Yeah, I don’t doubt that there was once a “Giordano cap,” but I do doubt that it is still relevant. Tkachuk’s contract—regardless of structure—will almost certainly violate it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Tkachuk isn't taking less in the first few years of his contract. He will take more. Its the new trend in Professional athlete contracts and according to some agents its one of the most important things in negotiations. Need that money early to get working for you. This is relatively new, even since the Gaudreau and Monahan contracts.
Increases trade value in the future too, if play drops off the new team stomach paying less real dollars a little easier.
Tkachuk isn't taking less in the first few years of his contract. He will take more. Its the new trend in Professional athlete contracts and according to some agents its one of the most important things in negotiations. Need that money early to get working for you. This is relatively new, even since the Gaudreau and Monahan contracts.
Thats a different contract though. He either gets $10 million in year 5 or is a UFA. Probably the only way to get a 4 year straight to UFA contract these days. If it was a 5+ year contract I'm sure it would have been structured more up front.
I think the Gio-cap is real, but I don't understand why it's even relevant anymore. It wouldn't have anything to do with AAV - that wouldn't make sense. It would be tied to annual salary while Giordano is on this team, which is 3 more years @ 6.75M, and so not a hindrance whatsoever to signing Tkachuk to an 8.5M AAV deal.
6.75
6.75
6.75
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
9.55
8yrs/8.5M AAV, without a single year being paid higher than Giordano.
Except Tkachuk wants $8.5M (or whatever) but on a much shorter deal.
I expect if he would take a $8.5M 8-year deal, it would have been done already.
That's 3 years more than Aho, but for the same money.
And discounting the earlier years makes it less valuable to Tkachuk, which is why teams like to front load them as much as possible. Give the player a financially more valuable deal without affecting the cap.
Not sure if this has been discussed yet but I look at the fact Andrew Mangiapane not being singed as a good sign.
To me if the flames had any inclination that Chucky's hold out will stretch into training camp or the season for that matter, they would've signed Mangiapane.
Why would you risk 2 players missing camp for the sake of one.
I see this day getting done this week.
Just my opinion.
The Following User Says Thank You to Pickle Juice For This Useful Post:
There is still no real progress at this point, but according to my sources the calls regarding interest in trading for Mitch have increased greatly in the past few days...Of course there are plenty of possibilities and no lack of teams interested in Marner, but when the calls start to increase you have to wonder why...Is it simply that the time is now short before the season begins or have the Leafs put out some subtle messages that they are looking at all options....
On Matthew Tkachuk....
There are many around the league who are starting to say that Tkachuk could be the first of these RFAs to sign....It sounds like a 5 years deal...more coming fro sure..
Subtle. I think this means that the deal is agreed to already between the Flames and Tkachuk, but it depends on the completion of a Frolik trade first. Eklund has hit a new level.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HitterD For This Useful Post:
Hasn’t Treliving referenced it himself multiple times?
Not that I'm aware of. I'd be interested in seeing/hearing a quote of Treliving saying such a thing.
He may have vaguely made reference to it when Gaudreau was signed. No one who has signed since then has really ever approached having a contract of that value, so it wouldn't really make sense for Treliving to mention it when no one has come within $1 million of Gio/Gaudreau's cap hit since Johnny signed.
Regardless, Gaudreau signed 3 years ago when the cap was 89.6% of this year's cap. With the rate at which the cap goes up every year, it would be foolish to think they could maintain the same internal player cap for 6 seasons.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
Not that I'm aware of. I'd be interested in seeing/hearing a quote of Treliving saying such a thing.
He may have vaguely made reference to it when Gaudreau was signed. No one who has signed since then has really ever approached having a contract of that value, so it wouldn't really make sense for Treliving to mention it when no one has come within $1 million of Gio/Gaudreau's cap hit since Johnny signed.
Regardless, Gaudreau signed 3 years ago when the cap was 89.6% of this year's cap. With the rate at which the cap goes up every year, it would be foolish to think they could maintain the same internal player cap for 6 seasons.
I'd be shocked if Tre said anything like that out loud.
That said, I think the cap percentage isn't the issue between players on the same team. I think that the players get that the percentage at the time of signing is the issue intellectually. On the other hand, they are human and I would imagine it rankles a bit to see a younger, less experienced and possibly less talented player get paid more than you. Not paid more because they play in a different era, paid more because they signed three years later. Gio, I'm not worried about - he's a vet who's been all over the depth chart so I'd think he's well-centred. Johnny, though, I could see thinking "I'm the best forward on this team, I should make the most". Not vocally, just a nagging thought.
Not that I'm aware of. I'd be interested in seeing/hearing a quote of Treliving saying such a thing.
He may have vaguely made reference to it when Gaudreau was signed. No one who has signed since then has really ever approached having a contract of that value, so it wouldn't really make sense for Treliving to mention it when no one has come within $1 million of Gio/Gaudreau's cap hit since Johnny signed.
Regardless, Gaudreau signed 3 years ago when the cap was 89.6% of this year's cap. With the rate at which the cap goes up every year, it would be foolish to think they could maintain the same internal player cap for 6 seasons.
You're right I couldn't find anything of Treliving referencing it, but I found an article saying that "the Flames didn't want to pay Gaudreau north of Gio's cap hit", with no source. Which obviously doesn't prove anything really.
But given that Johnny's initial ask was rumoured to be north of $8M, do you think it's a coincidence that they settled on Gio's exact AAV of $6.75M? Could be I guess, but that's pretty strong anecdotal evidence IMO.
There's obviously no way that Tkachuk will come under that given the cap rising, but maybe as a % of total cap would be how they frame it.
The way it might have to work for Calgary is by giving him the Timo Meier styled contract where the Flames gamble on Tkachuk going to 1 year from UFA with a 10m qualifying offer.
That effing blows from flames management perspective though.
That buys a lot of franchise ruining risk coverage.
signing for 4 by 6 turns into a 8x8 with a 4x10 added on at the end of the 4 x6
That would be fine if Tkachuk replaces Gio , Gaudreau and Monahan as the best players on the team and play a big role in 3-4 playoff series wins.
If 2018-19 was a career year and Tkachuk is actually a 40-50 pt player that he was before the Flames miracle regular season then the 4x6 turns into a 34M over 5 years and he is on the UFA market with with little chance of a 8M+ contract. That is the same time frame that Aho becomes a UFA.
I will try to put a perspective on the situation is that the Flames are in:
289 goals are the 8th highest goals scored by any NHL team since the 1998-99 season.
Only 19 teams over the last 20 years have scored 275 or more goals in a season.
TB has done it in back to back seasons 2017-18 (290), 2018-19 (317) and Ottawa 2005-06 (312) 2006-07 (286) as has Buffalo 2005-06 (276) 2006-07 (298)
The odds are overwhelming against the Flames putting up 275 goals this coming season. Not a lot of scoring numbers are going to go up a significant amount.
Last year the Flames bought low... they signed Hanifin 6x 4.95 2 ufa yrs and Lindholm 6x4.85 4 UFA years.
Had Lindholm signed a 3 yr rather than a 2 year RFA contact with Carolina would have last season moved him into a 8x8?
Signing Tkachuk to a 8+ x 8 yrs has a good chance of the Flames buying high.
EW hockey has the 2 year contract estimates a 5.37
The Following User Says Thank You to ricardodw For This Useful Post:
That buys a lot of franchise ruining risk coverage.
signing for 4 by 6 turns into a 8x8 with a 4x10 added on at the end of the 4 x6
That would be fine if Tkachuk replaces Gio , Gaudreau and Monahan as the best players on the team and play a big role in 3-4 playoff series wins.
If 2018-19 was a career year and Tkachuk is actually a 40-50 pt player that he was before the Flames miracle regular season then the 4x6 turns into a 34M over 5 years and he is on the UFA market with with little chance of a 8M+ contract. That is the same time frame that Aho becomes a UFA.
I will try to put a perspective on the situation is that the Flames are in:
289 goals are the 8th highest goals scored by any NHL team since the 1998-99 season.
Only 19 teams over the last 20 years have scored 275 or more goals in a season.
TB has done it in back to back seasons 2017-18 (290), 2018-19 (317) and Ottawa 2005-06 (312) 2006-07 (286) as has Buffalo 2005-06 (276) 2006-07 (298)
The odds are overwhelming against the Flames putting up 275 goals this coming season. Not a lot of scoring numbers are going to go up a significant amount.
Last year the Flames bought low... they signed Hanifin 6x 4.95 2 ufa yrs and Lindholm 6x4.85 4 UFA years.
Had Lindholm signed a 3 yr rather than a 2 year RFA contact with Carolina would have last season moved him into a 8x8?
Signing Tkachuk to a 8+ x 8 yrs has a good chance of the Flames buying high.
EW hockey has the 2 year contract estimates a 5.37
Let's not forget the fact that Gaudreau had literally zero leverage during his contract negotiations and surely would've broken the Gio cap if he had even a tiny bit of power.
It was either sit out the season or basically submit and sign what the Flames were offering. The only "win" for Gaudreau was that he at least only got 6 years and not 7 or 8.
