Large number of upcoming UFAs: blessing or curse?

The Ducks currently have 9 upcoming-UFAs on the roster (10 including Frankie). The league-wide average is 6.17. Do you think that's a good or a bad thing?


Now on to my thoughts:
Possible reason why it could be good: For many reasons, there will be a cap crisis. The NHL/NHLPA intentionally set revenue expectations low with the CBA, which couples with the CBA structure that gives players a larger % of revenue after achieving easily achieved revenue targets (we've just about hit the end of % increases); leading to artificially high cap growth the first few years. Revenues were also high because there was a boost in attendance because fans missed hockey, followed by a boost in attendance when semi-fans who turned away from the game came back (kind of like the expansion-phenomenon). Don't forget new jersey sales (redesigned jerseys, switch to EDGE jerseys). This should also be ending. Additionally, there's been a huge increase in salaries of formerly cheap 2nd contract guys, without much of a decrease in anyone else's salaries. GMs were still learning how to operate under the cap, and may made some poor decisions (long-term contracts, paying too much, not having a steady stream of expiring contracts). Now on top of all of that, there's the economy. With all of this, there will be a cap crisis where teams suddenly find themselves short on money, and bargains will be had by teams with cap space. Now immediately after the lockout, I had predicted it would be next season, but Burke had obviously predicted it would be this year based on our contract structures (he made everyone expire this year). We'll still have to see who is right, but it looks like we're both close. Bottom line: there will be an offseason or two where it's extremely cheap to retool with UFAs. If it's this offseason, we could capitalize.

Other good reasons: guys on contract years often put up higher numbers, which may help our team. Expiring contracts are easier pieces to trade, allowing us flexibility to trade them away for other expiring contracts to fit team needs (it's hard to predict ahead of time what the team will need: who would have thought we'd need competent defensemen a few years ago?) The fact that it's obvious this team's core is going to change may also lead to some urgency "let's get it down while the window's still here."


Possible bad reasons: Guys on contract years may put up higher numbers, but they may also play more "selfishly" to boost their numbers. It depends on the makeup of the player (and the role of the player... scorers might not play much differently, but checkers may play out of their role). Our poor team defense might be a result of this. Contract uncertainty may also be a distraction, leading to poor mental focus.



Real-world results: 6 teams have 8 or more UFAs. They include a decent team (Florida), 2 good but streaky teams (Montreal, Vancouver: both have good records but have had free fall stretches) and 3 not so good teams (Nashville, Ducks, TB).


I can't help but notice that the 2 negatives I came up with can cause the exact same problem that is hurting us: mental lapses. But then, lots of things can cause mental problems.

It's neither. Most of these free agents need to walk because they aren't pulling their weight anymore and there are rookies to take their places. I'm inclined to let all of our forward free agents go and only re-sign the d-men except Huskins and Hedican. Other than Scotty and Frankie, none of the other fee agents are core, impact players.

With the recent recession, I think it is a blessing for the organization. The Ducks will lose a lot of season ticket holders and they may have to rebuild this team on cheap. As a fan, it sucks monkey balls.

You think Murray might be pushing contract talks and that might distract the players' performance? It's puzzling, mainly because there's always little light shed on the re-signing process. I really hope we get to hear about some good extensions soon.

There's no "general" answer to this.

If you're a contender and your window is closing, it's a bad thing. For a team that's about to start rebuilding (like Ducks), it's great.

Ducks free themselves from bad contracts and get to start fresh. Also they can trade the valuable players for rebuilding assets in the deadline.

Sign the few key UFAs if they agree to reasonable contracts, otherwise just clean to house and build around the young cornerstones of the team.

It's neither. Most of these free agents need to walk because they aren't pulling their weight anymore and there are rookies to take their places. I'm inclined to let all of our forward free agents go and only re-sign the d-men except Huskins and Hedican. Other than Scotty and Frankie, none of the other fee agents are core, impact players.
Yeah I forgot to mention that. Having so many upcoming UFAs means we'll finally get some roster spots for the young kids to play in. Sadly the prospects are mostly mediocre, but it is good to see what they have and if any of them can impress or even exceed expectations.
With the recent recession, I think it is a blessing for the organization. The Ducks will lose a lot of season ticket holders and they may have to rebuild this team on cheap. As a fan, it sucks monkey balls.
Good point. Some times fans don't think enough about the business side. I think a lot of owners tend to think of their team as just a hobby, and don't mind losing some money, but they can't be bleeding cash.
You think Murray might be pushing contract talks and that might distract the players' performance? It's puzzling, mainly because there's always little light shed on the re-signing process. I really hope we get to hear about some good extensions soon.
That's a good point I hadn't thought about. Contract talks could be a distraction. And the sheer volume of UFAs might make talks drag out longer as well. Could prolong the distraction. Prolong the suck.
There's no "general" answer to this.

If you're a contender and your window is closing, it's a bad thing. For a team that's about to start rebuilding (like Ducks), it's great.

Ducks free themselves from bad contracts and get to start fresh. Also they can trade the valuable players for rebuilding assets in the deadline.

Sign the few key UFAs if they agree to reasonable contracts, otherwise just clean to house and build around the young cornerstones of the team.
Maybe it's how I phrased the post, but I was looking more for how it might affect the Ducks and not a general answer. But then you do answer that you think it's good for the Ducks. And selling the UFAs is certainly something I think they can capitalize on if they drop out of the playoff race. It could really shorten the amount of suck we'll have to experience during a rebuild.



I think my post actually strayed a little from my original intent though. Especially with my huge paragraph on the cap-crisis. Now how good it is for the team from a management perspective is certainly a worthy topic, and that discussion can certainly continue. But more specifically I was wondering how the UFA status might be affecting the team's performance this season. If anyone thinks that it may have contributed to our disappointing season.

Yeah I forgot to mention that. Having so many upcoming UFAs means we'll finally get some roster spots for the young kids to play in. Sadly the prospects are mostly mediocre, but it is good to see what they have and if any of them can impress or even exceed expectations.

For the most part the spots that need filling are bottom six roles that these players are capable of filling (Miller, Wirtanen). It's just the d-man spots that have me worried. I'd rather free agents/trades replace the d-man vacancies.