Player Discussion Matthew Tkachuk - "That Face You Just Want to Punch"

[Flames Fanatic]

But that also means that Tkachuk's QO means that if it is signed, his next QO is basically 9 year after year till he hits UFA, right?

No. A qualifying offer is for one year. Problem for us is that he's a UFA after one year of QO.

 

[InfinityIggy]

His brother has the same thing.
It's just where they're living at the moment.

Clearly they are both being traded to St. Louis.

 

[cannucky]

W Nylander + one from the grab bag for Chuckie ?

 

[Flames Fanatic]

W Nylander + one from the grab bag for Chuckie ?

No.

 

[cannucky]

No.

We have a pretty big grab bag of players available some still have more than a year left on their deal is 1 more year of Chuckie worth losing him for nothing ? Your short 8 players and only have 14.5 million to get there .

 

[Flames Fanatic]

We have a pretty big grab bag of players available some still have more than a year left on their deal is 1 more year of Chuckie worth losing him for nothing ? Your short 8 players and only have 14.5 million to get there .

Or....

Hear me out on this....

If we're trading him, I'm fairly confident in saying that we get 30 other offers, most of them more interesting than that.

We're 8 players short, have quite a few cheaper RFA's to sign, as well has have some prospects ready to graduate to the NHL. We're fine on cap space thanks.

Guess the Leafs should trade Reilly now too since he's only got 1 year left now.

Edit: Not to mention Nylander has a whole one more year of team control compared to Tkachuk before UFA....

 

[InfinityIggy]

We have a pretty big grab bag of players available some still have more than a year left on their deal is 1 more year of Chuckie worth losing him for nothing ? Your short 8 players and only have 14.5 million to get there .

Leafs cant afford Tkachuk. Dream on.

 

[TheHudlinator]

W Nylander + one from the grab bag for Chuckie ?

Has to be marner or Matthews coming back or I don't think it makes sense for the Flames

 

[Lunatik]

Has to be marner or Matthews coming back or I don't think it makes sense for the Flames

Only Matthews makes sense IMO, Marner's contract makes sense for no one.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Only Matthews makes sense IMO, Marner's contract makes sense for no one.

We disagree on marner but ultimately the return is most likely to much for a leaf fan to consider

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I would do Tkachuk and Gio for Marner for Rielly.

 

[TheHudlinator]

I would do Tkachuk and Gio for Marner for Rielly.

That's been my suggestion as well

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

That's been my suggestion as well

I love Tkachuk more than life, but we make out like bandits in that deal.

 

[crackdown44]

People cling to the QO because they want to tank his value and get him for cheap

There’s no reason to believe that he won’t get signed to a reasonable contract before he even takes that option, unless he really wants out

 

[DCDM]

I would do Tkachuk and Gio for Marner for Rielly.

Can't we just skip to doing Gio for Reilly? I'd much prefer that.

 

[super6646]

People cling to the QO because they want to tank his value and get him for cheap

There’s no reason to believe that he won’t get signed to a reasonable contract before he even takes that option, unless he really wants out

It’s leverage because if Tkachuk wants he has Calgary by the balls and can be a ufa at 25 and get some serious dough.

I doubt tkachuk leaves a penny on the table.

 

[crackdown44]

It’s leverage because if Tkachuk wants he has Calgary by the balls and can be a ufa at 25 and get some serious dough.

I doubt tkachuk leaves a penny on the table.

I don’t know, it’s not uncommon practice for bridge deals to be structured in a way that the QO is more than what the player is worth. Helps keep the AAV down on the original bridge contract, like you said it’s leverage for the player

With the exception of Trouba where is was abundantly clear from the get go that he was never going to stay in Winnipeg and they tried moving him for two years I can’t think of a scenario where it’s ever had an adverse effect

 

[Lunatik]

I don’t know, it’s not uncommon practice for bridge deals to be structured in a way that the QO is more than what the player is worth. Helps keep the AAV down on the original bridge contract, like you said it’s leverage for the player

With the exception of Trouba where is was abundantly clear from the get go that he was never going to stay in Winnipeg and they tried moving him for two years I can’t think of a scenario where it’s ever had an adverse effect

Trouba's situation didn't even involve his qualifying offer, it was about him forcing arbitration to go to UFA. But Trouba was a problem for the Jets from the time his ELC expired, when he "held out" for the first month of the season, refusing to sign a long-term deal, which is when it first started coming out that he wanted out of Winnipeg.

Also, did it even have an adverse effect? I mean the Jets got a hell of a young defenseman in Pionk and the 20th overall pick, and didn't sign Trouba to that awful cap hit that the Rangers are already regretting.

 

[super6646]

I don’t know, it’s not uncommon practice for bridge deals to be structured in a way that the QO is more than what the player is worth. Helps keep the AAV down on the original bridge contract, like you said it’s leverage for the player

With the exception of Trouba where is was abundantly clear from the get go that he was never going to stay in Winnipeg and they tried moving him for two years I can’t think of a scenario where it’s ever had an adverse effect

Yes there were quite a few players that took that bridge the last few yrs, and if those players have 1 year of term left they'll have a ton of leverage too. If Tkachuk wants 9 million long term from Calgary he'll either get it, or he will get it for 1 year and then walk to another market that gives it. The fact the contract was structured as it is (and the reputation his father has) is going to drive speculation. We don't have long term certainty with him, and that's a pretty significant problem. And frankly, I don't think it would be wise sinking 9 million into Tkachuk. The only player on this roster I'd give that sort of money is Gaudreau.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Yes there were quite a few players that took that bridge the last few yrs, and if those players have 1 year of term left they'll have a ton of leverage too. If Tkachuk wants 9 million long term from Calgary he'll either get it, or he will get it for 1 year and then walk to another market that gives it. The fact the contract was structured as it is (and the reputation his father has) is going to drive speculation. We don't have long term certainty with him, and that's a pretty significant problem. And frankly, I don't think it would be wise sinking 9 million into Tkachuk. The only player on this roster I'd give that sort of money is Gaudreau.

Considering Tre played hard ball with Gaudreau over his salary it was strange he paid Tkachuk but didn't get a long term deal locked up. It's one of the big reasons I'm on board with trading Tkachuk in a hockey deal as I don't think he will be worth the contact he gets after his last rfa year.

 

[Lunatik]

Considering Tre played hard ball with Gaudreau over his salary it was strange he paid Tkachuk but didn't get a long term deal locked up. It's one of the big reasons I'm on board with trading Tkachuk in a hockey deal as I don't think he will be worth the contact he gets after his last rfa year.

When Gaudreau signed it was one of the higher RFA bridge deals at the time, this was before the Oilers f***ed the system with the Draisaitl contract which more or less eliminated bridge deals and significantly raised RFA salaries. Tkachuk's contract is a by-product of Oilers management being inept.

 

[super6646]

When Gaudreau signed it was one of the higher RFA bridge deals at the time, this was before the Oilers f***ed the system with the Draisaitl contract which more or less eliminated bridge deals and significantly raised RFA salaries. Tkachuk's contract is a by-product of Oilers management being inept.

Lol. 10/10.

You could argue he was maybe a million too much aav for the time, but his contract has ended up as a bargain and frankly I don’t think made a big difference in the long run. When Matthew’s got 11.5 million for 5 yrs that’s when the market changed, and because we were so cap strapped we had to bridge tkachuk to that contract.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

When Gaudreau signed it was one of the higher RFA bridge deals at the time, this was before the Oilers f***ed the system with the Draisaitl contract which more or less eliminated bridge deals and significantly raised RFA salaries. Tkachuk's contract is a by-product of Oilers management being inept.

This is true. One needs to look no further than the Barkov and MacKinnon deals.

 

[crackdown44]

This is true. One needs to look no further than the Barkov and MacKinnon deals.

Barkov maybe, Mackinnon just had yet to break out when he signed his. He only averaged ~50 points over his first three seasons

 

[Volica]

This is true. One needs to look no further than the Barkov and MacKinnon deals.

Toronto and Edmonton really messed up the market in terms of how to deal with RFA's.
Insane to me guys coming out of ELC demand the highest salaries in the NHL without having won anything.

I get McDavid. You have to pay the best player on the planet what he's worth. But Toronto pooched by giving Tavares that massive contract while only having ELC's signed. You weren't going to be able to convince Auston Matthews or Mitch Marner that Tavares was worth 11 million, and them 8.