge deal of ~2 million a season, for 2 years.

I would be fine with 8 years @4.5-5 million, however. I do think he will out-perform that contract, but that is a risk that I don't think a GM would want to take.

Backlund signed a 3 year deal just south of 3.6 million. Backlund was around longer and had proved more by then. The cap has grown since then, however. Backlund's deal to me is too high for a bridge.

I think Jankowski makes Ferland/Bennett money for 1-2 years. 1.75-1.95. Anything north of 2.5 million seems too high for a bridge deal, but I do think that Jankowski would out-perform that. I do think it will be interesting to see what happens there.

[Samonadreau]

2 x 2 sounds good. Scoring at similar to Bennet pace but has shown more of a 200foot centre game as well.

If he is willing to gamble with a longer deal go with a 6x3.5. Dont go more than that for term or dollars.

[Corral]

Jankowski will be our 2C when this core is in its prime years - he'll be paid accordingly. The guy looks really good out there already - and I think he will take some of the money Backlund thinks he's going to be offered.

[Enoch Root]

I think it's fortunate for the Flames that Jankowski's contract is up this year. He is getting better every game and if he had another year to go, his next contract might end up being a low heavier.

But coming up this year, both sides will agree that one year isn't enough to determine a long term contract, so he will end up with a bridge deal. 2 x $2 sounds about right. Maybe between $1.5M and $2M.

[bigrangy]

8*2.65

finally get a steal for once instead of just good value

[blender]

Originally Posted by bigrangy

8*2.65

finally get a steal for once instead of just good value

Why would Jankowski even consider it?

[bigrangy]

Originally Posted by blender

Why would Jankowski even consider it?

why would Jarnkrok have considered a 6x2?

Tough to turn away 20 million on the table when you're a guy who's only played 1 season

[Enoch Root]

Easy to turn down $20M when your agent is telling you that you're likely to earn at least double that.

[blender]

Originally Posted by bigrangy

why would Jarnkrok have considered a 6x2?

Tough to turn away 20 million on the table when you're a guy who's only played 1 season

He would be leaving a lot of money on the table. He and his agent have to have a realistic idea of his potential earning power.

[GGG]

If you start to put together this deal let's start with a base that 2 x 1.75 is fair market today for shorty term. Jankowski gets 3.5 million and two years to show he's worth more, will have arbitration rights and 4 years before UFA. This position would be very valuable for Jankowski to hit the long term 6-8 year deal. So to buy him off his position you need to offer him something.

If Jankos upside is a top 2nd line centre then he is probably worth about 6m per for his peak years. So the Jankowski upside is
2 x 1.75
6 x 6
Which is roughly 40 million over eight.

The Jankowski downside would be a 3 million dollar 3C penalty killer with limited offense

So
2x1.75
2x 2.5
4x 3
For a total of just over 20 million.

So Janko's low end over the next 8 years is about 20 barring injury and high end is about 40. So can you work out an 8 x 3.75 for 30 that splits risk and upside? The worst case outcome is you end up with Matt Stajan for eight years.

I think as a player I would sign 8 x 30 before I'd sign 2 x 1.75 as it locks in your earnings and if you were worth the 40 million over the period your next contract would be pretty good. I suspect his agent would be pushing for a 6 year x 3.5 instead in that scenario which Would not be a good deal for the Flames.

2 x 1.75 = 3.5 most likely
6 x 3 = 18
8 x 3.75 = 30 my favourite.

[Enoch Root]

Solid post GGG, but if I'm Jankowski, I would not be interested in an 8 year, $30M deal.

The cap keeps going up. Time is his friend. His downside is at least $20M (and I would argue higher). So for me, $30M doesn't get me to bite.

If I'm Jankowski, I seriously consider $36M ($4M per), but nothing less than that.

[blender]

What does the collective think about Jankowski's upside as a 1C?

His pedigree is not typical obviously, but his physical attributes, hockey IQ, and his history of progression suggests it would not be out if the question. Or am I way off here?

I guess as his agent, there would be no desire to encourage him into a longterm cheap deal.

[ComixZone]

I feel like some of the projections on the long-term deals are completely out of whack.

For comparison's sake, Roman Josi. 7 years, 4M per. Signed when the salary cap was 64.3M, roughly 6.22% of the cap.

Next year the cap is going to be 80M. 6.22% would be 4.976M. Roman Josi played 1 season prior to signing that deal and put up .375PPG in that lockout shortened season, while Jankowski is putting up .39 PPG in his rookie year. Josi's deal also takes him to 30, prime age for another huge extension which is in line with where Jankowski would be at the end of a 7 year deal.

So even if you think Josi was significantly better at that age than Jankowski has been, despite the lack of evidence on that front I'd argue, you're still looking at 4.5M per on a 7 year deal. 4.75M over 7 years would be a good deal. Given the premium centres get, I think you do the 7 years around 4.75M and enjoy.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Solid post GGG, but if I'm Jankowski, I would not be interested in an 8 year, $30M deal.

The cap keeps going up. Time is his friend. His downside is at least $20M (and I would argue higher). So for me, $30M doesn't get me to bite.

If I'm Jankowski, I seriously consider $36M ($4M per), but nothing less than that.

Depends on how risky you think getting a career ending injury.

4 per is 32 million to get to 36 mil would be 4.5 which I think would be a no brainer for him as it would mean 2 x 1.75 then a 6 x 5.4 million.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I feel like some of the projections on the long-term deals are completely out of whack.

For comparison's sake, Roman Josi. 7 years, 4M per. Signed when the salary cap was 64.3M, roughly 6.22% of the cap.

Next year the cap is going to be 80M. 6.22% would be 4.976M. Roman Josi played 1 season prior to signing that deal and put up .375PPG in that lockout shortened season, while Jankowski is putting up .39 PPG in his rookie year. Josi's deal also takes him to 30, prime age for another huge extension which is in line with where Jankowski would be at the end of a 7 year deal.

So even if you think Josi was significantly better at that age than Jankowski has been, despite the lack of evidence on that front I'd argue, you're still looking at 4.5M per on a 7 year deal. 4.75M over 7 years would be a good deal. Given the premium centres get, I think you do the 7 years around 4.75M and enjoy.

While I'm not arguing your position on the long term deal proposals being way off here. I'm wondering why you would use Roman Josi as a comparable. Plays a different position and different development path.

[flamesfan1297]

2.5x3 would be my guess

[Da_Chief]

I'd say Bennett / Ferland contracts are the benchmark. He'll simply get a 2 year deal around ~1.6 mill.