Matthew Tkachuk, Does he make the team. - Page 3 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Five-hole · 10-03-2016, 12:03 PM

He's been our third-most effective forward, behind Bennett and Brouwer. I expect that to change once Johnny and Mony are back, and when Backlund and Frolik get going, but he's still almost a top-6 forward already.

At this point I think he has to play himself off the opening night roster. After that, it's all about how he does.

He'll need to improve his timing in transition to stick past the 9 game mark IMO, but his play in the offensive zone is already good enough.

calgaryblood · 10-03-2016, 12:06 PM

He hasn't earned it yet but would like to see him get his 9 games and then see how that goes first.

Firebot · 10-03-2016, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricardodw

pretty sure the Flames will keep with their policy of getting through a player's ELC as fast as possible.

I look for them to follow the Oilers Draisatl example where somewhere after 20-30 games they realize that being CHL big and tough at 18 is not NHL tough.

Are you saying that based on Monahan's handling? Or Bennett's?

Bandwagon In Flames · 10-03-2016, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Firebot

Are you saying that based on Monahan's handling? Or Bennett's?

Based on nothing. Ricardow doesn't deal with facts.

ricardodw · 10-03-2016, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Firebot

Are you saying that based on Monahan's handling? Or Bennett's?

Bennett, Gaudreau, Arnold, Jankowski..... sort of a Flame's policy or tradition

Different reasons for the shortened ELC spans by player but something that the Flames do.

GranteedEV · 10-03-2016, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Bennett, Gaudreau, Arnold, Jankowski..... sort of a Flame's policy or tradition

Different reasons for the shortened ELC spans by player but something that the Flames do.

Jankowski's ELC isn't shortened. If it were he would be an RFA at the end of this season. Likewise with Kenney Morrison who would probably be sent packing last July.

Also Bennett's ELC was shortened... simply because we made the second round of the playoffs. Hardly a good example.

Arnold, Gaudreau, and Agostino were not even signed by Treliving.

btimbit · 10-03-2016, 12:41 PM

I agree with some others, I think he sticks simply because of winger depth.

Needs to put on weight before he really makes an impact though

JerryUnderscore · 10-03-2016, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGY12

Don't make the decision based on the Flames depth situation or lack thereof. This decision should 100% be made based on Tkatchuk's development. This kid could turn into a star, if put into a position to succeed and handled properly.

Saying that, you give him his 9 games and go from there. Nothing would be better for this organization if they built a 1 2 punch of Johnny/Monahan and Bennett/Tkatchuk.

I completely agree with this statement. If Tkachuk forces the team to keep him up by showing that he can hang in the big leagues, great; if not, then send him back to junior. We're not winning the Cup this year (we may or may not make the playoffs), so there's not reason to burn a year of his ELC if he can continue to develop in the OHL.

pepper24 · 10-03-2016, 01:05 PM

I think with the depth in London and chance to be on another strong winning team is best from him.

Give him 9 games or less than back to OHL.

He's played well but not a great skater. Needs to improve that and come back next year with more weight on.

DiracSpike · 10-03-2016, 01:12 PM

He's been good, but not good enough to outweigh the benefits of plugging him in next year for three full years of an ELC. Toss him a bone for putting in good work and give him 4-5 NHL games at the beginning of the year.

Still a lot to learn being the leader of his jr team IMO

Flames Draft Watcher · 10-03-2016, 01:19 PM

I think Tkachuk stands to learn a lot quicker in the NHL. Best thing for his development is to stay up IMO.

Reggie Dunlop · 10-04-2016, 12:07 AM

Have a hunch the kid sticks. Sure, you could send him back to London, but I'm starting to think he could make this team.

Tkachuk-Bennett-Brouwer is a killer line that clicks.

I think rolling the dice could pay dividends.

CalgaryFan1988 · 10-04-2016, 12:10 AM

I think after 9 games he'll be sent down.

St. Pats · 10-04-2016, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I think Tkachuk stands to learn a lot quicker in the NHL. Best thing for his development is to stay up IMO.

Could be but I think that the nine game stint will really show whether he is learning or struggling. I would just roll with it and if he is making progress he stays / if not see ya next year.

Caged Great · 10-04-2016, 12:37 AM

The only reason why I think he sticks is who is reasonably expected to replace him? Do you sign Korpikoski and stick him on Backlund's line and put Bouma in Tkachuk's place? There really isn't a quality option outside of Tkachuk.

He fit rather well with the other two in each of the games and did not look out of place. Let him rip and see how it goes.

GoJetsGo · 10-04-2016, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by btimbit

I agree with some others, I think he sticks simply because of winger depth.

Needs to put on weight before he really makes an impact though

The Flames site list him as currently being 6'2, 202lbs

He's heavier than many of our current forwards:

https://www.nhl.com/flames/roster

He's a big kid.

dammage79 · 10-04-2016, 01:06 AM

He'll get his nine games. He's too good for OHL action but I don't believe he'll handle an 82 game NHL season either. This is a time where I feel like the AHL would be the best option.

I'd send him back after his 9 game cup of coffee. I also think one of Higgins or Korpikoski get signed too.

Cole436 · 10-04-2016, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

The Flames site list him as currently being 6'2, 202lbs

He's heavier than many of our current forwards:

https://www.nhl.com/flames/roster

He's a big kid.

He didn't look that big on the ice during training camp. I think the Flames site may be fudging the numbers a bit, he didn't look at all over 185-190 and you could tell on the ice. The strength wasn't there compared to Sam Bennett, who he was playing right beside.

GoJetsGo · 10-04-2016, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cole436

He didn't look that big on the ice during training camp. I think the Flames site may be fudging the numbers a bit, he didn't look at all over 185-190 and you could tell on the ice. The strength wasn't there compared to Sam Bennett, who he was playing right beside.

He is that big. You can debate his NHL readiness all you want, but several people in this thread have suggested he's not big enough and that just isn't the case.

I also see no reason why the Flames site would embellish. Certainly not by 15 pounds. That's a strange suggestion.

He very much looks to be 200lbs on the ice, and that's backed up by data from the draft.

He might have several areas to improve upon, but he certainly has size in his favour.

Vulcan · 10-04-2016, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

He is that big. You can debate his NHL readiness all you want, but several people in this thread have suggested he's not big enough and that just isn't the case.

I also see no reason why the Flames site would embellish. Certainly not by 15 pounds. That's a strange suggestion.

He very much looks to be 200lbs on the ice, and that's backed up by data from the draft.

He might have several areas to improve upon, but he certainly has size in his favour.

His size and weight weren't listed as he never took part in the pre-draft testing.

I think he could be useful this season but with the style he plays, he may not be ready to take on the stronger and more mature NHL players. Last thing that I want is to see him injured or set back by facing men he's not yet ready for.