[Signing] Gaudreau to Columbus (7 x $9.75 million)

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

Why is it 50%? He just missed a deadline to sign knowing the team is now giving him blanche carte to talk to other teams. That should change the chance of signing him to nearly nothing.

And there is no bullying tactics with Tkachuk. I ask him if he wants to sign 8 years, if not, I ask which teams he would sign with (to increase his value in a trade) but ultimately I likely trade him for the most a team is willing to give. Caveat being like a Pacific team. This isn't scaring or bullying tactics, it's the exact opposite. It's asking him what he wants.

I don't get the personal attacks because I don't like the way the Flames handled the situation. Doesn't mean I'm a bully or scary. Jeeze.

What personal attacks have you endured? Don't remember any.

I think given the rumours and speculation of how things went down that 50% is/was a pretty good estimate.

And agreed on Tkachuk for this week.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Gaudreau had a better playoffs but he still really choked against the Oilers in the last few games...he didn't look dangerous at all

Flames issue is going to be making the playoffs without his points IMO...I think they can make a better playoff team better utilizing that 10.5M

Yeah. You need guys to get you there and guys to win when you do get there. Unfortunately those aren't always the same guys. I don't think Gaudreau will ever be that playoff guy, but he is the reason they were 1st in division.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Bingo

What personal attacks have you endured? Don't remember any.

I think given the rumours and speculation of how things went down that 50% is/was a pretty good estimate.

And agreed on Tkachuk for this week.

I'd recommend you go back and read your responses to me. Every second post is a quip about how the "real world" works and how I must be psychic while I mostly tried to respond to you earnestly without insulting.

Again, all because I suggested that Treliving set an internal deadline and stick with it so he had certainty about the direction at the draft to avoid the situation the Flames currently find themselves in.

You seem to be looking at maximizing the "profit" by hoping Gaudreau signs last minute, I'm minimizing the "loss" by not going into the draft blind and avoiding the worst case scenario. Both happen in the "real world".

[PepsiFree]

The talk of Tkachuk in relation to Gaudreau is also interesting if you consider what his season or outlook might have been if Gaudreau had been traded last year.

He had a career season and seemed far happier at the end of this season than he has previously. I wonder if his personal success and the team's success actually increases his desire to stay. And if it doesn't, it definitely increases his value in trade (unless in this hypothetical hindsight world we're apparently living in we would have traded Tkachuk last year as well).

So, I think you can make an argument that keeping Gaudreau might improve the Tkachuk situation in either direction.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

I agree with you. The Flames aren't finishing top 3 (bottom 3...) without Gaudreau. Because they didn't embrace the rebuild like Chicago did leading up to the draft which I would have done.

Chicago got rid of anything that had a pulse outside of Kane, who has a NMC that may request a trade anyways, and Jones who they can keep for the rebuild. They're finishing bottom 3 because they got rid of DeBrincat, Dach, Hagel, Kubalik, Strome while letting de Haan walk. They took active steps to make sure they have the best chance at drafting Bedard.

So you admit that there isn't anything a team can do to make itself even worse than Chicago (and Arizona)? Good odds for anyone else to draft top 3, then.

[Lonestar]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Save your condescending drivel. Your position is, "Oh my god, what do you do when someone has you by the balls??? You let them squeeze even harder and just enjoy it!" No, you punch them in the nose so they let go and have something else to think about. The proper response is you assume some control and show you're willing to move the player and get whatever you can, because you're getting played to the point where you're going to have nothing to show for this unless you capitulate on every demand, and even then there is no guarantee. So you force the issue and be prepared to move the hell on.

Again, Treliving LOST when he couldn't get the contract across the goal line before the NTC kicked in. As soon as that happened the hockey team was screwed. At that point you're hoping the player has a crap year so you can get him under contract on a good deal, because the alternative is paying through the nose and giving other teams the potential to poach your player. Treliving ####ed up. Full stop. Again, a hard deadline that was ignored by Treliving got the team into this mess. This should have been dealt with a year earlier and not allowed to get to the 11th hour. When you're in negotiations you maintain control so you get a beneficial deal. If you lose control you have to manufacture a control point so you have some leverage. Treliving gave up the leverage and Gross never let up.

I see your point, but disagree. It takes two sides to make a deal, what incentive would Johnny have to sign a long-term deal after the Canadian bubble season he had? It wouldn't surprise me that last summer was a case of Johnny sitting on a fair offer that he knew he could beat with a productive 21-22 season. Everyone was excited about the team, why shouldn't he have been excited about the possibility of a personal bounce-back and what that would mean for earnings?

Secondly, Treliving gave up leverage in this negotiation 6 years ago when he offered a contract that would lead Johnny up to UFA status, Gross didn't take that from him. He knew how to count then and realized the position a GM (he's probably wasting zero headspace at that time on who holds that title in 2022) would be in at this point. Johnny outperformed that contract by a mile and Gross did exactly what he should have done for his client. Johnny, however, I think slighted the organization and it's fans for taking so long.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So you admit that there isn't anything a team can do to make itself even worse than Chicago (and Arizona)? Good luck for anyone else to draft top 3, then.

No?

They could have taken the same tactic as the Blackhawks and started shipping players out who wouldn't be part of the rebuild.

Chicago is expected to be bad because they just traded a multi-time 40 goal-scorer who is 24 years old. They used cap-space and a rebuilding year to acquire an additional 1st round pick by taking Mrazek. They didn't qualify middle-tier players who gave them a chance to win a couple games.

The Flames could have been following a similar plan and gutting the team for its first real rebuild this generation.

Of course there's no guarantee in drafting Bedard (or that he will be as good as expected), but Chicago took steps to give them better odds. The Flames clearly haven't.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

No?

They could have taken the same tactic as the Blackhawks and started shipping players out who wouldn't be part of the rebuild.

They could have done that this off season? Chicago has been bad and getting worse for years, and for the record, last year they tried to make moves to become immediately competitive – which is exactly what you criticize the Flames for doing.

This summer, Chicago took a 68-point team and gutted it. They did this to accumulate assets for the future, not because they think it will magically land them a #1 overall pick in competition against teams that got 63, 61, 60, 57, and 55 points and made no significant improvements.

You're suggesting that the Flames should take a 111-point team and make it worse than every one of those other teams in one go. It doesn't happen.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

I'd recommend you go back and read your responses to me. Every second post is a quip about how the "real world" works and how I must be psychic while I mostly tried to respond to you earnestly without insulting.

Again, all because I suggested that Treliving set an internal deadline and stick with it so he had certainty about the direction at the draft to avoid the situation the Flames currently find themselves in.

You seem to be looking at maximizing the "profit" by hoping Gaudreau signs last minute, I'm minimizing the "loss" by not going into the draft blind and avoiding the worst case scenario. Both happen in the "real world".

Just had a look. I think you're confusing me with someone else.

I said bullying, and scaring others ... have certainly accused you of avoiding the question (which you did), and putting words in my mouth.

I try and avoid personal attacks not really my thing. So if you think that's what I've done I guess we either have a different interpretation of what a personal attack is or we differ in thickness of skin.

Back on topic it's probability.

You don't close off a 50% chance of retaining your best hockey player, especially if the alternate route is a mid to late round pick as a "win"!

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

They could have done that this off season? Chicago has been bad and getting worse for years, and for the record, last year they tried to make moves to become immediately competitive – which is exactly what you criticize the Flames for doing.

Trade Tkachuk and maybe Markstrom/Tanev? Yeah, probably.

Dube-Lindholm-Toffoli
Coleman-Backlund-Mangiapane
Lucic-Trash-Trash
Trash-Trash-Trash

Hanifin-Andersson
Kylington-Trash
Trash-Trash

Vladar
Trash

Not sure Monahan coming back turns that team into a contender.

[powderjunkie]

The Flames needed more of a plan for what to do if Johnny DID sign than if he didn't.

Right now they can just re-sign their RFAs and be patient. Tkachuk is the real fork in the road, but I don't even think trading him should trigger a massive organizational direction change.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You don't close off a 50% chance of retaining your best hockey player, especially if the alternate route is a mid to late round pick as a "win"!

"Hey Johnny, we have determined that if you're not signed by the draft we're going to have to move on given the uncertainty. Here's our final and best offer for 8 years. Feel free to counter until the draft, but if you aren't signed by then we're going into rebuild mode which includes moving veterans out who want to be moved/can find spots for them."

If he doesn't sign then, it's no longer 50%. It's closer to 0%. Which was what it was looking like always. We're just finding out at a different time in this scenario.

The rumour which apparently is true is that they gave the Flames an offer to match, they matched it in the 11th hour and he still balked.

Seems like Treliving was doing his own hardballing to save a couple grand off the cap. Respectful goal, but missing the forest for the trees. Better to go into the draft with a certainty (whether that was signing Gaudreau at 10.5M instead of that 10M they wanted to get him at) or knowing he was actually leaving.

And I strongly disagree with you about your posts, you started off condescending and never let up.

Even now you refuse to acknowledge that I never cared about the return for Gaudreau. I cared about the certainty at the draft to plan accordingly.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

"What would you do?"

What I suggested.

"You can't do that, now what?"

Cool.

Let's just turn this around and say for sure the ownership was cool with a rebuild, what would you have done at the previous draft?

And, again, even if we couldn't rebuild, the draft was important enough in my opinion that certainty for Gaudreau was required and I still would have set a deadline and stuck with it before hand. Or can I not do that? I need to wait until he leaves as UFA because Treliving did that?

Previous meaning this summer or last summer?
I'm happy to provide my POV on that just wanted to clarify what you are asking.

[Zarley]

I think the Flames dodged a bullet by not signing him at $10.5M for 8 years. We are lucky that he had a last minute change of heart.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You called me "dense" yesterday so no you don't get the condescending card today at all. Has to be earned.

Yeah, after you dropped yet another one of your passive aggressive "I can't believe you think that" statements. You get what you deserve too Bingo. Don't think for a second that you are squeaky clean when it comes to discussion and argument. You've always leaned to the passive aggressive comments to gain an edge, and you've been hammering away at people with those comments, so keep that in mind.

I'll put my history of dealing with people in a classy way against yours any day of the week.

Your perception. The fact that you own the board means a lot of people will happily smell your farts and tell you they are laced with lavender and peppermint. No one is going to tell the emperor he has no clothes on.

Your bravado above is useless. The league has deadlines, everyone knows it and internet tough speak doesn't play in a world where the player has all the options.

Deadlines are arbitrary and can be pushed forward by a team if they so desire, especially if they want to extract value out of an asset or assume control over negotiations. The trade deadline is on Day X. Then why the hell would anyone make a trade ahead of the trade deadline when it is well know that is the deadline?

How many assets walk that might have signed because GM Lanny puffed out his chest and talked in platitudes about ball squeezing and face punching?

Dunno. How many teams/players stopped taking advantage of the Flames when Burke refused to trade Cammaleri at the deadline for the measly second round pick? You have to draw lines in the sand to get some control in situations.

The organization (owners) chose to not deal the player last summer to take a run with Sutter. Largely worked.

Those are two completely independent decisions. You do not ignore a time sensitive player contract because you hire a new coach. And if you are going to try and connect those two decisions, then no, it didn't largely work. We lost the player for nothing. If the intent was get the player signed at a favorable contract, they lost their asses and showed what fools they are. They surrendered all control to the player and his agent.

You keep asking people to explain why this was a loss for the team, which has been shown in spades and actual outcome, so lets turn the table. Please explain to me HOW this scenario would have played out in their favor? Explain how tying Gaudreau's contract to Sutter, and the hope of improved team success, would work in the team's favor at all? You're up. What potential benefit was there to kick this can down the road?

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Zarley

I think the Flames dodged a bullet by not signing him at $10.5M for 8 years. We are lucky that he had a last minute change of heart.

And I agree. Another reason I would have been fine giving him the best offer (which apparently for Treliving was 10.5M at the 11th hour) and a deadline to sign by the draft. If not, thanks for the memories Johnny.

This summer Jiri.

[PuckDemon]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

"Hey Johnny, we have determined that if you're not signed by the draft we're going to have to move on given the uncertainty. Here's our final and best offer for 8 years. Feel free to counter until the draft, but if you aren't signed by then we're going into rebuild mode which includes moving veterans out who want to be moved/can find spots for them."

If he doesn't sign then, it's no longer 50%. It's closer to 0%. Which was what it was looking like always. We're just finding out at a different time in this scenario.

The rumour which apparently is true is that they gave the Flames an offer to match, they matched it in the 11th hour and he still balked.

Seems like Treliving was doing his own hardballing to save a couple grand off the cap. Respectful goal, but missing the forest for the trees. Better to go into the draft with a certainty (whether that was signing Gaudreau at 10.5M instead of that 10M they wanted to get him at) or knowing he was actually leaving.

And I strongly disagree with you about your posts, you started off condescending and never let up.

Even now you refuse to acknowledge that I never cared about the return for Gaudreau. I cared about the certainty at the draft to plan accordingly.

I see where you're coming from on making a hard deadline prior to the draft. It's possible the Flames considered doing that too, but considered it not worth it. What is the value of going into the draft with certainty? It could be close to nothing. I don't know what the Flames would have done differently going into the draft if they let Gaudreau walk before then. More hinges on the Tkachuk situation I would say.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

And I agree. Another reason I would have been fine giving him the best offer (which apparently for Treliving was 10.5M at the 11th hour) and a deadline to sign by the draft. If not, thanks for the memories Johnny.

This summer Jiri.

In that case...
- I would have made no effort to sign him, as having him on this team for that cap rate doesn't put this team in position to win a championship (in my view). Had ownership agreed I would have traded him before his NTC kicked in, but that horse left the barn long ago. This summer I would have tried to trade him for whatever low return I could get
- I would similarly have moved Tkachuk for a higher return. I would have tried to get a high 2022 pick or non protected 2023 1sts, though I think those will be hard to get from anyone
- I would establish the market for other veterans on the team including Markstrom.
- I likely keep Tanev and Backlund around because I think they help players they play with develop into better ones.
- I focus on shooting for maximum cap flexibility in the summers of 2023 and 2024. I avoid any UFA signings of note this season
- I get the idea of tanking for 2023 but I don't view that as much of a plan b/c of the high level of luck involved. That being said, moving Tkachuk, Johnny and Markstrom probably is a good start to that.
- I would focus on about a 5 year period to re-coup the asset base to the point that you can actually be a perennial contender.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. He lost the most important one, the last one. And I'm not that certain how badly he won that previous round. He signed Gaudreau to 9.246% of the cap, not far off of Robert Thomas' 9.848% of cap. Seems like fair market value?

A fair market deal is surely a win. Just go back and look at the reaction. People were predicting the same term and $9M. And I wouldn't say Gross won a round this time either. I think he and Johnny screwed themselves. And the Flames. They overplayed their hand. They managed to screw the Flames too, but that's not on Treliving, for acting according to everything we know about Gross and his handling of star players like Gaudreau, Krug and Nylander.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Yeah, after you dropped yet another one of your passive aggressive "I can't believe you think that" statements. You get what you deserve too Bingo. Don't think for a second that you are squeaky clean when it comes to discussion and argument. You've always leaned to the passive aggressive comments to gain an edge, and you've been hammering away at people with those comments, so keep that in mind.

Your perception. The fact that you own the board means a lot of people will happily smell your farts and tell you they are laced with lavender and peppermint. No one is going to tell the emperor he has no clothes on.

You want to put "I can't believe you think that" against "dense" to a vote?

And now you're piling on to suggest everyone else on the site is a lemming? Way to double down man.

This crap just doesn't work on me. You can see through it from a mile away. I have plenty of civil arguments on this site, and have for 20+ years. You can't help but take a smarter than everyone else angle on everything, and when you get called on it, you take it personal.

We all know it.
We all see it.
We all know it won't stop.

I don't charge a fee. I don't moderate the board.

What pray tell is everyone so afraid of that they won't call me on being the ass you think I am?