Multiple people said he was the first...he is getting enough attention without having to make things up
Only three people have mentioned it. The person who asked the original question, then the person who referenced that question as a joke and then you making sure everybody knows it isn't true.
I don't see a single person saying it was true, never mind "multiple." I also don't see anyone "making things up."
It's doing a hell of a job of pointing out how poorly we market our players, even inside of this City.
So yeah - you get a lot of criticism while you play here, but guess what? You get almost none of the public benefits that you do while playing in Florida. You'll get all the public scrutiny, and none of the brand growth! What a deal!
I think it's a perception issue with Canadian hockey media and fans.
In Canada we have this "holier than thou" mindset about hockey and that all these players are good ole boys that do no wrong. Everyone needs to be wholesome and good role models.
They are leaning into Tkachuk being the Villain in Florida...he is the "Rat King". Which has to be a bit liberating for him.
Also I don't think the Flames media or market is that hard on their players at all. We aren't Edmonton levels of homers...but we aren't as harsh as the media in Toronto, Vancouver, or Montreal are on their players for sure.
I don't think Tkachuk was treated unfairly here by fans or local media at all. National Canadian Media of Oilers homers were the only ones tough on him and honestly think that was driven a lot by the Oilers and Canucks homer media that wanted to downplay their teams passing on Tkachuk for Puljujarvi and Juolevi. Although 2 more years of Tkachuk at $8.5M would look pretty good right now.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 06-05-2023 at 01:03 PM.
It's doing a hell of a job of pointing out how poorly we market our players, even inside of this City.
So yeah - you get a lot of criticism while you play here, but guess what? You get almost none of the public benefits that you do while playing in Florida. You'll get all the public scrutiny, and none of the brand growth! What a deal!
To be fair he didn't play like this here in the playoffs and never had a deep run
I mean if they lost in the first or 2nd round Tkachuk wouldn't be the face of anything in Florida or anywhere else either.
Canadian media being Oiler fanboys part is true though...imagine another star being criticized for being attacked by Kassian and not fighting back
If someone jumped McDavid would they call him a turtle
Also thought this was an interesting tidbit I heard this weekend.
The rumor is that in 2019 the Tkachuk camp and the Flames has agreed on the construct of 2 deals, and that 8 years wasn't really on the table from the Tkachuk camp.
3 year: 3 x $21 M ($7M AAV)
6 year: 6 x $50M ($8.5M AAV)
What I heard was in the end Treliving preferred the cap flexibility of the 3 year deal, as well as the opportunity to re-sign him longer which could have kept him here 8 years after the initial 3 year deal.
He thought getting Tkachuk to re-sign long term again after year 6 would have been tough, and he thought that having 2 years to re-sign or trade Tkachuk before his UFA status kicked in (July 1st 2021 - July 1st 2023), would be better than only buying two years of UFA and walking him to UFA at 27.
Honestly I have a hard time faulting that logic even with the benefit of hindsight. I think if it wasn't for COVID (and a bunch of other things...Sutter, Muzzin incident, etc) it might have worked out too.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
I respectfully disagree... I think it was very poor judgement by Treliving not to take the 6 year option if true. I appreciate that he would have needed to make other moves but you build around your key pieces and move vets and secondary players as needed to keep them not the other way around. Calgary has a long history of star american players wanting to move on after they've done their time and there were many people here concerned about the bridge deal when he chose to sign it. Just from a simple asset value preservation perspective locking in your young star players is always the way to go in today's NHL
Treliving made a lot of decent moves but for me decision to bridge Tkachuk and his failure to accurately assess Gaudreau's intention/waiting until the last minute so he had no trade option were two catastrophic mistakes
3 years and lock him up for 8 years in his prime or 6 years walk him to UFA and poney up a 8 year deal at age 28 that probably is double digits in his not so productive years.
3 years makes sense especially with the cap squeeze and a team that won the west in the regular season.
They are leaning into Tkachuk being the Villain in Florida...he is the "Rat King".
That's not really how they're using it. It's more of a reclaimation project. They see people calling him a rat and they're turning it around on them. Rats are their "C of Red."
Quote:
For older Panthers fans, the return of the rats to South Florida is a sight for sore eyes and leads them to fondly remember the Panthers magical run to the Stanley Cup Final in 1996. Yet, for the younger generation, a brief history lesson may be in order about the story behind the flying vermin.
The Origins of the Florida Panthers Rats
The story of the rats goes back to Oct. 8, 1995. Prior to a game against the Calgary Flames, a rat appeared in the Panthers locker room in the old Miami Arena. Former Panthers captain Scott Mellanby jumped up, grabbed a stick, and smacked the pesky rodent against a wall. Later that night, Mellanby scored two goals, leading then Panthers goalie John Vanbiesbrouck to quip, He scored a rat trick.
They're not leaning into him being a villian. They're saying, to everyone who calls him a rat, "You're absolutely right, but he's not just a rat. We're all rats, and he's our King."
Corny, I know, but the point is they're trying to chage the meaning of the term "rat" as it relates to Tkachuk, not celebrate the negative connotation of it.
Ps. My all-time favourite memory of the rats in Forida isn't even about the rats at all. It's about a bounce-back game for my all-time favourite player - and Michael Haynes', "Forget the rats, throw the hats!" after his third goal.
Last edited by FanIn80; 06-05-2023 at 01:30 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
I respectfully disagree... I think it was very poor judgement by Treliving not to take the 6 year option if true. I appreciate that he would have needed to make other moves but you build around your key pieces and move vets and secondary players as needed to keep them not the other way around. Calgary has a long history of star american players wanting to move on after they've done their time and there were many people here concerned about the bridge deal when he chose to sign it. Just from a simple asset value preservation perspective locking in your young star players is always the way to go in today's NHL
Treliving made a lot of decent moves but for me decision to bridge Tkachuk and his failure to accurately assess Gaudreau's intention/waiting until the last minute so he had no trade option were two catastrophic mistakes
I think it's an interesting discussion to be honest. I'm not sure which way I would have went, but I can understand the logic behind going for 3 and trying to main RFA control on the player.
Gaudreau got the 6 year deal.
Tkachuk got the 3 year deal.
Gaudreau walked at UFA leaving the Flames with nothing.
Tkachuk with the 3 year deal created a trigger point where Treliving still had control as an RFA and allowed him to make the deal when Tkachuk's intentions were clear.
If you don't like how Gaudreau's situation ended then I'm also not sure how to be against the Tkachuk deal. It created a push point to make sure Tkachuk's intentions were clear, and allowed them to move him at full value where a team could negotiate their own contract with him.
When the going gets tough Tkachuk has to curtail his inner pest as he's unravelled at the worst time. Maybe these antics are just who he is but he's a much better player when he sticks to playing.
At least one of them "retired" a flame.
