HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Anaheim Ducks
Notices

Perry and Getzlaf talks to start

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-16-2013, 09:36 PM
  #101
Selanne138
Registered User
 
Selanne138's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exit Dose View Post
What makes you think that his views aren't shared by the owners?

I think Murray might soften his stance and give a year or two over five, but I just don't see eight year contracts going out.
Other GM's or others in the organization? Obviously some of each share his views, but obviously many other GM's do not and Im sure there would be quite a few teams lining up to give that contract to either player.

I think he would budge and give either the max length if that's what they ask for. I just can't see him saying no if Getzlaf or Perry says if you give me 8 years at the rate you suggested I'll sign it, but if not Im testing the market. I could certainly be wrong though, he has been against doing so in the past, but saying no could cripple the franchise.

Selanne138 is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 09:36 PM
  #102
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exit Dose View Post
I wouldn't count on Murray breaking his stance on contract length just because Lou did it.
While I agree with your statement I think it would very discouraging if under the new CBA the Ducks continued to resist exceeding 5 years on any contract. It would pretty much indicate we are closer to be being the NYI west, than being any kind of Cup contenders again.

With the terms of the new CBA it's time for the Ducks to take a stand on which direction we are headed. I agree we cannot just offer a blank check. But we better offer 8 years and some serious coin. If we make an honest effort and lose out I won't be happy but I will be content that Henry hasn't thrown in the towel. On the other hand...

Eddie Shack is online now  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:11 PM
  #103
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,923
vCash: 500
Maybe this will be the time that they finally give in, but I still think that it's wishful thinking.

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:19 PM
  #104
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
In all fairness, there hasn't been a situation where this group has given out a 1st time UFA contract. There's no telling what their thought is for players this age.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:20 PM
  #105
Ducksgo*
#EtemUp
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Lakewood CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,898
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ducksgo*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Shack View Post
While I agree with your statement I think it would very discouraging if under the new CBA the Ducks continued to resist exceeding 5 years on any contract. It would pretty much indicate we are closer to be being the NYI west, than being any kind of Cup contenders again.

With the terms of the new CBA it's time for the Ducks to take a stand on which direction we are headed. I agree we cannot just offer a blank check. But we better offer 8 years and some serious coin. If we make an honest effort and lose out I won't be happy but I will be content that Henry hasn't thrown in the towel. On the other hand...
Great post. I agree twins need to be locked up long term regardless of the coin. If not guess we're head to head with CBJ in the West Conf. Bring on top 3 draft picks yearly ;(

Ducksgo* is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:31 PM
  #106
Paul4587
Registered User
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 13,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Shack View Post
While I agree with your statement I think it would very discouraging if under the new CBA the Ducks continued to resist exceeding 5 years on any contract. It would pretty much indicate we are closer to be being the NYI west, than being any kind of Cup contenders again.

With the terms of the new CBA it's time for the Ducks to take a stand on which direction we are headed. I agree we cannot just offer a blank check. But we better offer 8 years and some serious coin. If we make an honest effort and lose out I won't be happy but I will be content that Henry hasn't thrown in the towel. On the other hand...
I agree with this post 100%. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Paul4587 is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:33 PM
  #107
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
In all fairness, there hasn't been a situation where this group has given out a 1st time UFA contract. There's no telling what their thought is for players this age.
Possibly, but Murray and Burke were both guys banging the drum for term limits, and steeper than the ones currently in the CBA. We've already heard that they've walked away from negotiations with free agents because they felt the demands were too steep.

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
01-16-2013, 10:36 PM
  #108
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
In all fairness, there hasn't been a situation where this group has given out a 1st time UFA contract. There's no telling what their thought is for players this age.
I agree with your point very much. It's a tough spot to be in with the new CBA and no idea of what a Parise/Suter contract looks like in this current CBA environment. I just think that with the new CBA we have to be a lot closer to competing financially with the big dogs than ever before and as such would expect to see us come off of our old contract standards, at least for keeping our own top notch ufas.

Watching the contract status and trade rumors might be as much fun as watching the games the rest of the year. :-)

Eddie Shack is online now  
Old
01-16-2013, 11:09 PM
  #109
Paul4587
Registered User
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 13,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Shack View Post
I agree with your point very much. It's a tough spot to be in with the new CBA and no idea of what a Parise/Suter contract looks like in this current CBA environment. I just think that with the new CBA we have to be a lot closer to competing financially with the big dogs than ever before and as such would expect to see us come off of our old contract standards, at least for keeping our own top notch ufas.
Well we now know what a 2nd tier player contract looks like but it's not exactly a great help with Getzlaf/Perry.

Unfortunately they're the only top tier guys on this years market (maybe Iginla but at his age his contract won't be comparable). So we're either going to be the ones who set the market for star players or we'll be the ones to watch someone else set the market with our ex players.

Paul4587 is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 12:09 AM
  #110
Tony O
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 146
vCash: 500
From my perceptive the quote in the espn article is one of the most disconcerting comments made from this ownership/management group to date. “Ownership in Anaheim is not too pleased at all with the CBA because the salary cap wasn't set low enough for the Ducks' liking.” If article is true, I think they (ownership) have already answered the question on which direction this franchise is going. If ownership is unwilling or unable to sign both Getzlaf and Perry, then when will they ever be able to sign and keep big talent players?

As many of you have pointed out with the new CBA the league now has a lower cap, max years on contracts and revenue sharing. No excuses, right? But it sounds like Ducks don’t agree, and the ramifications go far beyond the current issues at hand (Getzlaf, and Perry).

No one knows what management is really thinking, but I do know that Perry’s contract situation is a bellwether for this franchise. What’s going to be? I for one I’m not very optimistic, but I hope I’m wrong, very wrong.

Tony O is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 12:10 AM
  #111
Ducksgo*
#EtemUp
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Lakewood CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,898
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ducksgo*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul4587 View Post
Well we now know what a 2nd tier player contract looks like but it's not exactly a great help with Getzlaf/Perry.

Unfortunately they're the only top tier guys on this years market (maybe Iginla but at his age his contract won't be comparable). So we're either going to be the ones who set the market for star players or we'll be the ones to watch someone else set the market with our ex players.
Yah Anaheim will set the tone regarding UFAs this season with us all over TSN. I feel like Mel Gibson in The Patriot. Instead of the French will come.... The Canadians will come. Cheers to Perry and Getz locked up long term like a house wife muah!

Ducksgo* is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 12:23 AM
  #112
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exit Dose View Post
Possibly, but Murray and Burke were both guys banging the drum for term limits, and steeper than the ones currently in the CBA. We've already heard that they've walked away from negotiations with free agents because they felt the demands were too steep.
Yes, but that was competing against ridiculously front loaded contracts over potentially much longer durations. There's also the fact that handing out those contracts would have 100% precluded having cap space for Getzlaf and Perry, and honestly - what free agents would you have rather had than them?

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 01:29 AM
  #113
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
Yes, but that was competing against ridiculously front loaded contracts over potentially much longer durations. There's also the fact that handing out those contracts would have 100% precluded having cap space for Getzlaf and Perry, and honestly - what free agents would you have rather had than them?
We were competing against those when we signed Ryan. He stuck to his guns and got a five year contract signed. I see no reason to think that is definitely going to change this time around. Maybe it will, but there is definitely no guarantee of that, let alone that they'll double dip.

I have no idea what the second sentence is referring to. I never said that there were free agents I'd rather have.

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 01:48 AM
  #114
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exit Dose View Post
We were competing against those when we signed Ryan. He stuck to his guns and got a five year contract signed. I see no reason to think that is definitely going to change this time around. Maybe it will, but there is definitely no guarantee of that, let alone that they'll double dip.

I have no idea what the second sentence is referring to. I never said that there were free agents I'd rather have.
It was regarding Murray walking away from free agents. He'd have been trading these two for them, so my point was that there was a reason for walking away beyond simply the price they were asking - there was no point unless they were an upgrade. Sort of a non-specific "you", not you personally, sorry about the confusion.

Ryan isn't a comparable. There would have been substantial compensation in draft picks. It's easy to stick to your guns when the other guy with the dump truck full of money knows they are going to lose multiple 1sts if they unload the truck.

I'm certainly not saying they'll sign either or both. I'm just saying there's been zero situations that actual compare to this one, so anyone saying Murray is going to act in any specific fashion is overstating.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 02:18 AM
  #115
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
It was regarding Murray walking away from free agents. He'd have been trading these two for them, so my point was that there was a reason for walking away beyond simply the price they were asking - there was no point unless they were an upgrade. Sort of a non-specific "you", not you personally, sorry about the confusion.

Ryan isn't a comparable. There would have been substantial compensation in draft picks. It's easy to stick to your guns when the other guy with the dump truck full of money knows they are going to lose multiple 1sts if they unload the truck.

I'm certainly not saying they'll sign either or both. I'm just saying there's been zero situations that actual compare to this one, so anyone saying Murray is going to act in any specific fashion is overstating.
I never said that he was definitely sticking to his guns. I said that we shouldn't expect him to throw out max term contracts just because Lamiorello did or because we want to keep them. I acknowledged that this time may be different.

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 07:09 AM
  #116
Spicy Porkins
Porkins the White
 
Spicy Porkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: He is risen!
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 50
I agree with whomever it was above that implied that Murray may be more likely to give contracts greater than 5 years now that the maximum is 8. It may be easier to take a hard line on contract length when you know the player could literally ask for any amount of years than when he's limited to only 8. Instead of a matter of principle it becomes simply tactical.

And even if not, Murray's hard line may have been directed at second contracts (the ones immediately after ELCs) than contracts generally, a sort of philosophical objection to giving relatively unproven players the keys to the vault.

Of course I have no idea, I just like those theories because it helps drive my wishful thinking that Murray will sign these two to the contracts they each want.

Spicy Porkins is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 09:10 AM
  #117
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
Call me crazy, and I know I don't have anything to base this on, but I'm actually not so sure if Getzlaf or (even moreso) Perry actually are the ones that want an 7/8-year deal. I personally don't really doubt that Murray would hand it to them in this situation. And even if it's illogical from the business-side for Getz/Perry to not cash in now that they're in their prime for the years beyond 30 as well, I'm somehow not convinced they're really ready to do that. It's entirely speculation on my part, but I would not be shocked to hear they feel right now, that they'd still like to continue here, keep working on the job they started, but also not quite yet willing to handcuff themselves for the mid-term future. (Even if there are ways to get out of places even on long-term deals, obviously.) I'm really not sure Murray's a, let alone the only thing stopping a long-term deal. It would be the obvious expectation, empirically, but I'm just not sure.

Vipers31 is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 10:59 AM
  #118
RPGrizzly
Registered User
 
RPGrizzly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 349
vCash: 942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipers31 View Post
Call me crazy, and I know I don't have anything to base this on, but I'm actually not so sure if Getzlaf or (even moreso) Perry actually are the ones that want an 7/8-year deal. I personally don't really doubt that Murray would hand it to them in this situation. And even if it's illogical from the business-side for Getz/Perry to not cash in now that they're in their prime for the years beyond 30 as well, I'm somehow not convinced they're really ready to do that. It's entirely speculation on my part, but I would not be shocked to hear they feel right now, that they'd still like to continue here, keep working on the job they started, but also not quite yet willing to handcuff themselves for the mid-term future. (Even if there are ways to get out of places even on long-term deals, obviously.) I'm really not sure Murray's a, let alone the only thing stopping a long-term deal. It would be the obvious expectation, empirically, but I'm just not sure.
I completely agree. 8 years seems a little awkward for a 27 year old. It takes them to 35, while say a 5 year deal would take them to 32 years old, an age where they can get big money again, and a lot easier than at 35. They could get their retirement contracts at 32 and still get paid very well.

Man I can't believe how old these guys already are. Seems like just a couple years ago they broke into the league

RPGrizzly is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 11:26 AM
  #119
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,793
vCash: 500
You guys are making some good points that Getz/Perry might be better off with shorter contracts. But what has been worrying me is the PA. In baseball (under Fehr) stars were pushed to take the very max possible in order to set the bar higher for all salaries. These two are the premiere ufas this season. The more they get the higher the bar for the whole league.

I understand baseball has no cap and the NHLPA only gets 50% total, but if I'm a top player I still want the highest contract I can get because escrow takes from everybody equally (same percentage).

I could see the union pressuring them to go for top dollar and length just to set a current high precedent. That could be a problem for the Ducks.

Eddie Shack is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 11:26 AM
  #120
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGrizzly View Post
Man I can't believe how old these guys already are. Seems like just a couple years ago they broke into the league
Ah, don't even mention that. I'd have been in the same draft year, and my progress to make it to the league has been rather immeasurable...

Vipers31 is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 11:37 AM
  #121
Old Man Barking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,206
vCash: 500
In my opinion, the big three are players the Ducks ought to do whatever needed to sign them. They are extraordinary talent and bring in fans. Make them Ducks for life.

Old Man Barking is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 11:37 AM
  #122
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
The downside to a short contract is the escrow is likely to be high for the next 2 years or so. With the limits on how much yearly variance you can have it means a lot less money over 5 years.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 02:04 PM
  #123
SupermanPahlsson
@DucksProspects
 
SupermanPahlsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 908
vCash: 500
Not sure if anyone here is into player equipment, but has anyone noticed that Getzlaf is back to rocking the Bauer helmet with no visor? And for the first time in his career, Bauer skates, stick and gloves. Did his deal with Easton expire?

SupermanPahlsson is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 03:38 PM
  #124
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,463
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Full column in Espn today on the situation. It's insider only, however.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/blog/...laf-loom-large

Static is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 04:21 PM
  #125
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGrizzly View Post
I completely agree. 8 years seems a little awkward for a 27 year old. It takes them to 35, while say a 5 year deal would take them to 32 years old, an age where they can get big money again, and a lot easier than at 35. They could get their retirement contracts at 32 and still get paid very well.

Man I can't believe how old these guys already are. Seems like just a couple years ago they broke into the league
Expanding on this, is the 35+ multi-year provision still in effect? Because that would probably make an 8 year contract extremely undesirable.

I think that's a big reason for the back-diving contracts in the first place. Because years past 35 are safer when signed from an under-35 contract compared to a 35+ contract. I hope they got rid of that rule.

snarktacular is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.