- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,306
- 18,699
I sure as hell wouldn't trade Kaprizov straight up for Tkachuk. Kaprizov is simply the better player.
Proposal: Brady Tkachuk 4 Kaprizov
- Thread starter ctmagic
- Start date
I sure as hell wouldn't trade Kaprizov straight up for Tkachuk. Kaprizov is simply the better player.
DingDongCharlie
Registered User
- Sep 12, 2010
- 11,600
- 9,717
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,306
- 18,699
Okay, so I said neither team does it in my post, but that's not the answer to the question. The question was which team adds. The answer, in my opinion, is Ottawa. If others disagree with me, okay...
DingDongCharlie
Registered User
- Sep 12, 2010
- 11,600
- 9,717
Yep Brady has several years in league establishing his value kap has one shortened season.
CristianoRonaldo
Registered User
Tkachuk is getting overrated, this is Kaprizov, easily.
kaprizov is a tier above, but IMO at this point a much bigger headache and a much bigger flight risk.
SpezDispenser
Registered User
- Aug 15, 2007
- 27,168
- 6,716
He's not getting overrated at all. He's a monster to play against.
Kairi Zaide
Unforgiven
Tkachuk might indeed have higher value around the league because GMs are generally dumb as f***
I think that the Senators would have to add, but not much. Tkachuk is really good too.
The next question concerns whether Kaprizov would sign with Ottawa. I think yes, just like he would also sign with Minnesota. The issue isn't getting him signed and in camp, though. The issue is the kind of contract terms he's looking for, right now. His camp is seemingly looking at a shorter deal, to position himself to either make bank with UFA leverage at the earliest opportunity, possibly even in a re-up scenario for eight years, or else to make an independent decision about somewhere else to play at the earliest opportunity (for seven years max).
So in my view, yes, he would sign for 2 or 3 years with Ottawa. He'd also sign with Minnesota for that kind of term, of course. Whether the team could depress wages much is not really clear, since the Wild hasn't been too willing to discuss this kind of short deal, for any dollars, so far.
In my view, the player owes the team a discount if the deal is short, though. It's a pure RFA bridge deal, if that's what he wants, and those deals should be for less dollars. Teams should not have to pay top dollar for players' RFA years.
Of course, my sense is that Tkachuk is similarly looking at a shorter deal. Now that is a problem.
The issue with these two negotiations is that in both cases, the player's desire for a shorter deal, which doesn't eat into his UFA years, is creating an intractable problem for the team with whom the player is negotiating. So a trade doesn't seem to solve either team's problem. Each team appears to want some of their star player's UFA years.
The next question concerns whether Kaprizov would sign with Ottawa. I think yes, just like he would also sign with Minnesota. The issue isn't getting him signed and in camp, though. The issue is the kind of contract terms he's looking for, right now. His camp is seemingly looking at a shorter deal, to position himself to either make bank with UFA leverage at the earliest opportunity, possibly even in a re-up scenario for eight years, or else to make an independent decision about somewhere else to play at the earliest opportunity (for seven years max).
So in my view, yes, he would sign for 2 or 3 years with Ottawa. He'd also sign with Minnesota for that kind of term, of course. Whether the team could depress wages much is not really clear, since the Wild hasn't been too willing to discuss this kind of short deal, for any dollars, so far.
In my view, the player owes the team a discount if the deal is short, though. It's a pure RFA bridge deal, if that's what he wants, and those deals should be for less dollars. Teams should not have to pay top dollar for players' RFA years.
Of course, my sense is that Tkachuk is similarly looking at a shorter deal. Now that is a problem.
The issue with these two negotiations is that in both cases, the player's desire for a shorter deal, which doesn't eat into his UFA years, is creating an intractable problem for the team with whom the player is negotiating. So a trade doesn't seem to solve either team's problem. Each team appears to want some of their star player's UFA years.
Al Lagoon
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2012
- 3,521
- 670
It obviously isn't about defense either because it isn't like Tkachuk bridges the gap that way
lol What? He's horrendous defensively. If what you mean is "he hits" then sure but that's the end of those contributions.
DanyHeatley
Registered User
- Dec 6, 2016
- 1,402
- 816
How many players have those teams developed? Ottawa has a better track record than the two of those teams combined. Hell, Ottawa has had more playoff success the past 5 years than any team mentioned in this thread. I don't know why people are saying Ottawa doesn't have a bright future - they easily have one of the best in the league. The issue is once they finally get over the hump is prolonged success due to Menlyk being a cheap ass.
Al Lagoon
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2012
- 3,521
- 670
The one where Kaprizov goes back to Russia.
HabsForHire
"Expect the unexpected"
ItWasJustified
Registered User
- Jan 1, 2015
- 4,570
- 5,770
Only because he's from North America. Kaprizov is a much more dynamic player than Tkachuk will ever be.
GreeningOil
Yarpmeister
Dead cap for Minnesota doesn’t mean Ottawa has a brighter future.
If you knew anything about Kaprizov you’d know he isn’t a loser. And what mentality are you talking about? Trying to negotiate the best contract? Guess you better trade that loser Tkachuk then.
Kaprizov is trying to negotiate a franchise crippling contract after half a season <PPG. Didnt take the 9.5 x 8 thats been reported so he can go to Russia.
This has already been turned down on its head as not happening. In fact it's been discussed to death
So clearly you’re misinformed. Kaprizov’s camp wants 3 years because it’s the fastest route to UFA and a large second contract (like Panarin). Minnesota wanted 8 years at $9M per. Now Minnesota wants 5 years about the same AAV. I believe it’s been agreed upon but there is still a lot of other things to iron out. There is no way this is a “franchise crippling” contract.
