Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks

gorbachav5

Members
  • Content Count

    6,715
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    138

gorbachav5 last won the day on March 18

gorbachav5 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5,261 Excellent

2 Followers

About gorbachav5

  • Rank
    Ultimate Ducks Fan

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. My mistake. I thought Terry was in '16 for some reason. Mostly I have no faith in Jacob Larsson. I think Troy Terry is going to be a very good second line winger. So there you go - even when Murray (possibly) whiffs on his first round pick, he finds a keeper in the late rounds.
  2. Burke was notoriously bad at drafting, outside of the one time he got the sure-thing Sedin twins at picks 2 and 3. For the Ducks, outside of Bobby Ryan, whom he got at #2, he drafted exactly one guy who played meaningful minutes for the Ducks - Matt Beleskey. Now, he does get some credit for drafting Jake Gardiner and Justin Schultz, but we're talking three guys in four years who were even middle six/middle pairing players, plus Bobby Ryan. That's bad. Look at this page and compared Burke's tenure (2005 - 2008) to any four year stretch of Murray's tenure through 2014. Yes, 2015 is probably going to be a bust, but every other year has at least one significant contributor, and some years have four or five (Burke never had a year like 2011). https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/ANA/draft.html
  3. Normally I'd agree with you, but I think you could do it this season and get away with it. The players aren't dumb - they know the NHL team isn't going anywhere and they know the AHL team is getting ready for the playoffs. You could easily tell them that they're playing well, but they're being sent down to help the Gulls for their playoff run. But I don't know what the trade-off is between that and getting the prospects some NHL development time.
  4. Here's the thing on the tank: I agree with you that we should have traded Silf, and that probably would have made the team worse in the short run. Other than that, what else can Murray do? I don't think keeping Carlyle around was an option. It would have helped the tank, but it might have embittered players, old and young, to a point where it would be tough to get the clubhouse back at all. Carlyle had to go. And now, there's not much he can do. He could drop the kids back down to the AHL, but it's not like any of them are playing out of their minds and single-handedly winning games for the team. Terry in those few games, maybe, but otherwise, the kids are just okay at this point. And getting them NHL experience is valuable as well. He's shut down Kesler (although that might hurt the tank as much as help it), but he can't really shut down anyone else if they're healthy without the NHL getting suspicious. I suppose he could rest a veteran or two as a "maintenance day." He can alternate starts between Gibson and Miller, but they're both solid goalies. I don't see any other management options for tanking. And since we can't expect players to give less than 100%, why should we root for losses? We want our players to play hard and do well. If they do, and they win, great! If they get outplayed or have a tough game and lose, there's a silver lining. I want a great draft pick as much as the next guy, but the ping pong will fall where they may.
  5. I really doubt it. Getzlaf might have given it the thumbs up, and he said all the right things, but I doubt he picked Carlyle. Who knows, though?
  6. The team is playing better because Carlyle sucked the life out of hockey, and once the guys on the roster had that weight off their shoulders, you or I could have gone back there to coach and they would have played better. That doesn't mean you or I should be the next full-time head coach of the Ducks. With as energized as the team has been under Murray, they're still 9-9. And even in games like last night where they won, they were outplayed for long stretches against a mediocre opponent. That's happened a lot less, but it's not like this team has gone on an epic run, dominating every team they've faced. The Ducks need a real hockey coach next season. Bob Murray is not it.
  7. Kesler earned that money and the contract was agreed to with the knowledge that this might happen. Yes, him retiring would be better for the team, but I am 100% against the GM asking him to do that. If Kesler feels like it's best, so be it, but the right thing for the organization to do is to put him on LTIR (assuming he's really hurt too badly to play) and pay him. Kesler put his body on the line every night, and would probably still do it if the doctors would let him. If he wants to retire and give that money back, that's very generous of him. But I won't think any less of him if he doesn't. That's his money.
  8. I'm going to say no to this one, too.
  9. I think you've missed my point entirely. The point of not re-signing Silf is to get better talent in the door. The team needs to get better. Silf doesn't do that, but he takes up a significant amount of cap space. That's the reality. If you think the only higher quality player we're getting in the next couple years is from the draft, then we either better get lucky with ping pong balls (or scouting) or some of our young guys better take unexpected leaps. Otherwise, we'll improve next year under a new coach and compete for a playoff spot but won't be anywhere near a division or conference title contender. The team could get back to being a contender very quickly, but the only way to do so is by adding high end talent. That's the difference between what I'm proposing and the comparison to the Coyotes. The Coyotes never used their cap space for elite players. The Ducks need to do that, but they don't have much cap space left. Or budget space, if the Samuelis tighten things up after a dismal season.
  10. If we want to change terms, that's fine. Silf is a better player, yes, but I'd rather have Ritchie on his contract. My main issue is that the Ducks desperately need higher end talent. To get it, they'll either have to sign it or trade for it (or get lucky and draft it), and either way, it's going to be expensive. Ritchie on his contract allows us to afford it. Silf on his makes that difficult, unless he's one of the players going the other way. As for Perry, he has a NMC. He's not going anywhere. I don't really consider that an option. But yes, he's one of the least valuable or lease cost-effective players on the team. Fowler is an option to be traded, but the Ducks are now very light on top 4 d-men. They have Lindholm, Manson (who struggled this year), and Fowler. If you're going to dump Fowler, you'd better add something to get an even better defenseman in return.
  11. I think the Ducks would be better served spending either Silf or Henrique's money, along with additional funds, on a guy who can put the puck in the net more than either of them can. Ritchie at $1.9 million is good value. Silf and Henrique at $5+ million are not. They're fine players and add something to the team, but that money can be better spent on players who will do more to move the needle. They're not BAD value, they're just not good value. On a team with a few guys making a ton of money without contributing elite production, Ritchie is a more valuable asset.
  12. It looks like we just disagree on Ritchie. I don't care that he was overdrafted and I don't care that he doesn't hit as long as he's producing and driving offense, which he is, even if he's not the one putting the puck in the net all the time. He's also killing penalties a bit now, and, by the numbers, is pretty good at it. If he's a 15-goal, 40 - 50 point guy on the third line, that's incredibly valuable at $1.9 million. I think he's got more in him, as his progression has shown and since power forwards historically have taken more time to develop. It's too late to move on from Silf, and we can't move on from Henrique because he's a center, but I think Ritchie at his current salary provides more value than both those guys. But because those guys are on the roster and making $5+ million, Ritchie might very well be the odd man out, as you suggest, which would be a shame.
  13. He was the worst on the team, despite the Carlyle effect. Relatively speaking, he was still bad (worst on the team by a decent amount at -9.8%). I think he's got potential, and he may force himself into the lineup next year, but I don't think he'll be better than Ritchie will be, and I'd rather plan on him getting a season in the AHL. I'm excited for Comtois's future, but I'm also excited for Ritchie's future. I think he's finally starting to live up to his billing and I'd hate to give up on him right when he's about to be good. If the Ducks don't have an elite forward coming in, they're going to need their bottom three lines all to produce like they're second lines. Ritchie has proven this season he can do that.
  14. Comtois put up some points, but was absolutely lost otherwise. His possession figures were appalling. He's going to need some AHL time. I think Comtois has a lot of potential, but Ritchie can help the team over the next two years. He's at a 45-point pace as a guy making less than two million a year. The Ducks need that badly. If Murray doesn't want to go through arbitration with him, then trade him in two years once he's put up a couple more good seasons and his value is higher.
×
×
  • Create New...