Johnny Gaudreau

[cross16]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

I didnt allude to a blank cheque. Just why wasn't he extended? I know there's 2 sides. But you don't let your best and most marketable player extend into tons of questions about FA. It's not a good look.

 

Why?

 

I don't know about this anymore. I get it's not normally the hockey way but I think the cap and changes to free agency have started to alter this and we should adapt too. it's really common for star players in other sports to head to FA without a contract so why is hockey so different?

 

It's a changing landscape. 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I didnt allude to a blank cheque. Just why wasn't he extended? I know there's 2 sides. But you don't let your best and most marketable player extend into tons of questions about FA. It's not a good look.

2 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Why?

 

I don't know about this anymore. I get it's not normally the hockey way but I think the cap and changes to free agency have started to alter this and we should adapt too. it's really common for star players in other sports to head to FA without a contract so why is hockey so different?

 

It's a changing landscape. 

 

Gaudreau is a tough contract because he's between 58 and 99-points.  That's a huge range.  We shouldn't be surprised if BT offered him 70-point-money long term during this past off-season... no way BT should be paying 90-point money based on the past two seasons.  Meanwhile, Gaudreau likely wanted 90-point-money.

 

If BT offered $10.5-mil x 8-years 6 months ago, of course Gaudreau would've signed.

 

Assuming BT was okay letting Gaudreau "prove it" this season then he should be okay to also sign Gaudreau to $10.5-mil x 8-years.  Let's hope it gets done.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, sak22 said:

 

This is why the Gaudreau camp doesn't put pen to paper in the summer, nobody would've put him in consideration for that award even in this market.  I get there is demand for heads to roll if he doesn't sign, but I can't think of GM's who lose their job on failing to sign a free agent, if BT takes a fall for that I don't know if Calgary becomes a prime target for top GM's.  I mean Jarmo in Columbus played a season with Panarin and Bobrovsky who were 100% going to market and then traded most his picks for more players lost for nothing, yet he's still employed.  We let BT go for this, unless we have a good in house option, we are probably looking at an overrated has been taking over i.e. Feaster V.2

 

i have always totally understood Johnny as our MVP. He’s that good. I always felt, like Bennett, you put him with better players and he’ll be that much better. I’ve had doubts, but I think it’s always been because he wasn’t playing with other play drivers when with Monahan to sustain that level of play. I think my apprehension has always been about the duo. 
 

I would love to see him with even better players, but the current mix is definitely making each other better. 

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

For me it's simple:

Look at his playoffs

Look at him in important games

Look at the fact he is a winger and not a center.

Look at his age

 

For me all valid reasons why you don't give him a blank cheque and why this was always likely going to be a tough negotiation. I don't really feel the panic about this situation and am perfectly happy to let it play out as I strongly suspect there is far more going on behind the scene than we know about. I don't' believe for a second Treliving made a decision to low ball or that he didn't/hasn't negotiated hard at this. I could be wrong, i just find it very hard to believe. 

 

i don’t think Conundrum is saying to give a blank cheque. I think what he is getting at is that maybe by waiting and not signing up your best player back then is that you’ve now snot yourself in the foot. Show you respect him and give an offer, maybe it would be lower than what he’s going to get now? Maybe Gaudreau wouldn’t have signed?

 

i thought Johnny was this good the year he got 99. He stopped doing the back check stuff at the all star break or roughly when the team went downhill. I dunno what happened but the team looked completely different even more so after that break. 
 

Johnny playing with better players helps… too bad we didn’t get Eichel… imagine. 
 

not to put Lindholm down, just that elite with elite would be amazing. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

i have always totally understood Johnny as our MVP. He’s that good. I always felt, like Bennett, you put him with better players and he’ll be that much better. I’ve had doubts, but I think it’s always been because he wasn’t playing with other play drivers when with Monahan to sustain that level of play. I think my apprehension has always been about the duo. 
 

I would love to see him with even better players, but the current mix is definitely making each other better. 

 

I'm not really sure that you could put him in a much better situation here.

Lindholm is as easily impactful as say Bergeron.

Tkachuk has his faults but score a ton.

Would he have 130 points playing with McD?

Yeah, but we aren't getting that level.

 

Is there an argument for him to play with a top RW or top C?

Yes, but I don't think that really makes this team that much better, except that it gives us depth.

That depth is in the top 1/2 of the roster.

[conundrumed]

Let me bring this thing in.

BT spent a lot of time and idiocy by not treating G or bottom 6 with the gravity it requires.

Big, BIG mistakes.

Signed Markstrom after al of that BS. Look everyone, the goalie position matters. Who knew?

What's really annoying outside of that is how "whatever" the bottom 6 was.

Hathaway, you're Blockchaining guy, wanted a raise. No.

Lomberg, a $750,000 guy, your Blockchaining guy, don't qualify him.

You've got to be kidding me. They were your awesome grabs, idiot.

What are we, a farm?

Louse.

Show some dedication to those you buy into.

We miss exactly those 2. But you're an idiiot.

And you still are. I don't trust BT at all,

[sak22]

28 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Let me bring this thing in.

BT spent a lot of time and idiocy by not treating G or bottom 6 with the gravity it requires.

Big, BIG mistakes.

Signed Markstrom after al of that BS. Look everyone, the goalie position matters. Who knew?

What's really annoying outside of that is how "whatever" the bottom 6 was.

Hathaway, you're Blockchaining guy, wanted a raise. No.

Lomberg, a $750,000 guy, your Blockchaining guy, don't qualify him.

You've got to be kidding me. They were your awesome grabs, idiot.

What are we, a farm?

Louse.

Show some dedication to those you buy into.

We miss exactly those 2. But you're an idiiot.

And you still are. I don't trust BT at all,

Well its not that simple.  Player needs to want to be here once they get the right to test the waters.  Did Hathaway even want to stay?  Lomberg wasn't a case of not qualified, he hit UFA early due to his, loyalty is a two way street.  I don't believe no calls went out to try and keep Hathaway.  At the end of the day there are 2 college free agents, one of whom brought in by Brad to begin with, can't force guys to stay and if you need to work hard convincing them to, your going to wind up not liking the end result.

[Heartbreaker]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Let me bring this thing in.

BT spent a lot of time and idiocy by not treating G or bottom 6 with the gravity it requires.

Big, BIG mistakes.

Signed Markstrom after al of that BS. Look everyone, the goalie position matters. Who knew?

What's really annoying outside of that is how "whatever" the bottom 6 was.

Hathaway, you're Blockchaining guy, wanted a raise. No.

Lomberg, a $750,000 guy, your Blockchaining guy, don't qualify him.

You've got to be kidding me. They were your awesome grabs, idiot.

What are we, a farm?

Louse.

Show some dedication to those you buy into.

We miss exactly those 2. But you're an idiiot.

And you still are. I don't trust BT at all,

 

Ha ha ha! Did I miss something? I thought that I had a pretty good handle on how most of the regulars are feeling, but this one caught me off guard! Did he text your wife something provocative?

That said, I was definitely sad to see Lomberg go, and I didn't realize how much I missed Garnet Hathaway until I saw him hit McDavid a few nights ago. That guy doesn't get hit cleanly too often, and I've longed to see a Flames player catch him like that. I love watching players like that, but I'm sure sick of watching that guy feast upon our team.

Love.

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

Ha ha ha! Did I miss something? I thought that I had a pretty good handle on how most of the regulars are feeling, but this one caught me off guard! Did he text your wife something provocative?

That said, I was definitely sad to see Lomberg go, and I didn't realize how much I missed Garnet Hathaway until I saw him hit McDavid a few nights ago. That guy doesn't get hit cleanly too often, and I've longed to see a Flames player catch him like that. I love watching players like that, but I'm sure sick of watching that guy feast upon our team.

Love.

Whatevs loverboy. Without a Blockchain about the hit, BT should stick with what he finds.He had a couple, right there.

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Let me bring this thing in.

BT spent a lot of time and idiocy by not treating G or bottom 6 with the gravity it requires.

Big, BIG mistakes.

Signed Markstrom after al of that BS. Look everyone, the goalie position matters. Who knew?

What's really annoying outside of that is how "whatever" the bottom 6 was.

Hathaway, you're Blockchaining guy, wanted a raise. No.

Lomberg, a $750,000 guy, your Blockchaining guy, don't qualify him.

You've got to be kidding me. They were your awesome grabs, idiot.

What are we, a farm?

Louse.

Show some dedication to those you buy into.

We miss exactly those 2. But you're an idiiot.

And you still are. I don't trust BT at all,

 

IMO he didnt neglected the bottom 6 as much as he simply had a different vision for the bottom 6.  He wanted skill and speed on all 4 lines.  He didn't believe in pure muckers.  He liked the nice guys Stajan, Ryan, Czarnik, Reider, Lazar, Leivo, etc.  He didn't appreciate what he had in Hathaway, Lomberg, etc.

 

BT's vision for the bottom 6 has been wrong until Sutter fixed it for him.  And I mean, he still has work to do.  Monahan and Lucic are not cost friendly in the bottom 6.  Good muckers shouldn't cost that much and it leaves more money for the top 6.

[The_People1]

50 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Whatevs loverboy. Without a Blockchain about the hit, BT should stick with what he finds.He had a couple, right there.

 

Well luckily, he might have two more home grown guys in Pospisil and Duehr.  Pelletier could be ready next year as well but they may groom him for a top 6 role instead and keep him in the AHL for one more season.

 

Pitlick and Richardson are for sure gone this summer.  I assume Monahan will be dealt this summer for cap reasons.

 

I'd like to see one of Lewis or Ritchie back because they are minimum wage vets. This frees up one RW spot next season to graduate one of Duehr or Pospisil.  Or even both.

 

Anyways, BT always nickles and dimes his own guys and then turns around and overpays for UFAs.  It's become his signature now.

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'm not really sure that you could put him in a much better situation here.

Lindholm is as easily impactful as say Bergeron.

Tkachuk has his faults but score a ton.

Would he have 130 points playing with McD?

Yeah, but we aren't getting that level.

 

Is there an argument for him to play with a top RW or top C?

Yes, but I don't think that really makes this team that much better, except that it gives us depth.

That depth is in the top 1/2 of the roster.

we do need depth in the top half of the roster. If Johnny was playing with an Eichel, do we move Lindholm to 2nd line C with Mangiapane? How much better is Johnny & Mangiapane in that scenario? 

[conundrumed]

10 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Whatevs loverboy. Without a Blockchain about the hit, BT should stick with what he finds.He had a couple, right there.

Clearly someone was a bit intoxicated after celebration with friends last night. Sorry Hearts, you're one of my faves and I think I meant that playfully. Doesn't work in text.:(

[travel_dude]

7 hours ago, robrob74 said:

we do need depth in the top half of the roster. If Johnny was playing with an Eichel, do we move Lindholm to 2nd line C with Mangiapane? How much better is Johnny & Mangiapane in that scenario? 

 

I'm not saying it doesn't.  I was saying that it only makes the top half deeper. 

Johnny with pre-injury Eichel is llikely similar to Lindholn, except Jack scores more.

More goals overall or the same just re-distributed; don't know.

3rd and 4th line no better.

Also, depending on what goes the other way, perhaps holes elsewhere.  

[cross16]

16 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

i don’t think Conundrum is saying to give a blank cheque. I think what he is getting at is that maybe by waiting and not signing up your best player back then is that you’ve now snot yourself in the foot. Show you respect him and give an offer, maybe it would be lower than what he’s going to get now? Maybe Gaudreau wouldn’t have signed?

 

i thought Johnny was this good the year he got 99. He stopped doing the back check stuff at the all star break or roughly when the team went downhill. I dunno what happened but the team looked completely different even more so after that break. 
 

Johnny playing with better players helps… too bad we didn’t get Eichel… imagine. 
 

not to put Lindholm down, just that elite with elite would be amazing. 

 

If we want to assume that BT hasn't made offers or hasn't tried to get him signed then sure but I would find that hard to believe. 

 

if the Flames wanted to sign Gaudreau at any point it likely would have been easy. They could have taken the Iginla approach and just said "how much and how long?". That is where the blank cheque comment comes from, it's easy to sign players if you just give them what they want. You can argue you shouldn't be prudent with your best players and that is fair. That's what I mean when I say blank cheque, the approach that this is your best player so do what it takes to get signed. It's not the approach it looks like BT is taking and I'm just personally fine with the approach as I think being prudent i this case makes sense. 

[travel_dude]

10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well luckily, he might have two more home grown guys in Pospisil and Duehr.  Pelletier could be ready next year as well but they may groom him for a top 6 role instead and keep him in the AHL for one more season.

 

Pitlick and Richardson are for sure gone this summer.  I assume Monahan will be dealt this summer for cap reasons.

 

I'd like to see one of Lewis or Ritchie back because they are minimum wage vets. This frees up one RW spot next season to graduate one of Duehr or Pospisil.  Or even both.

 

Anyways, BT always nickles and dimes his own guys and then turns around and overpays for UFAs.  It's become his signature now.

 

The reality is that teams overpay in FA.  With the Flames, you could argue that Neal was  prime example that killed us.  So bad that we had to trade for another overpaid player.  If you look back to the Gio, Monahan, Gaudreau and Tkachuk deals, they were a result of cap crunch.  We had the so-called Gio cap, but that was also a function of remaining cap.  We could only pay so much and still ice a good team.  The downside is that guys like Mange and Kylington were given meager raises.  And we had to keep Gaudreau and Tkachuk shorter than we really wanted. 

 

Pitlick was a miss, but it was a miss on how he would fit the team.  He's better than what we have seen.  I don't know if some injury created the version we see or if he just doesn't fit.  Richardson was a miss in that he isn't the player he was up to a year ago.  Faded too fast. 

 

I like Lewis, but for the money I would prefer Galchenyuk over Ritchie.

That assumes we still have Lucic and Guddy.

For minimum wage, have no problem with Ritchie as a 14th F, but not at the expense of a prospect getting a look.

[Heartbreaker]

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Clearly someone was a bit intoxicated after celebration with friends last night. Sorry Hearts, you're one of my faves and I think I meant that playfully. Doesn't work in text.:(

 

Ha ha ha! Oh, Man, I had so much fun. It's no sweat, and I figured!

Love.

[phoenix66]

On 2/8/2022 at 6:22 PM, conundrumed said:

Let me bring this thing in.

BT spent a lot of time and idiocy by not treating G or bottom 6 with the gravity it requires.

Big, BIG mistakes.

Signed Markstrom after al of that BS. Look everyone, the goalie position matters. Who knew?

What's really annoying outside of that is how "whatever" the bottom 6 was.

Hathaway, you're Blockchaining guy, wanted a raise. No.

Lomberg, a $750,000 guy, your Blockchaining guy, don't qualify him.

You've got to be kidding me. They were your awesome grabs, idiot.

What are we, a farm?

Louse.

Show some dedication to those you buy into.

We miss exactly those 2. But you're an idiiot.

And you still are. I don't trust BT at all,

Hindisght is easy.. Hathaway was a good player for us but he was and likely would still be primarily a 4th liner .. he makes 1.5m.. is he worth it ? Yes.. but when we had him that was too much for a 4th liner and he's become a better player since ..  our issue at the time was too much money at the bottom end of the roster .. 

Lomberg brings energy but omg I was waiting for him to get himself killed .. Lucic essentially is in his spot . Wouod you trust lomberg on the ice in the final 2 minutes with a 2-1 lead ?

 

 

But I will add, if the biggest complaint you have about your team is 4th line fringe players that's a problem I'll sign up for all day long 

 

In terms of Johnny.. I still believe it's been an ongoing discussion .. I don't think we give him 10.. if he hits market, he gets 10x7 IMO, after last season I wouldnt have given him 7x8.. but the transformation in his style that Sutter has pushed him into, he's no longer a star player ..he's playing like a future HOF elite player , with a style I predict will finally give him playoff success .. 

I'd guess they were asking for around 9 all along..and that's likely where he'll fall.. 8.5 to 9 x8..that trumps 10x7 

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Hindisght is easy.. Hathaway was a good player for us but he was and likely would still be primarily a 4th liner .. he makes 1.5m.. is he worth it ? Yes.. but when we had him that was too much for a 4th liner and he's become a better player since ..  our issue at the time was too much money at the bottom end of the roster .. 

Lomberg brings energy but omg I was waiting for him to get himself killed .. Lucic essentially is in his spot . Wouod you trust lomberg on the ice in the final 2 minutes with a 2-1 lead ?

 

 

But I will add, if the biggest complaint you have about your team is 4th line fringe players that's a problem I'll sign up for all day long 

 

In terms of Johnny.. I still believe it's been an ongoing discussion .. I don't think we give him 10.. if he hits market, he gets 10x7 IMO, after last season I wouldnt have given him 7x8.. but the transformation in his style that Sutter has pushed him into, he's no longer a star player ..he's playing like a future HOF elite player , with a style I predict will finally give him playoff success .. 

I'd guess they were asking for around 9 all along..and that's likely where he'll fall.. 8.5 to 9 x8..that trumps 10x7 

I think the problems lie in the bottom 6. Now that the 4th line is fixed this year, the 3rd is a mess and we only just kind of shored up the top6 with putting Mangiapane back on the line with Backlund. 
 

like Cross says, the team lacks a playmaker for their line that can help drive the play. It looks like their line has 3 players but don’t know how to use everyone, or they’re having trouble making open ice for each other.

 

plus. The narrative has been, prior to this year we needed a top6 RW and middle6 player, a #1C and top pair D and a Top4 D and bottom pair D and a 4th line. So I don’t think the 4th line was all Conundrum was worried about, and still the team could use a player or two more to solidify the lines.

[cross16]

Sounds like Johnny and Tkachuk are indeed priorities. 
 

 

[conundrumed]

And Johnny's been nothing short of remarkable this year.

I could go on for miles.

He is seeing the game at an unreal level. I watch a lot of hockey, he's on another planet.

We finally built a team around him.

[conundrumed]

After that typical performance last night, do we just give him the combination to the safe? What a game by him. We weren't beating Vas with the puck in front of him, so pop 2 from behind him and make him worry about that. Unreal.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

After that typical performance last night, do we just give him the combination to the safe? What a game by him. We weren't beating Vas with the puck in front of him, so pop 2 from behind him and make him worry about that. Unreal.

 

I liked the sneaky goals, but the bang bang goal from the slot?

Did TBL somehow not see him sneaking into the prime area?

He was just kind of slipping in and out of coverage, then went to a spot impossible to defend.

 

It's a difficult negotiation.  You have Tkachuk's deal getting in the way.

Gaudreau should get the max.  Tkachuk something less.

Go max term on Johnny, shorten the term for Tkachuk if that helps dial down the dollars.

 

Front load it and give him tons of cash early.

He's earned it and should get paid the most while he's still young enough.

Give him a NMC and he can control his fate.

Pay him according to what he means to the franchise.

Not his problem that the cap is the issue.

He wants the team to compete, but no hometown discount is owed.

[cross16]

Nothing ground breaking here from Treliving but a few pointed comments about re-signing Gaudreau.  I will be shocked if the Flames don't get him signed. 

 

Plus a few comments around Toffoli, Sutter and the up coming deadline. 

 

Quote

 

"It's the same thing we've said all year," Treliving said. "We're going to let that take care of itself behind closed doors. So it's been a non-issue.

"Johnny's a huge part of our team, drives our offense. We want to get him back. We want to sign him here long term but we've put all the focus on just worrying about playing the games here right now. We've stayed in touch with his representatives and we'll deal with that quietly and away from the spotlight

 

 

https://www.nhl.com/news/calgary-flames-gm-brad-treliving-discusses-johnny-gaudreau-trade-deadline-and-coach-darryl-sutter/c-331718170?tid=277548856

[JTech780]

I don't think there has been enough talk about Gaudreau for the Hart.