News Article: Has Anthony Duclair been too good for the Senators to keep?

Stylizer1

SENSimillanaire
Jun 12, 2009
19,296
3,695
Ottabot City
Would a two year deal not put him into UFA?
That would be true. I think because we showed him love he would resign here as long as it's a fair deal. Seeing as he got punted around the league already he knows the grass isn't always greener on the other side and with a new team comes all those expectations again. If he finds a role on this team and excels i don't think he would want to go through all of that again.
 

dumbdick

Galactic Defender
May 31, 2008
11,350
3,770
Sign him to a short deal to see if he can build off this season. Can't constantly trade good players, otherwise we're in a perpetual rebuild.
I disagree if we also keep adding ufa signings. Forces our youth to season longer and keeps us in lottery contention for another year or two. Duclair is great but why rush a rebuild if the trade value is right? We already did that once after 2007 and it backfired and cost us a decade of middling performance.

Blow it up repeatedly for a few years straight, stockpile futures and top 5 picks, and then roll out a dynasty.
 

Do Make Say Think

& Yet & Yet
Jun 26, 2007
51,167
9,909
I disagree if we also keep adding ufa signings. Forces our youth to season longer and keeps us in lottery contention for another year or two. Duclair is great but why rush a rebuild if the trade value is right? We already did that once after 2007 and it backfired and cost us a decade of middling performance.

Blow it up repeatedly for a few years straight, stockpile futures and top 5 picks, and then roll out a dynasty.

Life isn't a video game. Players want to win, not be used as pawns to make people on the Internet happy.
 

Stylizer1

SENSimillanaire
Jun 12, 2009
19,296
3,695
Ottabot City
Life isn't a video game. Players want to win, not be used as pawns to make people on the Internet happy.
Who's really left on the Sens who would be a pawn? Our core is young enough that they can play a few more years while we sure up draft picks. I wouldn't sign Duclair to a long term contract for that reason and keep his cap hit reasonable for potential trade options. If it works out that he is reliable and wants to stay you cross that bridge later.
 

dumbdick

Galactic Defender
May 31, 2008
11,350
3,770
Life isn't a video game. Players want to win, not be used as pawns to make people on the Internet happy.
This isnt video game stuff...our team did pretty much exactly this strategy over the past two years or so. We traded youth and brought in some vets to keep guys like bath from being gifted spots too soon. They'll move some of those vets at the deadline. The question is just how long will they keep it up and whether they see Duke as a piece of a winning core that should be locked up to money and term.

No reason they can't/won't continue this pattern into a multi-year tank and blow up the roster again, trading high-value pieces like pager and duclair. I suspect they will lock up Duclair for a longer term deal, but signing him when you're trying to tank is messing with fire. They chose not to sign Stone because they didnt intend on competing in the short term. I wont be crazy surprised if they do the same here.
 

Answer

Registered User
Dec 17, 2006
6,973
1,432
Edmonton
I'd trade Tkachuk before trading Duclair.

Tkachuk should net us a fortune since this league has never seen a player like him in it's entire history
 

jbeck5

Registered User
Jan 26, 2009
16,314
3,299
I never said they were similar players or played a similar game. What I was referring to is their situations being similar in respect to the trade deadline & their success so far this yr. I thought that was pretty clear but I guess not.

I literally just described how their situations are not similar at all going into the deadline.

I thought that was pretty clear but I guess not.

Ones a third liner on a career year, the other is a top line talent who was busting and finally broke out. Those come with 2 vastly different strategies when it comes to re-signing/trading. Totally different situations.
 
Last edited:

L'Aveuglette

つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Jan 8, 2007
47,845
19,809
Montreal
I kinda hate the questions asked in the article because it assumes Duclair has gotten a fair shot in the past which we all know isn't the case. There's obviously some trust between Anthony and DJ, and I don't see why we shouldn't give him a 3 year contract at a reasonable price. This should be a no-brainer. We hit the jackpot getting him as a throw-in because of Tortorella's obvious bias against the kid.
 

L'Aveuglette

つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Jan 8, 2007
47,845
19,809
Montreal
I'd trade Tkachuk before trading Duclair.

Tkachuk should net us a fortune since this league has never seen a player like him in it's entire history

At this point I have to assume you're looking to set a record for getting on the most block lists on HF Sens. :laugh:
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
It is pretty sad that Duclair has this unfair reputation now with regards to his "5 teams in 5 years" simply because people choose to ignore the facts. He is only 24 years old, and 226 of his 320 career games have been played for two teams (Ariz and Ott). The remaining 94 games were played for the other 3 teams (NYR-18, CHI- 23, CBJ- 53).

The first trade from NYR was simply a hockey trade, it had nothing to do with the player, he was much too young to make the assumption that the Rangers had given up on him. He then played 3 seasons for Arizona, a terrible team, and put up 74 points in 172 games (0.43 ppg) which is not terrible considering the team he played for and the fact he was still a young player learning the game. I also take his stints with Chicago and CBJ with a grain of salt as he did not play enough games to warrant proper judgement, still, he had 8 points in 23 games for CHI and then 19 points in 53 games for CLB which to me is okay, all things considered.

Now to be fair, maybe Chicago and Columbus management and coaches did not like his game and figured he played a risky style that did not suit their expectations. Needless to say however, with proper coaching, Duclair has excelled and become an excellent offensive player and a decent one without the puck too. There is absolutely no reason to think he will "regress" to his old ways since we do not really know what his old ways were. He was still a threat offensively, always has been, and always will be. Also, once an NHL player becomes better defensively and plays a strong game without the puck, they tend to continue their careers down that path and rarely ever go back to being a liability in that regard.

Coles Notes: the "5 teams in 5 years" means squat. Duclair has always been good, he just needed proper coaching to round out his game.

Bottom line: Sign him to a 3-5 year contract for 4-6 million.

5 years at 6 million? Lol ya that should destroy any chance of winning if that doesn’t work out.
1 year 3-4 million unless he is going to give up multiple years at under 3 there is zero reason to pay a guy with 50 good games money like that.
He has been inconsistent unmotivated and unable to keep to a system up until now. I wonder if he will keep the pace up all year never mind 5 years.
His shooting % was crazy high last year with the sens and it’s probably still higher than it should be. If that drops back down....well he sure doesn’t have many assists.
If it drops down in line with some of his other seasons his production wont be good at all.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,130
9,701
Duclair is 2 years away from being a UFA and we control his rights. I think he can be a very loyal soldier for us. He got his break here and his family is from Montreal so it's easy to see them frequently throughout the season. That said, we do not need to go ling term with him right now. I'd look at a 1 year deal in the 6 range assuming he tops 30 goals and if by jan 1 next year we are still seeing the same play from him, then you look at a 4 or 5 year deal
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
Duclair is 2 years away from being a UFA and we control his rights. I think he can be a very loyal soldier for us. He got his break here and his family is from Montreal so it's easy to see them frequently throughout the season. That said, we do not need to go ling term with him right now. I'd look at a 1 year deal in the 6 range assuming he tops 30 goals and if by jan 1 next year we are still seeing the same play from him, then you look at a 4 or 5 year deal
Most overlooked part...I really believe he is sincere in wanting to stay here
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,130
9,701
Most overlooked part...I really believe he is sincere in wanting to stay here
Yes i believe he is sincere in wanting to stay as well. But this team needs to be very cautious about lengthier deals, ensuring we only sign those with high work ethic. We cannot afford to sign anyone that turns around with an "I'm set" type attitude. We don't need to sign him to a longer deal and just doing a 1 year deal buys time
 
  • Like
Reactions: topshelf15

TheDebater

Peace be upon you
Mar 10, 2016
6,251
6,000
Ottawa
5 years at 6 million? Lol ya that should destroy any chance of winning if that doesn’t work out.
1 year 3-4 million unless he is going to give up multiple years at under 3 there is zero reason to pay a guy with 50 good games money like that.
He has been inconsistent unmotivated and unable to keep to a system up until now. I wonder if he will keep the pace up all year never mind 5 years.
His shooting % was crazy high last year with the sens and it’s probably still higher than it should be. If that drops back down....well he sure doesn’t have many assists.
If it drops down in line with some of his other seasons his production wont be good at all.

Actually you made that assumption on your own, I was purposefully vague with my contract suggestion because I did not feel like listing in detail what Duclair should earn in terms of length to money ratio.

I will clarify however, my original post said: 3-5 years at 4-6 million. So to break it down I would be satisfied if the team signed him to a 3 year 5.5 million to 5.9 million a year. Or, a 4-5 year term at 4.5 to 5 million per year. I would not be on board with 5 years at 6 mill per, for example. If he wants longer term, he will have to accept less money on a AAV.
 

Pierre from Orleans

Registered User
May 9, 2007
26,399
17,931
I'd trade Tkachuk before trading Duclair.

Tkachuk should net us a fortune since this league has never seen a player like him in it's entire history
But then we wouldn't have a player that the league has never seen in its entire history anymore
 
Last edited:

dumbdick

Galactic Defender
May 31, 2008
11,350
3,770
I wonder if he was willing to go long term last season? That could have been one of the shrewdest value contracts in the league.
 

bert

Registered User
Nov 11, 2002
36,144
22,116
Visit site
Trade or arbitration. That's where this is going. I hope I am wrong though.
I think you are being too negative. If you had bounced around then finally found a spot where you are a go to guy and can get a pay day that sets you for life do you think he turns that opportunity down? He seems to be in the core of the best players on the team from a social perspective. Duclair, Chabot, White, Tkachuk and Tierney seem to be all very close.

I could see a 3 year deal at 4 to 4.5 per.
 

bert

Registered User
Nov 11, 2002
36,144
22,116
Visit site
I disagree if we also keep adding ufa signings. Forces our youth to season longer and keeps us in lottery contention for another year or two. Duclair is great but why rush a rebuild if the trade value is right? We already did that once after 2007 and it backfired and cost us a decade of middling performance.

Blow it up repeatedly for a few years straight, stockpile futures and top 5 picks, and then roll out a dynasty.
You are right about how they should go about it but they should be trading almost everyone except Duclair.

Tierney, Pageau, Namestinikov, Anisimov, and Ennis should all be moved.

I wonder if he was willing to go long term last season? That could have been one of the shrewdest value contracts in the league.
I wanted them to sign him for a 2 year deal to see if he could sustain it. Had a feeling this would happen. Dorion is bad at giving out contracts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NB613

Nac Mac Feegle

wee & free
Jun 10, 2011
34,904
9,320
It is important to note Ottawa is not a good team. The opportunity players get on such teams usually inflates their numbers. We all can agree Pageau is a 3rd line center on a good team. His production has been really good because most of the team is inexperienced. Duclair is no different. We don't want to go down the Bobby Ryan path with him. He deserves a raise but until he can show consistency you be fair and not foolish.

2 years at 6.25m

season 1 2.5m
season 2 3 .75m

There is a big chance if you give him too much he becomes complacent.

If that contract could be signed right now, it would be done already.

I get what you're saying. I feel the same way. I think anything longer than a 2 year deal and we'll see some bad habit return to his game. But...we're kinda stuck.
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
Actually you made that assumption on your own, I was purposefully vague with my contract suggestion because I did not feel like listing in detail what Duclair should earn in terms of length to money ratio.

I will clarify however, my original post said: 3-5 years at 4-6 million. So to break it down I would be satisfied if the team signed him to a 3 year 5.5 million to 5.9 million a year. Or, a 4-5 year term at 4.5 to 5 million per year. I would not be on board with 5 years at 6 mill per, for example. If he wants longer term, he will have to accept less money on a AAV.

Your going to somehow buy more of his UFA years cheaper? 5 for 5? Man I am glad you do not get to hand out contracts. 1 year still a RFA after so then you can better judge what you have
3 million so if he does not play all that well you can still qualify him.
I guess arbitration could stick it to you but that’s only one year and a safe bet.
Now that Hall has moved I would rather trade him because other teams need wingers and I don’t think there are many high end rentals this year. Plus they will pay well for a RFA.
5 or 6 on him + whites contract looks really ugly if he does not pan out, if they both don’t pan out....oyyy
 

BatherSeason

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
6,640
3,702
Gatineau
I could see a 3 year deal at 4 to 4.5 per.
But if you are the Ottawa Senators organization, doesn't it make more sense to go to arbitration where you could probably save some money? This way they get Duclair for another "show me" year and push off his pay day for another 12 months. Its a very Ottawa Senators type of thing to do. I am actually not being negative, I actually think it may be the smart thing to do, but you may tick the player off in the process.
 

supsens

Registered User
Oct 6, 2013
6,577
2,000
But if you are the Ottawa Senators organization, doesn't it make more sense to go to arbitration where you could probably save some money? This way they get Duclair for another "show me" year and push off his pay day for another 12 months. Its a very Ottawa Senators type of thing to do. I am actually not being negative, I actually think it may be the smart thing to do, but you may tick the player off in the process.

Na you just act like you love him and want to give him billions but somehow you and him have to work out a “good” 1 year deal behind that cheapo Melnyk back.
Then your on his side and he’s happy your pals
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,858
31,075
My guess is we do something similar to what we did with Hoffman, with him it was a 4 year deal at around 7.1% of the cap. That works out to just shy of 6 mil a year. Duclair is a little younger than Hoffman was at the time, so more of the years are RFA years, we should be able to get it done a touch cheaper.

Hoffman had a bit better bargaining position too with having just come off his show me 1 year contract and done well.

5 years at 6 million? Lol ya that should destroy any chance of winning if that doesn’t work out.

Wrt his contract sinking us if he regresses, we can buy it out at 1/3 because he'll have signed it at under 26. Risk is pretty minimal going long term imo.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad