Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
We have plenty of offensively skilled guys to play the PP. We just have nobody who can coach them to be successful.
Speculation: 2024-25 - Free Agency/Trade Thread
- Thread starter All Mighty
- Start date
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
I don’t know that we have anyone with his shot.
As has been stated, the rest of his game not so much.
Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
Cutter has a quick release that would work wonders on the PP but I was told we can’t spare a couple of minutes of 5v5 time.
dracom
Registered User
Anaheim4ever
Registered User
- Jun 15, 2017
- 9,380
- 6,001
Soooo.... 98 mil with 49 deferred for years 10-16 for a 11 mil cap hit to Ratanen or Marner?
- Jul 25, 2012
- 43,769
- 41,182
The Vatrano re-singing is bigger than it is, imo. It tells me two things about Verbeek and the organization where they are at.
First, He is looking to finally turn the page from rebuild team to playoff contention team, and not sell everyone off at the TDL and instead maybe try and make a run. Hopefully more support comes their way this summer.
Secondly, it will really open up a lot of opportunities for free agents to sign here , since they want to actually play in Anaheim, Frank and Trouba as proof, but also see the Ducks are willing to negotiate a contract to suit their needs. Really a huge win for Verbeek. This is probably up there with the Drysdale/Cutter trade which is also looking like a real win.
To the people on the mains complaining about this deferred contract? Give me a break.
First, He is looking to finally turn the page from rebuild team to playoff contention team, and not sell everyone off at the TDL and instead maybe try and make a run. Hopefully more support comes their way this summer.
Secondly, it will really open up a lot of opportunities for free agents to sign here , since they want to actually play in Anaheim, Frank and Trouba as proof, but also see the Ducks are willing to negotiate a contract to suit their needs. Really a huge win for Verbeek. This is probably up there with the Drysdale/Cutter trade which is also looking like a real win.
To the people on the mains complaining about this deferred contract? Give me a break.
Im worried about the deferred salary effecting the cap. Im all for deferring the salary to get around CA taxes, but Ohtani level contracts (overpayment with CRAZY deferral) would be really bad for the sport.
I think I would prefer just doing away with it completely, or atleast having a cap on the percentage deferred or on the amount the cap hit can drop.
I think deferral will be more prevalent with mid tier guys (like Vatrano). Good players, but not game changers. The top players are going to get their money and get it now. The bottom players are going to small contracts where deferral isn't going to make a huge difference. It's going to be the $4-$5 mil guys getting $6-$7 mil with it being deferred. Hopefully this doesn't become a huge issue, though.
Agreed, until Toronto offers McDavid a 200 mil contract with 190 mil deferred to get the cap hit down to 15 mil :sarcasm
It's just a slippery slope. It only take one superstar willing to "take less money" to win a cup before it becomes a circus.
The deferred payments don't count against the cap in future years. Maybe you know that but it is not clear from your post.
The discounted value of the deferred payments count against the cap in the contract years. But they are discounted per the CBA formula. So it means his cap hit is 3 years at $4,571,189. After 3 years, there is no cap impact (barring a buyout). That is a great deal for the ducks IMO, but in terms of AAV and term.
Not being snarky, but I truly don't understand why you care? Do you thinks the ducks have a disadvantage if this happens?
And FWIW, Mario Lemieux did this years ago . . . and then Pittsburgh went bankrupt. It is how he became the owner.
The Ducks give an $18 million contract and only have a cap hit of $13.71 million. I'll take that every day. Kudos to the person(s) who conceived of the idea. It is a great way for the high tax states to compete for players in a hard-cap world. Deferred compensation is a smart way to go for the players as well.
I'm not saying I'm concerned for the Ducks. I'm concerned about the effect this will have on the league.
And call me crazy, but I prefer a level playing field and the hard cap has done wonders for that compared to before. It isn't all about what is best for the Ducks.
freikugel
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2024
- 99
- 151
I agree with you, but at least unlike MLB there still is a salary cap and floor.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 43,769
- 41,182
Vatrano was really our only significant sellable piece now that fowler is gone(gibson I guess still but don’t think there is value there so better to keep).
I’m hoping we see PV aggressive at the deadline and trying to bring in a big piece offensively that we can extend, and or has another year or 2, so we’re not tempted to rush sennecke if he isn’t ready
Still kinda indifferent on Dumolin…. I’d like to keep him but if rumors of him wanting to play out east are true not likely he’ll extend here. Also feel like we need that roster spot for Mintyukov, helleson, luneau etc.
What is the effect on the league. The only issue I can see is that this is a form of team "debt" which presents the possibility of a team being overleveraged (but I believe there are separate NHL rules on that).
But it is a level playing field. All deferred contracts receive the same treatment so the teams are on equal footing for cap purposes.
Dumolin probably should be traded because I don't think they will want him next year given the young guys.
Barring a major trade (e.g., Zegras) which seems unlikely at the TDL, I think the most likely way to add a player is if another team is looking to move a player to create cap (e.g., the failed Dadonov deal). I think bigger trades/additions will be in the off season.
I dont understand which part you are missing.
We were able to pay Vatrano 18 mil in salary and only get the cap hit as if he was getting 13.7 mil.
A team like Edmonton, Toronto, or NY can overpay players to get them there, and the deferred money balances out since they dont have to pay the 15%-13% in taxes when they are retired living in Florida.
Teams that dont have unlimited money cant afford to do that. Makes for a less even playing field.
I hear what you're saying, but I don't think it's going to be the slippery slope you think it is. A vast majority of players are going to want their money up front. I can't see a trend of players deferring a bunch of salary. As someone said above, this probably applies mostly to the mid-tier free agents who are signing their last big contract and are willing to get creative to earn a bit more from cap-strapped teams.
The second thing is that I see this as a leveler for the California teams. If you're in Florida or Nevada, you want that money now so that you're paying no tax. Then you can take your earnings and live elsewhere once you retire. If you're in California but planning to retire elsewhere, it makes more sense to defer that money so the tax rate is less when that money is coming in.
If anything, I could see the Ducks using this with more free agents to get them in the door despite the tax disadvantage.
Emerald Duck
Registered User
This offseason the idea of deferred payments will spread through the league and will not represent an advantage for the Ducks, Kings/Sharks, Canadian teams and other high tax regions for very long. If everyone is offering a contract+deferred payment to interested players then any early mover advantage will disappear.
The next CBA will have to address the idea as the richer clubs will otherwise skew the calculations to outbid smaller market teams with larger deferral payments to minimize present contract values and squeeze more talent onto their clubs under the current salary cap.
The next CBA will have to address the idea as the richer clubs will otherwise skew the calculations to outbid smaller market teams with larger deferral payments to minimize present contract values and squeeze more talent onto their clubs under the current salary cap.
Why? If he buys a rental, that would be odd. If he traded for Tkachuk, that would be incredible for now and long term.
All Mighty
Registered User
There are different forms of being a buyer. Should he be trading assets for rentals? Of course not. Should he be looking for buy low pieces or long term fits? Maybe yes.
In the end, I agree. Whether it spreads now or not, it does present a clear attempt to go around the cap. It is CBA approved so I have no issues with any team doing it, but I would bet the NHL does not want this to get out of hand. I think this will be addressed for sure in the next CBA.
