Matthew Tkachuk wants out rumour

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Joborule

I disagree. Honestly if Monahan wasn't such a dud/injured (again) this season, the Flames would've made the playoffs, and based on Habs now in the finals, could've gone all the way themselves.

Lindholm is great value for what he brings as a centre, and fill in on the top 6 nicely. What's lacking is another centre who contributes as a good level top 6 centre also since the team lacks a high end one. If Monahan, or if another centre is brought in that can contribute close to as well as Lindholm did, and Tkachuk + Gaudreau (and Eat Bread) continue to perform as they did in the late part of the season, the team up front would have a lot better results, and be in good shape to compete.

Did the Flames trade Backlund? 3 x 5.3 left on his contract.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Did the Flames trade Backlund? 3 x 5.3 left on his contract.

Backlund is Backlund. He's not going to be a ~70 point producer. That's the biggest fault with the Flames roster right now in that they don't have two centres that are capable of it if they're going for the heavy winger production approach.

If no changes happen to the core of the roster at all (won't be surprised even if Tre tries like previous failed attempts), then if Monahan can stay healthy and does produce around that level, Flames ideally should have a stronger season then.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Trade him

[Poe969]

Trade them all.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Joborule

I disagree. Honestly if Monahan wasn't such a dud/injured (again) this season, the Flames would've made the playoffs, and based on Habs now in the finals, could've gone all the way themselves.

Lindholm is great value for what he brings as a centre, and fill in on the top 6 nicely. What's lacking is another centre who contributes as a good level top 6 centre also since the team lacks a high end one. If Monahan, or if another centre is brought in that can contribute close to as well as Lindholm did, and Tkachuk + Gaudreau (and Eat Bread) continue to perform as they did in the late part of the season, the team up front would have a lot better results, and be in good shape to compete.

So you think it's a good idea to keep both Gaudreau and Tkachuk, extend them, and have the Flames two highest paid forwards for the next 6+ years be flawed left shot wingers who are both making north of $8 million or maybe even north of $9 million AAV each?

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

So you think it's a good idea to keep both Gaudreau and Tkachuk, extend them, and have the Flames two highest paid forwards for the next 6+ years be flawed left shot wingers who are both making north of $8 million or maybe even north of $9 million AAV each?

Yep. Considering they are the best players on the rosters that we got right now, and one of them is in prime development age, while the other was two seasons out of a 100* point season, and still has signs of being able to very productive with proper support. Who else on the roster should be getting the +9 million plus contracts?

The market for players that produce isn't going to be going down, and give it a couple years contracts are gonna rise up again. So you gotta be willing to pay for players that do actually produce. And those two players alone aren't going to handicap the Flames cap space. The rest of the roster needs to be built properly if the team as a whole is gonna be competitive.

There's also the case of retaining an assets for a duration of time. In the scenario that the Flames still aren't moving forward, and finally decide to commit to attempting another true rebuild, trading those two for decent value should be possible since there would be teams that feel their contributions would be worth the costs since they should still be good players overall. Unless for some unforeseen reason the quality of their player completely diminishes and they are shells of their former selves.

If both Gaudreau and Tkachuck do want to stay long term with the team, you definitely make deals at their market rate, and go from there.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

So you think it's a good idea to keep both Gaudreau and Tkachuk, extend them, and have the Flames two highest paid forwards for the next 6+ years be flawed left shot wingers who are both making north of $8 million or maybe even north of $9 million AAV each?

This is why I think the Flames have to take a good hard look at trading Tkachuk right now.

Tkachuk signed himself into being a 25 year old UFA, was told to "calm down", complained about his minutes, and wants to play in St. Louis. He has a lot of trade value and could likely bring back a better player than anyone else on the team (Lindholm probably should be worth more, but he would never be traded).

Gaudreau on the other hand, has been with the team since 2011 and has unequivocally stated that he wants to sign long term. He's durable and I doubt he'll regress any time soon.

It would be silly to pay two left wingers 17+ million when there are so many other holes in the lineup.

Both of them don't have much term. So to maximize value, you'll have to make the trade sooner rather than later.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Yep. Considering they are the best players on the rosters that we got right now, and one of them is in prime development age, while the other was two seasons out of a 100* point season, and still has signs of being able to very productive with proper support. Who else on the roster should be getting the +9 million plus contracts?

The market for players that produce isn't going to be going down, and give it a couple years contracts are gonna rise up again. So you gotta be willing to pay for players that do actually produce. And those two players alone aren't going to handicap the Flames cap space. The rest of the roster needs to be built properly if the team as a whole is gonna be competitive.

There's also the case of retaining an assets for a duration of time. In the scenario that the Flames still aren't moving forward, and finally decide to commit to attempting another true rebuild, trading those two for decent value should be possible since there would be teams that feel their contributions would be worth the costs since they should still be good players overall. Unless for some unforeseen reason the quality of their player completely diminishes and they are shells of their former selves.

If both Gaudreau and Tkachuck do want to stay long term with the team, you definitely make deals at their market rate, and go from there.

So you are suggesting we keep the core and change the pieces around it? Isn't that what we have been doing to no avail? Do you feel optimistic Tre will get the right pieces this time?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

This is why I think the Flames have to take a good hard look at trading Tkachuk right now.

Tkachuk signed himself into being a 25 year old UFA, was told to "calm down", complained about his minutes, and wants to play in St. Louis. He has a lot of trade value and could likely bring back a better player than anyone else on the team (Lindholm probably should be worth more, but he would never be traded).

Gaudreau on the other hand, has been with the team since 2011 and has unequivocally stated that he wants to sign long term. He's durable and I doubt he'll regress any time soon.

It would be silly to pay two left wingers 17+ million when there are so many other holes in the lineup.

Both of them don't have much term. So to maximize value, you'll have to make the trade sooner rather than later.

Can you link to a story or a tweet or anything where any of these things were stated?

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

This is why I think the Flames have to take a good hard look at trading Tkachuk right now.

Tkachuk signed himself into being a 25 year old UFA, was told to "calm down", complained about his minutes, and wants to play in St. Louis. He has a lot of trade value and could likely bring back a better player than anyone else on the team (Lindholm probably should be worth more, but he would never be traded).

Gaudreau on the other hand, has been with the team since 2011 and has unequivocally stated that he wants to sign long term. He's durable and I doubt he'll regress any time soon.

It would be silly to pay two left wingers 17+ million when there are so many other holes in the lineup.

Both of them don't have much term. So to maximize value, you'll have to make the trade sooner rather than later.

My concern with Tkachuk is if we see more of the same next season where he appears disconnected, we could be in the same boat missing the playoffs. Some have suggested players have off seasons, but this seemed different. It wasn't until after we missed the playoffs and Tkachuk was on the top line that we saw a little closer to the old Tkachuk.

Tkachuk can be a very good player, but without him playing his best it is an uphill battle for the Flames. If he stays it has to be because Tkachuk wants to be here and wants to be a big part of the team. It is on the Flames organization to find out what went wrong and fix it; Otherwise I think a trade while his value is high would be prudent.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Can you link to a story or a tweet or anything where any of these things were stated?

Does the obvious really have to be stated?

This is the same with Philly and Gaudreau.

If Tkachuk had his choice of ANY team in the league to play for starting tomorrow, which team in which city do you think he picks instantly?

Luckily there are other factors that play into it, first and foremost being that the Flames hold his rights for the next two seasons, otherwise he'd be gone already.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Can you link to a story or a tweet or anything where any of these things were stated?

I believe it was first brought up by Elliotte Friedman.

By the way, I'm not trashing Tkachuk for this. If anything, most of us are probably agree with him. The player who told him to calm down is the one at fault.
But I'm just saying that it's a potential reason for his discontent. Just speculation of course.

[Knut]

Btw. To add more fuel to this fire.

Tom Fitzgerald, GM of the devils, is related to Tkachuk. Him and Big Walt are cousins.

[Poe969]

The devils make a great trade partner for Gaudreau IMO. After the expansion draft teams will want to shore up newly created holes in the roster and some teams will just want to make a big push. This is the time to capitalize and take advantage.

If they put Tkachuk on the block he will get as much interest as Eichel and the return could be huge. As it stands, I don't think many people think Tkachuk will be here long term and even if theycan get him to stay a few more years, they have to rebuild the team around him because there seems to be a disconnect between him and everyone else. So your options are to keep a stale core and trade Tkachuk for a huge return or to trade the old leaders in the room and build around Tkachuk and hope you can get.him to stay.

A full rebuild won't happen and the most likely option is that they make no major changes, and keep deteriorating.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Does the obvious really have to be stated?

This is the same with Philly and Gaudreau.

If Tkachuk had his choice of ANY team in the league to play for starting tomorrow, which team in which city do you think he picks instantly?

Luckily there are other factors that play into it, first and foremost being that the Flames hold his rights for the next two seasons, otherwise he'd be gone already.

That doesn't address anything i said, and is purely speculation at best.


But..lets say he does want to play in St. Louis. What if they dont want to pay him what Calgary can? What if they dont want to add him at all? they are in win now mode there....2 years from now they could be selling off and starting a rebuild.

So is he going to risk that, vs signing a contract that is guaranteed for whatever amount? Is he going to turn down 50 Million dollars this summer or next? is the risk small enough that he might make that in St Louis in 2 years vs sustaining another concussion that could easily end his career, or another injury of some sort that limits his earnings?

This fabricated stuff about him wanting out that has been entirely refuted by the team at least 3 different times now is something that exists only in the minds of some fans...period.

Just because he took a deal last time that gave him leverage moving forward does not mean anything other than his agent knows what he is doing. Several other players signed similar deals to end up in similar circumstances....are they all going to leave their clubs as well or is it just the Flames guys that do this??

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

I believe it was first brought up by Elliotte Friedman.

By the way, I'm not trashing Tkachuk for this. If anything, most of us are probably agree with him. The player who told him to calm down is the one at fault.
But I'm just saying that it's a potential reason for his discontent. Just speculation of course.

Agreed the player(s) that told him to calm down (if that actually happened) are at fault and likely will be gonzo this summer.

Tkachuk is the guy, I believe, that BT builds around along with Lindholm up front. Knowing how BT likes his players to have some grease in their games, along with his size and offensive abilities (that are literally elite for the position) and there are 11 other guys you move before MT.

[Niemo]

Kind of ######ed that we have to worry about losing our drafted 23 year old star already. Just saying.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Niemo

Kind of ######ed that we have to worry about losing our drafted 23 year old star already. Just saying.

The only ones worrying about it are some fans....really doubt the management team is.

I can see him being traded...not because he has a big QO in the future, not because he wants out or to play in Missouri, but because he is a big enough piece that some GM could get desperate and make an offer that outweighs his value to Calgary.

That being said, if they do extend JG, then yes MT will be gone next summer for a diminished price I would suspect.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Agreed the player(s) that told him to calm down (if that actually happened) are at fault and likely will be gonzo this summer.

Tkachuk is the guy, I believe, that BT builds around along with Lindholm up front. Knowing how BT likes his players to have some grease in their games, along with his size and offensive abilities (that are literally elite for the position) and there are 11 other guys you move before MT.

It’s funny how Tkachuk can seemingly do no wrong in the eyes of some people

His shots per game went from over 5 to about half that for the next few weeks. He was visibly disengaged and it looked like he quit on his team

Yet still, he has the reputation of dragging his team in to the battle

And again, he talks a good game and it is almost comical the inverse correlation between his pre game proclamations and on ice performance

I’m with the poster that said it’s on the organization to figure out what happened, and how to not make it happen again

Because last year was sure not worth 7, much less 9. It’s an insult to the fans and the organization when the highest paid player checks out because of something that happened in the corner when the game was over and most of the team was headed to the locker room and didn’t see it

Having a player who is capable of positively influencing a game is great, having a player who talks big and comes up flat, or a guy who can quit on his team is a valid concern

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

So you are suggesting we keep the core and change the pieces around it? Isn't that what we have been doing to no avail? Do you feel optimistic Tre will get the right pieces this time?

If I was to do anything, I would look at changing Monahan out. I think with Gaudreau, Lindholm, and Tkachuck, there is something to work with. I think the main flaw with the core has been the lack of two top 6 centres. So if one of Johnny or Chucky is shipped to bring that in, I'm on board with it. But I also believe that if changing Monahan can still bring in a centre that can perform at top 6 level - whether that's external or internal - that team can perform well.

If nothing changes, than it's really dependent on Monahan going back to previous levels of high productivity, so Lindholm/Monahan is a good top 6 centre combination.