cross16

Agreed. IMO it's the biggest reason why no Canadian team has won the cup since 93. Canadian owners and teams have far less patience, IMO, than most US teams.

Have they though? Have they really been more successful than Calgary in getting players to play there? I'm not seeing that to be the case. I think Canadian teams will always have challenges retaining talent. Calgary will always have problem (travel, weather etc) but are certainly falling behind in terms of facilities and I think that matters. I mean yes having an elite talent will always help but it hasn't exactly moved the needle in Edmonton.

I'm with Pat on this. More you look at this move the more it makes more sense this is about trade and not about getting a deal done. it really doesn't make sense to me that they are at this point if Tkachuk really wanted to be here. This is all based on gut feel and no insider info so perhaps i'm wrong but i'm expecting to see Tkachuk traded this month.

I mean this isn't a new problem. Chris Drury, Adam Fox, Tim Erixon all wanted out and that stretch's back over sometime. This may feel like a new problem but i'm not really sure it is, nor do I think it's a problem that only the Flames face. Outside of Toronto this happens pretty regularly to all Canadian teams. It's pretty well known that a lot of US players prefer playing close to home rather than play in Canada so I think a lot of this is outside the Flames control. I think the arena and the facilities are a major factor and the Flames really need to figure that out but outside of that i'm skeptical there is an organizational problem here that is leading to this.

This can be true in practice but it make it harder. I am of the belief that in order to win a cup you need elite/star talent above all else. It is very difficult, and becoming even more so, to find that type of talent outside of the lottery in the draft.

Normally if arbitration has been elected it follows the player but that's in player elected arbitration. I would assume it's the same but i'm not 100% sure. it would make sense to me it follows though otherwise the player gets screwed. You are correct. Because it's in the 2nd window the have to offer him at 100% of his previous year salary which is 9 Mill.

And to be fair I have no problem with your logic or rationale so I don't intend to sound critical or that i'm insulting. I have time for the argument because I do get the why behind it for most people but mostly I just don't believe this ownership group is going to ok that and in fairness to them most ownership groups wouldn't either. If I had a choice I'd probably go with a tear down rebuild but at the same time I just acknowledge their are arguments on both sides.

Not really as it's really no different than him just taking his qualifying offer which i'm almost certain he would have done this week had they not got a longer term deal.

It's a pretty huge difference and this is coming from someone who advocated hard for a rebuild in that era. Once they traded Phaneuf and got no young impact players/prospects back in the deal I was out but even still it's not hard to see the difference. Post Phaneuf trade here are the Flames who were under the age of 29 at the end of 09/10: Rene Bourque, Curtis Glencross, Nigel Dawes, Gio, JBow, Moss, Stajan, Ian White, Backs, Adam Pardy Fredrik Sjostrom, Chris Higgins. That is it. 1 top 6 forward 2 top 4 dman (1 of whom was a terrible fit with the coach) and the rest depth. In the system at the time was the likes of Bouma, Brodie, Baertschi, Irving, Nemisz, Hanowski, Tyler Wotherspoon etc. Compare that to now: Tkachuk, Lindholm, Mangiapange, Dube, Hanifin, Andersson, Zadorov, Kylington. I mean this alone is more impressive that what they were working with in 09/10 but then consider the prospects: Valimaki, Connor Mackey, AHL Rookie of the year, AHL goalie of the year, Rory Kerins, Connor Zary, Phillips, Ruzicka. It really is night and day. Now I get it that people are looking at the Flames without Gaudreau and seeing a bleak future in terms of winning a cup. I get it and it's a fair argument and if your angle is cup or bust and you want to pull it all apart that is fair, there is an argument to be made and heard there. I don't think it's going to happen so i'm not sure there is value in putting it in every thread but I get the argument behind it. But I also think we need to see the other side to this. When you look at that core, it's age, it's contract situation, and the prospects coming it's not hard to see a competitive team there. Sure it's likely a team that will nip into the playoffs, maybe win a round or 2 here and there but it's a competitive team and who knows what can happen. Maybe you get lucky and a prospect like Kerins winds up a Point, maybe a FA hits the market or a trade potential. Yes i get that relies on luck, but so does pulling your team apart and tanking and I think we can and should acknowledge there are pros and cons to both sides and to both sides. That's where this is completely different for me. At the end of the Iginla era there was no plan you could show that had the Flames being competitive. This go around I think that's very different. Yes some of this analysis changes if Tkachuk isn't signed but Tkachuk isn't going to leave for nothing so i'm not sure it changes it drastically. So i'm not sure what "reality" there is to accept. Accept that this core won't win a cup? OK but what guarantees do you have the next one will?

Correct. Tkachuk can only receive a 1 year award in arbitration because he is 1 year away from UFA. it's not likely relevant anyway as it's the party who did not elect arbitration that gets to pick the term. Tkachuk wouldn't likely take a 2 year award even if it were an option, which it isn't.

ya it's a small leverage gain at no risk for the Flames so it makes sense. I'm certainly not trying to sell this as a game changing move as it's more procedural than anything but I do think it made sense for the Flames to do.

No restrictions on trading a player post arbitration. That is offer sheets you are thinking of.

That was likely going to happen anyway. I think it's highly unlikely that Tkachuk would not sign his qualifying offer so had the Flames NOT elected for arbitration they likely wouldn't have known that by Friday. Tkachuk holding out was not a likely outcome here. The leverage play here for the Flames is it takes his qualifying offer off the table and grants them more time to work on an extension or trade without the fear of Tkachuk's camp calling them up and taking the qualifying offer.

Yup. Again the fear of an offer sheet doesn't make any sense. The Flames no have reason to fear an offer sheet IMO and I actually don't think the Tkachuk camp would pursue one. Not as much to gain as people think.

Ya I don't think so. It's very obvious IMO. And even if it weren't there is a difference between tanking and pulling your team apart. Tanking is common but pulling your team apart in order to drive it to the bottom basically doesn't happen. I think the closest you'll find is the Florida Marlins of the 90s and economics were a huge factor there. What is being suggested here isn't to tank, it's to pull the team apart. Not saying there isn't an argument for it just that it's a bigger leap than I think most suggest.

This won't change the result No but it is a small gain in leverage from the Flames because it removes the chance that Tkachuk took his qualifying offer this week. A qualifying offer is a contract offer so all Tkachuk would have had to do is sign it and he's locked in for 1 year and UFA next year, no notice to the Flames or anything. Now that is off the table. But agreed, he very much still has the upper hand but the Flames did take a card out of his deck.

Agreed. If an offer sheet was coming for Tkachuk it would have been presented by now IMO. With arbitration rights any team would know this was possible and if you are offering someone 10 mill you'd want to on your books right away, not wait until deep in the offseason IMO.

The arbitration award will only be 1 year. Arbitrators cannot give 2 year deals to players 1 year away from UFA

I don't think it was the offer sheet they feared. I think it was that at any point in time Tkachuk could just call them, take the QO and go to UFA. He had a lot of leverage. now he can't do that so the Flames gain a small part of leverage back and also extend the deadline.

I'm not sure what you mean by arbitration period. What this does is essentially remove the qualifying offer from the equation. Flames still retain his rights but Tkachuk can no longer just phone the Flames up and say " ok I'm taking my QO". Between now and the hearing, which we won't hear about for probably 10 days or more, Tkachuk can't take his QO and cannot receive an offer sheet but can continue to negotiate with the Flames. once you go to arbitration and the arbitrators makes their ruling that is a binding contract and because he would be under contract an offer sheet would not be an option.

If Tkachuk's agents were smart (and they are) this is exactly what they should be doing. The optimism side of this, is if they are electing to extend the deadline and potentially cost themselves money (Tkachuk will get at least 9 or more in arbitration now) you would assume there is mutual interest on some kind of extension. The pessimistic side is it's not great that at this point they are not close enough on a long term deal that they need to push this deadline. I'm not sure they were worried about an offer sheet, this to me is to remove the chance of Tkachuk just taking his qualifying offer without the Flames knowing.

Flames have elected to take Tkachuk to arbitration, which is interesting. it extends the deadline and gives them a bit more leverage and time.

I know, which is part of the reason it's not likely going to happen. Doesn't really happen in pro sports and it's not hard to see why the owners would not want to.

Monahan yes but not sure Gaudreau. Either way I agree 6X6 is a no brainer.

This is true of every rebuild.