Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Sirwilliam89

What Is Best For Matthew Tkachuk

Recommended Posts

Perhaps it is time for the NHL and Player's Union to re-think this OS option and do away with it. The problem started with McDavid and has festered into the current problems being had with all these RFA. Whatever happened to arbitration as a continued option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm the complete opposite, i think the NHL should actually make offer sheets more attractive. Lower the cost in picks to send them over and create more competition and you'd likely see guys get signed sooner and perhaps even more player movement. I think the archaic old boys club that is the NHL and their owners is a big part of the reason this process is dragging out. Need to join modern times and create more deadlines if you want teams to act faster. I don't think having someone who knows nothing about hockey decide salary is a smart way to go. Arbitration tends to artificially drive up salaries

Share this post


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

I'm the complete opposite, i think the NHL should actually make offer sheets more attractive. Lower the cost in picks to send them over and create more competition and you'd likely see guys get signed sooner and perhaps even more player movement. I think the archaic old boys club that is the NHL and their owners is a big part of the reason this process is dragging out. Need to join modern times and create more deadlines if you want teams to act faster. I don't think having someone who knows nothing about hockey decide salary is a smart way to go. Arbitration tends to artificially drive up salaries

How do you see players getting signed sooner as everyone tries to fit these demands into the cap ? Agents know how to work the system creating pressure on the entire system. You want to see more player movement whereas I would like to see more team building from developing assets. Who are you to say arbitrators don't know the hockey environment or system enough to make prudent summaries. These GMs are that hand out these high dollar contracts are usually ex-hockey players without much business savy at all, it's out of control when you have this many cases out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GM_3300 said:

How do you see players getting signed sooner as everyone tries to fit these demands into the cap ? Agents know how to work the system creating pressure on the entire system. You want to see more player movement whereas I would like to see more team building from developing assets. Who are you to say arbitrators don't know the hockey environment or system enough to make prudent summaries. These GMs are that hand out these high dollar contracts are usually ex-hockey players without much business savy at all, it's out of control when you have this many cases out there.

 

Because it's not a cap issues, it's a negotiation issue. Pretty much all of these RFAs could sign today because the cap room is there it is not an issue of the GMs needing to create cap space The "problem" (if you want to call it that, but I don't) is that there is no urgency to get these deals done and the economic landscape is changing in the NHL. Players use to want long term security and didn't know where the cap would go, but not with revenues increasing and the potential more more revenues in the future, admist a better understanding of cap % versus cap hit, players are risking shorter term deals for more total dollars over their careers. That doesn't jive with the GMs who want the long term security of the cap hit so negotiations have hit a snag and IMO if you want to speed it up you need deadlines to create action. 

 

The problems with the arbitration system are well known and can be easily google'd if you want. The history of arbitration in the NHL is one one of artificial salary inflation, and now it's so silly that you have team that low ball, and players that go high and the arbitrator basically always pick the exact middle number. There is a reason teams are doing everything they can to avoid using arbitration. The arbitrators also by rule cannot be associated with the league in any way so it's not me saying they are not hockey people the rules are. 

 

But i'm also a free market guy so it's never made sense to me what you want arbitration, just like having restricted free agency until 27 also doesn't make sense to me. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what the total costs are for a team from the day that they draft a player until the end of their ELC.

Those costs may include the value of the draft pick itself, plus the scouting, development, insurance, travel, and legal costs incurred during the length of the ELC.

I would hazard a guess that except for the Top players, the costs are higher than the value of the player during his first contract.

NHL teams definitely need some security (RFA rights) on their investment, but whether that needs to be 7 seasons/27 years old is up for debate.

IMO, It would be quite tough to keep any roster together if every player gained UFA rights immediately after their ELC.

Share this post


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

 

Because it's not a cap issues, it's a negotiation issue. Pretty much all of these RFAs could sign today because the cap room is there it is not an issue of the GMs needing to create cap space The "problem" (if you want to call it that, but I don't) is that there is no urgency to get these deals done and the economic landscape is changing in the NHL. Players use to want long term security and didn't know where the cap would go, but not with revenues increasing and the potential more more revenues in the future, admist a better understanding of cap % versus cap hit, players are risking shorter term deals for more total dollars over their careers. That doesn't jive with the GMs who want the long term security of the cap hit so negotiations have hit a snag and IMO if you want to speed it up you need deadlines to create action. 

 

The problems with the arbitration system are well known and can be easily google'd if you want. The history of arbitration in the NHL is one one of artificial salary inflation, and now it's so silly that you have team that low ball, and players that go high and the arbitrator basically always pick the exact middle number. There is a reason teams are doing everything they can to avoid using arbitration. The arbitrators also by rule cannot be associated with the league in any way so it's not me saying they are not hockey people the rules are. 

 

But i'm also a free market guy so it's never made sense to me what you want arbitration, just like having restricted free agency until 27 also doesn't make sense to me. 

So you are saying if Tkachuk want 9.5M there is room for him ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GM_3300 said:

So you are saying if Tkachuk want 9.5M there is room for him ?

 

Yup because you can exceed the salary cap in the offseason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 420since1974 said:

I wonder what the total costs are for a team from the day that they draft a player until the end of their ELC.

Those costs may include the value of the draft pick itself, plus the scouting, development, insurance, travel, and legal costs incurred during the length of the ELC.

I would hazard a guess that except for the Top players, the costs are higher than the value of the player during his first contract.

NHL teams definitely need some security (RFA rights) on their investment, but whether that needs to be 7 seasons/27 years old is up for debate.

IMO, It would be quite tough to keep any roster together if every player gained UFA rights immediately after their ELC.

 

At the same time though the debate would have to include that if you have more free agents and more supply what does that do to the cost of the players? 

 

It’s a large debate and I’m not suggesting all RFA be scraped just that there is quite a bit of silliness to the system. Both hockey and baseball are imo starting to see the flaws of having a system where players are tied up in restricted status for so long. 

Share this post


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

i think the NHL should actually make offer sheets more attractive. Lower the cost in picks to send them over and create more competition and you'd likely see guys get signed sooner and perhaps even more player movement.

Totally agree with this 

 

I also think an add on would be NO cap help from buy outs. More actual $ saving by the team.

So if you screw up as a GM you live with it. If you screw up as a player you only get a small % of your salary and you live with it.

LTIR is regulated and paid by the league. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

At the same time though the debate would have to include that if you have more free agents and more supply what does that do to the cost of the players? 

 

It’s a large debate and I’m not suggesting all RFA be scraped just that there is quite a bit of silliness to the system. Both hockey and baseball are imo starting to see the flaws of having a system where players are tied up in restricted status for so long. 

In that scenario, one would hope that it may drive down the cost of UFAs, but there always seems to be a fair number of GMs who will overpay.

It is definitely an interesting thought for debate, personally I'm not sure which way it would go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, 420since1974 said:

In that scenario, one would hope that it may drive down the cost of UFAs, but there always seems to be a fair number of GMs who will overpay.

It is definitely an interesting thought for debate, personally I'm not sure which way it would go.

With UFA's its really up to the teams themselves to police themselves, with every bad contract signed in UFA there are multiple other GM's who are willing to pay similar and in some cases more than what a player signs for.  I would say it isn't even the cost but the term that is the issue, the decline in players today is almost comparable to the sudden decline in football players and there are really only a select few players that should be signed for 5 years or longer after gaining UFA status.  I think the expectations teams have and to an extent the overblown media hype around July 1, has helped get it carried away.  In baseball over a giving offseason there are generally half the teams than can realistically state that they have no shot of the postseason before free agency starts, in hockey over half the teams make the playoffs and the majority of non playoff teams believe they are close, leaving only a couple teams that are in more of a tank mode, those are what I feel are the biggest factor for the UFA madness.

Share this post


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

 

Yup because you can exceed the salary cap in the offseason. 

Maybe I'm being overly thick about this but how does that help anyone? Sign your players at what they want and hope to clear space before the season starts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2019 at 10:30 AM, The_People1 said:

 

Not sure how it will play out but since Nylander didn't lose a penny for sitting until December, that's incentive for sitting until December.

 

In terms of the Jets, that's two RFAs that if they don't sign will hamper team results and could cause them to miss the playoffs.  So, i think the Jets have urgency to get something done.  Marner can sit while Nylander plays in his spot with Tavares.  And Tkachuk... well, we have too many LWs that we could audition some of them with more minutes like Mangiapane and Jankowski on LW.

 

I think teams rally around it and then when players come back it actually hampers their groove. Guys get on a roll and then you move a guy that’s going down and it feels like a demotion. Even if they’re supposed to be professional they’re still human and it’s a knock on them. Then the guy who sat out comes in and it changes the whole dynamic of the team for a few months. I think it turns into a cancer for the year when they come back. 

 

Guys will play up their game but once the guy comes back and takes their place.... I think it is different than when it is an injury because they’re ready for them to come back, but when it is a hold out, guys expect the player coming back to perform and when they don’t... you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 420since1974 said:

In that scenario, one would hope that it may drive down the cost of UFAs, but there always seems to be a fair number of GMs who will overpay.

It is definitely an interesting thought for debate, personally I'm not sure which way it would go.

 

 

I think that there are GMs who don’t shop UFA. They may sign some but it’s the later signings that they’d do. 

 

I was excited to have Neal and his goals but if I knew he was anything like the way he was I wouldn’t have gone there. 

 

I don’t necessarily have a life but I kind of restrict my hockey to only watching Flames games so I barely know a lot about other team’s players other than ones that play the Flames. Usually only those that stand out. Plus when I haven’t downloaded podcasts or I am low on data i have to listen to Vancouver Canucks radio, so I hear about their players. 

Share this post


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

Maybe I'm being overly thick about this but how does that help anyone? Sign your players at what they want and hope to clear space before the season starts?

 

No, that is the point you don't just sign them for what you want you negotiate with them and if it requires it you wait them out like Treliving is doing with Tkachuk. It's about negotiating and negotiating tactics and it's why i don't have an issue with this as some due. 

 

My response was in regards to a point about needing to "fix" the cap or the structure when I don't think it's the cap that is the problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumored ask by Brock Boeser is $28-mil over 4-years.  Seems fair.  No one here thinks Tkachuk should get less than Boeser right?

Share this post


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

 

 

I think that there are GMs who don’t shop UFA. They may sign some but it’s the later signings that they’d do. 

 

I was excited to have Neal and his goals but if I knew he was anything like the way he was I wouldn’t have gone there. 

 

I don’t necessarily have a life but I kind of restrict my hockey to only watching Flames games so I barely know a lot about other team’s players other than ones that play the Flames. Usually only those that stand out. Plus when I haven’t downloaded podcasts or I am low on data i have to listen to Vancouver Canucks radio, so I hear about their players. 

 

I would classify you in the majority.

I may watch a bit more hockey through the week, but more than likely it's on the weekend.

HNIC for 2 games (if I care about the late game).

Hometown Hiockey for Sunday (if I care about either team).

 

The UFA signings are mostly a few teams involved.

We target one or two players, if we have money or there is a player we like.

Other GM's just remake their team in the summer.

EDM, for instance, has something like 9 UFA's and 4 RFA's next summer.

Their fans seem to think they will go from joke to contender because of this.

The reality is that they have to ice a full roster taking into account $21m for two players and RFA's like Nurse who were on a bridge contract.

$23m cap space to sign 13 players, and that assumes they don't have Puljujarvi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Rumored ask by Brock Boeser is $28-mil over 4-years.  Seems fair.  No one here thinks Tkachuk should get less than Boeser right?

 

4 years is the wrong legth contract for Tkachuk.

Takes him to UFA.

3 or 5 years or longer term.

5 years gets you closer to 8m

3 years, no idea - it doesn't make sense unless you think the player will regress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2019 at 10:31 AM, cross16 said:

I'm the complete opposite, i think the NHL should actually make offer sheets more attractive. Lower the cost in picks to send them over and create more competition and you'd likely see guys get signed sooner and perhaps even more player movement. I think the archaic old boys club that is the NHL and their owners is a big part of the reason this process is dragging out. Need to join modern times and create more deadlines if you want teams to act faster. I don't think having someone who knows nothing about hockey decide salary is a smart way to go. Arbitration tends to artificially drive up salaries

try this..   all players contracts negotiated and owned by the league.. Individual teams buy player contracts from the league

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2019 at 3:16 PM, GM_3300 said:

So you are saying if Tkachuk want 9.5M there is room for him ?

He can want whatever he likes.  I would not pay that.  I would have a tough time paying 7.5mm and prefer 6.75mm for 2-3 years.

Share this post


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

He can want whatever he likes.  I would not pay that.  I would have a tough time paying 7.5mm and prefer 6.75mm for 2-3 years.

Not sure he gets signed below 7M but it needs to get done so a good tone can be set for this team heading into a new season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Horsman1 said:

try this..   all players contracts negotiated and owned by the league.. Individual teams buy player contracts from the league

 

This is kind of too complicated with a league that spans two countries and players from worldwide.  There are tax implications and insurance issues.  Every state/province have their own contractor requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

This is kind of too complicated with a league that spans two countries and players from worldwide.  There are tax implications and insurance issues.  Every state/province have their own contractor requirements.

well that shoots that down.. lol and yet.... all player contracts are in U.S. dollars.. sooo .. seems to me.. there are ways around these issues you mention

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Horsman1 said:

well that shoots that down.. lol and yet.... all player contracts are in U.S. dollars.. sooo .. seems to me.. there are ways around these issues you mention

 

 

I think this system can work for the XFL where franchises are all in USA and all its players are American.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How much of it does Meehan get?

 

I get the arguement the NHL makes about costs.

I get the arguement players make that they are the actual draw.

 

I don't get the arguement for agents.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...