Matthew Tkachuk and the 9 games - Page 7 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Strange Brew · 10-30-2016, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Either way its all off topic and arguing hypotheticals. My point is that GMs hope the players from within the system challenge your veterans. If a younger cheaper guy plays so well that you have to protect himover the veteran. Its a good thing.

Plus I dont think I would call it losing a player for nothing. Shedding a termed contract for a player over 30 with dollars left on it has better value to teams than a lot of players in the league right now.

I will say that letting Tkachuck skate with Backlund and Frolik on the road might be okay. Opposition teams will try to get their top lines away from these guys on the road. Bennett was really getting traction on that line last year before the move to center. Tkachuck may do the same.

Yep. You are going to lose something for nothing in an expansion draft by definition. Exposing a few players in their thirties on bigger contracts while you have younger cheaper guys ready to step up is the way to play it.

Bandwagon In Flames · 10-30-2016, 11:55 AM

I think keeping Tkachuk on the big club is whats best for both his development and the team. He's a top-9 winger on this team and brings as much intensity as anyone which we need more of, not less.

Some people are saying he's not able to play his game without gaining more weight, but that's not what I'm seeing in games. Even if he's not able to dominate someone it's very clear that Tkachuk is pissing them off and throwing them off their game. He's getting in the dirty areas and not shying away from anything.

PeteMoss · 10-30-2016, 12:22 PM

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I will say this about London - he'll pick up bad habits there the same as anywhere in junior. Its the same environment as anywhere in junior where they let their stars take 2 minute shifts or don't bench them after dopey penalties. They get better players than other teams and they win.

getbak · 10-30-2016, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Bennett is an interesting comp. injury meant he missed a year. Without the injury, he may or may not have ended up in junior from the outset. Did a full year of not playing set him back? I don't think so. Why not keep tkatchuk around for whole year playing half the games? Stay below 40 games of course

That's not how it works. For triggering the first year of the player's ELC, it's actual games played that matters, but for determining an accrued season towards early UFA status, it's the number of games spent on the team's active roster that matters (whether the player actually played in those games or not).

Because Bennett was injured during training camp, he started the season with "Injured Non-roster" status, so he wasn't considered to be on the Flames active roster during that time.

After tonight, Tkachuk will have 8 games played, but 10 accrued games on the Flames active roster. 10 games played will trigger the first year of his ELC. 40 games on the active roster will count as an accrued season towards his UFA status.

Cactus Jack · 11-01-2016, 08:26 AM

I hope the organization makes the right decision either way. He has all the tools to be a great player but that doesn´t mean he has dominated or looked 100% comfortable as an NHLer. I´d send him down, keep him hungry and a big, older, stronger and even more motivated (if possible) Tkachuk will be here in 10 months to stay for good.

FanIn80 · 11-01-2016, 10:42 AM

I like what he brings, but I just think he needs to learn that he can't skate through everyone anymore. While I don't think he's quite ready for the NHL, I think sending him back to the CHL would do more harm than good. I think he needs to learn to adjust his game to play against grown men in their 30s, rather than stalky teenagers who are admittedly big for their age.

If there's a way we can send him to the AHL (though I'm sure there isn't), that would be my vote.

Edit: In terms of plugging the hole he'd leave, I'd like to see Janko get a shot.

FBI · 11-01-2016, 10:48 AM

This will be his 9th game right? Unless he has an apocalyptic game, I am guessing he's staying up.

bigrangy · 11-01-2016, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I like what he brings, but I just think he needs to learn that he can't skate through everyone anymore. While I don't think he's quite ready for the NHL, I think sending him back to the CHL would do more harm than good. I think he needs to learn to adjust his game to play against grown men in their 30s, rather than stalky teenagers who are admittedly big for their age.

If there's a way we can send him to the AHL (though I'm sure there isn't), that would be my vote.

Edit: In terms of plugging the hole he'd leave, I'd like to see Janko get a shot.

He has the mentality and the body type to be able to skate through people once he is fully developed. You don't want him to get away from that, either consciously (by training him to go around people) or unconsciously (by him losing the confidence to do those things because he isn't yet physically developed enough to do them right now). He's playing well enough that he's an asset to the team, and so if he is sent down, it will be because the team thinks it will be better for his development. I hope he can work on his foot speed no matter where he goes. The Flames don't have enough quick players.

yourbestfriend · 11-01-2016, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I will say this about London - he'll pick up bad habits there the same as anywhere in junior. Its the same environment as anywhere in junior where they let their stars take 2 minute shifts or don't bench them after dopey penalties. They get better players than other teams and they win.

I agree with this. I don't remember which game it was, but he took a stupid penalty early on and was pretty much benched for an entire period. That 100% won't happen in London
I personally think he'd develop better in the NHL. Playing him with Frolik and Backlund who are smart, responsible and who always do the little things right can only help his development in the pro game. No way he gets that kind of experience in the OHL.
He was also lined up against the Ovi line in the Washington game which does hint at a level of trust that coaching/mgmt have in him.

Finger Cookin · 11-01-2016, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by getbak

That's not how it works. For triggering the first year of the player's ELC, it's actual games played that matters, but for determining an accrued season towards early UFA status, it's the number of games spent on the team's active roster that matters (whether the player actually played in those games or not).

Because Bennett was injured during training camp, he started the season with "Injured Non-roster" status, so he wasn't considered to be on the Flames active roster during that time.

After tonight, Tkachuk will have 8 games played, but 10 accrued games on the Flames active roster. 10 games played will trigger the first year of his ELC. 40 games on the active roster will count as an accrued season towards his UFA status.

So because he's still on the roster today, the decision to start the clock on the ELC has already been made. Is that right?

sureLoss · 11-01-2016, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

So because he's still on the roster today, the decision to start the clock on the ELC has already been made. Is that right?

It is still 10 games played for it to use a year of his ELC. It looks like he plays tonight, so 1 more game before it is burned.

It is 40 games on the NHL roster (not games played) to count as a year to UFA.

Finger Cookin · 11-01-2016, 12:07 PM

OK, thanks for the clarification.

Nevermind32 · 11-01-2016, 01:12 PM

I would send him down.

JohnnyTitan · 11-01-2016, 01:32 PM

I'm confident the Flames management will make the right call and I could be convinced either way...but the more I think about it and read the thoughts in this thread I'm leaning towards keeping him up. Won't repeat other's thoughts..they are all good. Two additional points not discussed.
1) Doing the right thing. This was discussed around other Flames personnel decisions but not so much here. Not only Tkatchuk himself...but every other prospect and UFA in the future. If you say there's an opportunity and said individual does everything they can to seize that opportunity and you send him back just for contract considerations it leaves a bad taste in people's mouths. Little picture economics should not cloud big-picture / long-term reputation.
2) Staggering the rooks. We are blowing out some bad contracts next year and fully expect 2-3 AHLers to take spots. Do you want a "Rookie" Tkatchuk and a "Rookie" Jankowski along with another AHL forward and two AHL defenders all coming on-line in 2017? To join an already young core? My feeling is we'll have enough exciting young players to "Learn-The-Ropes" next year...no reason to defer Tkachuk's education in a year where there is still a lot of good veteran presence.

Love it or hate it...I know one of or both Bennett and Tkachuk will, by necessity, be getting bridge deals. I agree with the poster who talked about cap management in the future...there is no crystal ball...do what's right now. As long as you're committing to the right players.

activeStick · 11-01-2016, 01:36 PM

Based on comments from the coach today I think Tkachuk will remain up with the team this year as they are quite complimentary on Tkachuk's performance so far.

dino7c · 11-01-2016, 01:40 PM

I think he should stay...he has certainly earned it and should only improve...he deserves to be in the lineup most nights, what more can you ask?

Bandwagon In Flames · 11-01-2016, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by activeStick

Based on comments from the coach today I think Tkachuk will remain up with the team this year as they are quite complimentary on Tkachuk's performance so far.

As they should be. There's no reason to send him down.

He's physically imposing, complementing his linemates well and putting up respectable numbers for an 18 year old entering the league.

If he's doing all that while being in the coaches good books then I'd say he's earned it.

Vinny01 · 11-01-2016, 01:51 PM

I think he sticks as well. Biggest reason is we do not have a player like him in our lineup and we need a player like him. I don't think it hurts him to go back to junior but I also don't think it helps him immensely. If he hits a major wall let him go to the WJHC or send him down before we burn a year of unrestricted free agency.

Everything about this kid shows he is ready to handle the big leagues. Sure 4pts in 8 games is not the same impact that Monahan had but I still see more value in keeping him over sending him down

polak · 11-01-2016, 02:00 PM

The sending him down camp seems to think that sending someone down is always going to make them better and can't hurt their development.

Vinny01 · 11-01-2016, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

The sending him down camp seems to think that sending someone down is always going to make them better and can't hurt their development.

It is the safer play for sure. Might not speed up his development but there seem to be more risks keeping him bs sending him back. Personally I think he is ready and thought he was going to make the team this season the second he was drafted