Former Flames player performance thread - 2022/23 season

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

As much as it did suck to lose Johnny like we did, it is far more gruesome and egregious for the franchise to have lost Tkachuk like that. I think the trade was fine, but we should have been moving heaven and earth to extend him long term after first contract. I'm talking selling contracts on the cheap to make it happen. It was obviously a huge, huge error to not immediately prioritize matt as #1 on the team list. C'est la vie I suppose, but many of us knew he was our most important player ~3 season before he left.

The piece of Tkachuk's 2nd contract that really irks me looking back at it is that we didn't pay to unload Frolik's contract in order to get Tkachuk signed long term.

This team spent a 1st to dump Monahan so we could sign Kadri - but (seemingly) wouldn't spend a 1st to dump Frolik in order to give Tkachuk an 8 year contract (and likely the C)?

I loathe that we spent a 1st to be able to sign Kadri.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Gandhi not a Sutter player.

Too small. Not strong enough. Doesn’t move well at all.

But somehow manages to get in the way.

Sutter would play Ghandi 25 a night.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

The piece of Tkachuk's 2nd contract that really irks me looking back at it is that we didn't pay to unload Frolik's contract in order to get Tkachuk signed long term.

This team spent a 1st to dump Monahan so we could sign Kadri - but (seemingly) wouldn't spend a 1st to dump Frolik in order to give Tkachuk an 8 year contract (and likely the C)?

I loathe that we spent a 1st to be able to sign Kadri.

Tkachuk was never signing an 8 year deal and it likely would have had to match McDavid’s to even consider it. Marner signed for $11Mx6 and Matthews $11.65Mx5 in the same offseason. As soon as those deals were signed the hope of getting Tkachuk on a max term died. Tkachuk even commented how he was a huge fan of the 5 year term and was excited to see players get paid that much for that term.

Realistically the Flames would have had to be close to the Marner deal for 6 years or something around the Aho deal but likely a bit more. Sure we would have had Chucky for 2-3 more years but likely not able to get as much in a trade as a team who was signing him for 8 years got.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

As much as it did suck to lose Johnny like we did, it is far more gruesome and egregious for the franchise to have lost Tkachuk like that. I think the trade was fine, but we should have been moving heaven and earth to extend him long term after first contract. I'm talking selling contracts on the cheap to make it happen. It was obviously a huge, huge error to not immediately prioritize matt as #1 on the team list. C'est la vie I suppose, but many of us knew he was our most important player ~3 season before he left.

What dollar amount does it take to keep him in Calgary?

[Monahammer]

I think the dollar amount to keep him is immaterial. So what if it's mcDavid money?

The coach keeps identifying that we don't have elite talent. Well, he was wrong. We did have an elite talent. He's proving he's still an elite talent with more point production in a less rigid system. I prefered him in Calgary, but the point stands, this is a superstar talent. If your team drafts that, then money shouldn't get in the way of a contract signing, especially when you're willing to doll out 8x9 contracts to guys over 30 who have purposely cut out a trade to our franchise and never really performed to desired level on his former team(s). Outside of one season where he was sheltered by legit superstars in Mackinnon, Rantanen and Makar.

[Monahammer]

I think Tkachuk signs an 8 year deal if you overpay. Look at Brady and senators as an obvious example. It was always about money and spotlight. Give him 11 mil a season and a C. That was the right move, and I'm tired of people pretending that we played this saavy. No, we hardballed our best asset from the last 10 years and we lost.

[Paulie Walnuts]

How was he hardballed you are making things up.

THat summer is was a bunch of bridge deals or 5 year deals like Matthew Marner and Rantanen signed.

You would have been crazy to shell out a double digit deal to him at that point in his career.

Look at the 2 seasons he put on the ice and his no show playoffs. Not to mention his stupid antics get other teams to play us even harder.

Most people went into last season horrified at the thought of the 9 million QO he was owed.

After the Canadian Division and season after teh bubble people wanted changes.

Both Gaudreau and Tkachuk sewered their values, they put on a show last season so they could get paid.

But sure lets blow up the franchise and cap to make Tkachuk happy and try to make 9th place like Florida as long as he gets his points.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I think the dollar amount to keep him is immaterial. So what if it's mcDavid money?

The coach keeps identifying that we don't have elite talent. Well, he was wrong. We did have an elite talent. He's proving he's still an elite talent with more point production in a less rigid system. I prefered him in Calgary, but the point stands, this is a superstar talent. If your team drafts that, then money shouldn't get in the way of a contract signing, especially when you're willing to doll out 8x9 contracts to guys over 30 who have purposely cut out a trade to our franchise and never really performed to desired level on his former team(s). Outside of one season where he was sheltered by legit superstars in Mackinnon, Rantanen and Makar.

So Frolik money out doesn't get you McDavid money in and you are still short a roster player. And you then also don't sign, say Tanev, or Markstrom, or have money to pay Gaudreau what he wants. You can't lock up Rasmus.

He gave Tkachuk $7M per year. At the time Tkachuk had nevver hit PPG, and he didn't for two of the 3 years after that either. On what evidence do you give Tkachuk $15M in 2019?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So Frolik money out doesn't get you McDavid money in and you are still short a roster player. And you then also don't sign, say Tanev, or Markstrom, or have money to pay Gaudreau what he wants. You can't lock up Rasmus.

He gave Tkachuk $7M per year. At the time Tkachuk had nevver hit PPG, and he didn't for two of the 3 years after that either. On what evidence do you give Tkachuk $15M in 2019?

Because hes producing this year and Huberdeau isn't so we need to rewind 5 years back and throw a tantrum that Brad Treliving didn't have his magic 8 ball out that this guy was a 100 point player.

How many people even saw a 100 point player?

I also think we probably let him know he was going ot be paid, but again if a player doesn't want to sign with you what are you going to do? Brad said they wanted to sign him but he didn't want to be here.

Its like only players from our team leave.

[FlamesAddiction]

I'd rather have given Tkachuk McDavid money, then give Huberdeau almost McDavid money.

[Monahammer]

I'm being revisionist? LOL

Tons of people around here thought Matt had huge offensive upside, and was being held down offensively playing on lower lines with Backlund and Frolik. I was personally one of them, but there were many.

Gio, then you move more than just Frolik and you start playing rookies. Long term health of the franchise vs trying to win in 3 year increments. It's always been this way with ownership/management, and it's patently stupid.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I'm being revisionist? LOL

Tons of people around here thought Matt had huge offensive upside, and was being held down offensively playing on lower lines with Backlund and Frolik. I was personally one of them, but there were many.

Gio, then you move more than just Frolik and you start playing rookies. Long term health of the franchise vs trying to win in 3 year increments. It's always been this way with ownership/management, and it's patently stupid.

Yup. I was saying for a long time that Tkachuk was a better player than Gaudreau, and he was the guy to go all in on. If there was a chance that he would have signed long term at the time the bridge deal was signed, I'll be pretty mad.

I was not surprised he hit 100 points, and not surprised he is doing it again.

[dino7c]

I have my doubts you guys were pushing for 11x8 or something for Tkachuk back then

Even in the Canadian div season he didn't look like anything more than a 70 point player

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by traptor

Frank not so subtly inferring that he wanted to stay and was about to but his wife vetoed it.

Gotta wonder what the Tkachuk trade looks like if Gaudreau is staying.

I said this was the Intel I had as well and got told I was a liar and dragged through the mud. Nice to see another source come forward as I was never going to reveal mine and would rather take the crap storm I did.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I have my doubts you guys were pushing for 11x8 or something for Tkachuk back then

Even in the Canadian div season he didn't look like anything more than a 70 point player

They didn't. He said McDavid like money so probably something like 13.5X8 with the captaincy. Maybe name the arena the Matthew Tkachuk Event Center.

I never heard anyone say they saw 100 points in him until now, just like the one poster just knew Johnny would score 100 plus last season.

[dino7c]

Also gotta wonder how many points Tkachuk would have right now if he stayed

He would have been making 10.5 this year so who would be out? I doubt he has 100 points with Lindholm/Tof or whoever

[dino7c]

Before last season I was basically mocked off the board for saying the Flames were a playoff team so I doubt too many were predicting 100 points each for Tkachuk/Gaudreau coming off the Canadian div season.

Feel free to post history though

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I have my doubts you guys were pushing for 11x8 or something for Tkachuk back then

Even in the Canadian div season he didn't look like anything more than a 70 point player

Where did that number come from? Is this something confirmed somewhere, or just blind speculation?

I would bet the number on a long term deal would have been closer to what his qualifying offer would have been, hence why the bridge deal was for what it was. The dollar amount in the bridge was significant as well, so I am guessing that Treliving believed in him to a very large degree. Making it sound like Tkachuk just came out of nowhere to meet those salary expectations sounds more like revisionist history to me.

Sure, it would have a risk to sign him long term at the time, but a pretty reasonable risk given his age and what he had accomplished up until that point. A lot of people were thinking Buffalo were crazy for signing Thompson to a long term deal when they did, but sometimes teams need to take those chances.

[dino7c]

Well if you called Tkachuk a 100 point player 5 years ago hats off...I have my doubts though

I don't remember anyone with such lofty predictions

[Paulie Walnuts]

The deal signed by him anyways showed he didn't plan to be Calgary long term or hold us hostage this last offseason by taking his QO and walking which is exactly what happened.

There was smoke around Frolik maybe getting traded to create more room, if we have him that money thats right in that 11 plus range which sounds about right with what Matthews and Marner signed.

Imagine going into last offseason and Matthew Tkachuk after checking out in the Canadian Division on the books for 3 more years at 11 million plus. People would have wanted Brad fired.