The Matthew Tkachuk contract negotiations

[GioforPM]

I think we are looking at either 2 years or 6 years. I suspect it's 2 given cap issues.

[getbak]

I chose 6 years @ $8 million, but I think 2 years at $6 million or so is also possible.

I also wouldn't be shocked if he signed a 1 year deal to help the team get under the cap with a handshake deal to sign a longer, higher-value deal in the new year once the tagging room becomes available.

[BigErnSalute_16]

My guess would be 5 or 6 at just under 8 somewhere in the 7.5-7.75 range but voted 6x8 because I think it will be closer to 8 than it is to 7

[bubbsy]

I am hoping they go 3-4 years, minimize the cap hit, and utilize the money saved to maximize the on ice team during this 3 year window.

I think a lot of these RFAs are going to be sitting in Sep, and a lot are likely only going to be starting to play in ~Nov. There's really no incentive for them to rush it. Even the struggles of the player that miss camp and the start of the season (Nylander) are a greater detriment to the team than it is for the player. As such, I see no real rush for these RFAs to get a deal less than what they are wanting.

I'd love to see the voting age demographics of the NHLPA for the next CBA renewal (ie. % of players on an ELC, % who are due to be RFA, % who are due to be UFA).

If it's the established player segment (ie. due to be UFA) that own most of the vote, I'd imagine they would be willing to screw the next wave of youngsters, to ensure the cap is set up to maximize cap expenditure on UFAs, rather than this year's unprecedented shift in RFA contracts. If the 2nd NHL contract continues this trend, then we're going to definitely see a lot of older players that are due for their 3rd or 4th contracts get shafted.

I really like Tkachuk's throw back style of play, but for some reason, I just don't categorize him as a modern day NHL superstar because he's not one of these young, fast, electrifying skill players. It's probably why I am a bit reluctant to wanting to see him signed to a massive long term deal. I also think I'd be very interested in him playing with higher end offensive players, as playing on such a defensive accountable line perhaps dwindles some of his offensive upside, which is how NHL salary value seems to bias against.

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The argument though is that Tkachuk isn't just producing first line offense, he's doing it with plumbers on the second line AND he is doing it largely in a defensive role.

The article is bang on, there just aren't many players in the league who are able to do that, let alone guys doing it on their ELC.

That's why 8.5 is probably the starting point.

It really screws the Flames because they need to keep his AAV as low as possible to round out the roster, which means lowering the term.

I really think the flames are looking at an 8.5x4 deal here with Tkachuk going UFA at the end of the deal no matter what.

If the Flames want a term longer than 4 they are probably paying 10 per season to do it. Which they can't really afford in the short term without gutting the roster.

I definitely see it being right around there.
He's 5 years from UFA, right?
That gives us 4 years of a reasonable cap hit, with the opportunity to then sign him to an extended big $$$ contract; you almost have to assume that Johnny will be gone at that point, and Chucky will be our top LW.

[Toonage]

I originally figured $7.95 x 5 but got yelled at so I went $8M by 6 as its closest $$ wise to what I figure and the term means I won't get yelled at.

[Flash Walken]

Aho at 8.5x5 tells me Tkachuk at 9x6

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Toonage

I originally figured $7.95 x 5 but got yelled at so I went $8M by 6 as its closest $$ wise to what I figure and the term means I won't get yelled at.

You'll still get yelled at.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Aho at 8.5x5 tells me Tkachuk at 9x6

I voted 9x6 as well.

My guess is the Treliving magic knocks that down in the end, but it's the best fit

[VilleN]

I voted 8x5 - but I think it'll be closer to 8.5x5. Treliving may squeeze an extra year out of him, but then I'd guess the AAV comes in a hair below 9 (8.95).

[ComixZone]

I just hope we get an 8 year term. We should have got Johnny at 8 years, regardless of premium.

Johnny did 6 at 6.75? Could we have gotten him for 8 at 8.05-8.5M? That deal would still be a steal. Granted, the player would have to want to sign it. I look at Monahan the same way - 7 years at 6.375? Could we have got 8 years at 7M? That would still be a steal.

Historically the premium to get full term on RFAs has been worth it - and then Dubas gave Matthews 5 years at a dumb dollar figure and changed the entire market - although when you look at UFA's like Mark Stone, I don't think the argument is there that the market has been entirely reset (yet). 8 years and 9M to match Mark Stone's new deal? If possible, sign me up - or do we see teams go further down the rabbit hole and we truly do see a new market set, with Matthews being the first, not the only.

[Heavy Jack]

7 x 9 but would lean closer to 7 x 9.5

[Heavy Jack]

Monahan I believe was 7 x 6.375 and Johnny was 6 x 6.75

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

Monahan I believe was 7 x 6.375 and Johnny was 6 x 6.75

Corrected. Thanks again (damn, Tree does good work)

[lazypucker]

There are way too many choices on the poll, and the votes will be really spread out, not giving an accurate picture as to how the general posters feel.

We would all like to see Tkachuk signs for 8 years, but realistically I think he will only sign for 6 years at $8mil AAV

[Heavy Jack]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Corrected. Thanks again (damn, Tree does good work)

Sooooo... Tkachuk at 8x8??

[TheIronMaiden]

I voted 6 @ 7M because I am an optimist.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

There are way too many choices on the poll, and the votes will be really spread out, not giving an accurate picture as to how the general posters feel.

We would all like to see Tkachuk signs for 8 years, but realistically I think he will only sign for 6 years at $8mil AAV

I made it 15 responses before someone complained about the poll options!

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

There are way too many choices on the poll, and the votes will be really spread out, not giving an accurate picture as to how the general posters feel.

We would all like to see Tkachuk signs for 8 years, but realistically I think he will only sign for 6 years at $8mil AAV

Poll options are only intended to be a black-and-white, quantitative mechanism capturing only part of a nuanced opinion. Seeking a poll that can accommodate for the full breadth of opinions on a topic is a fool's errand.

[Ozy_Flame]

6 x 9 is my call. I don't think he comes back without a major contract in hand, and one where he can walk away from the Flames and into the free agent market.