The Matthew Tkachuk contract negotiations

[FiveSeven]

Am I missing something? I look on capfriendly and it shows 7 million. Minus 800k-1m for bread. How can they sign Chucky for 6 million?!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FiveSeven

Am I missing something? I look on capfriendly and it shows 7 million. Minus 800k-1m for bread. How can they sign Chucky for 6 million?!

You are missing a couple of things:

1) Valimaki's LTIR will kick in when the Flames need it, and that will add $850,000.
2) The Flames's current cap hit is accounted for by 12 forwards, so when both Manguipane and Tkachuk sign, one of those will be replaced.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Isn't this is a significant part of the problem that you are ignoring? "Market value" seems to be very much in flux right now. Just look at the RFA deals signed in the last calendar year—they are all over the map from LeBlanc's one year, $1.0 m contract, to William Karlsson's eight-year deal, to Werenski's three-year deal with the massive qualifying commitment, to Auston Matthew's five-year premium. Of course, Tkachuk and his companion RFAs are all looking at Matthews's contract and expecting comparable compensation and term. But with the current ongoing negotiations the League is having with the NHLPA about escrow, the static salary cap, and the unique situation with so many young players missing from camp there IS NOT a set market. Tkachuk's side can believe with all their hearts that their ask is within "market value," but unless there is a party prepared too pay it, it's just an imaginary number. I think it is fairly clear that teams are much more reluctant to pay than you are assuming.

I was going to say something like this. Market for a skilled winger is what exactly? I don't think it's what Marner is asking for. Keller signed for max term at just over 7, which I think is a real gamble on Arizona's part. Aho signed for $8.5 but he's a C and probably Carolina's most important forward.
Colin White signed for 6 years at 4.7 or so and his numbers are very good (not as good as Matt's). Vrana - the same.

And Treliving has to be careful. What was William Karlsson's market value after a 78 point season? What is it now?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Point is, GMs not named Chiarelli and Dumbass are still contributing to establishing the market

GMs can’t be pushovers, they need pugnacity.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

I've been told from a good source that the Flames offered $7.75 and Tkachuk's camp wants $9.5. No mention of what the term is.

9-9.5 for 8 years sounds about right.

7.75 for 6 years would be about right too.

7 years, somewhere in the middle.

That better be tkachuks camp's demand for max term. It's too high for anything less. But that's also negotiating (in its early stages).

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

9-9.5 for 8 years sounds about right.

7.75 for 6 years would be about right too.

7 years, somewhere in the middle.

That better be tkachuks camp's demand for max term. It's too high for anything less. But that's also negotiating (in its early stages).

I am quite sure that ask is not on an eight-year term. My guess would be six—the Flames’s counter-offer might be on five-years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

GMs can’t be pushovers, they need pugnacity.

Or they can hire interns to provide it

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I am quite sure that ask is not on an eight-year term. My guess would be six—the Flames’s counter-offer might be on five-years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would now say Tkachuk comes in between $7.25-.75M on a six year deal. The number does not go up perceptibly from here, and the more games he misses, the smaller the number gets.

When you're going to make over $40M on this contract and be young enough to make another $80M on your next one. I cannot think of a single recent example of a player as good as Matthew Tkachuk who did not get paid boatloads of money on their late-20s contract, or was catastrophically injured in their prime.

The great players are successful into their early 30s and then decline at varying degrees. But by then, they've gotten paid. Nobody's giving 28 year old Matt Tkachuk a four year deal. He's going to make $120+ million before his career is over.

I'd prefer if he didn't miss all of camp, but I can appreciate it. He starts missing regular season games, that's silliness. He's going to be paid like he's the best player on the team. I'm almost certain the offer he has on the table gives him that. And I'm even betting it makes him the highest paid player in franchise history. I bet it has killer lockout protections.

But he's not the team's best player. He's not the best player at his position on the team, and he plays the least valuable position on the ice (not to discount his contribution).

So I wouldn't understand why someone who wasn't all these things would need to miss games when he's already won.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I would now say Tkachuk comes in between $7.25-.75M on a six year deal. The number does not go up perceptibly from here, and the more games he misses, the smaller the number gets.



When you're going to make over $40M on this contract and be young enough to make another $80M on your next one. I cannot think of a single recent example of a player as good as Matthew Tkachuk who did not get paid boatloads of money on their late-20s contract, or was catastrophically injured in their prime.



The great players are successful into their early 30s and then decline at varying degrees. But by then, they've gotten paid. Nobody's giving 28 year old Matt Tkachuk a four year deal. He's going to make $120+ million before his career is over.



I'd prefer if he didn't miss all of camp, but I can appreciate it. He starts missing regular season games, that's silliness. He's going to be paid like he's the best player on the team. I'm almost certain the offer he has on the table gives him that. And I'm even betting it makes him the highest paid player in franchise history. I bet it has killer lockout protections.



But he's not the team's best player. He's not the best player at his position on the team, and he plays the least valuable position on the ice (not to discount his contribution).



So I wouldn't understand why someone who wasn't all these things would need to miss games when he's already won.

I don’t think the money on your third contract (as a 28 year old) is guaranteed anymore, due to cap constraints. Which is why the current crop of young RFAs want their money now.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

9-9.5 for 8 years sounds about right.

7.75 for 6 years would be about right too.

7 years, somewhere in the middle.

That better be tkachuks camp's demand for max term. It's too high for anything less. But that's also negotiating (in its early stages).

I think you are a tad high in all of your estimates. Plus, I think Tkachuk asked for 9.5 for a shorter term. The Flames ask seems way more reasonable than Tkachuk's IMO.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

Or they can hire interns to provide it

Just wanted to bump the thread as you requested.

[sureLoss]

Friedman on 960 says that he is hearing Flames and Tkachuk are now talking about term (contract length) that they were not discussing before.

Also said he is hearing the same thing as Johnston that there is reason for optimism on Marner now and that might be the catalyst

Chris Johnston @reporterchris
With the usual caveat that nothing is done until it's done, it sounds like there's been some progress in contract talks between the #leafs and RFA Mitch Marner.

[SniperJ]

Friedman couldn't even get a coherent sentence out when asked to discuss Mangi - "uhhh, errr, I just, ummm, hope, errrr"

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Friedman on 960 says that he is hearing Flames and Tkachuk are now talking about term (contract length) that they were not discussing before.

Also said he is hearing the same thing as Johnston that there is reason for optimism on Marner now and that might be the catalyst

Chris Johnston @reporterchris
With the usual caveat that nothing is done until it's done, it sounds like there's been some progress in contract talks between the #leafs and RFA Mitch Marner.

Sounds like a bridge deal :/

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

Sounds like a bridge deal :/

Sure does

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Sure does

Not sure how I feel about that. I was really hoping for 7 years.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

Sounds like a bridge deal :/

It just sounds to me like they’re talking about a length they weren’t talking about before. There’s been a few 6-year deals signed lately, so maybe they were talking about 7 years (Flames) and 4 years (Tkachuk) before, and now they’re talking about 6 and 5 respectively.

[The Boy Wonder]

I would guess Thachuk ends up with a three year bridge similar in structure to timo meier or werenski.

Basically 20 mil over 3 years but broken down to 5.5, 5.5, 9. Meaning flames have to qualify him after year three at right around 8 mil.

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

It just sounds to me like they’re talking about a length they weren’t talking about before. There’s been a few 6-year deals signed lately, so maybe they were talking about 7 years (Flames) and 4 years (Tkachuk) before, and now they’re talking about 6 and 5 respectively.

Its possible we will never know. I just hope if its a bridge deal that we see him sign long term afterwards.

[Flash Walken]

bridge deals are almost universally bad for teams so I hope it's a longer term that was previously off the table rather than a short term that was previously off the table.