Confirmed Signing with Link: [ANA] D Jamie Drysdale re-signs with the Ducks (3 year, $2.3M AAV)

[mouser]

This seems like an unbelievably team friendly deal for Anaheim. I would be shocked if Drysdale does not significantly outperform this deal.

Aside from the whole relationship possibly damaged part of course.

When a player signs for three years there’s no damaged relationship in my opinion.

I’m sure Anaheim had one, two and three year deals on the table. Drysdale went with the three year option.

 

[biturbo19]

I would have preferred the Ducks go the same route with Zegras as Buffalo, Montreal, and Minnesota did with Cozens, Caufield, and Boldy. It would’ve been great to get him locked up long term around $8 million. However, we don’t know why they didn’t. Knowing Zegras’ level of confidence in himself, if I had to guess, he probably wasn’t willing to sign long term without it being much higher than $8 million. I have no information on that but it just seems like Zegras is the type to bet on himself really breaking out and being worth $10 million on his next deal. Unfortunately, it takes two to tango and it just didn’t seem like a long term deal was ever going to be agreed upon. With Drysdale, I would’ve bet on him also if I were the Ducks on tried locking him up. The only issue with that would be what a fair number would be considering he’s coming off a major surgery. Whatever would be a fair offer probably wouldn’t entice Dry to sign long term. Down the road, it likely won’t be favorable for the Ducks and that sucks as a a ducks fan. I just don’t think people consider both sides when saying the Ducks screwed up. If, this was all on Verbeek and he didn’t want to offer Zegras long term, then I think he screwed up.

That's certainly reasonable. It's always tricky viewing things from the outside and trying to ascertain what options were even on the table.

With Drysdale for me though, i really think a 1-year deal would've been preferrable to 3. Three years just puts him in that awkward, potentially extremely expensive territory.

I actually love what they were able to get done with Terry (despite my brainfart slip up listing the wrong player). Part of that though, was in keeping the term to the right length. Maybe that's why they think a "3-year deal" is a magic bullet? But those were pretty unique circumstances and i'm still surprised Terry's deal wasn't actually even bigger.

 

[Crazy8oooo]

That's certainly reasonable. It's always tricky viewing things from the outside and trying to ascertain what options were even on the table.

With Drysdale for me though, i really think a 1-year deal would've been preferrable to 3. Three years just puts him in that awkward, potentially extremely expensive territory.

I actually love what they were able to get done with Terry (despite my brainfart slip up listing the wrong player). Part of that though, was in keeping the term to the right length. Maybe that's why they think a "3-year deal" is a magic bullet? But those were pretty unique circumstances and i'm still surprised Terry's deal wasn't actually even bigger.

Terry’s deal worked out good for both parties in my opinion. If he doesn’t improve, he’s paid about right. If he does, it can become a steal for the Ducks yet he’s still being paid a lot of money where he probably won’t be so good that he’s too underpaid. I thought he might’ve got 7.5 but didn’t feel like he deserved 8.

I see your point with Dry and it would be cool to hear inside info on why both parties didn’t shoot for a 1 year deal. It probably would’ve worked out for both sides. You’re right, if Dry ends up being a star, he’s due for a huge raise after this small contract.

It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[lwvs84]

I think a 3 year deal may actually be smart for both sides with Drysdale. Some players take a year to get back to where they were after shoulder injuries... or at least a majority of a season. Drysdale missed camp, has to adjust to a new system, and has to get the confidence to take big hits again. This gives him a year to get re-adjusted back to the NHL and 2 years after that to really get going. For the Ducks, it gives them two (hopefully) healthy seasons to evaluate where he's at and a few years of development from the other kids to see where everyone fits in. Drysdale will still two years away from UFA at that point so he can be signed or moved and still have value (depending on his play).

 

[StreetHawk]

think it's funny how no matter what we did with Drysdale or Zegras, people were gonna find some way to say the Ducks screwed up. Sign them long term, and it's committing too long on unproven or overrated players. Sign them to bridge deals and it's risking them leaving by not signing them long term. Literally can't win on this board, someone will always find a reason to say it's a bad move.

Honestly, the 2 deals are what I would have done.

Zegras, not sold that he's going to be a core player, so didn't think it was wise to go term on him. Want to see if he develops a defensive game under the new HC. If he does and or doesn't outscore the poor defense, then I know I need to move on after the contract.

Drysdale, want to see him return from this serious shoulder injury. At this stage, I'm not expecting a breakout season, missing training camp and basically the pre-season. So, I have him locked in for the extra 2 which also coincides with Zellweger's ELC. I can then decide if I want 2 sub 6 foot PMD or whether I should just pick one of the 2 and move the other.

 

[Vitto79]

Is he on the PP
Fantasy question lol

 

[StreetHawk]

That's certainly reasonable. It's always tricky viewing things from the outside and trying to ascertain what options were even on the table.

With Drysdale for me though, i really think a 1-year deal would've been preferrable to 3. Three years just puts him in that awkward, potentially extremely expensive territory.

I actually love what they were able to get done with Terry (despite my brainfart slip up listing the wrong player). Part of that though, was in keeping the term to the right length. Maybe that's why they think a "3-year deal" is a magic bullet? But those were pretty unique circumstances and i'm still surprised Terry's deal wasn't actually even bigger.

1 year maybe if the 2 sides could have gotten a deal done before camp. Once that passed, he's going to be behind and his numbers may not be as good. 2 years would have taken him to arbitration eligibility. So, really, that should have been the target, which I'm going to guess was Drysdale's aim. But, Anaheim likely stuck to their guns on a 3 year term which they have in the past insisted on Bobby Ryan before, same with Nick Ritchie who had not shown to be key pieces like Lindholm, Fowler, perry, Getz who got long term deals.

 

[SeanMoneyHands]

That's a steal for an up and coming superstar dman.

 

[Leksand]

They will be 2 years from UFA at the end of these deals.

Will they have arbitration rights?

 

[duxfan1101]

Will they have arbitration rights?

Yes.

 

[Ducks DVM]

Is he on the PP
Fantasy question lol

He will absolutely get time there, but we have no idea who the options he will be competing with at this point. Conceivably Fowler, LaCombe, Mintyukov, and/or Zellweger may well be out there too. I suspect it’ll be “whoever looks best”.