Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Sirwilliam89

What Is Best For Matthew Tkachuk

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

 

Based on reading between the lines, when asked, "where has the bridge contract gone?"  BT jokes, "I don't know where it's gone, just like my hair".

 

I would imagine Tkachuk is asking for $9-mil x 5.

 

Every player should be using the Matthews and Nylander contracts to set the bar.  No big name RFA has signed yet because they want the next "big money on 4/5-year" to establish and confirm the new norm.  Maybe all the RFAs have gotten together to push for this new type of contract.  Thus, nobody has signed yet.  Marner, Rantanen, Laine, etc.  Basically, max money now.  No UFA years bought.  No bridge deal.  No 8-year commitment.  No home town discount.  B-line to UFA with no reduction in cap hit.  

Personally I’d let him sit out a year, while bringing in some guys that have more interest in playing the game than getting max pay.  Every single NHL player is overpaid versus regular folks.... as is the same in many industries... but, doesn’t make it right.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 12:37 PM, cccsberg said:

Personally I’d let him sit out a year, while bringing in some guys that have more interest in playing the game than getting max pay.  Every single NHL player is overpaid versus regular folks.... as is the same in many industries... but, doesn’t make it right.

The DRAMA continues

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 12:37 PM, cccsberg said:

Personally I’d let him sit out a year, while bringing in some guys that have more interest in playing the game than getting max pay.  Every single NHL player is overpaid versus regular folks.... as is the same in many industries... but, doesn’t make it right.

 

Tom Hanks makes more money on films than Eddie the Actor.

People pay big money to watch Tom Hanks.

They might not if Eddie is the star.

Entertainment dollars.

 

A team of lovable losers is a good draw once they have success.  When a team of Young Guns wins games, plays exciting, and then makes the playoffs, the fans show up.  If they don't make the playoffs, nobody cares.  If Tkachuk wasn't an important part to the team's success, they could just let him stew.

They tried that with Gaudreau and it bit them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Tom Hanks makes more money on films than Eddie the Actor.

People pay big money to watch Tom Hanks.

They might not if Eddie is the star.

Entertainment dollars.

 

A team of lovable losers is a good draw once they have success.  When a team of Young Guns wins games, plays exciting, and then makes the playoffs, the fans show up.  If they don't make the playoffs, nobody cares.  If Tkachuk wasn't an important part to the team's success, they could just let him stew.

They tried that with Gaudreau and it bit them.

I agree re star performers, though I believe the whole system is out of whack.  As far as Gaudreau goes, they did eventually sign him to a “cheap” deal.  

 

I wonder if if one did an analysis of what, say, $10mm could get you in different scenarios, which would provide the best result?  I mean:

a. 1 superstar

b. 2 star players

c. 3 very good players

d. combination i.e. 1b & 2ELCs, 2C & 2 ELCs.... 

I’ll bet you that since it’s a team game the lower down the list you go, the more success you will have.  I’d reference this year’s Carolina or last year’s VGN..... The stars may draw the fans but the team wins the championships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

I agree re star performers, though I believe the whole system is out of whack.  As far as Gaudreau goes, they did eventually sign him to a “cheap” deal.  

 

I wonder if if one did an analysis of what, say, $10mm could get you in different scenarios, which would provide the best result?  I mean:

a. 1 superstar

b. 2 star players

c. 3 very good players

d. combination i.e. 1b & 2ELCs, 2C & 2 ELCs.... 

I’ll bet you that since it’s a team game the lower down the list you go, the more success you will have.  I’d reference this year’s Carolina or last year’s VGN..... The stars may draw the fans but the team wins the championships.

 

The time it took and the result to him were not good.

He was barely NHL ready by the time he showed up and the only reason he was okay was playing at the WC.

Nylander basically ruined his season with the two sides at an impasse.

They might have been better off just losing the year.

 

And he is a complementary player compared to Tkachuk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

I agree re star performers, though I believe the whole system is out of whack.  As far as Gaudreau goes, they did eventually sign him to a “cheap” deal.  

 

I wonder if if one did an analysis of what, say, $10mm could get you in different scenarios, which would provide the best result?  I mean:

a. 1 superstar

b. 2 star players

c. 3 very good players

d. combination i.e. 1b & 2ELCs, 2C & 2 ELCs.... 

I’ll bet you that since it’s a team game the lower down the list you go, the more success you will have.  I’d reference this year’s Carolina or last year’s VGN..... The stars may draw the fans but the team wins the championships.

It really is a mixed bag anymore of how to create a winning roster. Just look up North, they automatically hand McDavid 12.5M and Drasaitl 8.5M and handicap themselves to build a team around those two. You take CHI when they were winning with Toews and Kane they were smart enough to also solidify their Goal with Crawford and their Defense with Keith and Seabrook. They traded from their good fringe players as their contracts were coming up. It seems today even if you have a few winning seasons imminent changes are not far behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems very presumptuous to have these conversations given we have no idea what Tkachuk's ask has been and no idea that he is even asking for that much.

 

RFA deals don't get delayed because players shoot for the moon, they get delayed because there is little pressure to get them done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Seems very presumptuous to have these conversations given we have no idea what Tkachuk's ask has been and no idea that he is even asking for that much.

 

RFA deals don't get delayed because players shoot for the moon, they get delayed because there is little pressure to get them done. 

I don't think there is much sense worrying about what Tkachuk gets paid. Treliving has a good track record so let him do his thing. Dubas had no track record and has now gone down a very expensive road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

FWIW, Tkachuk is saying he would not sign an offer sheet.

 

My comments not particularly specific to Tkachuk, more so the whole RFA situation.  Glad to see the initial couple of deals coming in somewhat reasonable... Aho, Meier...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

My comments not particularly specific to Tkachuk, more so the whole RFA situation.  Glad to see the initial couple of deals coming in somewhat reasonable... Aho, Meier...

Meier was a hometown discount if you ask me.

There's no way he's less valuable than Monahan.

Strikes me as a bargain.

 

Aho was a bad offer sheet, and the only reason they kept the value low was so they didn't have to give up 4x1st.

The way the OS is constructed makes them benefitial to the player.

Has to average over 5 years, so they will not be more term than that.

If the offer was 7 years x 8.5m, then the OS compensation would be 11.9m.

Crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Meier was a hometown discount if you ask me.

There's no way he's less valuable than Monahan.

Strikes me as a bargain.

 

Aho was a bad offer sheet, and the only reason they kept the value low was so they didn't have to give up 4x1st.

The way the OS is constructed makes them benefitial to the player.

Has to average over 5 years, so they will not be more term than that.

If the offer was 7 years x 8.5m, then the OS compensation would be 11.9m.

Crazy.

If you look at Meiers deal it's mostly bonuses at the start but the last year is 10m no bonuses. Just in time for the re-sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharks also got a little lucky with Meier. In 16-17 he didn't play enough games to accrue a full season towards free agency so he essentially gets an extra year of RFA. In most cases players like Meier don't sign 4 year deals because it will walk him to UFA but in this case, Sharks were able to structure the deal differently because of the extra year they had to play with.

 

Smart on the Sharks for using it but IMO that's why this deal appears so low. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, flames-fan-in-jets-land said:

If you look at Meiers deal it's mostly bonuses at the start but the last year is 10m no bonuses. Just in time for the re-sign.

 

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Sharks also got a little lucky with Meier. In 16-17 he didn't play enough games to accrue a full season towards free agency so he essentially gets an extra year of RFA. In most cases players like Meier don't sign 4 year deals because it will walk him to UFA but in this case, Sharks were able to structure the deal differently because of the extra year they had to play with.

 

Smart on the Sharks for using it but IMO that's why this deal appears so low. 

 

Safe to say that his deal is less of a starting point for the Flames.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the same time though tack on the qualifying offer and its essentially a 7mill AAV. Still think it’s provides a comp the Flames can work with if the goal is a 5 year deal. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping the deal doesn;t drag on for the sake of saving a couple of 100k.

The Gio cap has to be done.

What they need to do to make it attractive is have the bigger numbers near the end of the term, if it's 5 or 6 years.

Set up the future QO.

JH's deal is excatly the same every year, with the only difference being signing bonus.

But that's just me.

Make the deal show that his future is worth more to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

I'm hoping the deal doesn;t drag on for the sake of saving a couple of 100k.

The Gio cap has to be done.

What they need to do to make it attractive is have the bigger numbers near the end of the term, if it's 5 or 6 years.

Set up the future QO.

JH's deal is excatly the same every year, with the only difference being signing bonus.

But that's just me.

Make the deal show that his future is worth more to them.

Agreed. Sure they got Johnny at a bargain, but for 1.25 more he’d have signed for 8 years at 8x8. Now might lose him to UFA in 3 summers

 

This also needs to get done sooner than later so BT can add to this team. Could be hard to do if this drags out until late August 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If i were Montreal I’d have offered a contract to Tkachuk instead. They seem ok at C. Although I don’t know their roster that well, but Domi seemed to transitioned well to C, they have a young group, but good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

If i were Montreal I’d have offered a contract to Tkachuk instead. They seem ok at C. Although I don’t know their roster that well, but Domi seemed to transitioned well to C, they have a young group, but good.

 

So, they picked a player that was publically being "lowballed".

The agent probably leaked it to teams to get something going.

Tkachuk, on the other hand, may not have even signed an OS with MTL.

First, they lose the element of surprise.

Second, they PO a GM with no chance of it working.

 

I mean, it was a good try for Aho, but not really.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

It was wise of Conroy to throw some cold water on it, better that than to say we haven't talked to his agent in 10 days.

If they want to getter done quick ask Aho how its done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, robrob74 said:

If i were Montreal I’d have offered a contract to Tkachuk instead. They seem ok at C. Although I don’t know their roster that well, but Domi seemed to transitioned well to C, they have a young group, but good.

 

If I was Montreal, then I would just tank for French Canadian Alexis Lafreniere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

Here's hoping for 7.5m for 8 years no NTC or NMC

 

He isn't eligible for any NTC or NMC in the first 4 years of his deal. I would be willing to give him a NTC in his UFA years if it saved a bit of cap.

 

On another note, Tkachuk went from 13 goals to 24 goals to 34 goals in first 3 seasons. I am expecting 44 goals for him next season, anything less and I will be disappointed :D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...