Speculation: 2024-25 - Free Agency/Trade Thread

[Arthuros]

My point is not that I want the team to turn the corner by signing the FA's, my point is Verbeek did the reasonable thing offering more money and/or term to the players they identified (that's the only thing we have going for us). I disagree there would have been any sacrifice of the future. Gibson and Fowler will come off the books, and by the time most of those contracts would have ended it would have not mattered. These are not albatross contracts we are sigining in contention time, these were meant to bridge the gap while we get to the contending stage.

And for the record, looking at the contracts I am not upset the way FA turned out for us.

Yeah, I'm kinda wary of criticizing PV for trying to offer more to FAs to get them to sign because that's just what we have to do, and we're also missing details on what PV specifically offered. Could have been that some players were offered more term (in which case, I hope that's not for any of the big names), and some were only offered higher AAV. And I very much doubt he would have offered contacts that restrict us from offering proper contracts to our core later.

In any case...at least PV was trying to be active, so the criticism from that angle is invalid.

 

[JAHV]

If that’s true Verbeek got saved from himself, good grief.

The big fish (Stamkos and Marchessault) are the guys you overpay. Yes, the contracts will be rough by the end, but they're the elite (or near elite) players. Those were the guys we wanted. And by all accounts, Verbeek did everything he could to bring them in. I have no problem with that. (Also, we have to take Seravelli with a grain of salt - if he's just riffing, I don't know that we can take his comments at face value.)

The tougher question is: what is it about Anaheim that turns guys off? We know that free agents will come here: Vatrano, Strome, Klingberg, Gudas, Killorn - all those guys came here. This year, none of them did. Is it just random bad luck? Or is there something about the organization? Or is it California?

This should, hopefully, lay to rest the idea that Verbeek isn't active or that the owners aren't willing to spend money. But it raises other questions.

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

The “guys don’t want to play in Anaheim cause it’s Cali” is funny. I’d venture to guess, outside of San Diego there’s probably nowhere nicer to live than the OC. Taxes? Maybe

Cali has had some of the best athletes in the world over the past few years. The location isn't the problem, it's the fact that the team has been UGLY bad for the past few years and the most die hard fan couldn't tell you when it'll get better. 5 years? 10 years? who knows. There's nothing but mystery with the Ducks right now.

 

[JAHV]

I disagree. I understand offering more money but offering guys 6 million (my estimate for Marsh) and 9 million (estimate for Stamkos) to contracts that takes them to 39 and 40 years old is stupid, IMO. I want the team to turn the corner too, but you can't sacrifice your future by forcing it now.

Why would this be sacrificing the future? If the cap continues to rise (as is projected), this would hardly hamstring the Ducks. If each of the young players gets good enough that Stamkos's contract in five years is forcing us to deal one of them, then the team has been successful in the intervening five years.

Also, Vegas showed that this is a valid way to build a champion. Bring in elite talent and let tomorrow figure itself out. Obviously, that's not going to work for Anaheim because this isn't as desirable a destination, but the proof of concept is there.

 

[Unholy]

Eh I personally don’t want to follow the way Vegas handles contracts, the cap, players etc.

Top tier guys didn’t want to sign on a lottery team, pretty simple

 

[JAHV]

Eh I personally don’t want to follow the way Vegas handles contracts, the cap, players etc.

Top tier guys didn’t want to sign on a lottery team, pretty simple

I don't particularly like it either, but I don't understand the pushback (not from you) on paying for talent, especially for a team like the Ducks that's currently under the cap floor.

 

[Duck Off]

My point is not that I want the team to turn the corner by signing the FA's, my point is Verbeek did the reasonable thing offering more money and/or term to the players they identified (that's the only thing we have going for us). I disagree there would have been any sacrifice of the future. Gibson and Fowler will come off the books, and by the time most of those contracts would have ended it would have not mattered. These are not albatross contracts we are sigining in contention time, these were meant to bridge the gap while we get to the contending stage.

And for the record, looking at the contracts I am not upset the way FA turned out for us.

Fair enough. I see your point, but I think it’s smart to agree to disagree here.

For me, it makes no sense to sign someone to 5- or 6-year contract for someone who will be that old at the end of the deal. That's essentially saying, "the 1 to 2 years where they'll be worth the contract are enough to justify the years, they'll be bad". That's not the right call to make for where we are on our competing timeline, IMO anyway. That logic makes more sense if you're trying to get over the hump for a cup run.

I agree that those deals are meant to bridge the gap, but that's not the right way to bridge that gap IMO. Definitely not the Stamkos one anyway. I realize we're having large contracts come off the books, but that doesn't justify locking up players to high salaries to nearly 40 years old for me. I'd feel a little differently if we didn't already have Kilorn and Strome, but we do. There would have been much more justification to have this approach for a defenseman than either of those two.

 

[Rybread86]

Something important to remember with the UFAs and Cali... its not ALL players who are rejecting CA teams, its some players.

The players we know we missed out on are older players who were the top tier guys. The lesser UFAs signed in CA, sans Toffoli. I guess Wennberg but he got overpaid on a short term deal and hes a center, something were not really looking for.

I have my issues with CA, but players likely dont care about the reasons I hate the State as much as I do. West Coast teams travel usually sucks more than EC teams. Taxes will factor in somewhat, maybe enough to push to a different team, but maybe not. But realistically, I would imagine its travel and ability to win sooner or at all before some of these guys hang em up.

Beeker tried and ownership was willing to spend money, thats about the best you can hope for.

 

[70sSanO]

Him falling off after has nothing to do with what they paid him initially, that’s just using hindsight.

I'm too Getzlaf to look it up, but IIRC correctly the Karlsson contract was "the" worst contract in the NHL at one time, and may still be. $11.5M for a broken down offensive Dman is absurd.

Poor judgement does not equal hindsight.

The Penguins are becoming one of the worst run organizations. I'm not sure what compels teams to hold onto aging vets at the expensive of truly being competitive. They used to be the best example of a well run organization that would add pieces and win it all. I'll never understand wanting to retire with the team without taking a team friendly contract.

Likewise Stamkos could retire as a Bolt but he, like most other players, wants his payday. Kudos to Tampa to cut bait.

John

 

[Duckesh]

The tougher question is: what is it about Anaheim that turns guys off? We know that free agents will come here: Vatrano, Strome, Klingberg, Gudas, Killorn - all those guys came here. This year, none of them did. Is it just random bad luck? Or is there something about the organization? Or is it California?

Losing. Its a long, long season if you are getting your rear end kicked night in and night out. Its physically a beatdown if you are constantly behind and being out played. You are taking extra hits to try to make plays, extending extra effort...

Its like any job really. Would you rather be on a sinking company, putting in extra hours, extra effort, spinning your wheels because things aren't efficient... or would you rather clock into a well working, functioning company where you can put in your 9-5 and feel successful with a high achieving cohort?

If the Ducks put together a mid-tier season, and the future looks bright, and the youngsters are stepping up, then Anaheim becomes a much more attractive place to stay. But when you are losing a large majority of your games, it doesn't feel like a great place to spend 3 years.

The guys you mentioned came in an "extra" money deals. The ducks gave them good money and good term. Those are also guys who haven't earned huge contracts over their careers and the Anaheim contract really is a large chunk of their lifelong earnings. Its not a retirement contract, but it financially was really a good situation for all of them.

I highly doubt the politics of "corrupts freeway taxes" or other local issues that irk Anaheimians really reaches these players. Obviously tax breaks/tax incentives likely factor into the overall contract value, but as mentioned, California taxes aren't hugely disproportionate to the rest of the the USA.

 

[Duck Off]

The big fish (Stamkos and Marchessault) are the guys you overpay. Yes, the contracts will be rough by the end, but they're the elite (or near elite) players. Those were the guys we wanted. And by all accounts, Verbeek did everything he could to bring them in. I have no problem with that. (Also, we have to take Seravelli with a grain of salt - if he's just riffing, I don't know that we can take his comments at face value.)

The tougher question is: what is it about Anaheim that turns guys off? We know that free agents will come here: Vatrano, Strome, Klingberg, Gudas, Killorn - all those guys came here. This year, none of them did. Is it just random bad luck? Or is there something about the organization? Or is it California?

This should, hopefully, lay to rest the idea that Verbeek isn't active or that the owners aren't willing to spend money. But it raises other questions.

There's a big difference between overpaying them and signing them to deals where the few years they'll be worth it do not coincide when we'd be competing. I agree about taking Frank with a grain of salt.

The Anaheim location thing is tough. It's all speculation. My 2 cents is it's not necessarily that they don't want to come here, there's just more enticing reasons to go somewhere else. Nashville is closer to competing (massive win for guys their age), and the tax thing. Plus, as someone who's lived on both coasts and the Midwest; I'd taking living in the Midwest easily every time.

Again, pure speculation, but I do wonder about the Zegras/Cronin situations. Z is arguably our best player right now, young, etc., and from the outside looking in, it doesn't look like he's been treated the best. No one is going to convince me that Cronin didn't treat him unfairly last year. That garbage double standard Z had was a joke.

One last time, I think it's more about other places being able to offer more than anything wrong with Anaheim though.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

The big fish (Stamkos and Marchessault) are the guys you overpay. Yes, the contracts will be rough by the end, but they're the elite (or near elite) players. Those were the guys we wanted. And by all accounts, Verbeek did everything he could to bring them in. I have no problem with that. (Also, we have to take Seravelli with a grain of salt - if he's just riffing, I don't know that we can take his comments at face value.)

The tougher question is: what is it about Anaheim that turns guys off? We know that free agents will come here: Vatrano, Strome, Klingberg, Gudas, Killorn - all those guys came here. This year, none of them did. Is it just random bad luck? Or is there something about the organization? Or is it California?

This should, hopefully, lay to rest the idea that Verbeek isn't active or that the owners aren't willing to spend money. But it raises other questions

I don’t think you should overpay them either. Toronto blew a lot of potential because they went after a big fish and gave him a contract he mostly lived up to. I saw the potential for an exception with Stamkos and to a lesser extent Marchessault because they fit major needs and an incorrect assumption that there wouldn’t be much term and things would mostly work out cap wise. I really hope there’s no big push for a Marner or even a Konecny next summer.

As for why guys won’t come, that’s easy. We’re bad and other teams have cap room. Maybe Stamkos lands here if teams didn’t have room but a good team offering him a good deal with always be more attractive than a bad team with a slightly better one.

 

[Duck Off]

Why would this be sacrificing the future? If the cap continues to rise (as is projected), this would hardly hamstring the Ducks. If each of the young players gets good enough that Stamkos's contract in five years is forcing us to deal one of them, then the team has been successful in the intervening five years.

Also, Vegas showed that this is a valid way to build a champion. Bring in elite talent and let tomorrow figure itself out. Obviously, that's not going to work for Anaheim because this isn't as desirable a destination, but the proof of concept is there.

Because I do not expect Stamkos to be a top line player more than 2 years. Anaheim has rarely been a cap team. Anaheim is one of the teams who should be most mindful of giving out inflated contracts because we don't get the same spend as the other teams.

I don't agree about that comment with Vegas either. Vegas was given an incredible roster to begin with due to teams being clueless how to handle the expansion draft. The "worry about tomorrow" logic is much easier to do when you've got a larger bank account than the competition, we don't.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I'm too Getzlaf to look it up, but IIRC correctly the Karlsson contract was "the" worst contract in the NHL at one time, and may still be. $11.5M for a broken down offensive Dman is absurd.

Poor judgement does not equal hindsight.

The Penguins are becoming one of the worst run organizations. I'm not sure what compels teams to hold onto aging vets at the expensive of truly being competitive. They used to be the best example of a well run organization that would add pieces and win it all. I'll never understand wanting to retire with the team without taking a team friendly contract.

Likewise Stamkos could retire as a Bolt but he, like most other players, wants his payday. Kudos to Tampa to cut bait.

John

It was not, it was just matching what Doughty got a year prior. He was all-NHL three out of his last four years in Ottawa with a Norris and the only year he’s had since where he was used right he scored 100 points and won another Norris. Hardly broken down.

 

[190Octane]

Ultimately I think it comes down to wanting to win. If we were offering more money the tax thing doesn’t matter, and honestly I think it’s overblown anyway considering that half of the games are on the road and are taxed at whatever rate the state they’re playing in is taxed at.

If you’re a rich young athlete, there aren’t many places better to live than Southern California… if you’re also winning hockey games.

 

[Deuce22]

Ultimately I think it comes down to wanting to win. If we were offering more money the tax thing doesn’t matter, and honestly I think it’s overblown anyway considering that half of the games are on the road and are taxed at whatever rate the state they’re playing in is taxed at.

If you’re a rich young athlete, there aren’t many places better to live than Southern California… if you’re also winning hockey games.

Depends on the player. Obviously the Ducks would be more attractive destination if they were better. But for some the 13% income tax rate is a negative, not to mention expensive rent or real estate.

 

[JAHV]

Because I do not expect Stamkos to be a top line player more than 2 years. Anaheim has rarely been a cap team. Anaheim is one of the teams who should be most mindful of giving out inflated contracts because we don't get the same spend as the other teams.

I don't agree about that comment with Vegas either. Vegas was given an incredible roster to begin with due to teams being clueless how to handle the expansion draft. The "worry about tomorrow" logic is much easier to do when you've got a larger bank account than the competition, we don't.

If Seravelli's comment has any truth to it, we do. The Samuelis have spent to the cap before and are clearly willing to spend money now. Guys just find other places more desirable. I get that, but it's a vicious cycle:

team goes into a rebuild and is bad -> free agents don't want to come here -> team continues to be bad because they can't attract any good free agents to help develop the kids -> free agents continue to not want to come here, etc.

In that case, the hope is in the kids and the coaching/development staff. It's up to them to get the roster playing at a competitive level. Then maybe we can attract those key pieces that take us to the next level.

 

[Arthuros]

We got another signing courtesy of the Ducks website!

Apparently we felt bad about losing a Meyers, so we added a Meyer back.

 

[Ducks DVM]

I wonder how much of the problem could be coaching and management? You have an abrasive coach, who never had answers in post game comments, a clearly clueless special teams approach, and a well documented skate you into the ground concept of training. I can’t imagine that’s terribly appealing to a star player in their mid-late career either.

It’s not going to be the primary reason, that’s the team has been horrible, and horrible teams always have to significantly outbid contenders or even average teams, but I do think it could be an element of what’s going on.

 

[190Octane]

Depends on the player. Obviously the Ducks would be more attractive destination if they were better. But for some the 13% income tax rate is a negative, not to mention expensive rent or real estate.

Of course, some people would rather live in Alaska… but as a whole, if you’re making millions there aren’t many better places to live. If you’re making 350k it might not be as great if you’re counting on living off that for a long time.

 

[All Mighty]

We got another signing courtesy of the Ducks website!

Apparently we felt bad about losing a Meyers, so we added a Meyer back.

Good AHL player I guess.

 

[Ducks DVM]

Of course, some people would rather live in Alaska… but as a whole, if you’re making millions there aren’t many better places to live. If you’re making 350k it might not be as great if you’re counting on living off that for a long time.

There’s far more to where you want to live than weather and things to do. There are massive culture differences between the Midwest, the south, California, and the northeast, and I’m not talking about politics. The way people interact and treat one another are completely different, and there are some definite negatives to that in Southern California if you’re coming from somewhere else.

 

[91Fedorov]

I think players will be less likely to come here until we show a couple things.

1. We have young players that have taken steps and give hope that they can win.
2. We have a coach that has a record demonstrating that his teams can win.

I can see why aging players wouldn't want to end their careers with an unproven team and unproven coach.

 

[190Octane]

FYI… some how the Rangers still seem to sign players. Maybe it’s not all about taxes?

One thing that I thought was interesting also was hearing an interview with Bieksa talking about how Vancouver did a lot more for their players with regards to things like babysitting during games even that the Ducks didn’t provide. Maybe if the organization started taking those perks more seriously we might have a better shot also.

 

[Vaakou]

Really hoping for Jack Roslovic and a trade for a Top pair RHD and i think we have done fine.