The Matthew Tkachuk contract negotiations

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

For toughness Prout was playing ahead of Stone. He signed as a UFA for 800k

Fantenberg was ahead of Stone he signed a 1 year deal at $950k.

Of the 18 teams that have 3.5M of cap space how many have RFA's to sign?


Cap friendly shows the Flames with 4.6 M in cap space already with Stone's 3.5 included... so there is no problem keeping him?

We have one of the biggest off season RFA's in the league to sign, Ricardo. It's a huge storyline league wide. If you're going to troll this board as a Jets fans at least keep up with the biggest news on the Flames or you'll come off looking clueless, which will weaken your trolling game when you try to claim to know what's best for the Flames.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I think Stone will be one of the better quality blueline pickups for a team come waiver time. He's not useless, and I doubt other teams want to give up any assets for him unless they're trying to dump salary themselves. I see a waiver pickup situation. According to Cap Friendly, there are at least 18 teams right now that could fit his cap hit under their own caps. That's quite a bit.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Only way I can see that happening is a buyout, I truly beleive Brad can't trade Stone unless we are taking an anchor contract back - which is probably not what he's looking to do.

Isn't the buyout window coming up for the Flames? If he's not bought out, then it's waiver wire for him - the more likely of the two scenarios.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

For depth, probably not. If he was 800k instead of 3.5 million you bet. But we need that cap space for Tkachuk.

I just don't see him being bought out or traded, only on waiver wire. And I don't really care if I'm proven wrong lol

Your string of posts on Stone are bizarre. You say he's a boat anchor contract that would require another boat anchor coming back in a trade, but then claim that he could get picked up on waivers in September? AND Brad is supposed to wait for that hope and prayer to become cap compliant!!?

Couple things - If he's untradeable without an anchor coming back, what team that sees that as his value right now is suddenly going to happily take on that same contract on waivers? That isn't logical.

Also, pre-season waivers don't work like you think they do, they're actually generally the opposite of what you're thinking. So many teams are trying to make final roster moves that teams actually use it as the best waiver period to "sneak" a player through waivers.

[Ozy_Flame]

He's a boat anchor from a contractual standpoint, after teams see their depth going into the season their perspective on him as an asset may change, especially if he's free. Nothing bizarre about that. He's also not a useless player - on the ice he isn't worth nothing. He plays his role and does it fine as a depth guy.

Want to get rid of him tomorrow? Either buy him out or trade him - but no one is going to do a trade for Stone without sending a boat anchor back, so it's kind of a moot point. Best case is we retain salary (maybe up to 50%) to move him out for basically a 6th or 7th round pick. And that's cheaper than a buyout in real dollars, so why buy him out unless you have a silver bullet trade lined up for him? Brad probably doesn't, even though we all think he's a wizard.

Also, Stone is a UFA after this upcoming season. As a waiver wire pickup, he might be digestible to a team looking at better blueline depth and a bit of cap wiggle room. Pretty sure GM's aren't stupid either - they'll know they can get a guy like Stone for free without giving up any picks come waivers during camp time. There's no sneaking done in this situation at all, especially given it's an annual tradition to put players through waivers. What sneaking is there to speak about? Odd take.

I believe he'll be in camp in September, and be put on waivers shortly afterwards. I personally don't think there will be any movement on him during a buyout window.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Also, Stone is a UFA after this upcoming season. As a waiver wire pickup, he might be digestible to a team looking at better blueline depth and a bit of cap wiggle room. Pretty sure GM's are stupid either - they'll know they can get a guy like Stone for free without giving up any picks come waivers during camp time. There's no sneaking done in this situation at all, especially given it's an annual tradition to put players through waivers. What sneaking is there to speak about? Odd take.

When people talk about sneaking players through waivers in September, no one is talking about other GM's being asleep.


What is means is that other GM's are going through their own roster crunches at the same time, and having to potentially send down cheaper and younger players who are not waiver exempt.

Teams at that time are not lining up to take on older, slower and more expensive players as they simply don't have the roster flexibility.


It's actually the least likely time Stone would be claimed.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Pretty sure GM's aren't stupid either - they'll know they can get a guy like Stone for free without giving up any picks come waivers during camp time. There's no sneaking done in this situation at all, especially given it's an annual tradition to put players through waivers. What sneaking is there to speak about? Odd take.

No, no, not an odd take at all. Maybe you just haven't followed pre-season waiver wires before? If you have 5 players on waivers in after mid season and teams are hit with injuries and thinking of playoff runs then there's a low chance you can sneak a guy through, as teams will pounce.

In training camp you have a perfect storm of GM's having a million players up through pre-season and then suddenly needing to become roster space and cap compliant.

So you have 30-40 waiver wire players, PLUS every GM is trying to send guys down to get under the roster limits. That's what sneaking means. I didn't think I had to explain that it wasn't literally sneaking them while the other GM's hopefully didn't look.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Want to get rid of him tomorrow? Either buy him out or trade him - but no one is going to do a trade for Stone without sending a boat anchor back, so it's kind of a moot point.

And yet after training camp they're going to take him off our hands for nothing. You can see my confusion can't you?

You're saying that no team is going to take him without salary retention or a boat anchor coming back, yet in a couple months they no longer need to send a boat anchor back, they will just take him for nothing.

[jayswin]

To sum up my confusion in a more concise manner - In one breath you're saying they'll take him off waivers because they don't have to give anything up for him, and in another breath you're saying that right now not only would teams not take him for nothing, but we'd have to add to make them take him off our hands.

You're acting like the "free asset" part of waivers makes Stone a great pick up, yet his value is worse than free as we would have to add.

[Ozy_Flame]

You're goddamn right.

There is a difference in roster needs between end of July and end of September.

Stone is more likely for the waiver wire than he is for a trade or buy-out. That's my position.

[jayswin]

But if anything there's more options for cheap, depth defensemen in September as everyone is trying to trim rosters down for opening night.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by jayswin

But if anything there's more options for cheap, depth defensemen in September as everyone is trying to trim rosters down for opening night.

Contract aside, do you see a guy like Stone surviving waivers?

I see another team taking a flyer on him when they realize their young blueliner they had pegged for the 5th or 6th spot doesn't pan out in camp. I also see a playoff-ready team with cap wiggle room to add a free asset that can hold his own and actually contribute. He's financially worth the risk since he is not an obligation past April anyways.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Contract aside, do you see a guy like Stone surviving waivers?

You can't take out the single largest hindrance to someone claiming Stone and expect the answer to be relevant.

Stone does have that contract and you can't just wish that away. He's also a 5/6 defenceman who played 14 games total last year. There's a lot of reasons not to claim him.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

You're goddamn right.

There is a difference in roster needs between end of July and end of September.

Stone is more likely for the waiver wire than he is for a trade or buy-out. That's my position.

And if he doesn’t get picked up on waivers?

Does Treliving throw up his hands and proclaim “ Well that was bad advice, I guess I need to call the NHL and tell them the Flames are not cap compliant, we need to start forfeiting games?”

Treliving can’t pin his hopes on a possible, yet doubtful, waiver claim.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ozy_Flame]

Simple. Then you keep him for depth, and when other teams start to lose troops to injuries, the grind, and the inevitable "shake things up" panic mode, you flip him as a rental.

In fact, I would venture to say his greatest trade value is going to be after the waiver wire period and further into the season.

I am assuming Frolik is the one to be moved first, if any trade is to happen. He has more value and a higher hit.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Simple. Then you keep him for depth, and when other teams start to lose troops to injuries, the grind, and the inevitable "shake things up" panic mode, you flip him as a rental.

In fact, I would venture to say his greatest trade value is going to be after the waiver wire period and further into the season.

I am assuming Frolik is the one to be moved first, if any trade is to happen. He has more value and a higher hit.

Stones greatest trade value would be at the trade deadline. Veteran depth D on an expiring contract would be a nice trade chip then. The problem is without doing something there isn't a way for the Flames to get from now until then with a signed Tkachuk.

They have to do something, and Brodie, Stone and Frolik are the most likely candidates.

[PugnaciousIntern]

It’s too bad Gio is so integral to this team for leadership and work ethic and everything he brings beyond the points and the corsi. Just finished a Norris season, but at 35 with 3 more years and 6.75 hit, Tre could clear room, sell high and reduce the risk of seeing the decline (though I still think it’s a few years away), and get a darn good return in the process.

I’m not in favour of it at all. When you just had a season like they had, you don’t lose your best player and undisputed leader in a young room when you could buy out Stone or just punt Frolik for a 7th. But theres some features that make it objectively appealing.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

It’s too bad Gio is so integral to this team for leadership and work ethic and everything he brings beyond the points and the corsi. Just finished a Norris season, but at 35 with 3 more years and 6.75 hit, Tre could clear room, sell high and reduce the risk of seeing the decline (though I still think it’s a few years away), and get a darn good return in the process.

I’m not in favour of it at all. When you just had a season like they had, you don’t lose your best player and undisputed leader in a young room when you could buy out Stone or just punt Frolik for a 7th. But theres some features that make it objectively appealing.

If the Flames have any interest in winning the Stanley Cup over the next few years, they keep Gio and double down with everything they have. The true contention window is now.

The only feature that makes it objectively appealing is the desire to be a perpetual bubble team that might or might not make the playoffs every year. Never good enough to be a true contender, never bad enough to be a true rebuilding team.

Flags fly forever.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kyuss275]

I really hope Point signs soon. It might give Tre and Tkachuk something to work with. If Tkachuk is waiting for Marner, then he wont be signing for a while. Every thing i have read about marner situation is that they expect it to go till the start of the season.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I really hope Point signs soon. It might give Tre and Tkachuk something to work with. If Tkachuk is waiting for Marner, then he wont be signing for a while. Every thing i have read about marner situation is that they expect it to go till the start of the season.

Yeah, I expect Point to go cheaper simply because he's signing with Tampa, and because it seems quite clear that Marner wants the very last cent he can ring out of the Leafs (but also wants very much to stay).

I also think the hold up on Tkachuk is the term vs. the money per se.

But of course, you expect the AAV to rise as the term gets greater.

I think Treliving can buy into the $8.5M AAV (or whatever), but wants it on an 8-year term, not a 5-year term.

[Enoch Root]

Moving Gio would tear the team in half. Brutal idea, unless the plan is to rebuild.

[Bingo]

Bumped to add poll.

Oiler fan on Twitter thinks the average Calgary fan is delusional because they think Tkachuk is going to sign a team friendly deal.

Not the sentiment for most on this board from my travels so added a poll to flesh out.