[News] Tkachuk notifies Flames he won't sign long term (The Athletic)

[djsFlames]

Wanting out is a lame excuse for diminishing returns. That's a bluff that teams will use to negotiate a more favorable deal, but they're still being pitted against each other and the Flames can QO if the packages don't meet their expectations.

Best package still wins out. So pay up, b###es!

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Redlan

That is why the Flames need to state they are prepared to sign the arbitrator decision and sit on the player. Even if it is a bluff.

Hard to bluff when you have the Benny Hill theme song playing in the background when you announce your bluff.

[Harry Lime]

If Pasta is off the table... Carlo, Lysell and 2023 1st. Even that is a little underwhelming.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Azure

Strange argument to say that him wanting out diminishes the return.

Yep. I don't believe the comment.

Examples of players wanting out obtaining good returns

Sabres -- Eichel
Avalanche --- Matt Duchene
etc

[devo22]

the tweet is funny because it was a response to a tweet saying "Boston should try like hell" to get Tkachuk. Yeah, Hall + Carlo sounds like hell, alright.

[RobotTalk]

Originally Posted by Reaper

To sign an 8 year deal he has to have been on the teams roster prior to the previous trade deadline so he could only sign an 8 year deal with the Flames after January 1 prior to being traded if this goes to arbitration.

So to get maximum value it has to be a sign and trade prior to his arb date?

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Would a move like that be enough to get Treliving fired?

Better be!

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Reaper

To sign an 8 year deal he has to have been on the teams roster prior to the previous trade deadline so he could only sign an 8 year deal with the Flames after January 1 prior to being traded if this goes to arbitration.

This was changed in the last MoU. You no longer need to be on the teams roster last deadline but if you weren't, you'd need to be signed through the next deadline.

So Tkachuk, without a contract, can only sign 7 years if he was traded.

Valimaki, signed for one more year, could be traded and then sign an 8 year extension immediately as he is signed through next deadline.

I imagine, like Karlsson prompting the new change, that Tkachuk's situation may prompt another change but currently it's 7 years if he's traded.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Azure

Strange argument to say that him wanting out diminishes the return.

There is going to be a bidding war. That increases the return. How do they reporters have a job?

What diminishes his value is the fact that Calgary has to trade him, and likely by the arbitration hearing.

Because once that decision comes down, he can't sign a extension until Jan 1, and that will really diminish his value.

There will only be a bidding war if multiple teams want him, can fit him in cap wise, and he's on their list.

The timing after UFA has gone on for awhile is bad, and many of the best teams he'd want to go to already have a troubling cap situation.

[OILFAN #81]

I think it will be to the Devils for Bratt + 2023 1st.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by flambers

Yep. I don't believe the comment.

Examples of players wanting out obtaining good returns

Sabres -- Eichel
Avalanche --- Matt Duchene
etc

When Duchene said he wanted out he only got them a 1st rounder, a second rounder, a third rounder, a former first rounder and an established defenceman and a former 2nd rounder.

When Jones wanted out he only got them a former top 10 pick, a future 1st rounder, moving up from 32 to 12 in the draft and a 2nd rounder.

What are you saying that when teams are forced to move a player they can't get good value.

[Redlan]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

This was changed in the last MoU. You no longer need to be on the teams roster last deadline but if you weren't, you'd need to be signed through the next deadline.

So Tkachuk, without a contract, can only sign 7 years if he was traded.

Valimaki, signed for one more year, could be traded and then sign an 8 year extension immediately as he is signed through next deadline.

I imagine, like Karlsson prompting the new change, that Tkachuk's situation may prompt another change but currently it's 7 years if he's traded.

I thought is was changed to support the new team to have the ability.

CBA §50.8(b)(iv) shall be amended to provide that when a Club acquires a Player who is signed through the subsequent Trade Deadline, it can immediately sign him to an 8-year SPC without waiting until the subsequent Trade Deadline if otherwise permitted to do so under Section 50.5(f)

Maybe I am looking at an older version...

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Redlan

I thought is was changed to support the new team to have the ability.

CBA §50.8(b)(iv) shall be amended to provide that when a Club acquires a Player who is signed through the subsequent Trade Deadline, it can immediately sign him to an 8-year SPC without waiting until the subsequent Trade Deadline if otherwise permitted to do so under Section 50.5(f)

Maybe I am looking at an older version...

Tkachuk isn't signed.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by devo22

the tweet is funny because it was a response to a tweet saying "Boston should try like hell" to get Tkachuk. Yeah, Hall + Carlo sounds like hell, alright.

If I'm Brad I piss on the phone reciever in response to that pitiful offer.

I suppose you knew the lowball twitter garbage from teams thinking we'll tear down for their spare parts was coming.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

I think it will be to the Devils for Bratt + 2023 1st.

imagine trading Tkachuk for a guy whose two best seasons in the NHL were 73 points and 35 points and a 1st rounder. That would be such a pathetic return.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

I think it will be to the Devils for Bratt + 2023 1st.

Personally I find it hard to believe Tkachuk would be willing to sign some massive long term contract with New Jersey and I suspect they aren’t on his “trade list”.

[Timbo]

I’m quite prepared to be very underwhelmed on the return on MT

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Hard to bluff when you have the Benny Hill theme song playing in the background when you announce your bluff.

Sure you want to get it done before the arbritration.. and obviously a bit before so he can work out the contract with the team. But if you have to keep him because the offers suck then you do it until they don't suck.

I don't see that being a problem though.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by flambers

Yep. I don't believe the comment.

Examples of players wanting out obtaining good returns

Sabres -- Eichel
Avalanche --- Matt Duchene
etc

Most people did not consider the Eichel return that great at the time IIRC. But the players they got turned out better than many expected.

But each had more than their final year left IIRC.

I don;'t think Tkachuk wanting out makes that much of a difference. It's the expiring year and time crunch to get an extension done, and the cost of that extension.

[VilleN]

My dream return would be a hockey trade around Brayden Point. Calgary kid, #1 centre… not sure why Tampa would do it, unless we took some cap off their hands… maybe they’d throw in a 1st.