Alex Tuch contract talks

[LGR4GM]

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

[Flashsabre]

21 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

Jacob Bryson😝😁

[Taro T]

59 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

And why presume, if they don't pay Tuch, that they'll pay ANYBODY the money that he would've been getting?

Wouldn't have minded the Peterka trade as much had they been sitting at $1MM in cap space now rather than $5.1MM.

Trading Tuch (because he'll be the best player in the trade going either way) or letting him walk is the proverbial "canary in the coal mine."  Still have time to sign him; but have little faith that Adams will be able to adjust capably to the Kaprisov signing and what it implies for new contracts moving forward.

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

Who said he's not getting paid?

[mjd1001]

14 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

I keep on going back and forth whether or not I want him extended at a high dollar. It seems like each day I wake up. I'm thinking the other side of things. 

But to answer your question directly... You have him this year. Is he going to be a consistent 65 point winger if you sign him to a big deal the year after that, and the year after that, and the year after that? As he approaches his mid-thirties? 

The more direct answer is, with the money that you would not pay him, you hope that one of your up-and-coming youngsters fills that role and you pay them, or you go out on the free agent or trademark it and pay money that you have available. 

If they announce they signed him to an 8-Year extension at $75 million tomorrow, I won't be too upset. 

On the other hand, if they decide to let him play the year out and see how things go, I'm not going to be upset about that either. I think losing him next year would be a tiny step back compared to what you could do with that $8 to $10 million... And that is not the biggest problem this team has starting next year.

[JustOneParade]

14 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

If you don't pay Tuch, who are you paying to be a 65pt all around winger? 

Exactly. Who? And for how much? Assets(via trade) and/or $$ ( via FA).

[LGR4GM]

8 minutes ago, JustOneParade said:

Exactly. Who? And for how much? Assets(via trade) and/or $$ ( via FA).

Don't know, but now you have to find and get said player in a world where everyone had cap space. 

[French Collection]

Just now, JustOneParade said:

Exactly. Who? And for how much? Assets(via trade) and/or $$ ( via FA).

Factor in the palm trees and tax rates to attract new guys. He’s already here and wants to be here.

I agree that he will not be a great player in 5+ years but they should keep him because their two best players are locked in at lower rates for a long time. The over payment can be absorbed. Heck, Tuch might even transform his game to become a bottom six PK and defensively responsible checker in his mid thirties just to remain a contributing Sabre.

[JP51]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Don't know, but now you have to find and get said player in a world where everyone had cap space. 

There is another piece to this with Tuch on top of exactly what you said... its the human piece... this is the one guy who wants to be here more than anything, home town, live and die etc... he was your real return for giving up Eichel...  you have failed for 14 years, your core players are less than content with golfing every April and you have an effective leader, scorer and pretty good two way hockey player that you let walk.... that to me would be a final straw concern for some of these players... like how can you not pay this guy... how committed are you to winning.... dont exetend him, miss the playoffs again... and I can pretty much promise you some folks are gonna want to be traded...