Value of: Brady Tkachuk

[h2]

Yes. I'm learning that you seem to have a habit of "Not wanting to revisit" points after you've realized you were wrong lol.

Yes, I don't see how "Don't really give a shit" (Interesting that you completely reworded this and put it in all caps...) in reference to availability of #1RHD compared to Elite PWFs is contradicted by a direct comparison of Seider's scoring and Tkachuk's. These are two completely different points. Maybe look up the definition of contradiction? Did you use the wrong word?

And finally, no. I very clearly understand what you were saying. You brought up the Jones for Johansen 1 for 1 thinking Johansen was a scrub and trying to draw a comparison in value to prove that an additional piece wouldn't be needed to acquire Seider. And then when you realized Johansen was putting up the stats of a Top 10 center in the league all of a sudden you didn't want to compare value anymore. Again, you conveniently jump off these topics once you realize you were wrong.

There's no point in revisiting because it's simply not debatable. You LITERALLY cannot debate that a PPG Power forward is not more rare than a #1 RHD. Try it. You won't be able to. I'll listen if you can.

I mean, you did make a contradiction. You didn't let it go.

That's clearly not what happened at all. Again, I'm agreeing with how you evaluated Johansen. He was not dog shit at the time. Columbus did not add anything to get Jones. I'm not sure why you're being stubborn here other than it completely destroys the notion of your OP.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Norris, Tkachuk, and Sanderson for 2024 1st, 2025 2nd , berrgren, Edvinsson, and another prospect of your choosing ???

Drop Edvinsson and Sanderson from this as a wash. (Which is extremely generous to Detroit because Sanderson is proven at the NHL level and Ed isn't)

Now it's Norris and Tkachuk for a mid 1st, mid to late 2nd, Berggren, and a prospect of Ottawa's choosing.

... Do you not see how this is laughably absurd? (And completely impossible with a cap)

 

[h2]

Do they? Matthew Tkachuk coming off a 109 point season, FAR better than what Brady has done, got an aging Huberdeau and Weegar. At the time people also felt that Calgary was robbed, so it’s not like that was felt to be fair value.

What other scoring PWF have been traded and commanded high values? Crouse as a prospect was traded for a 2nd and a 3rd, so it’s not like he was valued super highly then. I can’t even think of other PWF that were traded. Just because something is rare doesn’t mean it’s automatically high value.

I personally don't view Matthew as a power forward. He's more skilled, but he doesn't possess the same physical abilities as Brady. He's absolutely all in your face, but it's a different player.

Also, Matthew taking control of the trade process limited Calgary's options. If Brady pulled a similar card, absolutely the return would be lower. As it would with any player.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Some insane overrating of a 65-75pt PWF going on in this thread. Brady is not Matthew. He has one PPG season and then a bunch of decent ones.

there’s no galaxy in which I’d trade Seider for him. No team should be trading a young 1D for Brady tkachuk.

It doesn’t really matter if he’s rare…6’8” starting goalies are also exceedingly rare. Does that mean you trade your 1D for a real tall goalie cause the latter is hard to find? Weird logic.

If tkachuk was an elite 1st liner, fine. But he ain’t…

Lots wouldn’t trade Seider for Brady, and lots wouldn’t trade Brady for Seider.

So that probably puts value similar then.

Norris, Tkachuk, and Sanderson for 2024 1st, 2025 2nd , berrgren, Edvinsson, and another prospect of your choosing ???

Ottawa likely hangs up phone

 

[RedHawkDown]

I personally don't view Matthew as a power forward. He's more skilled, but he doesn't possess the same physical abilities as Brady. He's absolutely all in your face, but it's a different player.

Also, Matthew taking control of the trade process limited Calgary's options. If Brady pulled a similar card, absolutely the return would be lower. As it would with any player.

If you don’t believe Matthew is a PWF, can you list who in the NHL are top 6 PWF apart from Brady? If you’re implying he’s the only player of his kind around, sure…but again I’m not sure that rarity by itself automatically pumps up value. It’s just an arbitrary argument to make.

Also you keep saying Brady is a PPG forward when he’s only had one season at that and is well below it this year. Weird assertion.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

There's no point in revisiting because it's simply not debatable. You LITERALLY cannot debate that a PPG Power forward is not more rare than a #1 RHD. Try it. You won't be able to. I'll listen if you can.

I mean, you did make a contradiction. You didn't let it go.

That's clearly not what happened at all. Again, I'm agreeing with how you evaluated Johansen. He's was not dog shit at the time. Columbus did not add anything to get Jones. I'm not sure why you're being stubborn here other than it completely destroys the notion of your OP.

The revisionist history is strong with this one.

I conceded awhile ago that #1 RHD are more readily available in the draft than Elite PWF. That was not what you continued to argue. You continued to argue that a #1RHD could be found in every draft. When I cited three drafts in the last ten years that disproved that, all of a sudden you pulled the "I'm not revisiting this again."

I am, again, asking you how pointing out that Seider and Tkachuk are producing similarly this year contradicts the statement that I don't give a shit if #1RHD are more readily available in the draft than Elite PWFs. Please tell me how one statement contradicts the other? Those two topics have nothing to do with each other.

You can keep denying it all you want, but if you weren't introducing it as a value comparison, there was absolutely zero reason to bring it up. You abandoned ship when you realized that you terribly undervalued Johansen and realized that Jones fetched a far better player at the time than your hindsight led you to believe.

Please don't make me pull out direct quotes to prove that you're trying to rewrite the way this went down...

Lots wouldn’t trade Seider for Brady, and lots wouldn’t trade Brady for Seider.

So that probably puts value similar then.


Ottawa likely hangs up phone

Likely is an understatement. They absolutely hang up the phone. They likely block Yzerman's number immediately after lol.

 

[Golden_Jet]

The revisionist history is strong with this one.

I conceded awhile ago that #1 RHD are more readily available in the draft than Elite PWF. That was not what you continued to argue. You continued to argue that a #1RHD could be found in every draft. When I cited three drafts in the last ten years that disproved that, all of a sudden you pulled the "I'm not revisiting this again."

I am, again, asking you how pointing out that Seider and Tkachuk are producing similarly this year contradicts the statement that I don't give a shit if #1RHD are more readily available in the draft than Elite PWFs. Please tell me how one statement contradicts the other? Those two topics have nothing to do with each other.

You can keep denying it all you want, but if you weren't introducing it as a value comparison, there was absolutely zero reason to bring it up. You abandoned ship when you realized that you terribly undervalued Johansen and realized that Jones fetched a far better player at the time than your hindsight led you to believe.

Please don't make me pull out direct quotes to prove that you're trying to rewrite the way this went down...



Likely is an understatement. They absolutely hang up the phone. They likely block Yzerman's number immediately after lol.

Yep agree on the block number.
Seider pacing for 48 points and Brady 64.

Sanderson pacing for 52 points, probably a closer comparison to Seider.

 

[h2]

The revisionist history is strong with this one.

Yeah, I think you're confusing the revisionist history with yourself. You've twisted absolutely everything I've said to fit your narrative.

When I cited three drafts in the last ten years that disproved that, all of a sudden you pulled the "I'm not revisiting this again.

I accepted your data at face value and didn't contend it, and made the point that even with 3 drafts missing #1 RHD's, it still doesn't defeat the notion that an elite power forward is more rare/has more value. Am I over generalizing when I say one is available in every draft? Probably. It doesn't change the rarity argument. It sounds like we don't disagree on that then if you've conceded that point.

I am, again, asking you how pointing out that Seider and Tkachuk are producing similarly this year contradicts the statement that I don't give a shit if #1RHD are more readily available in the draft than Elite PWFs. Please tell me how one statement contradicts the other? Those two topics have nothing to do with each other.

Because you're trying to use a 1/4 of a season sample size to justify your position on the very immediate sentence prior. Different points, yes. But you brought it up for a reason. Let's not act disingenuous here.

You can keep denying it all you want, but if you weren't introducing it as a value comparison, there was absolutely zero reason to bring it up. You abandoned ship when you realized that you terribly undervalued Johansen and realized that Jones fetched a far better player at the time than your hindsight led you to believe.

Please don't make me pull out direct quotes to prove that you're trying to rewrite the way this went down...

Please do pull direct quotes. There's no point though. I've been pretty much agreeing with you on the trade comparison on every post from a value perspective. The only motive to bringing it up was to show that a Top line forward brought back a #1 RHD without any inclusions. I still stand by stating I think Brady has more value than Johansen did at the time, and Jones/Seider have similar value. I fail to see anything controversial here lol..

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Yep agree on the block number.
Seider pacing for 48 points and Brady 64.

Sanderson pacing for 52 points, probably a closer comparison to Seider.

Wouldn't put Sanderson near Seider in value, yet.

Also, a bit of a side note, but for shits and giggles, I wanted to see how unfavorable Seider's Offense/Defensive zone starts were... Seider had the most unfavorable of the Top 60 TOI defensemen. Still producing well out of it.

 

[h2]

If you don’t believe Matthew is a PWF, can you list who in the NHL are top 6 PWF apart from Brady? If you’re implying he’s the only player of his kind around, sure…but again I’m not sure that rarity by itself automatically pumps up value. It’s just an arbitrary argument to make.

Also you keep saying Brady is a PPG forward when he’s only had one season at that and is well below it this year. Weird assertion.

Starting with your last point, is it not accurate to use the last full season stats when making a statement as a player being PPG? The current season is only 1/4 complete and the whole team sucks this year. Brady is also not a finished product and still improving, I know he'll get more PPG seasons moving forward.

With your first point, the only other forward that comes to mind in today's NHL is Jamie Benn. It's a dying breed in today's NHL. I do think Brady is very unique and agree it's a very arbitrary argument to make as well.

 

[Golden_Jet]

If you don’t believe Matthew is a PWF, can you list who in the NHL are top 6 PWF apart from Brady? If you’re implying he’s the only player of his kind around, sure…but again I’m not sure that rarity by itself automatically pumps up value. It’s just an arbitrary argument to make.

Also you keep saying Brady is a PPG forward when he’s only had one season at that and is well below it this year. Weird assertion.

Brady is the top power forward in the league, Matthew would get crushed in a fight with Brady. Keith said a fight would last 3-5 seconds, the amount of time for Brady to throw a punch and Matthew to fall to the ice.

 

[Voight]

disregard

 

[h2]

Interesting that his deal doesn't include any sort of NTC or NMC

NMC in the last 3 years according to capfriendly.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Interesting that his deal doesn't include any sort of NTC or NMC

No player in the league is eligible for that in a contract, until what would qualify as their first UFA season.
Which Brady has in year 5 of current contract

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Yeah, I think you're confusing the revisionist history with yourself. You've twisted absolutely everything I've said to fit your narrative.



I accepted your data at face value and didn't contend it, and made the point that even with 3 drafts missing #1 RHD's, it still doesn't defeat the notion that an elite power forward is more rare/has more value. Am I over generalizing when I say one is available in every draft? Probably. It doesn't change the rarity argument. It sounds like we don't disagree on that then if you've conceded that point.



Because you're trying to use a 1/4 of a season sample size to justify your position on the very immediate sentence prior. Different points, yes. But you brought it up for a reason. Let's not act disingenuous here.



Please do pull direct quotes. There's no point though. I've been pretty much agreeing with you on the trade comparison on every post from a value perspective. The only motive to bringing it up was to show that a Top line forward brought back a #1 RHD without any inclusions. I still stand by stating I think Brady has more value than Johansen did at the time, and Jones/Seider have similar value. I fail to see anything controversial here lol..

i think I know who you're talking to and my best advice is don't lol

 

[Voight]

NMC in the last 3 years according to capfriendly.

Ahh I was looking at the Sens main page and not Tkachuks specific contract.

 

[h2]

i think I know who you're talking to and my best advice is don't lol

I had to find out I guess lol

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

I had to find out I guess lol

same. and boy did i feel stupid after wasting that time.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Yeah, I think you're confusing the revisionist history with yourself. You've twisted absolutely everything I've said to fit your narrative.

I accepted your data at face value and didn't contend it, and made the point that even with 3 drafts missing #1 RHD's, it still doesn't defeat the notion that an elite power forward is more rare/has more value. Am I over generalizing when I say one is available in every draft? Probably. It doesn't change the rarity argument. It sounds like we don't disagree on that then if you've conceded that point.

Your claim:

There's no point in revisiting because it's simply not debatable. You LITERALLY cannot debate that a PPG Power forward is not more rare than a #1 RHD. Try it. You won't be able to. I'll listen if you can.

You reframed the argument back to PWF vs. #1RHD availability. This was post #101. I had already conceded this in post #85.

RHD? Not really. More than the elite tier PWF? Yeah probably. Don't really give a shit.

Post #80, you directly said that you can find a #1RHD in every draft.

Common enough that you can literally draft one every single year like I said.

You again said they can be found in every draft in post #87, after I conceded that they're more available than Elite PWFs.

You don't agree that you can find a top RHD in every draft? It's a pretty common piece to draft at the top every year no?

#91, I pointed out multiple years where a #1RHD wasn't found.

A #1 RHD?

2021 your best chance is Clarke, and while he's no doubt going to be an NHLer, I question whether he'll be a #1 go to in all situations guy.
2020 there is none.
2015 there is none.

So yes, it's hardly a guarantee.

Your direct response in #92 is when you made the comment about "I wont be revisiting this any further."

Yeah, even going off what you've stated for a #1 RHD and draft history, I think that it's common enough to draft at the top every year. Certainly compared to a PPG Power forward. - Again, this cannot be debated. I will not be revisiting this any further.

So yes. The discussion at that point was absolutely about whether #1RHD were available every single draft, not about whether they were more available than PWFs, which I conceded. You ran away from the argument ("I will not be revisiting this any further") once you realized that you were completely wrong about a #1RHD being available at the top of every draft.

Nice try.

Because you're trying to use a 1/4 of a season sample size to justify your position on the very immediate sentence prior. Different points, yes. But you brought it up for a reason. Let's not act disingenuous here.

How does comparing Seider and Tkachuk's production have anything, anything at all to do with availability of PWFs in the draft vs. availability of #1RHD?

One literally has nothing to do with the other, and yet you're still clinging to this argument because you can't admit that you called something a contradiction that wasn't contradictory in the slightest. Just let it go, dude.

 

[Golden_Jet]

How does comparing Seider and Tkachuk's production have anything, anything at all to do with availability of PWFs in the draft vs. availability of #1RHD?

One literally has nothing to do with the other, and yet you're still clinging to this argument because you can't admit that you called something a contradiction that wasn't contradictory in the slightest. Just let it go, dude.

Yea comparisons are different, just like production is different.

One is pacing for 64 points the other 48
One is pacing at 43 goals and the other at 13 goals

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Please do pull direct quotes. There's no point though. I've been pretty much agreeing with you on the trade comparison on every post from a value perspective. The only motive to bringing it up was to show that a Top line forward brought back a #1 RHD without any inclusions. I still stand by stating I think Brady has more value than Johansen did at the time, and Jones/Seider have similar value. I fail to see anything controversial here lol..

Sure, we'll do this one too:

Introduction of the Jones/Johansen comparison:

Do I need to remind you that Seth Jones brought back Johansen when they were both young? Ottawa would not be adding lol

Request for clarification:

Also, would love some elaboration on the Jones/Johansen comparison. I assume you're saying Johansen wasn't that great of a get for Nashville?

You admit that you were viewing the trade in hindsight. You admitted that you were using it "More for the value side of things".

For the comparison, I don't think in hindsight it was a good get for Nashville, but I was using it more for the value side of things. I think Jones and Seider have similar value at the time. I think Tkachuk has more value than Johansen at the time, there was no adding that took place.

Johansen's value at the time of the trade is pointed out.

Also, I was very clear you were looking at the Jones/Johansen trade in hindsight. The season prior to his trade he was 8th in scoring among centers, on par with Stamkos and Sedin and ahead of Toews, Zetterberg, Thornton, and Kopitar. As a 22 year old. His value was extremely high at the time of the trade.

Then, suddenly, "I won't argue the value comparison"

Regardless of the Jones/Johansen example, I won't argue about the value comparisons. The point remains that nothing was added in a forward/defense swap.

Of course you wont, because you realized the value was way off and the comparison wasn't valid lol.

 

[Raistlin]

J.T.Miller, Boeser, 1st and a 2nd

for

Pinto or Norris, Tkachuk

You guys basically add Miller to your core. Boeser can largely fill Tkachuks spot and has built in chemistry with Miller.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Yea comparisons are different, just like production is different.

One is pacing for 64 points the other 48
One is pacing at 43 goals and the other at 13 goals

You know you're screwed when you introduce goals as a comparable stat between a winger and a defenseman.

Sam Reinhart is way better than Cale Makar.

 

[malcb33]

Christian Dvorak, David Savard, and a 2nd-round pick. Merry Christmas Ottawa!!!

I mean Dvorak was traded for the pick that the Habs got back from the Kotkaniemi OS, and Kotkaneimi was the pick before Tkachuk, so that would be unbelievable value for the Sens.

You're just throwing in Savard and a 2nd for the Holiday cheer at this point

 

[h2]

Your claim:


You reframed the argument back to PWF vs. #1RHD availability. This was post #101. I had already conceded this in post #85.



Post #80, you directly said that you can find a #1RHD in every draft.



You again said they can be found in every draft in post #87, after I conceded that they're more available than Elite PWFs.



#91, I pointed out multiple years where a #1RHD wasn't found.



Your direct response in #92 is when you made the comment about "I wont be revisiting this any further."



So yes. The discussion at that point was absolutely about whether #1RHD were available every single draft, not about whether they were more available than PWFs, which I conceded. You ran away from the argument ("I will not be revisiting this any further") once you realized that you were completely wrong about a #1RHD being available at the top of every draft.

Nice try.



How does comparing Seider and Tkachuk's production have anything, anything at all to do with availability of PWFs in the draft vs. availability of #1RHD?

One literally has nothing to do with the other, and yet you're still clinging to this argument because you can't admit that you called something a contradiction that wasn't contradictory in the slightest. Just let it go, dude.

It's actually very hard to follow along because you're changing the narrative with every post. A few posts ago it's alleged that I realized I'm completely wrong about Johansen's value at the time, and now I'm completely wrong about a #1 RHD being available at the top of every draft?

At least be consistent.

The semantics that you're so obsessed over literally do nothing to change the substance of the point.

How does comparing Seider and Tkachuk's production have anything, anything at all to do with availability of PWFs in the draft vs. availability of #1RHD?

One literally has nothing to do with the other, and yet you're still clinging to this argument because you can't admit that you called something a contradiction that wasn't contradictory in the slightest. Just let it go, dude.

Again, you're being completely disingenuous here, and I'm sure the other posters see it as well.