Speculation: 2024-25 - Free Agency/Trade Thread

[Terry Yake]

No, I don’t think I will. It’s your thesis, you prove it.

I’m also done tilting at windmills. I’m saying that politics do matter to some people, because…clearly they do. Not that they always do, not that they must, but that they CAN. Plenty of people openly say they believe so. Your position is that because you don’t think politics matters for you, it cannot possibly be the case that they’d matter for anyone else, and again, the fact that there’s an argument about it is prima facie evidence that my position isn’t correct.

Also, the world is a far, far more polarized place than it was 15 years ago. Quoting attitudes from 15 years ago isn’t necessarily relevant.

sure

koivu, emery, souray, lydman, winnik, vermette, grant, and miller were all successful FA signings during the ducks contention period. obviously there are more players who were brought in via FA but i only listed the guys who were actual difference makers in their time here and weren't overpaid (like stoner). there's also kesler who was acquired via trade but had anaheim as one of his preferred destinations

no, my position is that its silly to blame state politics for players not wanting to sign with one of the worst teams in the league. especially when that team has never been a big player in FA or willing to throw money around to begin with. its also silly when you consider that there are a number of other NHL teams in states with similar politics to CA (as well as the kings/sharks) that have still signed quality FAs in recent years and continue to do so.

if the ducks had been a playoff contender for the last few seasons and were still having to resort to overpaying guys, then maybe there'd be some merit to this argument. but why would anyone choose the ducks over a playoff contender or a team on the cusp of contention if they were being offered similar $?

 

[Hockey Duckie]

tim thomas is one extreme example and you're only basing that off his decision to not visit the white house and some comments he's made. not sure what that has to do with anything really, especially when he starred for a team in one of the most liberal cities in the US

i've traveled to quite a places in the US and there isn't a single place i would refuse to live in because of politics as the main factor. especially if i was being given an opportunity to succeed at something. weather, cost of living, distance, etc sure. but not politics. if you want to talk places i wouldn't live solely for political reasons, i'm thinking somewhere like afghanistan or north korea

that's just the 09/10 roster. look at the teams throughout the last decade when they were winning the division. plenty of quality players who were brought in via FA. almost as if guys would rather play for winning teams

@Ducks DVM has consistently pointed out that "politics wasn't the main factor" a few times already, but you're not willing to accept that information. You're creating an argument that doesn't exist. It's time to let that illusion to fade.

sure

koivu, emery, souray, lydman, winnik, vermette, grant, and miller were all successful FA signings during the ducks contention period. obviously there are more players who were brought in via FA but i only listed the guys who were actual difference makers in their time here and weren't overpaid (like stoner). there's also kesler who was acquired via trade but had anaheim as one of his preferred destinations

no, my position is that its silly to blame state politics for players not wanting to sign with one of the worst teams in the league. especially when that team has never been a big player in FA or willing to throw money around to begin with. its also silly when you consider that there are a number of other NHL teams in states with similar politics to CA (as well as the kings/sharks) that have still signed quality FAs in recent years and continue to do so.

if the ducks had been a playoff contender for the last few seasons and were still having to resort to overpaying guys, then maybe there'd be some merit to this argument. but why would anyone choose the ducks over a playoff contender or a team on the cusp of contention if they were being offered similar $?

@Ducks DVM also had listed exclusions for acquiring "quality" FA signings:

• were not a brother
• a close friend
• a player they re-signed after a trade

Listing players who weren't at their primes isn't what I think of "quality" FA signings: Finnish Koivu signed at age 35 and a friend of Teemu, Lydman was signed as a 33-year old and a Finn, Vermette signed as a 34-year old., and Souray signed as a 36-year old. The other players listed were complementary skaters or backup goalies.

 

[Terry Yake]

@Ducks DVM has consistently pointed out that "politics wasn't the main factor" a few times already, but you're not willing to accept that information. You're creating an argument that doesn't exist. It's time to let that illusion to fade.



@Ducks DVM also had listed exclusions for acquiring "quality" FA signings:

• were not a brother
• a close friend
• a player they re-signed after a trade

Listing players who weren't at their primes isn't what I think of "quality" FA signings: Finnish Koivu signed at age 35 and a friend of Teemu, Lydman was signed as a 33-year old and a Finn, Vermette signed as a 34-year old., and Souray signed as a 36-year old. The other players listed were complementary skaters or backup goalies.

all of those FA signings i listed played key roles on various ducks teams. if you want to nitpick their age and nationality, go ahead, but that doesn't change the fact that for a team that has never been a big player in FA, they didn't have any issues attracting FAs during their contention window

players want to play for winning teams. such a simple concept that some just aren't willing to grasp for some reason

 

[70sSanO]

I do hope we can get Laine for the right price. But I don’t want to give up a key piece.

$8.7m in cap space is hard to absorb for any team in a position to compete. And for those teams he would be expected to put up numbers commensurate with that salary. Not a great state of affairs for him if he struggles.

Don’t know his condition, but if he needs a change from Columbus, there are probably not many less pressure gigs.

I’m sure PV has pondered this and made calls if he wanted to pursue him.

John

 

[ohcomeonref]

Would anyone here do Lacombe straight-up for Laine no retention? Seems like he's the type of player the BJ's are targeting.

 

[70sSanO]

Would anyone here do Lacombe straight-up for Laine no retention? Seems like he's the type of player the BJ's are targeting.

Sure. But not sure how they can balance out the salary discrepancies.

John

 

[Kalv]

Would anyone here do Lacombe straight-up for Laine no retention? Seems like he's the type of player the BJ's are targeting.

No thanks. I think Laine does not have the track record to warrant such a return. Even the latest reports say CBJ now expect only picks/prospects, not roster players.

Our D sucks as it is. No need to trade a player that logged the most minutes after Fowler and Gudas. As a rookie.

 

[DavidBL]

No thanks. I think Laine does not have the track record to warrant such a return. Even the latest reports say CBJ now expect only picks/prospects, not roster players.

Our D sucks as it is. No need to trade a player that logged the most minutes after Fowler and Gudas. As a rookie.

Is that per game or over the season?

 

[Son of Gib]

Yeah. Imagine a team with Laine and Gibson as the two highest paid players. What could go wrong?

It's 2 seasons. We won't be anywhere close to the cap during that time.

 

[Bergey37]

Would anyone here do Lacombe straight-up for Laine no retention? Seems like he's the type of player the BJ's are targeting.

I would., given a reasonable comfort level with the player after proper due diligence.

 

[Hey234]

Laine makes a ton of sense. Only 2 years, still produced even with issues, RW. The Ducks don't need any retention which lowers the price. They reportedly want picks and prospects which the Ducks have plenty. A 2nd and a prospect would be more than fair for me.

Gauthier-Carlsson-Laine
Vatrano-McTavish-Terry
Fabbri-Zegras-Strome
Harkins-Lundestrom-Leason

 

[Bergey37]

Laine makes a ton of sense. Only 2 years, still produced even with issues, RW. The Ducks don't need any retention which lowers the price. They reportedly want picks and prospects which the Ducks have plenty. A 2nd and a prospect would be more than fair for me.

Gauthier-Carlsson-Laine
Vatrano-McTavish-Terry
Fabbri-Zegras-Strome
Harkins-Lundestrom-Leason

Where's Killorn?

 

[JAHV]

I don't like Laine for this team, but he's a 40-goal scorer. And until last year, he was a near point-per-game player. Yes, he's paid a large amount, but it's absurd to think that Columbus would accept LaCombe straight up for Laine. I like LaCombe, but he's a 5/6 d-man with a ceiling as a #4. The Ducks would need to throw in a decent prospect and/or a high pick.

 

[Kalv]

Is that per game or over the season?

Per game.

Over the season LaCombe played 2nd most minutes. Let's remember the praise he got from Cronin as well (most improved guy over the season)

 

[Opak]

IIRC Laine had a local interview during his draft year, where he said that talking to a sports psychologist helped him make the leap from Finland’s 2nd tier league to the elite league, during only a single offseason. He’s battled inner demons for a long time, the fact that he ended up reaching out to the PAP isn’t that surprising in hindsight.

If fully healed and 100%, Laine would be the best player in our entire organization. He’s way better than most main board posters are saying, and that monster right-hand shot is exactly what this team is missing from the lineup. He’s a pretty good playoff/tournament player as well. In a vacuum, taking the remaining 2 years of his contract, even with no retention, wouldn’t even be that risky for us IMO.

The problem is if CBJ thinks we can put together the best package, and if Laine feels comfortable enough to come to Anaheim (10 team NTC). I have no clue what we would even put on the table for Laine, and what the CBJ would be looking for…

EDIT: I have here a link to a 2014 article (Finnish), where Laine admits to seeing a psychologist ’for a few years’. There was also an incident at the time, where Laine was disciplined via suspension from a junior NT tournament after verbally harassing his coach, to which Laine owned up to and apologized for.

The point here is just to show that he’s had these issues for a while, and that previously with proper counseling he’s managed to bounce back from his darker moments.

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

Would anyone here do Lacombe straight-up for Laine no retention? Seems like he's the type of player the BJ's are targeting.

Yes.

I feel like forward depth is very important for this team right now.

On paper the first 3 lines look decent but this team is a few injuries away from having Leason in the top 6.

 

[70sSanO]

I think Columbus wanting picks/prospects is simply a message that they don’t want a big contract coming back; unless it is a true producer. They don’t want to be a dumping ground for a SC contender.

But he is such an unknown over the next 2 years. I can’t see any contender giving up a key piece on a roll of the dice. No one knows if Laine can handle a playoff grind at this time.

If I were betting on a team, I could see a team like Seattle offering a Shane Wright and both teams taking a chance.

John

 

[FlyingV09]

I would do something around Strome and LaCombe for Laine.

 

[tomd]

I would do something around Strome and LaCombe for Laine.

Waddell says he wants picks and prospects for Laine...and I assume he wants good ones.

 

[12ozPapa]

Not sure Laine makes sense for us. Too much baggage and not a player I’d want around our young kids.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

all of those FA signings i listed played key roles on various ducks teams. if you want to nitpick their age and nationality, go ahead, but that doesn't change the fact that for a team that has never been a big player in FA, they didn't have any issues attracting FAs during their contention window

players want to play for winning teams. such a simple concept that some just aren't willing to grasp for some reason

Again, you're creating conflict when it doesn't exist. Quality signings does not equal role player signings. Quality players puts the team on their backs like a Getz, Perry, Scotty, Prongs, and Kesler. Role players fill in the gaps or are glue types. You need both to succeed, but under our new GM, we're only able to sign role players and not quality players because we're not a playoff quality team.

I dunno why you keep assigning that I don't believe in "players want to play for winning teams" to me. I have stated already in this thread that it's because we're not a playoff quality team that better players chose not to sign with us, which is essentially saying, "players want to play for winning teams". See, that's where you are creating conflict when it never existed.

You have to do a much better job reading b/c we're practically on the same page, but you're refusing to accept it for some unknown reason or reasons. It feels like talking to a person who has drunk too much and doesn't care what is actually said.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

Laine is a problem child who is overpaid until he proves he isn't an overpaid problem child. I wish him well in his personal life, but as a hockey player there's no way this team should be giving up value while taking all the risk. No thanks for anything other than a low draft pick.

 

[SmokeyDuck]

Wonder if there is any interest in Johnson. Right shot center, PV would be well familiar with him form his time in Tampa I would assume. Still a UFA. As for Laine, consider me interested if the price is right.

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

Laine is a problem child who is overpaid until he proves he isn't an overpaid problem child. I wish him well in his personal life, but as a hockey player there's no way this team should be giving up value while taking all the risk. No thanks for anything other than a low draft pick.

problem is, when he isn't an overpaid problem child he'll cost an arm and a leg.

You take chances on these players when their value is at their lowest (see Ryan O Reilly) and hope to reap the rewards.

 

[ohcomeonref]

problem is, when he isn't an overpaid problem child he'll cost an arm and a leg.

You take chances on these players when their value is at their lowest (see Ryan O Reilly) and hope to reap the rewards.

This is where I'm at. Elite level shooters don't become available often. Buy low baby.