I think the salary cap era has fundamentally re-shaped what it means to be a "desirable" landing spot. A lot of those old feeling stem back to the pre-cap days, where teams like New York, Toronto, Philadelphia, Colorado, and Detroit could always just throw out another big contract at a desirable free agent. That advantage is heavily curbed these days.
We're coming from an off-season in which the biggest UFA signed with Columbus. The next couple premiere free agents signed with Calgary and Ottawa. Not exactly a row of premiere franchises or destinations. The three biggest free agents to change teams in 2021 signed with New Jersey, Edmonton, and an expansion team. Aside of getting to play with McDrai, not exactly premiere destinations there either. Unless your organization is an absolute tire fire, you can generally attract talent (and, heck, even Ottawa is signing players and Vancouver secured a JT Miller extension).
I get the hesitance towards not wanting to become an undesirable place to play, but over-reacting in the other direction is letting the tail wag the dog. We want the team to be a desirable place to attract talent because we want to see the team succeed. But we shouldn't be willing to compromise the team's success to make it a desirable place to play. Roster decisions should be forward-thinking, rather than focused on past achievements. You can treat players with respect and dignity without giving them that extra contract or extra years.