Speculation: Anaheim Ducks Roster Discussion Part IV

[ADHB]

That depends on if you think he’s better off spending another year in College. He’s having a great rookie year but hasn’t been tearing it up like a lot of high picks have in the past. And there is an outside chance it could, as Bergey37 said he may get hurt. He’s going to be more prone to getting hurt now at 170 pounds soaking wet than if he would be after bulking up over an offseason.

Also the development argument is kind of beside the point. We should be rewarding players with cups of coffee when they’re too good for the league they’re playing in, not just for the sake of it.

I think the important part here is Zegras seems to have it in his head he only wants to play one year of college hockey. While the Ducks can give him advice, ultimately it's up to him. And it sure sounds like he wants to go pro right now. Obviously next year would be better spent in the AHL rather than with the big club if that's the case.

 

[Masch78]

His body is for sure not ready. We will see but i doubt he can gain enough over summer.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

What's it take to burn a year of ELC? Because I could easily see Bob giving Z some games this year if it means getting him to that 2nd contract with less ammo.

 

[ADHB]

What's it take to burn a year of ELC? Because I could easily see Bob giving Z some games this year if it means getting him to that 2nd contract with less ammo.

Pretty sure you just have to play one game to burn the first year.

The only way he could turn pro and not have his clock start is if he signs a PTO with San Diego and plays only AHL games,

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

What's it take to burn a year of ELC? Because I could easily see Bob giving Z some games this year if it means getting him to that 2nd contract with less ammo.

I'm all for doing it with lesser guys but Zegras could be one that burns you. If he comes in hot out the gate, all you'll be doing is losing a cheap year of production. Then again I also don't think he'll be a RFA after it expires(like Boeser and McAvoy this year) so maybe that evens it out a bit.

 

[Paul4587]

Pretty sure you just have to play one game to burn the first year.

The only way he could turn pro and not have his clock start is if he signs a PTO with San Diego and plays only AHL games,

It’s 10 games isn’t it? I think there’s a weird rule in terms of arbitration though where you can burn off a year of the ELC without having arbitration rights as early.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

I know it takes 40 or 41 games to count as a year for getting to ufa before age 27. Not sure about any of the other rules.

 

[ADHB]

It’s 10 games isn’t it? I think there’s a weird rule in terms of arbitration though where you can burn off a year of the ELC without having arbitration rights as early.

That's for guys in juniors. The first year can slide as long as they go back to juniors before 10 games are up. Europeans might fall under the same category. The college guys are different, I believe. It may have something to do with their age when they sign their contract. Z is 18 now but will be 19 in a few weeks. I'd have to look it up. You can probably look up Quinn Hughes and I imagine Z falls under the same category.

And yeah, you're right. You can burn a year off the ELC without having RFA status bumped up by a year. Believe that is where the 10 games comes into play. So if it's what I think it is, as soon as Z plays one game, he burns one ELC year, but can play up to 9 games before he's considered to have played a "pro season." That is what affects RFA /arbitration status.

 

[Paul4587]

That's for guys in juniors. The first year can slide as long as they go back to juniors before 10 games are up. Europeans might fall under the same category. The college guys are different, I believe. It may have something to do with their age when they sign their contract. Z is 18 now but will be 19 in a few weeks. I'd have to look it up. You can probably look up Quinn Hughes and I imagine Z falls under the same category.

And yeah, you're right. You can burn a year off the ELC without having RFA status bumped up by a year. Believe that is where the 10 games comes into play. So if it's what I think it is, as soon as Z plays one game, he burns one ELC year, but can play up to 9 games before he's considered to have played a "pro season." That is what affects RFA /arbitration status.

Ah yes I think you’re right. I remember Jack Johnson back in the day played and burned off a year but wasn’t arbitration eligible after his ELC expired.

I have no idea why they don’t just make the rules the same across all players.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

Given how Bob chose to force rookies into the lineup while benching Shore and given all the talk about veteran leadership for the youngsters, maybe he should have just kept Cogs thru this cluster f*** of a retool/transition/rebuild and helped these young guys learn how to be a pro. Nothing against Shore but I think a 20 point Cogs could bring more value to this team than a press box Shore. It's not like we were expecting to start a new run of playoff appearances.

 

[Paul4587]

Given how Bob chose to force rookies into the lineup while benching Shore and given all the talk about veteran leadership for the youngsters, maybe he should have just kept Cogs thru this cluster f*ck of a retool/transition/rebuild and helped these young guys learn how to be a pro. Nothing against Shore but I think a 20 point Cogs could bring more value to this team than a press box Shore. It's not like we were expecting to start a new run of playoff appearances.

He certainly at the very least have helped the PK.

If Murray wanted to shake up the core So bad he should have traded Rakell. Easy for me to say with hindsight knowing how Rakell has performed this year though.

 

[Bergey37]

He certainly at the very least have helped the PK.

If Murray wanted to shake up the core So bad he should have traded Rakell. Easy for me to say with hindsight knowing how Rakell has performed this year though.

No argument about the PK. But as I recall at the time, most folks saw it not just as a shakeup but a way to cut some salary and avoid a negotiation, getting a player of expectedly similar contribution who would be RFA and obviously, younger. I hated to see Cogs go - I have his jersey - but I kinda understood the rationale. I also suspected that Dallas may have come to Bob with that that idea, and he bit. Disappointing in hindsight because I see Shore as totally expendable right now; I don't expect him to be a Duck next season.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

He certainly at the very least have helped the PK.

If Murray wanted to shake up the core So bad he should have traded Rakell. Easy for me to say with hindsight knowing how Rakell has performed this year though.

Yeah, I realize I said that with hindsight, but I think it's pretty fair to say Bob had a vision in mind that involved playing these kids come hell or high water. People throw the term "intangibles" around a lot. But if there was a guy who brought intangibles to work every day it was Cogs. Exactly the kind of intangibles young guys can learn from. So what if he was slightly overpaid. It's not like we needed cap space to make that cup run acquisition.

 

[duckpuck]

Ah yes I think you’re right. I remember Jack Johnson back in the day played and burned off a year but wasn’t arbitration eligible after his ELC expired.

I have no idea why they don’t just make the rules the same across all players.

Like Terry his first year, having a player like Zegras come in for a few games offers a financial incentive to sign. It is a gesture by the organization and a way to insure you don't lose a player like Schultz.

 

[Paul4587]

Like Terry his first year, having a player like Zegras come in for a few games offers a financial incentive to sign. It is a gesture by the organization and a way to insure you don't lose a player like Schultz.

I always thought Terry becoming RFA after 2 seasons was because he signed at an older age but that makes sense now.

 

[Ducks DVM]

Like Terry his first year, having a player like Zegras come in for a few games offers a financial incentive to sign. It is a gesture by the organization and a way to insure you don't lose a player like Schultz.

That would require Zegras stay in school for three more seasons. If he only wants to spend one year in college, that would mean he’d just have to sit on his butt and not play at all next year, so that he could then re-enter the draft. He has no fast route to NHL free agency.

 

[duckpuck]

That would require Zegras stay in school for three more seasons. If he only wants to spend one year in college, that would mean he’d just have to sit on his butt and not play at all next year, so that he could then re-enter the draft. He has no fast route to NHL free agency.

You're missing the point - I wasn't suggesting Zegras would wait 3 years. Per the CBA, all entry level players can receive the same maximum contract. So the only thing "extra" a team can offer is to start the ELC clock a bit sooner - by signing the player at the tail end of their college year. The ducks could play hardball and start the clock next year. But they're not - which explains why Zegras will get the proverbial cup of coffee with the team later this year.

 

[Ducks DVM]

You're missing the point - I wasn't suggesting Zegras would wait 3 years. Per the CBA, all entry level players can receive the same maximum contract. So the only thing "extra" a team can offer is to start the ELC clock a bit sooner - by signing the player at the tail end of their college year. The ducks could play hardball and start the clock next year. But they're not - which explains why Zegras will get the proverbial cup of coffee with the team later this year.

We have no idea whatsoever if they’re playing hardball or not. That quote is hardly evidence that they’ll sign him for the NHL vs a PTO for San Diego.

I’d go so far as to say that if BM burns a year off his ELC that I’d consider that the final nail in his coffin and want him fired. The only excuse would be Zegras demanding it and saying he’d refuse to sign at all. Even then, he’d easily be flipped for a high 1st.

 

[Static]

Who cares if he burns a year off of his elc? If Zegras becomes good enough that soon for that even to matter then awesome, we won't have anyone we are paying big money then anyway.

 

[Ducks DVM]

Who cares if he burns a year off of his elc? If Zegras becomes good enough that soon for that even to matter then awesome, we won't have anyone we are paying big money then anyway.

1 less year of control, and I look at what happened when (name the Edmonton player), Marner/Matthews, etc get paid early - everyone else wants to get paid high and early too. There’s also the recent trend of signing for 4-5 years by those guys rather than 7.

 

[Static]

1 less year of control, and I look at what happened when (name the Edmonton player), Marner/Matthews, etc get paid early - everyone else wants to get paid high and early too. There’s also the recent trend of signing for 4-5 years by those guys rather than 7.

Those are other teams though. BM has historically come in way under market with RFAs.

I'm not worried about paying guys at this point because we have so little in high end talent that yield large contracts. If Zegras is good enough to warrant that then he will be paid, BM has had no issues with that either.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

Burning a year of ELC early isn't necessarily a bad thing. On a crappy Ducks team it just means he could get to that second contract with less ammo (stats) to demand a bigger payday. It won't change his ufa date because it's under 40 games.With his current size and no finisher in sight he isn't going to come in here and have east coast people staying up to watch him.

 

[MMC]

So who gets called up now? Hopefully Sprong (and he actually gets in the lineup).

EDIT: Duh, its Backes

 

[Deuce22]

So who gets called up now? Hopefully Sprong (and he actually gets in the lineup).

EDIT: Duh, its Backes

They'd rather ice Shore than Sprong. That speaks volumes.

 

[duckpuck]

We have no idea whatsoever if they’re playing hardball or not. That quote is hardly evidence that they’ll sign him for the NHL vs a PTO for San Diego.

I’d go so far as to say that if BM burns a year off his ELC that I’d consider that the final nail in his coffin and want him fired. The only excuse would be Zegras demanding it and saying he’d refuse to sign at all. Even then, he’d easily be flipped for a high 1st.

First of all, whether they sign him for NHL or San Diego is irrelevant - either way his ELC starts. The main difference is that he would make more money in the NHL for a short period of time.

You are shortsighted and have let your dislike of Murray cloud your judgement. Putting some money in Zegras pocket is a great way to reward the player and build loyalty/culture. As I understand it, he won't be an RFA when the ELC expires because he won't have accrued sufficient game experience (again, similar to Terry), which means his salary won't really go up much (and more likely he signs a longer term deal).

It also builds excitement and brings some hope to the fans.