Matthew Tkachuk & Johnny Gaudreau Signing Watch Thread

[rhino]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

But Johnny cannot be traded and have that team give him 8 years, so the 5 team NTC allow list is not relevant, as any deal would have to be a sign and trade, which Johnny is obviously involved in.

He can sign an 8 year deal with Calgary then be traded as part of a trade package

[OptimalTates]

And I keep bringing him up so why not once more, but that's probably why Panarin's contract was so signing bonus heavy. Lockout and buyout proof (unbeknownst when he signed COVID proof as well) are obvious reasons, but Panarin probably considers himself a Florida residence for tax purposes (house there, believe he goes there in off-season but not sure about Russia ties still). So I assume he gets taxed at Florida rate for his signing bonuses but could be wrong.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by rhino

The 8 year benefit only applies if he is signed pre July 13, if after even the Flames can only sign him to 7

Yes, but if it goes that far it indicates Gaudreau is more interested in testing the market than staying with the Flames - doesn't mean he definitely won't re-sign, but I would say it means money and term aren't the only considerations.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

Signing bonus is the easiest though. Article XVI of the Convention Between Canada and the United States of America more or less means you are taxed at a rate of where you call home (15% max by the contracting state residence means Alberta would get 15% of Gaudreau's signing bonuses and Pennsylvania 23.73%).

Canada gets 15%, Alberta gets zippo?
(But I can't find a resource for this...not my usual line of work, but intriguing. As Alta is not a "residence" why would they get any of it?)

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by rhino

He can sign an 8 year deal with Calgary then be traded as part of a trade package

I think GM’s are still struggling on the value of that 8th year. There certainly was discussion between the Oilers and Leafs regarding Hyman. Holland had Hyman agree to an 8 year deal around $5M but the Leafs wanted a 2nd back where the Oilers were offering a 5th. The Leafs didn’t want to help the Oilers out so he got the 5.5x7 deal.

One sign and trade I have wondered about with Johnny would be to the Bruins for Debrusk? Flames get a solid top 6 forward to sign Johnny to the 10x8 deal and Boston clears space to bring him in? Not something I want to happen but something I have wondered about with teams without cap space trying to get into the bidding for Johnny

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Canada gets 15%, Alberta gets zippo?
(But I can't find a resource for this...not my usual line of work, but intriguing. As Alta is not a "residence" why would they get any of it?)

Just to add one thing to the tax discussion, each player is taxed in every state/province they play a game in each season. The salary is broken down by 82 games and each district gets their portion (hopefully this is clear).

eg, Flames play 9 games in California so the players are taxed 9/82 x local tax rate and then same for non tax states #/82 x 0.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I think GM’s are still struggling on the value of that 8th year. There certainly was discussion between the Oilers and Leafs regarding Hyman. Holland had Hyman agree to an 8 year deal around $5M but the Leafs wanted a 2nd back where the Oilers were offering a 5th. The Leafs didn’t want to help the Oilers out so he got the 5.5x7 deal.

One sign and trade I have wondered about with Johnny would be to the Bruins for Debrusk? Flames get a solid top 6 forward to sign Johnny to the 10x8 deal and Boston clears space to bring him in? Not something I want to happen but something I have wondered about with teams without cap space trying to get into the bidding for Johnny

Jesus Christ that is gruesome. Imagine of Treleving signed the most popular player who is our star and then flipped him for DeBrusk? I would lead the lynch mob. I don't see any scenario of a sign and trade anyhow, hell if JG signs a contract with the Flames no matter if he wanted a sign and trade you still keep him or you trade him for a hell of a lot more than DeBrusk. Nothing says if you sign him to trade him you have to do it right away.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Jesus Christ that is gruesome. Imagine of Treleving signed the most popular player who is our star and then flipped him for DeBrusk? I would lead the lynch mob. I don't see any scenario of a sign and trade anyhow, hell if JG signs a contract with the Flames no matter if he wanted a sign and trade you still keep him or you trade him for a hell of a lot more than DeBrusk. Nothing says if you sign him to trade him you have to do it right away.

You don’t get it. Johnny is gone either way in this scenario and it is trying to recoup something for him by letting the team acquire him get an 8 year deal over a 7 year deal. I is definitely not Johnny signing here because he wants to and then trading him. It is losing him for nothing in a 7 year deal or getting something for him so the team he wants to go to can get the 8 years.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Jesus Christ that is gruesome. Imagine of Treleving signed the most popular player who is our star and then flipped him for DeBrusk? I would lead the lynch mob. I don't see any scenario of a sign and trade anyhow, hell if JG signs a contract with the Flames no matter if he wanted a sign and trade you still keep him or you trade him for a hell of a lot more than DeBrusk. Nothing says if you sign him to trade him you have to do it right away.

So, you think if Johnny and the Bruins come to Treliving and say they've negotiated a sign and trade, and the Flames will get Debrusk as payment for the brokering of that deal, that Treliving should screw Johnny/Bruins by simply keeping him?

I am without speech. Treliving and the Flames would lose all credibility.

In fact, its likely that Treliving could not legally do such a thing, as it would go against the parameters of the agreed deal.

And the payment of Debrusk for doing this deal is so much more than what the Flames should reasonably expect. Because the alternative is zero.

[GioforPM]

The tax issue is pretty moot unless one of the teams that would sign JG is in Fla, AZ or TX. The Fla teams are full, AZ is a shambles (and on a budget) and TX has cap issues of its own thanks to old guys with big contracts and a couple star players coming up.

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Jesus Christ that is gruesome. Imagine of Treleving signed the most popular player who is our star and then flipped him for DeBrusk? I would lead the lynch mob. I don't see any scenario of a sign and trade anyhow, hell if JG signs a contract with the Flames no matter if he wanted a sign and trade you still keep him or you trade him for a hell of a lot more than DeBrusk. Nothing says if you sign him to trade him you have to do it right away.

Exactly, even now if Tre trade Johnny's right for DeBrusk is crazy talk.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The tax issue is pretty moot unless one of the teams that would sign JG...

Or if you bring up Kucherov's and Stone's contracts as comparables again.

[OptimalTates]

Lol agreeing with Gaudreau and his agent to trade him immediately to Boston if he signed a contract and then not doing so would result in a grievance (which would quickly go Gaudreau's way) while blackballing the Flames for the foreseeable future.

As for "trading" Gaudreau for DeBrusk, if the alternative is "trading" Gaudreau for nothing, seems pretty obvious lol.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

Exactly, even now if Tre trade Johnny's right for DeBrusk is crazy talk.

If you know Johnny's not going to sign with Calgary, trading his rights for a coke and a bag of chips is better than nothing.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Doesn't make much sense to me. Their agents should at least be able to help with the basic math.



I can understand it for a retirement contract but only to an extent.

But within the current cap system annual earnings can be adjusted in various ways. For example, Darnell Nurse will be the highest paid defenseman in the League this year(!), but his cap-hit ranks #9. If Gaudreau—or any player—feels strongly about how he is paid in any given year, that is something that can be tweaked to reflect his wishes.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

Or if you bring up Kucherov's and Stone's contracts as comparables again.

OK, how about Zibanejad. Point. Rantanen. Ovechkin.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

But within the current cap system annual earnings can be adjusted in various ways. For example, Darnell Nurse will be the highest paid defenseman in the League this year(!), but his cap-hit ranks #9. If Gaudreau—or any player—feels strongly about how he is paid in any given year, that is something that can be tweaked to reflect his wishes.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

Players care about what the average salary they get. I doubt they care if in 2025 they happen to be the highest paid for that year only.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Players care about what the average salary they get. I doubt they care if in 2025 they happen to be the highest paid for that year only.

I think structure is really important to a lot of players. Getting as much money sooner in a front-loaded contract is definitely a bonus since the buying power of a dollar almost always decreases. They can also get that money in investments .

But yeah, if a player is concerned about where they rank on the ladder among their peers, then average salary is the measuring stick. I am not sure how much players actually look at that though. They realize that some players are overpaid and some are underpaid.

[Mr.Coffee]

If I’m Gaudreau not a chance I’m taking 9.5 over 8. More like 10-10.25 over 8 for around $80-84MM and now we are talking. But, this is the Flames starting position so let’s see.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I think structure is really important to a lot of players. Getting as much money sooner in a front-loaded contract is definitely a bonus since the buying power of a dollar almost always decreases. They can also get that money in investments .

But yeah, if a player is concerned about where they rank on the ladder among their peers, then average salary is the measuring stick. I am not how much players actually look at that though. They realize that some players are overpaid and some are underpaid.

I didn't say structure was not important. It's just not relevant so a player can say he's #1 in paid salary for a given year.