Based on what? I think it's closer than most people do, but Matthew is definitely better offensively and defensively. Brady hits harder.
Rumor: Pagnotta: Flames taking calls on Tkachuk, ask is "astronomical"
- Thread starter JKG33
- Start date
Bounces R Way
Registered User
Astronomical ask because he's really really good and is 23 years old. Players like that return a lot.
Tanknation
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2012
- 3,063
- 3,396
flamesforcup
Registered User
- Sep 5, 2017
- 3,026
- 3,539
We'll be fine at bottom pairing LD. We need a top 4 guy. I have no confidence in Valimaki.
flamesforcup
Registered User
- Sep 5, 2017
- 3,026
- 3,539
I think hes a good piece and he will grow into a top 4 role. Having him and Dermott competing for #2 while adding a right shot goal scorer like Nylander (who is a faster skater then Tkachuk) would be great. The Flames need to get faster and move on from slow players like Tkachuk and Monahan imo. Tkachuks a great piece but not if hes the best player.
Bank Shot
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2006
- 11,405
- 7,033
Tkachuk has all the leverage.
He needs to be qualified at $9 million next season.....
Larry Hanson
Registered User
- Aug 1, 2020
- 1,820
- 3,157
It's been said over and over again but no, he does not need to be qualified at 9M next year. He can be signed to a long term extension or he can be traded at any point in the next 2 years. If he has a great year next year he will probably get 8M+ on a long term extension anyway, if he doesn't have a great year then the team can take him to arbitration rather than qualify him. If he isn't interested in extending then the Flames trade him with a year left, hopefully to a team that he will extend with. He has no more leverage than any other RFA player, any RFA can refuse to sign long term and get to UFA as quick as possible, most don't because turning down large guaranteed contracts is a big risk.
He does have more leverage though because he has the option of demanding a $9m minimum salary or he goes straight to UFA.
Advantages of being a UFA... he can go to UFA market with multiple suitors... likely nets him a larger AAV contract and he gets to chose the team/city he wants to play in.
Also, he could be a dick and make it very well known that he is asking for $9m (qualifying offer requirement) or he is going to FA. If he ends up doing that, he may take less money in the end, but he gets to pick his own destination to play in. I hate Tkachuk and the Flames but, selfishly, I would hate to see this start to become a trend... small market teams, especially Canadian ones, have enough hurdles to jump through than to start to see that as a trend. If Tkachuk does take that approach, his value in a trade could be diminished significantly - more risk on the acquiring team.
Last edited:
We don't see it as often because most RFAs get extended before their QO. If he didn't want to extend they would obviously qualify him since they paid a high cost to get him. Why the hell would a team not qualify him and see him walk for nothing after paying a shitload to get him? Makes zero sense. Even if he walks after you get him for that season and can move him as a rental.
People thinking he goes back home is so dumb, the blues might suck ass or might be capped out and honestly most kids don't give a shit if they live in the same city, especially wealthy ones who can afford to visit whenever they want. I don't think he wants to be in Canada but NJ with their young core might appeal to him.
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
Not if Calgary files for Arbitration, then he can't demand 9M.
Using the "he could be a dick and..." argument makes no sense. Tkachuk hasn't done anything to warrant that label off the ice. Being a dick is more along the lines of what Adam Fox did to get to New York. He refused to sign his ELC and was going to play NCAA until his rights were moved to the Rangers or he hit UFA.
As for the idea of Tkachuk being traded (very unlikely), no team is going to trade for him if they can't or at least don't think they can extend him. His value will not drop by much if he's not interested in extending long term in Calgary
Bank Shot
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2006
- 11,405
- 7,033
Wrong.
In order to retain Tkachuk's rights in order to take him to arbitration the Flames have to make him a qualifying offer. The Flames can only take Tkachuk to arbitration if Tkachuk fails to sign the offer.
If Tkachuk has a poor season, he can just accept the $9 million qualifying offer, play out one season and become a UFA.
Tkachuk holds all the cards.
If the qualifying offer was substantially lower, and Tkachuk had a poor season, he may be fearful of going into arbitration and sign a more team friendly deal. But in reality the guy can just take $9 million and walk to free agency even if he lays down a stinker of a season. Tkachuk holds all the cards in terms of where he gets dealt because of this which limits the Flames from getting the best return.
Bank Shot
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2006
- 11,405
- 7,033
You guys are misinformed. Cgy has to give Tkachuk a qualifying offer before they can take him to arbitration. Dude can just sign the qualifying offer and take his one year, $9 million deal and then waltz to free agency.
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
No actually you are wrong, if the team elects Arbitration then they give him 85% of his previous years salary (9M). So they can give him a 7.65M contract
Larry Hanson
Registered User
- Aug 1, 2020
- 1,820
- 3,157
You responded to my post but you clearly didn't read the whole thing, he has no more leverage than any other RFA. The team can extend him long term if they can agree on a deal, qualify him at 9M if he has a great year next year and keep negotiating, go to arbitration if he doesn't have a great year and/or trade him at any point in the next 2 years. It is highly unlikely that he goes straight to UFA but if for some reason that does happen it will be a team decision not a player decision.
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
No you are the one who is misinformed here, team arbitration window is before free agency
Larry Hanson
Registered User
- Aug 1, 2020
- 1,820
- 3,157
Mugzy97
#StandWitness
If you think Tkachuk is more valuable than Marner then I don’t even want to hear your opinion on anything else
Lots of Leafs fans think that. I'm a Flames fan and I'm definitely in the minority in that I would do Tkachuk for Marner. I think people are overreacting to the Leafs playoff failures. Your fanbase is overvaluing Nylander and undervaluing Marner now. Nylander isn't close in value to Tkachuk. Marner is more valuable. That said, you guys could use some top 6 sandpaper and a LHS. We could use a RHS. I think that's the logic behind it.
Mugzy97
#StandWitness
That’s pretty fair, I guess my thoughts is statistically Nylander and Tkachuk are close, but Tkachuk is 2 years younger. He will also demand a larger contract that Nylander next year I assume, while Nylander has a few years at 6.9 left. I agree Tkachuk has more value with the added sandpaper, which is why I added Dermott in a proposal who is no slouch in value and Calgary might be in need of a LHD once this expansion passes.
We need a top 4 LHD. Tkachuk is a fantastic defensive player as well. Calgary has 3 options for 3rd pair LHD right now. If you want to talk Muzzin, Brodie or Rielly that fills a need for us. Dermott not so much, he's kind of weird player. Looks really good on a 3rd pair and struggles up the lineup. The Leafs will miss Hyman. They'll be fine if they add a Coleman type instead, but they need that puck retrieval, battle element in the top 6. Leafs lose a Marner for Tkachuk deal in talent, but might win it in roster composition if that makes sense.
kevsh
Registered User
- Nov 28, 2018
- 3,345
- 4,626
He's already been anointed as the future captain of the Sens, Matthew is core piece of a core that has underperformed and his team is apparently taking calls on him.
If you're going on goals and assists, backchecking, then fine, solid arguments. But I'll judge them based on their trajectory and how much their own team values them.
