The Matthew Tkachuk contract negotiations

[Rando]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Good guy attended camp in good faith and bought his own insurance

Oh, I know. I posted that just the other day!

That was a sign of the times though. Players did that then, Ryan Smyth in Edmonton at one point too, some others.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Friedman on SN960 just said that he believes both Tkachuk and the Flames want to sign a long term deal.

Originally Posted by Rick M.

Music to my ears.

I wonder if things don't end up working out like this: If Tkachuk and the Flames cannot come to terms on a 5–7 year deal by 3 October, then they have a 2 or 3 year deal essentially drafted, and will sign as an alternative.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Friedman on SN960 just said that he believes both Tkachuk and the Flames want to sign a long term deal.

That would be great (depending on the numbers of course).

I still think it's a 6 year deal with an 8 handle.

[Manhattanboy]

^^ Am good with that but let’s replace Oct 3 with Sept 25.

[ricardodw]

When does it come down to the rest of the team feeling that Tkachuk is not responsible about his potential role on the team and is letting the team down.

There are a whole bunch of guys on the Flames that in their hearts feel they are as good or better than Tkachuk and are playing for less money than he is asking for.

Colborne, playing on the left side of Backlund had 39 es pts in 73 games on Backlund's LW. He was out of the NHL 62 games later. Tkachuk had 53 es pts in that role last season... 14 more pts in 7 more games.

Matt misses any games to start the season and Bennett finally gets into the top 6 again and has 10 pts in 10 games and then what happens?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That would be great (depending on the numbers of course).

Oh, for sure. But if this is true, I am most pleased about the implication that Tkachuk is committed to the Flames, and he clearly sees that his best potential to succeed and win is here.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

When does it come down to the rest of the team feeling that Tkachuk is not responsible about his potential role on the team and is letting the team down.

There are a whole bunch of guys on the Flames that in their hearts feel they are as good or better than Tkachuk and are playing for less money than he is asking for.

Colborne, playing on the left side of Backlund had 39 es pts in 73 games on Backlund's LW. He was out of the NHL 62 games later. Tkachuk had 53 es pts in that role last season... 14 more pts in 7 more games.

Matt misses any games to start the season and Bennett finally gets into the top 6 again and has 10 pts in 10 games and then what happens?

Did you just compare Colborne to Matthew Tkachuk???

[Rando]

He also compared total points to even strength points because that made whatever bizarre point look better.

This also made me legitimately laugh out loud

There are a whole bunch of guys on the Flames that in their hearts feel they are as good or better than Tkachuk and are playing for less money than he is asking for.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

When does it come down to the rest of the team feeling that Tkachuk is not responsible about his potential role on the team and is letting the team down.

There are a whole bunch of guys on the Flames that in their hearts feel they are as good or better than Tkachuk and are playing for less money than he is asking for.

Colborne, playing on the left side of Backlund had 39 es pts in 73 games on Backlund's LW. He was out of the NHL 62 games later. Tkachuk had 53 es pts in that role last season... 14 more pts in 7 more games.

Matt misses any games to start the season and Bennett finally gets into the top 6 again and has 10 pts in 10 games and then what happens?

We start planning the parade.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

When does it come down to the rest of the team feeling that Tkachuk is not responsible about his potential role on the team and is letting the team down...

I just don't think NHL players think like that.

There are a whole bunch of guys on the Flames that in their hearts feel they are as good or better than Tkachuk and are playing for less money than he is asking for.

There are? Who are they?

Colborne, playing on the left side of Backlund had 39 es pts in 73 games on Backlund's LW. He was out of the NHL 62 games later. Tkachuk had 53 es pts in that role last season... 14 more pts in 7 more games...

Are ....

are you serious? Is this an actual comparison that you are attempting to draw as a means to gauge Tkachuk's value? The year that Colborne scored 19 goals with Mikael Backlund he was 26-YEARS-OLD. Matthew Tkachuk is 21.

Matt misses any games to start the season and Bennett finally gets into the top 6 again and has 10 pts in 10 games and then what happens?

Who knows? But whatever happens this is a spectacularly pleasant problem to have.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Rando

He also compared total points to even strength points because that made whatever bizarre point look better...

No, he didn't. The year in which Colborne scored 39 ES points, he had 44 points in 73 GP.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

When does it come down to the rest of the team feeling that Tkachuk is not responsible about his potential role on the team and is letting the team down.

There are a whole bunch of guys on the Flames that in their hearts feel they are as good or better than Tkachuk and are playing for less money than he is asking for.

Colborne, playing on the left side of Backlund had 39 es pts in 73 games on Backlund's LW. He was out of the NHL 62 games later. Tkachuk had 53 es pts in that role last season... 14 more pts in 7 more games.

Matt misses any games to start the season and Bennett finally gets into the top 6 again and has 10 pts in 10 games and then what happens?

Many arguments on CP start up regarding what we really do have in Bennett.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Poe969

The longer this goes on, the less I like the player. I can see this ending in a Turris type situation where he's traded in December.

Yolanda, I thought you were gonna be cool.

[The Boy Wonder]

I honestly hope he signs and for less than the point contract.

MT in the playoffs was non-existent and I just don't see how he can justify getting paid more than Point. If he wants to hold out for more than $7 than I would wait him out.

I don't see Tre caving, and as Ricardo stumbled into making a valid point about Bennett (somehow) I think Tre isn't as pressed to get Chuckie back in the lineup as the leafs are for marner or the avs are for rantanen as examples.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I wonder if things don't end up working out like this: If Tkachuk and the Flames cannot come to terms on a 5–7 year deal by 3 October, then they have a 2 or 3 year deal essentially drafted, and will sign as an alternative.

The problem is that they need to make a quick trade to fit him in in a 5-7 year deal. Do they make that deal now and hope they get him signed long term? Maybe, but if they can only get him signed to a bridge contract then they made the team worse in the short term for no reason.

[Vinny01]

2 year $6.25M or 6 year $8.25M

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Fire

The problem is that they need to make a quick trade to fit him in in a 5-7 year deal. Do they make that deal now and hope they get him signed long term? Maybe, but if they can only get him signed to a bridge contract then they made the team worse in the short term for no reason.

I still believe that Treliving has frameworks for a trade or two essentially on the table on which he can pull the trigger when he needs to. But even as things stand today, there is still some time to work things out without making a trade. Here is one option:

Say Tkachuk is signed @ 6 x $8.2 m.

The Flames could start the season with 13 forwards, 7 defensemen, and 2 goalies.

There is $6,341,625 m of cap space. If they waive and send Czarnik and Quine to Stockton that frees up $1,735,000, and leaves the Flames with $770,791 of room after Valimaki's LTIR kicks in. (If Czarnik is claimed, that leaves $126,625 of room with no LTIR relief.) At worst, this gives them a window in which to work out a trade to free up money and ice a 23-man roster.

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ The only way Tre has a move that he can execute at any time would be a trade he is losing. That’s the kind of favour the other GMs will offer to get him out of a bind

Any contract Tre signs with Tkachuk that necessitates another move is offset by any negative value of the move he makes to make it possible.

Like Fire, I would not mind seeing a bridge deal, addition without material subtraction, because the team’s window is basically open right now.

Other thoughts - though technically possible, I’m not sure they want to run with a reduced roster. Haven’t heard anyone say they were open to it

(Also, too bad Talbot looked decent yesterday. They could bury him and bring up Zagidulin.)

Just kidding

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ The only way Tre has a move that he can execute at any time would be a trade he is losing. That’s the kind of favour the other GMs will offer to get him out of a bind ...

I disagree. Treliving does not have to trade a player right away, as I illustrated above. There are players that other teams will value enough to pay a fair asking price, and because Treliving is not cornered, he does not just have to accept whatever is offered to get under the cap.

Other thoughts - though technically possible, I’m not sure they want to run with a reduced roster. Haven’t heard anyone say they were open to it...

I’m sure they would rather not, but in a pinch, if the Flames are unhappy with offers on trades for players it is most certainly a viable option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Macho0978]

[QUOTE=DeluxeMoustache;7211900]^ The only way Tre has a move that he can execute at any time would be a trade he is losing. That’s the kind of favour the other GMs will offer to get him out of a bind

Any contract Tre signs with Tkachuk that necessitates another move is offset by any negative value of the move he makes to make it possible.

Like Fire, I would not mind seeing a bridge deal, addition without material subtraction, because the team’s window is basically open right now.

Other thoughts - though technically possible, I’m not sure they want to run with a reduced roster. Haven’t heard anyone say they were open to it

(Also, too bad Talbot looked decent yesterday. They could bury him and bring up Zagidulin.)

This is all assuming that Treliving can get Tkachuk at around 8 mil for 6 years. If he does, great take it and run but I don't see 6 years being less than 8.75, more than likely 9 or more. I just don't see why this is a good idea and why forcing himself to make a bad trade last second to get under is a good thing.

I also don't see how waiting too much longer is a good thing. We are already in a scenario where Tkachuk misses all of camp and this could cost the teams wins early in the season. 3 years 6.25 mil, get it done tonight so he can get a few games in. Or play hardball and maybe not get a great deal, potentially waste this season when Gio is 36 still all for this idea that Tkachuk will only accept the QO in 3 years and will not sign long term and we will lose him in 4 years. It's set in stone, 4 years and gone if he signs a 3 year bridge.