The Matthew Tkachuk contract negotiations

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Says me? I don’t even understand what that means. I don’t agree that the Flames can negotiate off the basis that they can’t afford him. Again if they truly could only afford to pay him below $7 million in a 1 year deal, then yes they run the high risk of losing him to an offer sheet. But as you pointed out, this isn’t true.

The negotiation comes down to what the Flames are willing to pay him, and what they are willing to do to clear the cap room necessary.

And if they have painted themselves into a corner because the moves available to clear the space are no longer there, well that’s on the GM. If they were to take that position during negotiations at this point, that wouldn’t be a team I’d want to play for.

You told me my comments didn't fit an argument that I wasn't in ... hence "Says you"

I've never said they can negotiate off the idea that they don't have room.

I do think however that Tkachuk's camp has to be cognisant of what a late arrival means to year one, and how that may push the team into having to gut things so much that he hasn't done his club any favours.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's easier for other teams to make moves to open themselves up for an offersheet than it is for the Flames to sign Tkachuk to a contract that puts them over the cap only to then negotiate cap relief from another team.

Why do calgary any favours at that point? Why not ask for 2 first round picks for 2 million in cap relief? What's tre going to do, say no and start the season over the cap threshold?

Any team looking to free up say $10M right now will be looked at suspiciously. Sure Calgary with Tkachuk signed is obvious, but so too would any team that suddenly needs to drill a big hole in their roster.

Can't see much difference to be honest.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I mean, who cares what Tkachuk does if he holds out.

What I care about is do the Flames even make the playoffs without him?

Do you sacrifice a season in your winning window to send a message to Tkachuk or to avoid having to eat a pick to move Frolik?

Seems downright idiotic.

I think the Flames make the POs without him. They finished in first place with him, and it’s a long way from there to out of the POs. Plus they’ve upgraded in goal, the D is still solid, Dube looks to be able to play NHL minutes, etc. It’s a team game and it wouldn’t be the first time a team has come together without a star player in the lineup. And, after all, he was a second line winger and they finished first - he wasn’t a top pairing defence man, or a C.

Which makes a holdout risky for him.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Says me? I don’t even understand what that means. I don’t agree that the Flames can negotiate off the basis that they can’t afford him. Again if they truly could only afford to pay him below $7 million in a 1 year deal, then yes they run the high risk of losing him to an offer sheet. But as you pointed out, this isn’t true.

The negotiation comes down to what the Flames are willing to pay him, and what they are willing to do to clear the cap room necessary.

And if they have painted themselves into a corner because the moves available to clear the space are no longer there, well that’s on the GM. If they were to take that position during negotiations at this point, that wouldn’t be a team I’d want to play for.

Sure, and the player is entitled to those feelings.

Sharing the current cap and current contractual commitments is not a position, it is a fact, and context for the negotiation. The Flames position would be what they are willing to do in order to make cap available.

In addition to those feelings, the player is also entitled to the option to sit out and take zero dollars, and zero chance of winning, for the year.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I mean, who cares what Tkachuk does if he holds out.

What I care about is do the Flames even make the playoffs without him?

Do you sacrifice a season in your winning window to send a message to Tkachuk or to avoid having to eat a pick to move Frolik?

Seems downright idiotic.

Imagine a situation where Treliving tells Tkachuk’s agent that in order to pay him market value on a long term deal, he’d have to trade Frolik and send a second round pick with him in order to clear the full cap space needed.

That somehow would motivate Tkachuk to sign a year deal for less money? That seems far fetched to me. He must really like Frolik.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I mean, who cares what Tkachuk does if he holds out.

What I care about is do the Flames even make the playoffs without him?

Do you sacrifice a season in your winning window to send a message to Tkachuk or to avoid having to eat a pick to move Frolik?

Seems downright idiotic.

I dont believe there is a realistic scenario where MT holds out for an entire year...unless all of Marner, Rantanan, Point, and to a lesser degree Laine all do as well.

To me its pretty much whoever "blinks" first and sets the market that you will rapidly see the rest of them follow suit and sign with their respective clubs.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Says me? I don’t even understand what that means. I don’t agree that the Flames can negotiate off the basis that they can’t afford him. Again if they truly could only afford to pay him below $7 million in a 1 year deal, then yes they run the high risk of losing him to an offer sheet. But as you pointed out, this isn’t true.

The negotiation comes down to what the Flames are willing to pay him, and what they are willing to do to clear the cap room necessary.

And if they have painted themselves into a corner because the moves available to clear the space are no longer there, well that’s on the GM. If they were to take that position during negotiations at this point, that wouldn’t be a team I’d want to play for.

On the GM or not, the cap situation is what it is. I can’t see how it doesn’t affect negotiations. As for the GM, he has more than one player to consider here. He has to pay 22. He’s done a better than average job in salary control - his successes are greater than his mistakes IMO, especially at the top of the lineup.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You told me my comments didn't fit an argument that I wasn't in ... hence "Says you"

I've never said they can negotiate off the idea that they don't have room.

I do think however that Tkachuk's camp has to be cognisant of what a late arrival means to year one, and how that may push the team into having to gut things so much that he hasn't done his club any favours.

I never claimed you did say that. There is a broader discussion going on here that you jumped into.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Sure, and the player is entitled to those feelings.

Sharing the current cap and current contractual commitments is not a position, it is a fact, and context for the negotiation. The Flames position would be what they are willing to do in order to make cap available.

In addition to those feelings, the player is also entitled to the option to sit out and take zero dollars, and zero chance of winning, for the year.

Sure share all you want. But sitting out a year is not a situation that works for the club.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I dont believe there is a realistic scenario where MT holds out for an entire year...unless all of Marner, Rantanan, Point, and to a lesser degree Laine all do as well.

To me its pretty much whoever "blinks" first and sets the market that you will rapidly see the rest of them follow suit and sign with their respective clubs.

Agreed.

[Manhattanboy]

Will be interesting to see which of the RFAs signs first.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Sure share all you want. But sitting out a year is not a situation that works for the club.

Does it work better for the player? IMO no.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I mean, who cares what Tkachuk does if he holds out.

What I care about is do the Flames even make the playoffs without him?

Do you sacrifice a season in your winning window to send a message to Tkachuk or to avoid having to eat a pick to move Frolik?

Seems downright idiotic.

Why are you jumping to sending a message?

About a dozen RFAs are trying to change the landscape and teams are trying their best to hold the line. Not to mention a bad contract now likely increases the chances of losing the player prematurely if he's on the three years and a huge final year train like others.

This doesn't have to be personal, and given Treliving's demeanor I think we can assume it's all about asset management and good business.

[the-rasta-masta]

I've been told from a good source that the Flames offered $7.75 and Tkachuk's camp wants $9.5. No mention of what the term is.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Does it work better for the player? IMO no.

Certainly better for the player than the team though. Players can still go overseas and earn money albeit at a greatly reduced amount.

Teams cant just plug in another guy who will contribute to winning now.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I never claimed you did say that. There is a broader discussion going on here that you jumped into.

So you brought up an offer sheet here ...

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Let’s also say the Flames cap constraint was hard and fast, and the ONLY option is to offer say a 1 year $6.75 million deal. I couldn’t think of a better situation for an offer sheet.

But it's me that missed a broader discussion and jumped into something when all I did was speak to your specific post and the offer sheet option you brought up?

Is this getting personal dude?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

I've been told from a good source that the Flames offered $7.75 and Tkachuk's camp wants $9.5. No mention of what the term is.

Thats a massive gap regardless of term...but if its true, there is a problem here.

Also if true, there is zero chance MT signs anything until one of the other guys sets the market.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

I've been told from a good source that the Flames offered $7.75 and Tkachuk's camp wants $9.5. No mention of what the term is.

Obviously depending on term, that sounds about as expected.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Why are you jumping to sending a message?

About a dozen RFAs are trying to change the landscape and teams are trying their best to hold the line. Not to mention a bad contract now likely increases the chances of losing the player prematurely if he's on the three years and a huge final year train like others.

This doesn't have to be personal, and given Treliving's demeanor I think we can assume it's all about asset management and good business.

If you're saying the flames can pay tkachuk whatever it is he's asking by signing him and making a move after he's signed to free up the necessary cap space

Then

NOT signing him would clearly be an indication they are sending a message that they are unwilling to pay him what he's asking even though they could if they wanted to.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

If you're saying the flames can pay tkachuk whatever it is he's asking by signing him and making a move after he's signed to free up the necessary cap space

Then

NOT signing him would clearly be an indication they are sending a message that they are unwilling to pay him what he's asking even though they could if they wanted to.

When did I say that?

Man this is getting silly. All I said is an offer sheet is unlikely. That teams that have space, are attractive, don't have their own RFA issues or an internal budget are not plentiful.

Would the Flames be in a bind if they signed Tkachuk to a 8x10M contract? For sure. But so too would any team, even if they tried to free up the space before the offer sheet.