Around the NHL, Off-Season Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.

bleedblue1223

Registered User
Jan 21, 2011
52,925
16,382
One of two things is going on here. 1) there truly are a few other teams Tkachuk would sign with and Nashville as reported was one of them; 2) Strickland who is questionable but tight with the Tkachuks is correct.
Could be both to an extent, and those other teams are just being used as leverage for contract negotiations. It's a tactic we see a lot in Euro soccer, and something I wouldn't be surprised if the Tkachuk's employed.
 

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,875
5,963
Badlands
Could be both to an extent, and those other teams are just being used as leverage for contract negotiations. It's a tactic we see a lot in Euro soccer, and something I wouldn't be surprised if the Tkachuk's employed.
I think it's safe to say that Armstrong right now knows exactly what that long term contract will be on the Blues regardless of this type of posturing. If the intention to come to STL is so transparent that the likes of Strickland is going all-in to redeem his infamous Tkachuk hugging at the airport incident, then it's equally transparent to Armstrong. There is no world in which Strickland knows more than Armstrong about what Tkachuk will do.
 

Xanadude

Registered User
Jun 12, 2018
510
477
Ballwin
I have to think signing a top-6 LW takes Nashville out of the Tkachuk running. This might handcuff Calgary even more.

And/OR this could be Nashville's reaction to learning they're out on Tkachuk, their plan B.

F5 button is broken
 

bleedblue1223

Registered User
Jan 21, 2011
52,925
16,382
I have to think signing a top-6 LW takes Nashville out of the Tkachuk running. This might handcuff Calgary even more.

And/OR this could be Nashville's reaction to learning they're out on Tkachuk, their plan B.

F5 button is broken
Right, that's my thinking, that they are pivoting to plan B. Whether that means they couldn't get an extension done or didn't like Calgary's price, it could be anything. Could also be that they were never interested and Nino just took longer to sign.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xanadude

MissouriMook

Still just a Mook among men
Sponsor
Jul 4, 2014
8,058
8,667
Wonder if this pushes them out of the Tkachuk race.


Dammit! I wanted the Blues to find a way to bring him in and put him on a line with Thomas and Tkachuk so we could have a TNT line. Now I guess we'll just have to re-sign James Neal.
 

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,580
14,247
This is why those saying just wait for him in UFA are likely barking up wrong tree. By telling Flames he won't resign he will almost certainly be traded. Unless he is only willing to play for Blues- not at all likely even though we appear to be his preferred destination- if we want him for the rest of his prime it is going to have to be in a trade.
He is maximizing his leverage as he has been doing for 3+ years now. This is the next step in that process. Maybe he is doing it to come to St. Louis or maybe he is doing it to maximize the dollar amount on his next deal. Or maybe he has a few preferred destinations and wants the maximum contract from one of those few destinations. We don't know his complete endgame/goal here.

But I'm confident saying he doesn't give a rat's ass what Calgary gets in return for him in a trade and isn't going to sign an extension just to help them. And I'm about 95% confident that he is happy to play on a 1 year deal and then hit UFA next summer.

Nothing about his refusal to sign a 1 year deal in Calgary tells me that he is willing to sign an 8 year deal wherever he gets traded. And there is an argument that he will have more leverage to negotiate the contract he wants next summer as a UFA than he'll have with whatever team trades for him.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BlueMed

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,580
14,247
Yep - whoever trades for him gets his next 9-years. No doubt teams will understand and meet his contract demands prior to any trade.
I have doubt.

I won't be at all surprised if his demands are UFA-market money. It is pretty rare for teams to give up UFA money AND assets in order to acquire a guy. The Hawks were the last team to do that with Seth Jones and it immediately set their franchise back at least a year.

Tkachuk has a guaranteed 1 year $9M+ deal coming in arbitration. He's going to turn down any 8 year offer made by an inquiring team if he thinks that he will make more on his 1 year arbitration award plus the 7 year UFA deal next summer.

The only exception to that is if he is dead set on one (or a handful) of locations, at which point that could happen this summer or next.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlueMed

Stealth JD

Don't condescend me, man.
Sponsor
Jan 16, 2006
16,965
8,449
Bonita Springs, FL
I have doubt.

I won't be at all surprised if his demands are UFA-market money. It is pretty rare for teams to give up UFA money AND assets in order to acquire a guy. The Hawks were the last team to do that with Seth Jones and it immediately set their franchise back at least a year.

Tkachuk has a guaranteed 1 year $9M+ deal coming in arbitration. He's going to turn down any 8 year offer made by an inquiring team if he thinks that he will make more on his 1 year arbitration award plus the 7 year UFA deal next summer.

The only exception to that is if he is dead set on one (or a handful) of locations, at which point that could happen this summer or next.
I can't see the best offer for Calgary coming from a team who views him as a 1-year rental. If Treliving is going to get the most value out of Tkachuk in a trade, it's going to have to be from a team that's willing to sign him long-term. Surely a team like the Devils aren't going to pay good assets this summer only to see him walk next summer. You'd better have some assurances that he'll be around for a while before spending those assets, otherwise you would be setting the franchise back, absent a Stanley Cup win next season.
 

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,875
5,963
Badlands
That is officially my #1 hope, that the New Jersey Devils trade a lot of futures for him hoping to sign him long term, he doesn't and next summer the Blues just take their free agent and the Devils get nothing and they suffer a heavy blow to the organization.

I might have a 1A/1B situation with Devils and Islanders given that it would specifically be Lou Lamoreillo to lose hard.
 

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,580
14,247
I can't see the best offer for Calgary coming from a team who views him as a 1-year rental. If Treliving is going to get the most value out of Tkachuk in a trade, it's going to have to be from a team that's willing to sign him long-term.
Absolutely. Calgary will be looking for a deal like that. If there is a team willing to meet Tkachuk's asking price AND beat all the other trade offers then that is what will happen. But any team making a trade offer contingent on a long term extension is going to demand to be able to talk terms with Tkachuk before finalizing the deal with Calgary.

My point is that when they have those conversations, Tkachuk is almost certainly going to say "I think I can get $75M-80M on a 7 year deal on the open market next summer and I think I'll get $10M+ in arbitration. So I'm not considering any 8 year deal with you right now unless you're offering $85-90M+." There are plenty of teams who might be willing to give up that kind of contract in UFA but aren't willing to give up a couple quality assets AND that kind of contract.

The best offer we got for Shattenkirk was with an fresh contract extension. It didn't happen because Shatty didn't like the offers he got. Tkachuk has as much or more leverage than any RFA the NHL has seen in the last decade. He has no reason to agree to an 8 year trade and sign with a suitor unless they give him exactly the value he believes he would be worth as a UFA. He's a year from hitting UFA at 25, the scheduled arbitration guarantees exactly a 1 year deal of at least $9M and he just put up a 100 point season. He has an insanely good arbitration case to bring that number well above $9M. In the last decade, there have only been 2 players that have signed an RFA contract after a 100 point season:

Connor McDavid: $12.5M AAV on an 8 year extension with $57M of actual dollars paid during RFA years ($14.25M a year for the RFA years).

Nikita Kucherov: $9.5M AAV on an 8 year deal with $12M real dollars paid during the lone RFA year.

Those will be the two comps that his camp hammers home to the arbitrator. If Calgary counters with some comps of 100 point players who did it (or came close) in years after signing a lower AAV long term deal (Huberdeau at $5.9M signed in 2017, Drai signed at $8.5M in 2017, MacKinnon ay $6.3M in 2016, Miller at $5.25M in 2018), then Tkachuk will counter that most of them hit 100 points years after signing at those AAVs and will bring up guys like Matthews ($11.6M AAV), Marner ($10.9M) and Kaprizov ($9M) who also didn't max out the term. I don't see how the arbitrator comes in less than $10M, so any team that wants to extend him now is really going to have to make it worth his while.
 

MissouriMook

Still just a Mook among men
Sponsor
Jul 4, 2014
8,058
8,667
Don't the Blues already have a N name that fans are gifting a top 9 spot?
DOH.gif
 

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,875
5,963
Badlands
Absolutely. Calgary will be looking for a deal like that. If there is a team willing to meet Tkachuk's asking price AND beat all the other trade offers then that is what will happen. But any team making a trade offer contingent on a long term extension is going to demand to be able to talk terms with Tkachuk before finalizing the deal with Calgary.

My point is that when they have those conversations, Tkachuk is almost certainly going to say "I think I can get $75M-80M on a 7 year deal on the open market next summer and I think I'll get $10M+ in arbitration. So I'm not considering any 8 year deal with you right now unless you're offering $85-90M+." There are plenty of teams who might be willing to give up that kind of contract in UFA but aren't willing to give up a couple quality assets AND that kind of contract.

The best offer we got for Shattenkirk was with an fresh contract extension. It didn't happen because Shatty didn't like the offers he got. Tkachuk has as much or more leverage than any RFA the NHL has seen in the last decade. He has no reason to agree to an 8 year trade and sign with a suitor unless they give him exactly the value he believes he would be worth as a UFA. He's a year from hitting UFA at 25, the scheduled arbitration guarantees exactly a 1 year deal of at least $9M and he just put up a 100 point season. He has an insanely good arbitration case to bring that number well above $9M. In the last decade, there have only been 2 players that have signed an RFA contract after a 100 point season:

Connor McDavid: $12.5M AAV on an 8 year extension with $57M of actual dollars paid during RFA years ($14.25M a year for the RFA years).

Nikita Kucherov: $9.5M AAV on an 8 year deal with $12M real dollars paid during the lone RFA year.

Those will be the two comps that his camp hammers home to the arbitrator. If Calgary counters with some comps of 100 point players who did it (or came close) in years after signing a lower AAV long term deal (Huberdeau at $5.9M signed in 2017, Drai signed at $8.5M in 2017, MacKinnon ay $6.3M in 2016, Miller at $5.25M in 2018), then Tkachuk will counter that most of them hit 100 points years after signing at those AAVs and will bring up guys like Matthews ($11.6M AAV), Marner ($10.9M) and Kaprizov ($9M) who also didn't max out the term. I don't see how the arbitrator comes in less than $10M, so any team that wants to extend him now is really going to have to make it worth his while.
What makes this whole thing such a wild ride is that there is also MASSIVE smoke saying he simply wants to come to STL period. There can be no way that this much smoke after the five days where Armstrong could talk to Tkachuk about hypothetical contracts if Armstrong wasn't satisfied the numbers are workable in whatever conversations they had. What's Armstrong's definition of workable? Based on the contracts he has given out, can you imagine 10M per? I just can't get there.

So something is the missing piece. Once Tkachuk declares "I took less to come here, STL, because I only want to win a Cup for the Blues, I love this town," a spectacle of love ensues. He becomes the king. That has an undefined value. We don't know what it is. We can guess. But only Tkachuk knows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Itsnotatrap

Stealth JD

Don't condescend me, man.
Sponsor
Jan 16, 2006
16,965
8,449
Bonita Springs, FL
Keith works for the Blues. Presumably the family and Armstrong already know what contract Matthew will or wont accept. To believe otherwise is naive. You can bet your ass Keith is in both of those boys ears constantly, and it's just a matter of whether KT would blatantly discuss it with Army while Matt is property of another team.

On a separate matter...if Calgary were to indeed blow it up, would you prefer to chase Tkachuk, knowing he's going to strain the payroll or would anyone prefer to go for Lindholm or a defenseman? I could see Doug going galaxy-brain and acquiring Lindholm knowing ROR isn't going to be re-signed, kind of re-living the Faulk-Pietrangelo scenario. With the Captain not having yet been extended, what kind of plot-twist would that be? lol
 

Ranksu

Crotch Academy ftw
Sponsor
Apr 28, 2014
19,847
9,450
Lapland
Army you blow it. You had all pieces and didn't bring MT home. Fire Army. Go Siperia. Awful off-season by Army.

But price what Panthers paid is deeeeep.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

  • HV 71 @ Lulea Hockey
    HV 71 @ Lulea Hockey
    Wagers: 4
    Staked: $413.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Croatia vs Portugal
    Croatia vs Portugal
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $50.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Luxembourg vs Northern Ireland
    Luxembourg vs Northern Ireland
    Wagers: 5
    Staked: $52,070.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Poland vs Scotland
    Poland vs Scotland
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $50.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Serbia vs Denmark
    Serbia vs Denmark
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $55.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad