[Rumour] Francis: All contract talks on hold for Flames

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

I honestly think Hanifin wants to play on an American team.
I know there were rumblings about it in the past but I wouldn’t be surprised if he signs with an American team in the summer and then later on says things like Tkachuk did.

Tkachuk said he wanted to sign long term here, after he signed the bridge deal. It was "the wizard" Brad Treliving that effed that up. Maybe Tkachuk sings for six instead of two and bolts after, but Tkachuk easily could've been here for a few more years if the GM didn't screw up

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

Also:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1719930689909596339

It's crazy how random twitter guy says something and it's now gospel on this site.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

Tkachuk said he wanted to sign long term here, after he signed the bridge deal. It was "the wizard" Brad Treliving that effed that up. Maybe Tkachuk sings for six instead of two and bolts after, but Tkachuk easily could've been here for a few more years if the GM didn't screw up

Tkachuk says a lot of things. A lot of which are spin. He didn’t sign a two year deal - he signed a 3 year deal with a guaranteed 4th year at the Flames’ option.

In 2019, what do you sign a RFA for who’s had two 50 point seasons and a 77 point season? Do you give him 5 or 6 x $9M? And then get fired when that guy is less than PPG over the next two seasons?

Hindsight is great, but show me all the posts from here that urged $9M for Tkachuk.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

Tkachuk said he wanted to sign long term here, after he signed the bridge deal. It was "the wizard" Brad Treliving that effed that up. Maybe Tkachuk sings for six instead of two and bolts after, but Tkachuk easily could've been here for a few more years if the GM didn't screw up

Gio has it right.

What would Tkachuck have gained by saying ‘I was only looking at short term deals that would get me to UFA status as soon as possible’? He’s far too smart to publicly play his hand. If he was willing to sign a six year deal, why didn’t he? How do we know that wasn’t discussed? Or is it more likely Tkachuck’s demand on a six year deal wasn’t something the Flames were going to do, as Gio pointed out.

Maybe the other thing Treliving could have done is trade Tkachuck in 2019 for who knows what.

[Goriders]

As soon as Gaudreau left I’m sure Tkachuk decided there were greener pastures. The climate and taxation situations are also infinitely better in Florida. I guess why would he stay?

[Spurs]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

It's crazy how random twitter guy says something and it's now gospel on this site.

I usually laugh at these twitter insiders but there has been a lot reports from much more reputable people about a Hanifin re-signing and that the deal would be more than the Toews deal.

So while I doubt this guy has the exact details and is likely just using what actual insiders have reported to guess at a number whether it is 8 x 60 or 8 x 58 there is enough information out there to suggest the Flames were wiling to discuss a deal for 8 x 7+ million and whatever comes after the 7 is a scary number whatever it is.

[Strange Brew]

Flames didn’t have cap space to offer Tkachuk a longer term deal. That’s about the only thing we can say with certaintly.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Tkachuk says a lot of things. A lot of which are spin. He didn’t sign a two year deal - he signed a 3 year deal with a guaranteed 4th year at the Flames’ option.

In 2019, what do you sign a RFA for who’s had two 50 point seasons and a 77 point season? Do you give him 5 or 6 x $9M? And then get fired when that guy is less than PPG over the next two seasons?

Hindsight is great, but show me all the posts from here that urged $9M for Tkachuk.

If you have faith in the players progression, you absolutely sign him for as many years as you can.

The Tkachuks have always taken the money when offered. I expect he would have taken 8x $8.5MM if offered, although Calgary did not have a cap room.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Flames didn’t have cap space to offer Tkachuk a longer term deal. That’s about the only thing we can say with certaintly.

That’s one factor but there were others.

I find it hard to believe the Flames had no option’s whatsoever when it came to cleaning cap space. If they wanted to and there was good reason to, they would have.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

If you have faith in the players progression, you absolutely sign him for as many years as you can.

The Tkachuks have always taken the money when offered. I expect he would have taken 8x $8.5MM if offered, although Calgary did not have a cap room.

Not a chance in hell he took 8x8.5. Marner signed for $11M, Matthews for $11.6M and Aho got a 5 year $8.5M deal. Maybe if he were open to signing a year out they could have got that deal (before his 34 goal 77pt breakout). Dubas really screwed the RFA deals with his massive money at less than max term for Marner and Matthews. I think the Flames would have been in the 9-9.5 range for 6 years had they been able to get Tkachuk long term.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Every team in the NHL comes down to two categories:


1) Well-managed
2) Poorly-managed


I will argue until I am blue in the face that NO TEAM should be trying to rebuild unless they have been extremely poorly managed. A rebuild is basically just rolling over on your back and giving up. It only happens not because of any natural cycle. It happens because whomever was in charge made a series of wrong decisions that either:
a) forced you into a rebuild as no other legitimate avenue of improvement exists
b) you are still being mismanaged and the guy in charge doesn't know what else to do

I think the Flames poorly managed Gaudreau and Tkachuk but once they decided to leave a well managed team would have the foresight to see that as the opportune time to rebuild. The reason many rebuilds struggle is because they start with very limited assets. They wait far to long to start. The only way to speed that up is by converting current assets into future assets. Don't wait until every player has little to no value left. Flip those assets when they have value and can bring back significant pieces that can help you inject an abundance of young talent at once.

They waited to long on Gaudreau and got nothing, they wasted Tkachuk who should have got them at minimum a very good young player to build around. They've now waited until they very last minute on Lindholm and Hanifin. They didn't trade Backlund after a career year. Toffoli was very underwhelming. Not to mention nothing of significance for Hamonic, Brodie, Gio, Bennett. Wasted a 1st to get rid of Monahan. These guys are atrocious at asset management.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TOfan

That’s one factor but there were others.

I find it hard to believe the Flames had no option’s whatsoever when it came to cleaning cap space. If they wanted to and there was good reason to, they would have.

It’s all assumption. You’re assuming Tkachuk wouldn’t have signed a long term offer. Others assume he would have.

Fact is Flames didn’t have the room and I haven’t seen any credible reports that they had a deal in place should they have needed it. It sure seems like they were trying to keep the team intact and keep Tkachuk’s AAV low.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

It’s all assumption. You’re assuming Tkachuk wouldn’t have signed a long term offer. Others assume he would have.

Fact is Flames didn’t have the room and I haven’t seen any credible reports that they had a deal in place should they have needed it. It sure seems like they were trying to keep the team intact and keep Tkachuk’s AAV low.

I do know that when Tkachuk talked about long term deals his starting number was "6". I do know his QO (and therefore his last yearly wage) was $9M, so that's what he expected going forward on a year to year basis. I do know that he could have signed a long term deal at the same or more money here before he left. Yet he left for the US. That's all evidence pointing to what he wanted at the time.

[Geeoff]

one veteran player that could definitely go on waivers is Vladar

[CroCop]

I would hope that “all contract talks on hold”would include all previous offers rescinded.

[GioforPM]

Moving on from past deals and onto the present topic, the hold on contracts means one of a few options:

a. This is a negotiation tactic by Conroy.
b. This is a management decision that negotiations are becoming a distraction (see the team's record) and should wait until the on ice performance improves.
c. There's been a change in strategy on what the team should look like going forward.

If it's C, you will have a team with a few vets: Huberdeau, Kadri, Weegar, Andersson, Backlund, Markstrom. And a bunch of kids coming up: Coronato, Zary, Pelletier, Wolf, Ruzicka, Honzek, Poirier, Solovyev etc. Plus whoever they draft with their present picks and what they get for Hanifin, Lidstrom, Zadorov, Tanev and Dube. Maybe they also trade guys with term like Coleman and Mangiapane.

Start of 24-25 you might see a lineup of:

Huberdeau-Kadri-Mangiapane
Zary-Backlund-Sharangovich
Pelletier-Ruzicka-Coronato
Duehr-Hunt-Schwindt

Weegar-Andersson
Poirier-X
X-X

There may be some better young players as well depending on the returns for the trades.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

one veteran player that could definitely go on waivers is Vladar

Does that shake the room up though?

Can’t be Huberdeau, Kadri or Backlund as they all currently have a NMC

Wouldn’t be Coleman or Mangiapane because they are playing decently well and wouldn’t be Lindholm for obvious reasons.

I don’t see a Dman that would qualify especially since they are already short handed.

I really have no idea who the veteran on waivers to wake up the room could be.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Team leaks the "a veteran going on waivers' thing to try to push the room.
I suspect all this is. Was never an actual player.

[Paulie Walnuts]

The Tkachuk thing is always funny.

Everyone after his 106 point season says I would have signed him to 8x10 in that offseason.

He had 2 good years and 1 great year and got a bridge deal that a lot of guys signed that summer.

2 years into that bridge deal the thought of 9 million disgusted many people, the same people who now are saying of course we should have signed him to 8x10 made him captain blah blah.

Everyone forgets the frustration of the previous years with him and Johnny.

[Monahammer]

I forgot Huberdeau had an NMC- what a brutal contract.

Trading him at 50% is a better outcome than a buyout. Saves us more cap and ends sooner. Not sure how ownership would feel about it obviously, but it seems like it could be a preferable outcome for us fans.