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

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

La has one of the best prospect base/young players in the league. Calgary could do well there with a trade.

Yeah, but they'd need to dump salary and don't have anyone I care about in the least (who doesn't have a NMC - I'd take Fiala).

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by saillias

If they're getting lowballed (ie St. Louis taking anyone of value off the table) would rather Flames take the arbitrator's decision then trade him now. Make him play for the Flames until a team pays the price. Or what Burke did with Cammalleri. Rather just not trade a guy at all then give him up for scraps and let teams know you can be had. Plus he doesn't actually have a NTC. St. Louis won't necessarily have the best deal at the trade deadline. Maybe you make a March trade with Ottawa and suddenly Matthew likes playing with his brother.

Basically I want to screw St. Louis.

The Cammalleri move would be next level. “I will screw myself completely over before I let you screw me”. Even for Brad I think there is almost zero chance of that.

[Racki]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

Twitter reaction tells me that just about every fan base out there wants their team to take a run at a deal for Tkachuk.

Ya, I think everyone feels like he’s a guy that you hate when he’s on another team but would love to have him on your team. I hope the list is larger than we think, some GM has to be willing to overpay fo such a unique player.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by OILFAN #81

La has one of the best prospect base/young players in the league. Calgary could do well there with a trade.

Is this even true anymore?

Outside of Byfield and Durzi who would you want there?

Vilardi and Turcotte have taken steps back and Kaliyev, I like him but he has holes in his game.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

Twitter reaction tells me that just about every fan base out there wants their team to take a run at a deal for Tkachuk.

As they should. He’s one of the premier power forwards in the league, young and entering his prime. Any team would want someone of his skill set on their roster

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by flamesgod

That's what I would bet on.

I agree. I want a rebuild. But I think the Flames are going to try to remain competitive, at least that’s what they told Zadorov and that would be consistent with team history.

[MrMike]

Who would we take from NY as a cap dump?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

As they should. He’s one of the premier power forwards in the league, young and entering his prime. Any team would want someone of his skill set on their roster

Absolute studs like Tkachuk so rarely come available that almost every GM should at least be thinking about how they might be able to get him, with a select few actually likely having the ability.

[Icon]

Originally Posted by MrMike

Who would we take from NY as a cap dump?

Goodrow

[Drunk Uncle]

Originally Posted by littlereddevil

I'd try to avoid American born players if possible, especially if they'd be leaving a contender and large market like the Rangers (and remember that Miller has to re-sign after next year, so who's to say he won't try and leave after 1 season). Sure, they may not be like Gaudreau or Tkachuk, but what kind of American player would be willing to play for Calgary right now?

Personally, if I were entertaining trade offers from the Rangers, I'd be looking at Othmann as a minimum. That kid's going to be a star.

I think Othmann could be a star or could be a dime a dozen NHL player. Lot more risk/reward with that return and one I wouldn't take with a Tkachuk trade... especially after losing Guadreau. I'd also like to see the Flames build down the middle.

I'm also not convinced you need to avoid all American players. There are countless examples of Americans signing long term in Canada. Heck Brady Tkachuk did just that. Miller would also be an RFA with no arb rights so definitely tradable if the situation became tenuous.

Having said that, if it was Schneider and Chytil that would be better but I don't see the Rangers doing that.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Mull

Question maybe already answered here.


If we were going for the full rebuild... wouldn't of we hoped someone would of given him an offer sheet? Wouldn't that be a higher haul in terms of rebuild options then what we can trade for?


Doesn't going for the trade imply the flames are hoping for a band aid swap?

Replace "of" with "have" and you (almost) ... have... an English sentence.



I've never understood the "would of", "could of", "should of" logic....

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by AC

Francis suggesting NYR or LA as good fits.

Check out the state tax in those Two states vs what Tkachuck had on his list. He won't want to sign there either.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Check out the state tax in those Two states vs what Tkachuck had on his list. He won't want to sign there either.

Rich people, athletes included want to be in NY and LA

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Check out the state tax in those Two states vs what Tkachuck had on his list. He won't want to sign there either.

You mean the list that was said to be fake, or did they release another one?

[taxbuster]

I blame this all on the "Two Js"...Justin and Jyoti.
COVID rules in Canada for the former, lack of an arena deal on the latter.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The Cammalleri move would be next level. “I will screw myself completely over before I let you screw me”. Even for Brad I think there is almost zero chance of that.

No team is going to low-ball the Flames. Burke proved they are a hardball outfit. /s

[GullFoss]

Steps:
1) Trade Tkachuk for a top 3 draft pick under the age of 21
2) Run out the season with Monahan and Lucic. Miss the playoffs. Win first overall pick. Draft Bedard
3) Spend $20m of available cap space to improve the team
4) Win Stanley cup in 2023-24
5) Profit

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Replace "of" with "have" and you (almost) ... have... an English sentence.



I've never understood the "would of", "could of", "should of" logic....

Some people don't read frequently enough (outside of forums and comment sections) to understand the verbal contraction would've, could've etc is not would of: the two sound nearly identical in common vernacular. This is the genesis of your confusion.

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by mile

Has a long-standing personal relationship with ownership.


If he doesn't want to coach, I hope he still stays on as an advisor or scout. Even in a rebuild, this organization is better with him than without.

I absolutely love Sutter, but his value is as a coach because he knows how to motivate and knows the game so well. We've seen him as a GM and team building - no good.

[Roof-Daddy]

####ty week but it's probably best we didn't commit $20+ million AAV to two left shot wingers and try to build a championship team around them.