Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackey
Here maybe I can lay it out for you to follow. Bratt is a young player that is expected to improve and every year of this contract is in his prime age window. These are the players you bet long term on and hand out long term deals to. The Flames should have done the same with Tkachuk. He was a young player you'd expect to improve and many saw as the future captain. His numbers improved over each of his first 3 years and the final year before the contract he put up 77pts. The option to sign him long term was there and they didn't take it. Just because Bratt signed a bridge doesn't change the fact that we're talking about this contract and the fact the Flames had the option so sign a similar contract with Tkachuk and didn't get it done. Fail.
|
8 years was never on the table.
Flames probably could have done something like 6x9M. Cool. We’d have 2 years left assuming he didn’t ask for a trade the moment his NTC kicked in (this off season I think).
There is no obviously better path between bridge/long term…each has pros/cons, each can blow up in your face.