What Is Best For Matthew Tkachuk

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, bosn111 said:

I think BT has to do something a little different to get Tkachuk signed. It might not be a popular method, but might be more affective. 

 

Make him an initial lowball offer. Use whatever excuse you want being stats, history, limited career, line played on etc, and use a number starting in the 6 - 6.5 range with term that he will still be RFA when contract finishes so 3 years. You stay open to negotiations but use the idea that in 3 more years, the cap goes up, Johnny and Gio's contracts will be up and therefore re-negotiating will likely see a solid pay increase for Chucky with significant term as the cap is likely to have also risen a bit more by then.

 

Once the offer is made, you go out and sign Rittich, Mangiapane, Bennett and a goalie. This leaves only 1 space open on the team without any trades or buyouts and so if Tkachuk really wants to be a Flame, he realizes it and maybe takes the hometown discount with the understanding that his next contract will be better.

 

If an offer sheet comes in over 8.455, I would not match it and instead take 2 1sts a 2nd and a 3rd pick plus cap space. 

 

Could also use the cap space to grab someone like a Timo Meier from SJ to replace him on the left side (Similar stats, make him similar offer as he is RFA as well). 

 

Space would also allow to trade for RFA's Kapanen or Labanc (Both RW).

 

Basically if you can get Meier + (Kapanen or Labanc) for 10 mil combined or less then I would do that over Tkachuk for 8.5 + as that is better cap and asset management. Especially if to get those players you are moving out cap in the form of Brodie, Stone, Frolik and / or Neal etc.

I myself was actually thinking along the lines of a a 3 year bridge , 6.9 same as Johnny , even give him a full NMC just to show we're committed to him . that rides to the end of the Johnny era window , take your chances in 3 years, and at that point he will definitely be the guy . Sell him on the window to win 

[bosn111]

If the anticipation is that he should be signing in the 7.5 range, and you make the first offer of 6.5 (only a 1 mil difference) that is not a significant low ball. It's not like I suggested 3 mil. There are always negotiations. It is possible that the agent starts in the 9-10 range. Is that going to make the Flames simply walk? It's called negotiating. 6.5 per season would make him the 3rd highest player on the team behind only Gaudreau (3 time all star, top scorer) and Giordano (Captain, Top D on the team and this years top D in the league). It is a very valid contract offer to make based on the rest of the team. I'm not saying that is where the contract will end up due to comparables in the league, but it is a tactic that could be used. As I said, if another team wants to pay him north of 8.5, I take the compensation and walk. You can sign 2 players or more for about that amount who will replace his output easily. 34 / 43 / 77 / +14 for Tkachuk, Meier 30 / 36 / 66 / +9 and Kapanen 20 / 24 / 44 / +12 =  50 / 60 / 110 / +23. While both Meier and Kapanen combined would be more than Tkachuk alone, you are getting 2 pieces who would likely combine for more.

 

You are also giving him the shorter deal so that the next deal, when made, he will have more stats to negotiate with, likely more outrageous contracts will have been signed and there will be a higher cap so he will likely negotiate a higher salary. 6.5 x 3 works out to 19.5 if he the re-negotiates for 10 x 5 that becomes 69.5. Even if he signed for 8 x 8 now, then it only works out to 64 mil, so taking a lower pay now could easily work in his favour over the same 8 years. 

[LouCifer]

8 hours ago, bosn111 said:

I think BT has to do something a little different to get Tkachuk signed. It might not be a popular method, but might be more affective. 

 

Make him an initial lowball offer. Use whatever excuse you want being stats, history, limited career, line played on etc, and use a number starting in the 6 - 6.5 range with term that he will still be RFA when contract finishes so 3 years. You stay open to negotiations but use the idea that in 3 more years, the cap goes up, Johnny and Gio's contracts will be up and therefore re-negotiating will likely see a solid pay increase for Chucky with significant term as the cap is likely to have also risen a bit more by then.

 

Once the offer is made, you go out and sign Rittich, Mangiapane, Bennett and a goalie. This leaves only 1 space open on the team without any trades or buyouts and so if Tkachuk really wants to be a Flame, he realizes it and maybe takes the hometown discount with the understanding that his next contract will be better.

 

If an offer sheet comes in over 8.455, I would not match it and instead take 2 1sts a 2nd and a 3rd pick plus cap space. 

 

Could also use the cap space to grab someone like a Timo Meier from SJ to replace him on the left side (Similar stats, make him similar offer as he is RFA as well). 

 

Space would also allow to trade for RFA's Kapanen or Labanc (Both RW).

 

Basically if you can get Meier + (Kapanen or Labanc) for 10 mil combined or less then I would do that over Tkachuk for 8.5 + as that is better cap and asset management. Especially if to get those players you are moving out cap in the form of Brodie, Stone, Frolik and / or Neal etc.

 

Are you in my head or something? That’s 2 posts in a row that could’ve been written by me, verbatim. 

[CheersMan]

8 hours ago, bosn111 said:

I think BT has to do something a little different to get Tkachuk signed. It might not be a popular method, but might be more affective. 

 

Make him an initial lowball offer. Use whatever excuse you want being stats, history, limited career, line played on etc, and use a number starting in the 6 - 6.5 range with term that he will still be RFA when contract finishes so 3 years. You stay open to negotiations but use the idea that in 3 more years, the cap goes up, Johnny and Gio's contracts will be up and therefore re-negotiating will likely see a solid pay increase for Chucky with significant term as the cap is likely to have also risen a bit more by then.

 

Once the offer is made, you go out and sign Rittich, Mangiapane, Bennett and a goalie. This leaves only 1 space open on the team without any trades or buyouts and so if Tkachuk really wants to be a Flame, he realizes it and maybe takes the hometown discount with the understanding that his next contract will be better.

 

If an offer sheet comes in over 8.455, I would not match it and instead take 2 1sts a 2nd and a 3rd pick plus cap space. 

 

Could also use the cap space to grab someone like a Timo Meier from SJ to replace him on the left side (Similar stats, make him similar offer as he is RFA as well). 

 

Space would also allow to trade for RFA's Kapanen or Labanc (Both RW).

 

Basically if you can get Meier + (Kapanen or Labanc) for 10 mil combined or less then I would do that over Tkachuk for 8.5 + as that is better cap and asset management. Especially if to get those players you are moving out cap in the form of Brodie, Stone, Frolik and / or Neal etc.

Well, that is one sure way of getting rid of MT for a lesser compensation package. Late 1st’s or 2nd’s or 3rd’s don’t do it. Sure you might hit the lottery on a young, late round draftee but not likely.  Plus you want to show the other 30 team vultures what your last dollar is. I think there has to be a better way of going about negotiations.

[cross16]

Any tactic that could potentially result in losing Tkachuk for only the RFA draft pick compensation is an all time terrible idea that should not be entertained for more than 2 seconds. 

 

I do not understand the hesitation to pay Tkachuk. earned it as much as any Flame the last 10 years imo. 

[cccsberg]

41 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Any tactic that could potentially result in losing Tkachuk for only the RFA draft pick compensation is an all time terrible idea that should not be entertained for more than 2 seconds. 

 

I do not understand the hesitation to pay Tkachuk. earned it as much as any Flame the last 10 years imo. 

We may have to lead the way, a la St Louis.  No superstar salaries, what is best for the team?  If you can get two players/more production/less dollars.... you have to give it serious consideration.  Team comes first.

[rickross]

I think Tkachuk comes in at a more reasonable price than we think. Gio winning the Norris could favor BT when it comes to negotiating value as a comparable. Hopefully the Marner deal isn’t too fat to where BT is handcuffed by the market it creates 

[LouCifer]

10 hours ago, CheersMan said:

Well, that is one sure way of getting rid of MT for a lesser compensation package. Late 1st’s or 2nd’s or 3rd’s don’t do it. Sure you might hit the lottery on a young, late round draftee but not likely.  Plus you want to show the other 30 team vultures what your last dollar is. I think there has to be a better way of going about negotiations.

 

Let me try to clarify. Essentially what bosn was suggesting was:

 

Matthew Tkachuk

for

2 firsts, 1 second, 1 third, plus Timo Meier and one of Lebanc or Kapanen. 

 

Sure, depending on the $ amount for Meier and one of Lebanc/Kapanen, some our own own picks go the other way to SJ... but overall, if this is even a remote possibility, it has to be considered by BT. I love Tkachuk, don’t get me wrong. This is maybe one scenario where I’d be willing to give him up. 

 

Alternately, I’m very high on Lebanc. I think he’s muffled in SJ with everyone that plays ahead of him. I think he’s going to be a breakout player with more opportunity. He was a center in the OHL to Mangiapane. There’s already chemistry there and I really want to see those two reunited with Ras on the backend. 

 

BT really needs to get Brodie and Stone off the books, and to a lesser priority Neal (I believe Neal will have a better season this year)

[LouCifer]

8 hours ago, rickross said:

I think Tkachuk comes in at a more reasonable price than we think. Gio winning the Norris could favor BT when it comes to negotiating value as a comparable. Hopefully the Marner deal isn’t too fat to where BT is handcuffed by the market it creates 

 

I agree. BT usually hits it out of the park when it comes to negotiations. And I know whatever Tkachuk comes in at, he had to earn it from our GM. 

[GM_3300]

10 hours ago, cross16 said:

Any tactic that could potentially result in losing Tkachuk for only the RFA draft pick compensation is an all time terrible idea that should not be entertained for more than 2 seconds. 

 

I do not understand the hesitation to pay Tkachuk. earned it as much as any Flame the last 10 years imo. 

What would you pay him ?

[cross16]

10 hours ago, cccsberg said:

We may have to lead the way, a la St Louis.  No superstar salaries, what is best for the team?  If you can get two players/more production/less dollars.... you have to give it serious consideration.  Team comes first.

 

St Louis re set the market with the Vlad Tarasenko contract at 7.5million. worth 10% of the cap which would equal over 8 million salary for Tkachuk. They also made Pietrangelo one of the highest paid dman in the league when they re signed his deal. St Louis did pay their players for production. They won more because they draft and develop so well (half a dozen members of the team on ELC) and they found lightning in a bottle with a goalie. Not exactly a model that is probable to replicate. 

 

If you want to discuss the merits of trading Tkachuk for less production for more dollars idea, sure that has merit but you don't accomplish that by letting him walk for picks and then hoping that a team deals you other assets that they probably won't. 

[cross16]

53 minutes ago, GM_3300 said:

What would you pay him ?

 

8.5 Mill AAV or less for whatever term you get him for (should be at lest 5 years).

 

Ultimately i think Tkachuk will sign a 5, maybe 6, year deal in the 8-8.5mill AVV range. That's my gut feel. 

[The_People1]

Sounds like the league's salary cap limit will be suppressed for two years.  Will any player take a 2 year term in a gamble to score a massive raise in 2 years?

 

Will Tkachuk sign for $7-mil x 2-years?  And then come back in 2 years where the cap is $90-mil+ and ask for $11x8-years?

[travel_dude]

23 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Sounds like the league's salary cap limit will be suppressed for two years.  Will any player take a 2 year term in a gamble to score a massive raise in 2 years?

 

Will Tkachuk sign for $7-mil x 2-years?  And then come back in 2 years where the cap is $90-mil+ and ask for $11x8-years?

 

In two years there could be a stoppage, mostly due to the GM's spending like drunk sailors.

I think the smart players will try to get the most for the longest without messing up too many UFA years.

4 years takes MT to UFA.

5-6 buys a bit for the team, but allows the ask to go up.

At the end, his actual salary has to be enough that he can get a raise and make at least as much as his best year to that point.

To say it another way....

 

Year     AAV     bonus    Salary   Total

19/20   8          1.0         5           6.0

20/21   8          2.0         5           7.0

21/22   8          8.0         1           9.0

22/23   8          2.0         7           9.0     

23/24   8          1.0         8           9.0    

 

The above makes him less likely to be traded in the last years, and gives him an ending salary of 9m.  He gets a big bonus in the potential lockout year.  This comes at the cost of extra money.  8x5 is probably reasonable, which is higher % of cap than Johnny was.  It's going to be tough to keep that salary lower.

[rickross]

I’ll go out on a limb and say Tkachuk signs between $7.25-7.75M, 5-6 yrs deal. Fingers crossed of course. He’s not our highest scoring forward but he’s definitely among our best, his intangibles are what you’re paying for...however perhaps BT really lays into the “But, can u do it again?” negotiating tactic and ends up with a more conservative cap hit...but shorter term

[Carty]

23 hours ago, cross16 said:

Any tactic that could potentially result in losing Tkachuk for only the RFA draft pick compensation is an all time terrible idea that should not be entertained for more than 2 seconds. 

 

I do not understand the hesitation to pay Tkachuk. earned it as much as any Flame the last 10 years imo. 

 

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

St Louis re set the market with the Vlad Tarasenko contract at 7.5million. worth 10% of the cap which would equal over 8 million salary for Tkachuk. They also made Pietrangelo one of the highest paid dman in the league when they re signed his deal. St Louis did pay their players for production. They won more because they draft and develop so well (half a dozen members of the team on ELC) and they found lightning in a bottle with a goalie. Not exactly a model that is probable to replicate. 

 

If you want to discuss the merits of trading Tkachuk for less production for more dollars idea, sure that has merit but you don't accomplish that by letting him walk for picks and then hoping that a team deals you other assets that they probably won't. 

 

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

8.5 Mill AAV or less for whatever term you get him for (should be at lest 5 years).

 

Ultimately i think Tkachuk will sign a 5, maybe 6, year deal in the 8-8.5mill AVV range. That's my gut feel. 

 

   That's 3 posts in a row that I agree with...   I may have to consider the possibility that I have entered the twilight zone...

 

I think you are pretty close on dollars and term as well...   Back at the beginning of February Tkachuk made a few comments about the Mathew's deal saying that it set a new bar for RFA's this year, and that a few guys that change the money, whether higher or lower,etc...   Tkachuk specifically mentioned the 5 year term of Mathew's deal, and once again said that it definitely set the bar for this year...

 

I agree with your guess of a 5 or 6 years range for term, and between $8 - $8.5 mil a year cross.. My guess is a 5 year deal, and I think that it just might take $8,5 to get it done...   If the Flames, and the rest of us, are lucky... the term might be extended as a concession for meeting the high dollar ask...

[CheersMan]

MT might get $7 AAV on a 5 year deal.

BT will not be giving out a 6 yr deal as that would take him directly to UFA I believe.

I'm thinking the only way he gets $8 AAV is on an 8 yr deal. 

 

8 yrs, $64M, 8 AAV

7yrs, $53M, 7.6 AAV

5yrs, $35M, 7 AAV

[Thebrewcrew]

1 hour ago, CheersMan said:

MT might get $7 AAV on a 5 year deal.

BT will not be giving out a 6 yr deal as that would take him directly to UFA I believe.

I'm thinking the only way he gets $8 AAV is on an 8 yr deal. 

 

8 yrs, $64M, 8 AAV

7yrs, $53M, 7.6 AAV

5yrs, $35M, 7 AAV

4 years takes him right to UFA, it’s gonna be either a 3 year deal or 6. 

 

3 Gio and Johnny are up at that time, best case scenario you divvy up the Gio contract amongst Johnny and Tkachuk. If 13 leaves then there’s plenty of money to pay Tkachuk.

 

5 years, you have Hanifin and Lindholm up. I’d imagine both guys will continue to trend upwards so I think BT would push for 6 as there are no current roster players up at that point

[CheersMan]

8 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

4 years takes him right to UFA, it’s gonna be either a 3 year deal or 6. 

 

3 Gio and Johnny are up at that time, best case scenario you divvy up the Gio contract amongst Johnny and Tkachuk. If 13 leaves then there’s plenty of money to pay Tkachuk.

 

5 years, you have Hanifin and Lindholm up. I’d imagine both guys will continue to trend upwards so I think BT would push for 6 as there are no current roster players up at that point

Thank you for the clarification, I should of looked it up. Players become UFA's after 7 years service or 27 yrs of age. MT could become a UFA after 4 more years. I will add in a 6 yr deal option as well.

 

6yrs, $43M, 7.3 AAV

[The_People1]

 

 

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.  

[Thebrewcrew]

4 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.  

Even if Tkachuk signs for 5 years, I think it’s more-so maximizing the number of pay-days he gets in his career than he wants to leave Calgary ASAP 

[The_People1]

39 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Even if Tkachuk signs for 5 years, I think it’s more-so maximizing the number of pay-days he gets in his career than he wants to leave Calgary ASAP 

 

Oh absolutely.  That said, if he continues without legit first line linemates, then maybe he wants to leave.  My personal thoughts.  We need to get him a Nylander or Aho.  

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Oh absolutely.  That said, if he continues without legit first line linemates, then maybe he wants to leave.  My personal thoughts.  We need to get him a Nylander or Aho.  

 

If BT and him talked and that was the message, then he needs to keep the salary down to allow that to happen.

 

[cross16]

FWIW.. Friedman weighed in and said his understanding is Tkachuk loves Calgary. 

[travel_dude]

37 minutes ago, cross16 said:

FWIW.. Friedman weighed in and said his understanding is Tkachuk loves Calgary. 

 

I don't think there is any issue with the player, just BT trying to sign him to a deal that doesn;t sink us.

What bothers me is we don;t save enough cap to pay the players we are building with.

We could have signed JH longer term, but the Gio cap killed that.

Monahan slightly longer, but not max term.

BT is smart to keep the costs down on the big pieces, but not so much in the future.

 

So, we are here debating the value of Tkachuk.

Save a few pennies so we can go sign a re-tread backup.

Too many guys getting paid for 4th line contributions.

You can't afford 4.5m for Frolik if he's playing 4th line.

You can't afford both Neal and Bennett playing 3rd line minutes.

Stone should not even be a consideration for next year.

We need to choose between Gio, Hanifin, Hamonic and Brodie,

Can;t keep them all.