What Is Best For Matthew Tkachuk

[CheersMan]

8 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...

A 3yr bridge deal with an AAV of $6.3 would seem to be all that BT has remaining in the cookie jar. That 3rd yr could set up MT nicely on his next deal, similar to the examples you have shown above. An offer sheet could really mess that up though.

[travel_dude]

6 hours ago, ABC923 said:

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.

 

AMac is a LHS.

Perhaps he would give us better depth than Stone, but I don't know if he would be a great fit with Kylington, assumng Brodie was traded.

Gio-Ras

Hanifin-Hamonic

Kylington-AMac

Stone

 

My only fear about trading Brodie is that Stone would be a regular.  I hope that he's outplayed by everyone including Gryba.

As an AHL body or emergency call-up, I can stomach Stone.

[The_People1]

We need to clear about $1-mil cap space even if we bridge.

[Horsman1]

18 hours ago, CheersMan said:

A 3yr bridge deal with an AAV of $6.3 would seem to be all that BT has remaining in the cookie jar. That 3rd yr could set up MT nicely on his next deal, similar to the examples you have shown above. An offer sheet could really mess that up though.

I thought there could not be more than a 35 percent increase from one year to the next?? 

[Horsman1]

Just now, Horsman1 said:

I thought there could not be more than a 35 percent increase from one year to the next?? 

there well be a strike in 3 years

 

[Thebrewcrew]

The guys on 960 were talking about a Tkachuk bridge the other day, as it stands right now the Flames could do 6.75x3. Not eyepopping, but if push came to shove, they could structure it in a way the Werenski and Mcavoy deals were signed. Year 1 and 2 a 5.5 salary and in year 3 it rises to 9.25, that would mean the Flames would need to qualify him at over 9.25 4 years from now, at which point Tkachuk could accept and walk to UFA or they can negotiate a long term deal likely over 10mill. It's a risk for the Flames as you may only get 4 years of Tkachuk, but it allows you to fit him into the cap this year without making cap-dump trades and it miraculously would not upset the apple-cart, the internal cap would remain in tact.

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

The guys on 960 were talking about a Tkachuk bridge the other day, as it stands right now the Flames could do 6.75x3. Not eyepopping, but if push came to shove, they could structure it in a way the Werenski and Mcavoy deals were signed. Year 1 and 2 a 5.5 salary and in year 3 it rises to 9.25, that would mean the Flames would need to qualify him at over 9.25 4 years from now, at which point Tkachuk could accept and walk to UFA or they can negotiate a long term deal likely over 10mill. It's a risk for the Flames as you may only get 4 years of Tkachuk, but it allows you to fit him into the cap this year without making cap-dump trades and it miraculously would not upset the apple-cart, the internal cap would remain in tact.

 

I would take the chance. If he doesn't sign any longer than the one year, trade him for a lot. 

[The_People1]

16 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

The guys on 960 were talking about a Tkachuk bridge the other day, as it stands right now the Flames could do 6.75x3. Not eyepopping, but if push came to shove, they could structure it in a way the Werenski and Mcavoy deals were signed. Year 1 and 2 a 5.5 salary and in year 3 it rises to 9.25, that would mean the Flames would need to qualify him at over 9.25 4 years from now, at which point Tkachuk could accept and walk to UFA or they can negotiate a long term deal likely over 10mill. It's a risk for the Flames as you may only get 4 years of Tkachuk, but it allows you to fit him into the cap this year without making cap-dump trades and it miraculously would not upset the apple-cart, the internal cap would remain in tact.

 

That's exactly what i said 2 pages ago.

 

Of course we all prefer Tkachuk at 8-years but to keep the cap hit down, a 3-year may be the best way to go.

[cross16]

If the Flames keep the qualifying offer around 9 million then i think the 3 year option has merit.  it's giving him 10 million or more i'm not ok with because you have to remember Tkachuk can just sign the qualifying offer and walk himself to UFA. A qualifying offer is a contract offer.

 

At 9 million or less it swings the power back more to the Flames and gives them a chance to get a longer term deal done. it still should be an absolute last resource though because it's an extremely risky place for the Flames to be. 

 

The smart play is what Treliving is doing. Hold out and use your leverage to get a minimum 5 year, preferably a 6 year, deal done. Anything less than that is not ideal. 

[travel_dude]

9 minutes ago, cross16 said:

If the Flames keep the qualifying offer around 9 million then i think the 3 year option has merit.  it's giving him 10 million or more i'm not ok with because you have to remember Tkachuk can just sign the qualifying offer and walk himself to UFA. A qualifying offer is a contract offer.

 

At 9 million or less it swings the power back more to the Flames and gives them a chance to get a longer term deal done. it still should be an absolute last resource though because it's an extremely risky place for the Flames to be. 

 

That's the biggest problem I have with a 3 year deal.

QO and taking it to get to UFA.

 

So it comes back to whether something in the range of $9m today on a long term contract is something that can be nailed down.

If it is, then you have to seriously consider it and plan the trades accordingly. 

 

[cccsberg]

48 minutes ago, cross16 said:

If the Flames keep the qualifying offer around 9 million then i think the 3 year option has merit.  it's giving him 10 million or more i'm not ok with because you have to remember Tkachuk can just sign the qualifying offer and walk himself to UFA. A qualifying offer is a contract offer.

 

At 9 million or less it swings the power back more to the Flames and gives them a chance to get a longer term deal done. it still should be an absolute last resource though because it's an extremely risky place for the Flames to be. 

 

The smart play is what Treliving is doing. Hold out and use your leverage to get a minimum 5 year, preferably a 6 year, deal done. Anything less than that is not ideal. 

Glad you guys are finally coming around to a 2-3 year bridge. Can’t say it is the preferred option, but even a few months ago you could see it coming as the only reasonable option.  Hope Tkachuk agrees and BT gets the deal done ASAP.

[cross16]

26 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Glad you guys are finally coming around to a 2-3 year bridge. Can’t say it is the preferred option, but even a few months ago you could see it coming as the only reasonable option.  Hope Tkachuk agrees and BT gets the deal done ASAP.

 

It's always been a reasonable option, it's just so far from ideal that you hope it doesn't end up there. 

[conundrumed]

I think when you smoke the negotiation right down to the filter all of the time, you leave term on the table.

I'll be shocked if we don't this time.

BT needs to get ahead of this crap.  Follow the leader. *sigh*

Give him his due, 8 x $8.5. Call it an investment.

He's a rising star.

[redfire11]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Give him his due, 8 x $8.5. Call it an investment.

There's no credit cards in cap hockey once the season starts. No buy now pay later. Flames could come up with about 7 m this year. I am sure BT is trying to move cap but so is 10 other teams. Unless BT gives away a roster player or pays to have someone take one the offer to Tkachuk will be 7 or less.

[travel_dude]

6 hours ago, redfire11 said:

There's no credit cards in cap hockey once the season starts. No buy now pay later. Flames could come up with about 7 m this year. I am sure BT is trying to move cap but so is 10 other teams. Unless BT gives away a roster player or pays to have someone take one the offer to Tkachuk will be 7 or less.

 

It will be a long wait for that kind of money.

He would be crazy to not lock him up for a low cap hit like that.

But, that's probably not what Matty wants at this point.

 

Less than 7m would be less than 3 years.

3 years bumps into Johnny's and Gio's contracts.

Gio won't be expensive to re-sign, but possibly needing to pay a #1D is.

JH is another issue.

Would be like trying to re-sign Matthews and Marner in the same year.

[redfire11]

35 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It will be a long wait for that kind of money.

He would be crazy to not lock him up for a low cap hit like that.

But, that's probably not what Matty wants at this point.

 

Less than 7m would be less than 3 years.

3 years bumps into Johnny's and Gio's contracts.

Gio won't be expensive to re-sign, but possibly needing to pay a #1D is.

JH is another issue.

Would be like trying to re-sign Matthews and Marner in the same year.

Tell me how Bt will pay Tkachuk. What team is going to jump in and do us a favor.

[cross16]

10 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I think when you smoke the negotiation right down to the filter all of the time, you leave term on the table.

I'll be shocked if we don't this time.

BT needs to get ahead of this crap.  Follow the leader. *sigh*

Give him his due, 8 x $8.5. Call it an investment.

He's a rising star.

 

Unfortunately, I think with the Marner deal the 8 year price is more like 10mill or more. I can't see Tkachuk doing 8.5AAV for 8 years and if he was willing I think the deal was done a long time ago. I think 8.5 mill probably gets you MAX 6 years. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, redfire11 said:

Tell me how Bt will pay Tkachuk. What team is going to jump in and do us a favor.

 

Just saying that if 8.5m was the number, he would have been signed.

Less than 7 is not really reasonable on anything that really benefits the team.

Meier took a big concession so the team could retain Karlsson.

Does Tkachuk have to make that concession because of the Lucic trade?

Had the Brodie/Janko trade been made, we may not have bothered with Lucic for Neal.

And we might have signed Tkachuk a lot sooner.

 

Just pure speculation.

 

[conundrumed]

Well if Marner is $11 longterm, how much is Rantanen? I'd rather have Rantanen. Then what, Rantanen becomes a Tkachuk comparable? I don't even think it's close.

The comps are getting askew imho. Tkachuk is Aho money, at best. Aho's a C and a better player.

But can't say I didn't see signing Tkachuk was going to be a migraine, seeing who his Dad is...

[MP5029]

Well rumour has the Avs Rattenen around 8.4-8.75 on a long term deal...

 

question is, is Tkachuk in the same ball part as Rattenen in terms of talent and what he brings to the table?  Hard to say, by stats and pure goal scoring probably not...close but not quite...however, it’s the intangibles Tkachuk brings like grit and agitator that’s worth a lot to a team but hard to place a value on...that in my opinion, balances him out with Rattenen...

 

you would think BT could manage to free up some cap room of about 2-3 mil or so and build a longer term deal that could bring the AAV to about 9 mill but grows ever so slightly towards the middle of the contract then tappers back at the end...

 

kinda like 8 at

 

8

9

9.5

10

10

9.5

9

8

 

Not sure about those numbers and all but he’s got about 6 mil free right now and some guys could be moved and or

released for this year and then a few that expire over the next few years that won’t matter too much to us anyway...

 

anyway i I was wondering if something like that could work? Could be a way of planning for monny and Johnny later too?

 

this is where my opposition to signing Taboit comes in...that’s the wiggle room we need now for Tkachuk...and I’m not confident Tabiot is going to be at all any better then some of your young prospects in backing up Rittich...hopefully BT is done with theses FA reclamation projects and sticks to trades and internal development and drafting, that’s what he’s good at, he needs to stop handcuffing his ability to do what he’s good at by over priced FA’s...money better spent trading and signing like Hanifin and Lindholm stick to those things BT that’s what your good at

[The_People1]

23 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Well if Marner is $11 longterm, how much is Rantanen? I'd rather have Rantanen. Then what, Rantanen becomes a Tkachuk comparable? I don't even think it's close.

The comps are getting askew imho. Tkachuk is Aho money, at best. Aho's a C and a better player.

But can't say I didn't see signing Tkachuk was going to be a migraine, seeing who his Dad is...

 

Why hasn't Rantanen signed?  The Avs have lots of cap.

 

[cross16]

2 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Why hasn't Rantanen signed?  The Avs have lots of cap.

 

 

They've barely talked. Sakic was pretty open that they were waiting for comparable before they got into heavy negotiations. 

[conundrumed]

21 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Why hasn't Rantanen signed?  The Avs have lots of cap.

 

From what I've read Rantanen wants the $s being mentioned on a 3 year deal.

Kinda makes sense why he isn't being offer sheeted, of all the rfa's, he'd be the first guy I'd offer sheet. But it would be $11 over 7 for sure.

Looking back a few short yrs ago at Mony, Gaudreau, MacKinnon, Scheifele and what those guys signed for, this thing has ballooned into no man's land.

Marner isn't an $11mil player, it's ridiculous.

Tkachuk isn't near as skilled as Rantanen or Marner, hence he plays a gritty agitator game. Why the $$ would be in that realm is beyond me.

What really annoys me in all of this, is Eric Francis *spit* guessed, of all the RFA's this summer, Tkachuk would most likely be the one that misses the start of the season.

He's starting to look accurate, and god knows that won't go to his head. *rolleyes*

 

[The_People1]

37 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

From what I've read Rantanen wants the $s being mentioned on a 3 year deal.

Kinda makes sense why he isn't being offer sheeted, of all the rfa's, he'd be the first guy I'd offer sheet. But it would be $11 over 7 for sure.

Looking back a few short yrs ago at Mony, Gaudreau, MacKinnon, Scheifele and what those guys signed for, this thing has ballooned into no man's land.

Marner isn't an $11mil player, it's ridiculous.

Tkachuk isn't near as skilled as Rantanen or Marner, hence he plays a gritty agitator game. Why the $$ would be in that realm is beyond me.

What really annoys me in all of this, is Eric Francis *spit* guessed, of all the RFA's this summer, Tkachuk would most likely be the one that misses the start of the season.

He's starting to look accurate, and god knows that won't go to his head. *rolleyes*

 

 

It seems to be a perfect storm because while RFA deals have been rising thanks to Auston Matthews, the league cap is said to finally stay the same for the next 2 or 3 years (before new US TV deal).  That means both the player and team have to gamble on what happens in year 4 while still trying to fit everyone under the cap before then.

[conundrumed]

40 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

It seems to be a perfect storm because while RFA deals have been rising thanks to Auston Matthews, the league cap is said to finally stay the same for the next 2 or 3 years (before new US TV deal).  That means both the player and team have to gamble on what happens in year 4 while still trying to fit everyone under the cap before then.

If only my wage vs the inflation to cost of living had have been like this. lol