How Big Was Keith Tkachuk?

Epsilon

#basta
Oct 26, 2002
48,464
369
South Cackalacky
"Powerforwards", despite being fawned over as a group by fans and the media, have a fairly inconsistent, even underwhelming track record as playoff performers (especially relative to the reputations they acquire). A "powerforward" with essentially the same track record as a "soft skilled player" will be given exponentially more chances to turn things around before being labelled a choker/loser/etc.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,981
Brooklyn
Tkachuk absolutely was a warrior. Tkachuk beating the snot out of Claude Lemieux in the preliminary round of the 1996 World Cup is often credited with giving the Americans the swagger they needed to believe they could beat Canada on the scoresheet - which of course they did in the finals. (The 96 World Cup is strangely ignored when the HHOF cases for LeClair and Tkachuk are brought up - actually it isn't strange considering most of the pundits are from canada) .

Tkachuk's problem was a typical one of power forwards in the playoffs - he got too caught up in the physical game to be in position to score effectively. Adam foote played keith perfectly - in a 7 game series, tkachuk focused more and more on shoving matches and the like with foote and less on getting his stick in position in front of the net.

For what it's worth, tkachuk had become a bit of a powerplay specialist by the time his injuries started to mount in st Louis (which is why I stand by the statement that he wasn't the player he once was even if his overall totals are similar on a per game basis). And it's the powerplay aspect of his game that truly tanked in the playoffs.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,146
Well yeah. I dont even want to know how many empty netters Wayne Gretzky has scored. Yet we all know Tkachuk had two 50+ goals seasons but also 6 and 8 empty net goals respectively. That's quite a lot and those goals are always a bit pis poor.

Nice for him that he was on the ice and sealed the deal but anybody can put the puck in the net with no goalie.

I think in 2004 St. Louis had 6 of his 38 goals in the empty net. I will certainly say one thing, empty net goals are not easy. They LOOK easy. But when the other team is pulling out all the stops to tie the game it isn't always easy to put a puck through a couple legs from center ice into an empty net. In some ways, an empty net goal is the most important goal of the game. If a team is pressuring the other team to tie the game and a player siezes the opportunity and literally ends the game by scoring the empty net goal quite often that's the nail in the coffin. Besides, I'm not a Tkachuk fan, but if you take those empty net goals away in 1996 he still scored 44 goals.

You're undercutting him a bit here.

He was an elite player from 1993-2004 which is a hell of a long time. He only fell off past age 32-33 which is pretty normal.

His numbers suffered a bit from 1997-2004 because of injuries (seemed to miss 10-15 games every year) but if you pro-rate his numbers he would have been top-10 in the league in goals practically every year in that stretch and top-10 in points in some of them as well.

His regular season career is clearly HHOF calibre - elite goalscoring record in his prime, 500 goals and 1000 points, two post-season All-Star nods, one of the best power forwards ever.

If he'd done anything at all in the playoffs - even had one strong run before losing in the Finals like Alfredsson - he'd be going to the HHOF. But he didn't, and his playoff record is one of the worst ever from an elite player.

The 2001 playoffs in particular were godawful. He was aquired at a huge price by St. Louis at the deadline that year, was dead in his prime, and St. Louis were an elite team who were a legitimate Cup contender. He was supposed to be the guy that put them over the top. Instead, he was completely invisible, scored 2 goals in 15 games as the Blues were bounced in the Conference Finals. Pierre Turgeon carried the team on his back that playoffs while Tkachuk and Demitra were abysmal.

As someone else noted, it's odd that he seemed to get worse and worse in the playoffs as his career went along. Looked great on bad Jets teams in his first couple seasons, scored 17 goals in his first 32 career playoff games. Then scored 11 in his next 57, which is just shocking when you think about it - essentially turned from a guy who averaged 35-40 goals/82 games in the regular season to one who pro-rated out at 16 goals/82 games in the playoffs.

A lot of "what ifs" though. I don't think he was an elite player for that long either. Tkachuk did not age well at all and other than his poor playoff record (even in his prime) he never once cracked 100 points, only more than 86 once, and was never a top 10 scorer. Getting kicked out of the game in the 1996 World Cup Game 3 is an example of his ill-timed temper. There are far more cons than pros to evaluate him as a HHOFer.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,981
Brooklyn
There might be more cons than pros about tkachuk, but his overall performance in the 1996 work cup is definitely a pro. He had a huge psychologically powerful effect on his American teammates.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,779
16,224
Tkachuk absolutely was a warrior. Tkachuk beating the snot out of Claude Lemieux in the preliminary round of the 1996 World Cup is often credited with giving the Americans the swagger they needed to believe they could beat Canada on the scoresheet - which of course they did in the finals. (The 96 World Cup is strangely ignored when the HHOF cases for LeClair and Tkachuk are brought up - actually it isn't strange considering most of the pundits are from canada) .

Tkachuk's problem was a typical one of power forwards in the playoffs - he got too caught up in the physical game to be in position to score effectively. Adam foote played keith perfectly - in a 7 game series, tkachuk focused more and more on shoving matches and the like with foote and less on getting his stick in position in front of the net.

For what it's worth, tkachuk had become a bit of a powerplay specialist by the time his injuries started to mount in st Louis (which is why I stand by the statement that he wasn't the player he once was even if his overall totals are similar on a per game basis). And it's the powerplay aspect of his game that truly tanked in the playoffs.

i think it depends how you define warrior, which is kind of my point. if a warrior is someone who squashes guys like claude lemieux or battles in front of the net, then yes tkachuk was a warrior. tkachuk always seemed like a bully out there to me, which is fine because a physical player needs to be a bully. but he also seemed to have the psyche of a bully. like you said, he got frustrated when he couldn't dominate like he's used to doing and then he loses focus.

now, a warrior in the sense of, i don't know, tomas holmstrom takes the abuse. does his job. gets the last laugh.
 

Pantokrator

Who's the clown?
Jan 27, 2004
6,150
1,323
Semmes, Alabama
Dunno but he is huge now. :laugh:

tkachuck.jpg

Haha! Are you sure that isn't his father or Grandfather? I didn't know he was like 65 yrs old. He must've played into his 60s like Gordie Howe.
 

Pantokrator

Who's the clown?
Jan 27, 2004
6,150
1,323
Semmes, Alabama
"Powerforwards", despite being fawned over as a group by fans and the media, have a fairly inconsistent, even underwhelming track record as playoff performers (especially relative to the reputations they acquire). A "powerforward" with essentially the same track record as a "soft skilled player" will be given exponentially more chances to turn things around before being labelled a choker/loser/etc.

Good point. It seems like Power Forwards have only like a 5 yr period of dominance. I think of players like LeClair, Kevin Stevens, Tkachuk, and Bertuzzi as players in that mold. It's hard to say with Neely because his career was cut short by nagging injuries. Shanahan was able to modify his game and maintain some relevance it seems.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,779
16,224
as far as power forwards being playoff performers, neely was a fantastic playoff performer of course. stevens and shanahan were excellent. rick tocchet and gary roberts were very good, iginla had that great run, leclair had his moments. it is only tkachuk and bertuzzi that have consistently failed in the playoffs, among power forwards in the stricter sense of big physical guys who crash the boards, battle in the corners, and stand in front of the net. oh, and owen nolan too.

if you count centers, then the gold standard among guys since the 80s is messier. lindros had been extremely good in the playoffs, but probably not as good as he could have been. joe thornton, well...

but i certainly don't think it's a rule that power forwards tend to disappoint in the playoffs.
 

Briere Up There*

Guest
Nice for him that he was on the ice and sealed the deal but anybody can put the puck in the net with no goalie.

Not true at all. They are easier, but they're not easy. PP goals are easier than EN, what about those? A guy with a few empty netters and a boatload of PP goals might as well be Wade Belak with better ice time, right?

I don't think it detracts from his totals at all.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,595
84,107
Vancouver, BC
A lot of "what ifs" though. I don't think he was an elite player for that long either. Tkachuk did not age well at all and other than his poor playoff record (even in his prime) he never once cracked 100 points, only more than 86 once, and was never a top 10 scorer. Getting kicked out of the game in the 1996 World Cup Game 3 is an example of his ill-timed temper. There are far more cons than pros to evaluate him as a HHOFer.

The evidence says otherwise.

Working backwards :

- 2003-04 - Tkachuk finishes top-10 in goals despite missing 7 games through injury. Over 82 games, his numbers projected to 6th in the NHL in goals and 12th in points.

- 2002-03 - missed 26 games, scored 31 goals in 56 games. Projected over 82 games, his numbers would have been good for 3rd in goals and 12th in points.

- 2001-02 - finished 7th in goals and 12th in points, despite missing 9 games. Projected over 82 games, his numbers would have been good for 2nd in goals and 4th in points.

- 2000-01 - missed 9 games, still finished with 79 points. Numbers project to 15th in goals and 13th in total points.

And prior to that, we're going into his Phoenix/Winnipeg years where he was clearly elite.

How are those 4 years heading into the lockout not the work of an elite player? Top-10 in goals twice despite injury problems, and would have been a top-15 scorer every year had he stayed healthy. 2001-02 he probably would have been runner-up for the Rocket Richard trophy.

He only started slowing down in 2005-06 when he was 33-34 years old, which is perfectly normal. The notion that he 'didn't age well' is completely false.

And if you're rating someone who had his entire prime in the 94-04 Dead Puck Era by the amount of 100-point seasons he had ... I don't know what to say there.

Absolutely his discipline was an issue, and his playoff record is a major problem. But Tkachuk's regular-season resume is absolutely outstanding. Like I said previously, would be going to the HHOF if he'd had even one decent run in the post-season.
 

Infinite Vision*

Guest
"Powerforwards", despite being fawned over as a group by fans and the media, have a fairly inconsistent, even underwhelming track record as playoff performers (especially relative to the reputations they acquire). A "powerforward" with essentially the same track record as a "soft skilled player" will be given exponentially more chances to turn things around before being labelled a choker/loser/etc.

I have to say that's very true.
 

IggyFan12

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
317
6
Tkachuk is one of 3 players with 500 goals and 2000 PIMS along with Verbeek and Shanahan. He also once led the league in goals (96-97) with 52. His spotty playoff record however is his down fall. Never once reaching the Stanley Cup finals is a huge knock on his legacy. The one thing you can say about Keith however is his loyalty. Playing for only 3 teams in his career and considering Atlanta was a purely rental situation and he resigns in St.Louis during the off-season. Keith Tkachuk was also in 1999 on a list produced by the Hockey News 100 Greatest Players of all time book to be a potential player to make that list. I consider him no where near the top 100 of all time but that shows how the media viewed him in 1999.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,779
16,224
Tkachuk is one of 3 players with 500 goals and 2000 PIMS along with Verbeek and Shanahan. He also once led the league in goals (96-97) with 52. His spotty playoff record however is his down fall. Never once reaching the Stanley Cup finals is a huge knock on his legacy. The one thing you can say about Keith however is his loyalty. Playing for only 3 teams in his career and considering Atlanta was a purely rental situation and he resigns in St.Louis during the off-season. Keith Tkachuk was also in 1999 on a list produced by the Hockey News 100 Greatest Players of all time book to be a potential player to make that list. I consider him no where near the top 100 of all time but that shows how the media viewed him in 1999.

i remember when he retired, st. louis fans had some great things to say about tkachuk as a leader. apparently, he was a great vet, did the little things on the ice and in the room, helped out the rookies, was good in the community, etc.

basically the polar opposite of his time in phoenix/winnipeg:

Welcome to Tkachuk world. This is where goals are everything; and we don't mean team goals. It is quite common to have a team's leading scorer as the captain, provided he is of strong moral fibre and is capable of putting the team's needs ahead of his own selfish motivations. Keith Tkachuk should not be the captain of the Phoenix Coyotes.

This is not simply based on his outburst during the Calgary game, an event merely symptomatic of the problem. Tkachuk has a long and storied history of putting his own ego and monetary desires ahead of his team.
Keith Tkachuk smashed and scored his way to the Hockey News's High IQ Award (combining intimidation, through penalty minutes, with goal-scoring prowess) for two years in a row in 1994 and 1995, finishing only second to Eric Lindros in '96. Last season he became the first American-born player to lead the league in goals, all the while accumulating 228 penalty minutes. HE didn't do it with Eric Lindros and Mikael Renberg feeding him, either.

But numbers will never tell you who is adding to their team through leadership. Marcel Dionne scored over 1700 points in his career, but his playoff history makes Mike Gartner look like Jean Beliveau. 52 goals is 52 goals, but is a three-goal night against a bottom-feeder team more important than showing the leadership that would lift the ENTIRE team to greater heights against the best competition night in, night out?

For all his attempts at increasing his monetary wealth, Tkachuk has never been a poor man. Heading into his option year, he was handed a controversial two million (canadian), dollar contract. But trouble was brewing ahead.
Tkachuk became a restricted Group II free agent back in the summer of '95, and showed little interest in returning to the Winnipeg Jets, the team he captained. Tkachuk would have everyone believe that he never wanted out of Winnipeg. In actuality, he was invisible during that summer. He missed all of training camp, but signed a 5-year, $17 million dollar contract with the Chicago Blackhawks and it had teeth marks all over it.

Long before Joe Sakic's front-loaded deal came Tkachuk's contract that had six million of those dollars stacked up front in the first year. If the Rangers thought a team like Colorado couldn't match their offer to Sakic, then certainly Tkachuk and the Blackhawks knew that Winnipeg, the second smallest market in the NHL, would be severely troubled in doing the same. In fact, the only reason the Jets were able to match it was because the taxpayers (whose government was propping up the mounting losses) who would be stuck with the bill. The team knew it was going to Phoenix the following summer but the people of Winnipeg would be stuck with over a third of his contract in that first of five years.

Winnipeg matched it on October 3rd, immediately compared to the week long wait for Sakic, due to the season opening four days later. Tkachuk actually proffered up the point that he had a golf game with Paddock right before July 1st in which Paddock said to him that he would just match any offer and that Tkachuk should just field other offers. Right...

That story doesn't match with the verbal tirade G.M. John Paddock was having to the press in the middle of September, when he said ''They never contacted us; if he doesn't want to come back he should come out and say''. Hardly two people working in unison.

What makes it all the more ridiculous is that Tkachuk hadn't skated all during September. Most players work themselves to death to keep in shape during unsigned periods. Tkachuk heard some loud boos in the team's home opener against Dallas which were only exacerbated when he pulled a groin in his second game and missed three more.

Now, nobody will deny a working man his right to get whatever monies can come to him but when one is the captain, one must adhere to certain principles inherent with the position. Comments to Mark Brender of the Hockey News in a November 17, 1995 piece stating "I got my money" or in a February 9th piece, by Winnipeg reporter Tim Campbell, saying ''People don't realize I was given that money'' are not what focusing on team goals are all about. All year, the monotony never ended. By August of 1996, his power to separate himself from the team was omnipresent.

What Tkachuk refers in the quote below is what happened during the unsigned period in early October of 1995. Terry Simpson was the coach of the team at that time and, unsure that Tkachuk was even going to play for the Jets ever again, handed the captaincy over to Kris King. Rather than bow his head and accept the coach's decision, he tore apart any cohesion between coach, management and players. ''I'll never forget what they did to me. It was wrong. It wasn't my fault they gave it (the money) to me.'' How many teams in the history of the NHL have succeeded with a captain more concerned for his own ego gratification, not to mention a warped sense of economics? How many teams have succeeded when they declare public warfare on their coach and G.M?
Perhaps Tkachuk should have been concentrating on his own play during the playoffs of 1996 when the six million dollar man potted one goal against Detroit in the opening round and was part of a power-play that went 0 for 28. Without the sparkling play of second-year goalie Nikolai Khabibulin, a four-game sweep would have been all the departing for Phoenix, Tkachuk-''led'' Jets left for their white-shirted faithful.

To most leaders in the NHL, their money is earned in the playoffs, where raising one's level of play a notch is fundamental to team success. For all of Phoenix's individual talent, they have yet to win a round in Tkachuk's existence; Tkachuk has played like a cowboy, potting 14 goals in 26 games yet adding a pathetic two assists; Tkachuk vanished when needed most in last year's Game 7 against the Ducks of Anaheim as Phoenix was shut out, and will be lucky this year to make the playoffs.

Some would say Tkachuk is a ''money player'' as a default judgment was earned against him on March 27th, 1996. Tkachuk allegedly used information from a Mr. Sabharwal to place bets illegally on NFL games through a bookmaker in Boston between October 1995 and January 1996. The man contended Tkachuk agreed orally to share winnings with him.

Tkachuk denied it, threatening to file a $1 million dollar countersuit. The NHL investigated and somehow found it to be meritless. Apparently captain Tkachuk was served with the lawsuit in late February during a road trip to Calgary and threw the papers in his bag ''and forgot about them'', according to his agent. And Barry Switzer forgot about that little ol' gun.

Again, nobody denies Keith can score goals and nobody denies accidents happen. But repeated incidents lead to one conclusion and that is that Tkachuk is not the ''man for the job'' as former coach Don Hay called him when re-instating him as captain in the summer of 1996. There can be no more damning statement of this then what occurred at the beginning of the 1997 season.

When asked back in August of 1996 whether or not he could handle the drop off in salary from six million to the approximately three million for the remaining four years on the contract, Tkachuk flatly stated ''Don't make an issue of it, because it's not one.'' Little did Phoenix fans know how much of an issue Tkachuk was going to make of it.

Players in professional sport are portrayed as money-grubbing scum all too often by a jealous, bitter portion of the populace but EVERYONE agrees that when an athlete signs a contract, he should live by that contract until its end, or until the team gets stupid and re-negotiates it early.

Team captain Tkachuk was suspended on Friday September 26th, 1997 for threatening to hold out and not play the final exhibition game plus, at least the season-opener. Most men will publicly ask for a renegotiation but Tkachuk, as is his habit, secretly undermined his team with his threat on walking out if they didn't re-do a contract that was only TWO years old!

Poor Keith felt that two and a half plus million a season wasn't enough. His basic grasp of economics failed to inform him that he had received six million the first year, as was the nature of the front-loaded contract. In one of his few smart moves, General Manager Bobby Smith sent the team ''captain'' home.

"This is a team that hasn't won a playoff round in 10 years, and to assemble what I feel is a very good team and then have one of the top players refuse to play, it's very disappointing," Smith said.

"We had a long talk with Bob (Smith) yesterday about playing this contract out," said Tkachuk. "I wanted to play here, and if I sat out, who knows how long it would have been, but it wouldn't have been any good for myself or the team. Stuff like that would have been a little bitter. I'm not going to worry about money now. If you look around the league right now, there are teams that are renegotiating deals. Different teams have different ways of handling situations."

If Tkachuk had been stripped of his captaincy for being a Group II free agent, it boggles the mind to believe that he is still worthy of being captain after such an episode. ''Stuff like that would have been a little bitter'' indeed. Few have faith that Tkachuk will not ''worry about money now''. Perhaps he is saving all that worry for the playoffs.
Phoenix will be lucky to make the playoffs and Tkachuk's recent comments will have a hand in this. Much like when Mario Lemieux stabbed his team in the back by meddling in management affairs, Keith has done the same. Lemieux held a gun to G.M. Craig Patrick's head during the off-season of 1996, saying that if the team didn't find better players to play with ''him'', he MAY consider not coming back.

Now, how exactly did Mario figure this was going to make it easier for Patrick to acquire better players via trades? If you are an opposing G.M. and you have a chance to severely weaken an opposing team by ridding them of the Art Ross winner, would you not ask for the moon in trades, knowing that Patrick had to get players to keep Mario ''happy''?

Tkachuk made the same calculated move in early November 1997 when he took his feelings about Oleg Tverdovsky's contract (or lack thereof) status to the media. Tkachuk said G.M. Bobby Smith should sign him for the money he is asking as he is an extremely valuable member of the team. A nice sentiment but Tkachuk knew he was stabbing Smith in the back. Now Smith is even deeper under the gun as most fans will take the side of their captain over management. But this is how Phoenix operates. ''Getting'' management for all the dollars they are worth is the key factor, and they are led in this by their captain.

A captain is a person who is suppose to speak with distinction, setting an example for his teammates, his franchise, and his city. He is NOT supposed to hamper management's efforts to run the team (as he has done in BOTH cities). He is NOT supposed to participate in swear-a-thons or incite other teams by publicly bashing them.

http://web.archive.org/web/19990203154903/http://www.interlog.com/~ditko37/citn/hfb3how1.html

a very slanted article, obviously. but if you can wade through all that and get the facts: tkachuk signs big front loaded offer sheet, then holds out two years into that contract because he wants it renegotiated, he shows up after his holdout having not worked out at all (sound familiar?), he publicly supports a teammate's holdout...

to be fair, those early days of the coyotes were a gong show (and, really, for most of their existence), but it seems like tkachuk was adding to the problem, not trying to find a solution.
 

lextune

I'm too old for this.
Jun 9, 2008
11,560
2,585
New Hampshire
It is notable that as a Left Wing he lead the league in goals in 96/97 and yet was still not voted a 1st or 2nd team all-star.

Nice for him that he was on the ice and sealed the deal but anybody can put the puck in the net with no goalie.

Not guys on the bench. Or anyone at all, for that matter, if the team with the man advantage scores....

This whole "taking into consideration empty net goals" thing is silly. Empty net goals a huge game clinching goals, that say nothing but positive things about a player....

....anyway....Keith had a flash of stardom and then was simply a very very good player for a long time.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
85,204
138,572
Bojangles Parking Lot
I think of Tkachuk as one of those "niche" stars like Leclair, guys who fill a very narrow role in the right environment so they put up numbers somewhat beyond their ability. Not to say he wasn't a star, but he wasn't the kind of guy you could imagine being quite so successful in just any environment.
 

Sorge Georos

Registered User
Apr 28, 2009
3,026
260
LI
You can't just discount EN goals in a vacuum.

It is natural for a team's best player to score a good amount of empty netters. Therefore, if you take away everybody's empty net goals, nothing really changes.
 

Edgeworth*

Guest
His accolades will be exagerrated a little since he was one of the few American All-Stars in the league beside Modano
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
When he failed his physical and was suspended after the lockout - oh, about 270 lbs.
 

Brooklanders*

Registered User
Feb 26, 2012
6,818
2
He was a superstar, than a star, then he faded slowly into obscurity. He lived off his star power reputation for awhile. He was a step below a guy like John leclair. He never did a thing in the playoffs. Probably was better than Tocchet and around say Dino Cicarellis level

In todays game as far as ability I would rank him with Daniel Alfredsson
 

IComeInPeace

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
2,468
877
LA
Just reading through this...
Was Tkachuk on 3 separate playoff teams that blew a 3 games to 1 series lead?

My battery is almost dead on my iPad, so I cant do the homwork, but Im wondering if he was on any/all of the following teams that blew a 3 games to 1 series lead:

Winnipeg Jets vs the Vancouver Canucks
Phoenix Coyotes vs St Louis Blues
St louis Blues vs Vancouver Canucks

If so, that has to be an extreme rarity.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad