Matthew Tkachuk & Johnny Gaudreau Signing Watch Thread

[OptimalTates]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...a-rfa-stamkos/

Here's a list pre 2016

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

Intentionally obtuse? If Gaudreau and his agent say they are leaving and Flames say "look Boston has expressed interest in signing you to 8 years two-fillion total contract, you willing to sign this contract if we trade you to Boston immediately? " "Sure, I'll sign here if you trade me to Boston"

Then Treliving says "Sucker! You're here for life" Gaudreau files a grievance, at best the contract is voided, but more likely he ends up in Boston with that contract and the Flames are blacklisted by every agent and team in the league.

You're not trading Gaudreau for Debrusk. The Bruins are trading Debrusk for an 8th year of Gaudreau. (Though I don't think the actual return or even team is right).

Can you not read? I said if it is a sign and trade Gaudreau wants why do it with Boston? If the Bruins want Gaudreau for 8 years they can either offer more than DeBrusk or try their luck with 7 years once he hits FA. Hey, while we are at it we should sign Tkachuk for 8 years and then trade him to Ottawa to play for his brother for Pinto. I mean if you want to trade our star players for way less than market value I am sure you are on board! Thank Christ you are not our GM.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...a-rfa-stamkos/

Here's a list pre 2016

Wow, look at all those long term extension and then trades! Totally a realistic thing in the NHL.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

IIRC it was pretty rare for them to happen as a blind trade - usually the GM knew they weren't re-signing the player and gave other teams permission to negotiate with an understanding of the price to sign them immediately.

Yeah, just like with Jaybo. Calgary knew his ask, was willing to pay it, gave a small amount to be able to do so.

[CF84]

Too many dicks on the dance floo...I mean message board.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Can you not read? I said if it is a sign and trade Gaudreau wants why do it with Boston?

I feel like you're missing the sign part of the sign-and-trade.

Gaudreau still has to agree. In fact it would be likely his agent facilitating the contract, not the Flames, after given permission. I don't care about the actual pieces, I never suggested Debrusk. I'm disagreeing with your crazy notion that they should trick Gaudreau into signing a contract.

Originally Posted by dissentowner

If the Bruins want Gaudreau for 8 years they can either offer more than DeBrusk or try their luck with 7 years once he hits FA.

Sure, maybe they can ask for more. And then they may end up like Tavares and Islanders, Hyman and Toronto. Losing the UFA for nothing. Serious question, would you rather have Debrusk or nothing?

[transplant99]

LOL @ this thread....and zero surprise at why it happened.

Amazing.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Can you not read? I said if it is a sign and trade Gaudreau wants why do it with Boston? If the Bruins want Gaudreau for 8 years they can either offer more than DeBrusk or try their luck with 7 years once he hits FA. Hey, while we are at it we should sign Tkachuk for 8 years and then trade him to Ottawa to play for his brother for Pinto. I mean if you want to trade our star players for way less than market value I am sure you are on board! Thank Christ you are not our GM.

Tkachuk is a restricted free agent which is completely different than a UFA. In The past UFA rights have gone for a 3rd rounder (Bouwmeester) but when trading for an RFA they have gone for a 1st+2 2nds (Hamilton)


I think the fact we haven’t seen star players in sign and trades is because teams have not been able to agree on the value of that 8th year. I think the team signing the player thinks it is worth a late pick because the other team is losing the player either way. The team losing the player is not going to help lower the cap hit over the course of the deal by 500k-1.5M per for a Late round pick.

The Debrusk idea was just an example that we do not need to fixate on however moving the cap space would help Boston fit in Johnny (and Debrusk has an active trade request)

When we are in this scenario it is either lose Johnny for nothing or try and be creative and get something for him by signing him for the 8 years and trading him to a team that would have trouble signing him without shedding cap.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

I feel like you're missing the sign part of the sign-and-trade.

Gaudreau still has to agree. In fact it would be likely his agent facilitating the contract, not the Flames, after given permission. I don't care about the actual pieces, I never suggested Debrusk. I'm disagreeing with your crazy notion that they should trick Gaudreau into signing a contract.



Sure, maybe they can ask for more. And then they may end up like Tavares and Islanders, Hyman and Toronto. Losing the UFA for nothing. Serious question, would you rather have Debrusk or nothing?

I never insinuated they should trick Gaudreau. Yes, I actually would rather Gaudreau walks for nothing than doing such a poor deal. Not only does it set a precedent we can be majorly taken advantage of but the backlash it would cause with the general fanbase would be terrifying.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by transplant99

LOL @ this thread....and zero surprise at why it happened.

Amazing.

Nothing amazing about the fact that as usual, your post contributes nothing but a typical T99 troll.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I think the fact we haven’t seen star players in sign and trades is because teams have not been able to agree on the value of that 8th year.

And just how few of them make it to UFA. Tavares and Panarin are the only ones I put near Gaudreau's level coming off the season he just had. As much as dissentowner likes to bring up the no sign-and-trades, I could just as easily ask him how many players on the right side of 30 and finished second in scoring have made UFA at all since 2013. Top players in their prime don't enter UFA, so sign and trades for those players can't happen.

We'll probably get the same thing as Tavares if Gaudreau signs elsewhere. Gaudreau will talk about how great of a city Calgary is, say how he would be happy to get a deal done, and then when it becomes July 13th and he signs in Philadelphia or wherever he'll talk about how close he was to signing with the Flames but felt Philly was just a better fit for his family and blah blah blah. And the Flames will get that moral victory of being second place but nothing to show for it.

Would love to be wrong, but if I'm Treliving, I give until July 5th to get something done then I give him total permission to talk to any team and make it clear, just like Yzerman did, that a sign-and-trade is a possibility. Hope it leads to some form of bidding war from the Devils, Flyers or whoever.

Flames get something instead of nothing
Gaudreau gets 8 years
Acquiring team gets lower cap hit

Win-win-win

If the acquiring team is telling the Flames they'll only give up a 7th rounder, tell them to pound sand, if it's a divisional rival tell them to pound sand regardless. But assuming he's going out east and the team offers 'something', I hope that Treliving isn't worried about optics like dissentowner is. Try and get the most you can, but take what you can get.

But also the fact that Lou, Yzerman, and Dubas have all very strongly rumoured to have explored or pitched sign-and-trades (or in Yzerman's case just said it), I'm guessing they're out to lunch as well.

[dissentowner]

This is truly hilarious that people think a sign and trade of Johnny Gaudreau is remotely possible.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

This is truly hilarious that people think a sign and trade of Johnny Gaudreau is remotely possible.

Was it equally hilariously when Yzerman thought a sign and trade of Stamkos was remotely possible?

Why wouldn't a sign and trade be a possibility.

You keep avoiding the question, and we know why, but do you think it would be better to get some form of asset for Gaudreau or just let him walk if he isn't signing here?

Also, I hate to break it to you, but this is a hypothetical discussion in a thread designed for hypothetical discussion. Treliving, Gaudreau, his agent and the other 31 NHL GMs aren't in this thread.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

Was it equally hilariously when Yzerman thought a sign and trade of Stamkos was remotely possible?

Why wouldn't a sign and trade be a possibility.

You keep avoiding the question, and we know why, but do you think it would be better to get some form of asset for Gaudreau or just let him walk if he isn't signing here?

Also, I hate to break it to you, but this is a hypothetical discussion in a thread designed for hypothetical discussion. Treliving, Gaudreau, his agent and the other 31 NHL GMs aren't in this thread.

When did Stamkos get signed and traded?

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

When did Stamkos get signed and traded?

The same time he hit UFA. Never. Because star players don't hit UFA often. When they do though, or looks like they are, teams are proposing it. Conveniently you ignore that just like the question you have been asked several times. If Gaudreau was not to sign with Calgary, would you prefer he walk for free or the Flames acquire an asset?

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...trade-stamkos/

I keep respond to you, try to be polite and explain, you know have a discussion, while you're avoiding questions and literally telling people to shut up, so I'll not bother responding if you don't bother answering the question.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

The same time he hit UFA. Never. Because star players don't hit UFA often. When they do though, or looks like they are, teams are proposing it. Conveniently you ignore that just like the question you have been asked several times. If Gaudreau was not to sign with Calgary, would you prefer he walk for free or the Flames acquire an asset?

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...trade-stamkos/

I keep respond to you, try to be polite and explain, you know have a discussion, while you're avoiding questions and literally telling people to shut up, so I'll not bother responding if you don't bother answering the question.

Go back and read my posts, I already answered that question. Look, we are not losing Gaudreau for nothing or anything for that matter. We can debate it until the cows come home and that's fine but he is going to sign here. Hell, even Francis thinks he is signing here now.

[Vinny01]

I believe a deal with Johnny gets done. If by chance he decides to leave I hope
The flames explore the value of the 8th year for other teams.

I really do think he signs.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Go back and read my posts

I have. For someone who comes in saying that "We should trade Tkachuk for Norris and the 7th!" like you have to realize that is about as likely as a sign and trade, right? And far less likely than telling Gaudreau you'll trade him to Boston and then not trade him...Just fun discussion, or was supposed to be lol.

But I didn't see an answer to the question. Just seems like you're so hung up on Calgary signing Gaudreau that you're mad at anyone bringing up the possibility of that not happening. Not even saying it won't happen, just bringing up the possibility.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

I have. For someone who comes in saying that "We should trade Tkachuk for Norris and the 7th!" like you have to realize that is about as likely as a sign and trade, right? And far less likely than telling Gaudreau you'll trade him to Boston and then not trade him...Just fun discussion, or was supposed to be lol.

But I didn't see an answer to the question. Just seems like you're so hung up on Calgary signing Gaudreau that you're mad at anyone bringing up the possibility of that not happening. Not even saying it won't happen, just bringing up the possibility.

I said I would rather lose him for nothing than to lose him for just DeBrusk. I would rather lose him for nothing rather than sign him for 8 years for someone else unless the return is much better. I am not mad at anyone at all, I just think it seriously unrealistic we will see a sign and trade with our star player.

[BlackRedGold25]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Can you not read? I said if it is a sign and trade Gaudreau wants why do it with Boston? If the Bruins want Gaudreau for 8 years they can either offer more than DeBrusk or try their luck with 7 years once he hits FA. Hey, while we are at it we should sign Tkachuk for 8 years and then trade him to Ottawa to play for his brother for Pinto. I mean if you want to trade our star players for way less than market value I am sure you are on board! Thank Christ you are not our GM.

Wow. I'm trying to figure out if you're ruder than you are idiotic or vice versa.

Star players aren't worth much when they can hit unrestricted free agency in weeks. This is something that even Oiler fans have figured out but it seems beyond your intellectual capacity. Oops. Sorry for using multisyllable words. I'm sure you struggle with those as well.