Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
There are two people in the negotiation. I suspect Tkachuk was asking for the moon and not for max term. And was never interested in playing here anyway.
|
I doubt Tkachuk would have taken less than $9M on a long term deal - that is why the contract had a $9M poison pill.
Also he would have been pointing at Rantanen $9.25M x 6, and Marner $10.9 x 6 as the comparables from that offseason.
And if Tkachuk wanted to be here long term he could be here - he made the choice to ask for a trade now.
What would have been better:
Tkachuk at 6 x $9M walking him right to UFA.
or
Tkachuk at 3 x $7M and then 8 x $10.5M (Which was on the table if Tkachuk wanted to stay)
or
Tkachuk at 3 x $7M ending as a RFA with the ability to trade him if he refuses to re-sign.
I think the argument can be made that a bridge was still the right move based on the information available at the time the contract was signed. If Tkachuk wanted to be here long term he would still be here, there was a great 8 x $10.5M contract on the table for him if he wanted to stay.
More likely scenario is he never wanted to be here long term. Wouldn't have taken a long term deal back in 2019, and wasn't willing to take a long term deal now. He word is worth nothing, he says whatever makes Matthew Tkachuk look like the good guy in the media.