What Is Best For Matthew Tkachuk

[GM_3300]

27 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Pretty difficult to state this without knowing each sides position in talks.

 

I've heard no one credible state that the Flames mandated they stay under the Gio cap, it's just pure speculation IMO. 

It's BS people adopted. Gaudreau got what was fair for him at the time. McDavid ad Drasaitl contracts changed the salary landscape in a huge way. Personally I would be using the next 2 season to make a push for a SC and start making changes. Gaudreau would be one player I would look at moving with good value in return.

[conundrumed]

7 minutes ago, GM_3300 said:

It's BS people adopted. Gaudreau got what was fair for him at the time. McDavid ad Drasaitl contracts changed the salary landscape in a huge way. Personally I would be using the next 2 season to make a push for a SC and start making changes. Gaudreau would be one player I would look at moving with good value in return.

That's a really tough call if his numbers keep rising, if he's a 40G/70A player, are you really going to get the value in trading that?

People pay to see Johnny. He puts fans on the edge of their seats. If he stays at last years level, I have no idea how you consider trading him.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Pretty difficult to state this without knowing each sides position in talks.

 

I've heard no one credible state that the Flames mandated they stay under the Gio cap, it's just pure speculation IMO. 

 

I don't know about the Gio cap being a thing or 100% coincidence.

What I do know was at the time JH's agent was looking for mid 7's on a longer term.

Supposedly, JH caved and told his agent to get it done.

 

[GM_3300]

25 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

That's a really tough call if his numbers keep rising, if he's a 40G/70A player, are you really going to get the value in trading that?

People pay to see Johnny. He puts fans on the edge of their seats. If he stays at last years level, I have no idea how you consider trading him.

Start of a new player cycle just like the Neuwyndyk for Iginla type of move.

[travel_dude]

37 minutes ago, GM_3300 said:

It's BS people adopted. Gaudreau got what was fair for him at the time. McDavid ad Drasaitl contracts changed the salary landscape in a huge way. Personally I would be using the next 2 season to make a push for a SC and start making changes. Gaudreau would be one player I would look at moving with good value in return.

 

Is it?  

9.5% of the cap for the most valuable Flames player at the time.

Playoff results not withstanding, he's the highest scoring Flames player since his rookie season (2nd on the team that year).

McDavid's salary was the biggest deal since what, Crosby?

Draisaitl was no more than what big guns were getting, he just had less results.

ROR, Tarasenko, Benn, etc were getting large contracts.  Just to name a few.

 

You consider trading Gaudreau if he is not willing to sign an extension, but you better be ready to go all in.

Magic beans will not do it.

Not a Seguin return.

 

[conundrumed]

6 minutes ago, GM_3300 said:

Start of a new player cycle just like the Neuwyndyk for Iginla type of move.

But you have to admit, you're cherry-picking on one trade.

If Gaudreau is putting up 100 pts and helping Mony put up 40 goals, how do you reinvent that?

My guess is you don't.

 

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

IMO, this is an cop out that seems to shift the blame to the player which i think is incorrect. Big contracts are not IMO, what leads to teams downfalls, their inability to draft, develop and the old school desire of contending teams believe they need to move all their picks/prospects is what does it in. Depth suffers when you can't draft but if you can draft or find under valued players you will be fine. That's an organization problem not a player one which is another reason i don't like to call players greedy. 

 

I also thikn that more cap space has not exactly proven to be the asset people think it is as most GMs wind up spending it in FA and overpaying. 

 

 

I agree, it’s a GM thing, and a bit of overpriced signings. 

[GM_3300]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

But you have to admit, you're cherry-picking on one trade.

If Gaudreau is putting up 100 pts and helping Mony put up 40 goals, how do you reinvent that?

My guess is you don't.

 

Hockey teams make the same mistake of falling in love with players for to long and more times than not fail to realize it. Look at LAK, pitiful. Time will tell.

[GM_3300]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Is it?  

9.5% of the cap for the most valuable Flames player at the time.

Playoff results not withstanding, he's the highest scoring Flames player since his rookie season (2nd on the team that year).

McDavid's salary was the biggest deal since what, Crosby?

Draisaitl was no more than what big guns were getting, he just had less results.

ROR, Tarasenko, Benn, etc were getting large contracts.  Just to name a few.

 

You consider trading Gaudreau if he is not willing to sign an extension, but you better be ready to go all in.

Magic beans will not do it.

Not a Seguin return.

 

Yep just made up BS

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

But you have to admit, you're cherry-picking on one trade.

If Gaudreau is putting up 100 pts and helping Mony put up 40 goals, how do you reinvent that?

My guess is you don't.

 

 

 

I don’t know if it is necessarily cherry picking. The Flames have been historically horrible at making those trades. 

 

I, for some reason, have more faith in BT making the deal. I don’t know if the Flames will need another rebuild once their contracts are up. I feel BT has done a bad job of trading away picks. They’ve found decent players throughout the rounds, but not game breakers. That ability is reserved in the first round and rare for later ones. Gaudreau and others are an anomaly.

[travel_dude]

11 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I don’t know if it is necessarily cherry picking. The Flames have been historically horrible at making those trades. 

 

I, for some reason, have more faith in BT making the deal. I don’t know if the Flames will need another rebuild once their contracts are up. I feel BT has done a bad job of trading away picks. They’ve found decent players throughout the rounds, but not game breakers. That ability is reserved in the first round and rare for later ones. Gaudreau and others are an anomaly.

 

I haven't seen any BT trades that are one-sided for the Flames.

The best one to date is Ferland and Hamilton (+ Fox).

Even that could be considered a high payment for a lesser D and a better/younger forward.

Or perhaps the one to get Dougie initially.

Russell for basically Dube.

 

 

Most of the other trades are head-scratchers.

Kulak for a scrub.

Granlund for a scrub.

Neal for Lucic.

2nd for Lazar.

Multiple goalie trades (this for Elliott, that for Smith).

[robrob74]

19 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I haven't seen any BT trades that are one-sided for the Flames.

The best one to date is Ferland and Hamilton (+ Fox).

Even that could be considered a high payment for a lesser D and a better/younger forward.

Or perhaps the one to get Dougie initially.

Russell for basically Dube.

 

 

Most of the other trades are head-scratchers.

Kulak for a scrub.

Granlund for a scrub.

Neal for Lucic.

2nd for Lazar.

Multiple goalie trades (this for Elliott, that for Smith).

 

Yeah. That makes me less comfortable with BT. Has he been better than past GMs? Maybe, but how has he really done? Perhaps inheriting the roster and building around it is part of the deals he had to make to build a competitive team. 

[travel_dude]

50 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Yeah. That makes me less comfortable with BT. Has he been better than past GMs? Maybe, but how has he really done? Perhaps inheriting the roster and building around it is part of the deals he had to make to build a competitive team. 

 

I think he has been okay.

Bester than Feaster and Sutter, but that isn;t saying much.

Better than Chia.

Again, low bar.

 

He's smart when it comes to cap management, but needs to be because he makes dumb signings.

I would have preferred to trade Neal for a bag of pucks and pay Ferland 4-5m over trading for Lucic.

Dougie was a good trade, but we had to give 3 picks for him, only to turn around and deal him with another player for two players.

Dougie (1st + 2x2nds) + Ferland + rights to Fox for Hanifin and Lindholm.

 

I liked the Monahan deals and the ones for other RFA's (Gaudreau, Hanfin, Lindholm, Backlund, etc) since he got them for less than other teams were paying.

I don;t necessarily agree with the decisions about other RFA's, but I get them.

[redfire11]

Was Just listening to 960 and they were speculating that the salary cap would stay the same for the next 2 and possibly 3 years even after the tv deal goes through. This would put quite a few teams into cap hell. Teams with space will dominate similar to year 1 of vegas. Colorado, Ottawa, Columbus.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, redfire11 said:

Was Just listening to 960 and they were speculating that the salary cap would stay the same for the next 2 and possibly 3 years even after the tv deal goes through. This would put quite a few teams into cap hell. Teams with space will dominate similar to year 1 of vegas. Colorado, Ottawa, Columbus.

 

Love it.  This will burn teams who bet on the cap to increment $5-mil per year.  Like the Oilers who thought Draisaitl would be a great deal in 6 years.

[redfire11]

Boeser 3 years 5.8m

Another benchmark for Tkachuk negotiations this one lower.

[ABC923]

2 hours ago, redfire11 said:

Boeser 3 years 5.8m

Another benchmark for Tkachuk negotiations this one lower.

Unfortunately Boeser doesn’t help us much.  He’s 1 year older, and put up about 20 fewer points last season.  A comparable 3 year deal for Tkachuk likely starts with an 8 if he’s used as a comparable.  Better to go 6x9 at that point.

[GM_3300]

19 hours ago, conundrumed said:

That's a really tough call if his numbers keep rising, if he's a 40G/70A player, are you really going to get the value in trading that?

People pay to see Johnny. He puts fans on the edge of their seats. If he stays at last years level, I have no idea how you consider trading him.

I guess we will see if he is still pulling off those numbers in a few years. Enjoy him for now.

[GM_3300]

9 hours ago, ABC923 said:

Unfortunately Boeser doesn’t help us much.  He’s 1 year older, and put up about 20 fewer points last season.  A comparable 3 year deal for Tkachuk likely starts with an 8 if he’s used as a comparable.  Better to go 6x9 at that point.

Right now he fits in at 7M given the situation here.

[cccsberg]

10 hours ago, ABC923 said:

Unfortunately Boeser doesn’t help us much.  He’s 1 year older, and put up about 20 fewer points last season.  A comparable 3 year deal for Tkachuk likely starts with an 8 if he’s used as a comparable.  Better to go 6x9 at that point.

Boeser was injured and missed quite a few games.  He’s closer to Tkachuk than the raw numbers indicate.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cccsberg said:

Boeser was injured and missed quite a few games.  He’s closer to Tkachuk than the raw numbers indicate.

 

You can't really compare the two players equally.

Tkachuk has three years NHL experience and Boeser two.

224 games versus 140.

 

VAN used that to lower the AAV, by paying only $4m in year 1.

 

[Carty]

I hope that I'm wrong, and Tkachuk is signed to a long term deal, but there is a pretty good chance he could be signed to a bridge deal that is structured similar to those that McAvoy, Werenski or Boeser signed to keep the AAV down...   While I would like to see Tkachuk locked in with term, it might not be a bad path to take with the increasing speculation of the cap remaining closer to where it is now for the next couple of seasons...

 

McAvoy - $3.7, $3.7 and $7.3 mil - AAV $4.9 mil

 

Werenski - $4, $4 and $7 mil - AAV $5 mil

 

Boeser - $4, $6.125 and $7.5 mil - AAV $5.875 mil

 

The incentive for the teams to go with this structure is a lower AAV...   The incentive for the players is the higher salary in the last year to set up their next contract...

 

If this happens, it will likely be a little higher than Boesers, but the AAV would be more manageable for the Flames at a time when losing what Brodie or Frolik bring to the team would not be ideal...   The gamble of replacing what they each bring to the team with someone already under contract could be too risky, as it is a little soon for that...   It might be better to wait and see how Valimaki is healing up before the trade deadline and how some of our younger forwards and defensemen are progressing that might be able to fill the holes before creating them...

 

Maybe a trade still happens for either Frolike or Brodie, but with the current overall situation in the league with so many teams close to the cap, I have to question what value the Flames could get back in a trade that is made to open up cap space, that wouldn't hurt the team for this season...

[GM_3300]

56 minutes ago, Carty said:

I hope that I'm wrong, and Tkachuk is signed to a long term deal, but there is a pretty good chance he could be signed to a bridge deal that is structured similar to those that McAvoy, Werenski or Boeser signed to keep the AAV down...   While I would like to see Tkachuk locked in with term, it might not be a bad path to take with the increasing speculation of the cap remaining closer to where it is now for the next couple of seasons...

 

McAvoy - $3.7, $3.7 and $7.3 mil - AAV $4.9 mil

 

Werenski - $4, $4 and $7 mil - AAV $5 mil

 

Boeser - $4, $6.125 and $7.5 mil - AAV $5.875 mil

 

The incentive for the teams to go with this structure is a lower AAV...   The incentive for the players is the higher salary in the last year to set up their next contract...

 

If this happens, it will likely be a little higher than Boesers, but the AAV would be more manageable for the Flames at a time when losing what Brodie or Frolik bring to the team would not be ideal...   The gamble of replacing what they each bring to the team with someone already under contract could be too risky, as it is a little soon for that...   It might be better to wait and see how Valimaki is healing up before the trade deadline and how some of our younger forwards and defensemen are progressing that might be able to fill the holes before creating them...

 

Maybe a trade still happens for either Frolike or Brodie, but with the current overall situation in the league with so many teams close to the cap, I have to question what value the Flames could get back in a trade that is made to open up cap space, that wouldn't hurt the team for this season...

I like it and see it as a prudent way to go with Tkachuk. If they see themselves going for it again,which they should Brodie and Frolik would be good soldiers to have in the effort.

[Cowtownguy]

3 hours ago, Carty said:

I hope that I'm wrong, and Tkachuk is signed to a long term deal, but there is a pretty good chance he could be signed to a bridge deal that is structured similar to those that McAvoy, Werenski or Boeser signed to keep the AAV down...   While I would like to see Tkachuk locked in with term, it might not be a bad path to take with the increasing speculation of the cap remaining closer to where it is now for the next couple of seasons...

 

McAvoy - $3.7, $3.7 and $7.3 mil - AAV $4.9 mil

 

Werenski - $4, $4 and $7 mil - AAV $5 mil

 

Boeser - $4, $6.125 and $7.5 mil - AAV $5.875 mil

 

The incentive for the teams to go with this structure is a lower AAV...   The incentive for the players is the higher salary in the last year to set up their next contract...

 

If this happens, it will likely be a little higher than Boesers, but the AAV would be more manageable for the Flames at a time when losing what Brodie or Frolik bring to the team would not be ideal...   The gamble of replacing what they each bring to the team with someone already under contract could be too risky, as it is a little soon for that...   It might be better to wait and see how Valimaki is healing up before the trade deadline and how some of our younger forwards and defensemen are progressing that might be able to fill the holes before creating them...

 

Maybe a trade still happens for either Frolike or Brodie, but with the current overall situation in the league with so many teams close to the cap, I have to question what value the Flames could get back in a trade that is made to open up cap space, that wouldn't hurt the team for this season...

I wonder if Treliving is thinking the same thing? That might explain why rumours are that he actually wants to sign a couple of these PTOs. 

[ABC923]

21 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

I wonder if Treliving is thinking the same thing? That might explain why rumours are that he actually wants to sign a couple of these PTOs. 

I think Brodie's fate hinges on MacDonald and Anderson tbh.  If big Mac shows well, he can anchor the third pairing at a fraction of the cost of Brodie, and if Anderson continues to progress, he will do fine on the top pairing.  Gives us the depth we need to be able to offload Brodie for forward help and cap relief.  

On a related note, Mtl was hoping Juulsen might step up onto the big club this year in a more meaningful way, but it sounds like he is still having concussion issues.  They are already thin on the blueline, so they could make a decent trading partner.