Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by gorbachav5

  1. I think the biggest bummer is that none of these guys are elite skaters. The Ducks could really use a skilled guy with wheels. These guys are mostly average skaters or slightly above. But I think that's just the reality of this draft.
  2. I just have this bad feeling about Holtz, and it's the one-dimensional thing. If the shot doesn't pan out at the NHL level, he's got nothing. And I have not been enamored with the Ducks' ability to develop skill players. Still, the Ducks certainly need someone who can score. I'd probably go: Drysdale Rossi Perfetti Raymond Holtz Sanderson Quinn But two of those guys will be gone by the time it gets to us, unless Yzerman has another moment of insanity when it's Detroit's turn to pick. I think the Ducks should take Drysdale if he's still there. I'd take any of the next four guys if Drysdale is gone. I feel like Sanderson is the hot new name to move up the boards, but I think he's a slight reach at six, given the Ducks' needs at forward.
  3. Honestly I have no idea which of those three I prefer. The Ducks desperately need a shooter, but the #6 pick seems awfully high to take someone who is one-dimensional, unless Holtz is the next Patrick Kane. It would have been nice if the Ducks had taken Kaliyev last year and then maybe that need wouldn't be so dire.
  4. Absolutely. I actually think Drysdale, assuming he pans out, is exactly what the Ducks need - a right-shot playmaker on defense. Shea Theodore, Cale Makar, Miro Heiskanen - these guys are doing serious damage from defense and the Ducks could really use that. Of course, they could also use a couple forwards who can put the puck in the net...
  5. Heck, look at the game last night. Tampa Bay outshot the Islanders, outchanced the Islanders, heck, even outscored the Islanders if you include the overturned goal that was called back (which I agree was the right call). Kucherov gets a glorious chance in the second OT and just can't quite put it in, and then Kevin Shattenkirk, a solid defenseman, particularly in the offensive zone, whiffs on a shot attempt, which leads to a 2-on-1 that the Islanders convert. The results say that the Islanders were a better team than Tampa Bay last night. Should Tampa Bay change anything because they lost? Maybe they should make a deal with whatever deity they see fit to get some of their players healthy, but other than that, I don't see anything they need to change. It's just the way it goes. If the Lightning keep playing that way, they probably win one of the next two games. But they also might not because that's sports. It doesn't make them the worse team, or even mean that they played worse.
  6. I don't think there is any way to make a playoff series do a better job at having the better team win. Randomness is part of sports, particularly hockey. And while the result in this particular series didn't come out the way I wanted, that doesn't mean I think this is bad. Without this feature, we'd never have upsets or Cinderella stories. We follow sports in part because it's the only true drama left to us; you can't predict what's going to happen, and that's a good thing. But it does result in injustice sometimes, which I think was done in this series. Sports is a results-based business, but I think process is the thing you have to focus on. Results can HELP inform if the process works or whether changes should be made, but you can also make the huge mistake of allowing randomly determined results to influence changes in a process that was good. If you outshoot a team, but your normally reliable snipers hit posts or the goalie made some ridiculous saves, you don't dump those snipers for grinders. As for advanced stats, the ones I'm looking at aren't that difficult to understand. If you go to the games section on Natural Stat Trick and select Vegas and hit submit, check the xGF% column. Basically, what that column does is it looks at all shots and scoring opportunities generated during the game and assigns a value to it based on how often that scoring chance results in a goal. For example, a point shot with no one screening might be given a value of .005 (i.e. that shot will go in the net 0.5% of the time, very rarely) whereas a shot off of a clean pass on a 2-on-1 might be given a value of .6 (i.e. that shot is a goal 60% of the time). You add up all of these to come up with your total expected goals for the game and then figure out what percentage of those should be assigned to which team. Vegas actually didn't look as good as I thought at 5-on-5, but if you change the option up at the top to "All Strengths," you can see that Vegas was fairly dominant, and even more so in the Vancouver series. You can go to the "Teams" section of that site and look at the performance for the season. Vegas was the best team during the season of taking their share of scoring chances, and their percentage of expected goals for was under 54%. So when you look at their playoff performances and see a bunch of xGF% in the high 50's and 60's, you realize just how well Vegas was playing. I think teams should do exactly this. Vegas should look at how they played using advanced stats and video analysis, determine that it was good, and they should say, "Man, we played well and just didn't get enough pucks past a ridiculously hot Anton Khudobin. It would be a mistake to over-react to that and make unnecessary changes." I'm not saying teams shouldn't try to improve; obviously, every team should try to improve every year. Tampa, despite being the best team in the league last season, tried to make some improvements. But I don't think the moves they made mean they're a much better team than last year. I think they slumped against Columbus last season, had some poorly timed injuries and bad play, and lost to a hot team. Similarly, Vegas should absolutely try to improve because it would be dumb to do otherwise. They're not an unstoppable juggernaut. But they should also honestly assess how they played and realize that their process and approach was good. It was better than Dallas, but just didn't go the way they wanted. Bob Murray has been doing way too much results-based analysis for the Ducks. Rather than determining a good process and sticking with it, he tweaked the roster every year based on which team they lost to in the playoffs. If it was a fast team, he added speed. If it was a big team, he added size. If it was a shot-blocking team...etc. It also led to canning Bruce Boudreau for Randy Carlyle and now Dallas Eakins. I don't think it's a successful way to go about managing a sports franchise.
  7. With all due respect, this just isn't true. A best-of-7 series is meant to find a winner (and generate playoff revenue for owners), and at least attempts to even out the luck somewhat by requiring the winner to win four games rather than one. But there are still wide disparities in luck over seven games (or five). According to Natural Stat Trick, which uses shot position and scoring chances to determine expected goals, Vegas should have outscored Dallas 11.5 - 8.7 over the final four games of the series, winning each one by at least half a goal. Instead they lost three of the four. That sounds an awful lot like a team that outplayed its opponent and simply couldn't get the shots to go in (and we know Vegas is a talented shooting team, so we can't say that this is a team like the Ducks that can't put pucks in the net because they don't have shooting skill). Not coincidentally, that also sounds an awful lot like the game of hockey to me.
  8. That all sounds like "heart" and "will" and "grit" mumbo jumbo to me. Vegas severely outshot Vancouver and Dallas and were subject to shots not going in due to facing hot goalies and getting some bad bounces. The bolded is a huge, huge fallacy. If you believe that, you believe that Columbus was a better team than Tampa Bay last year, and if you believe that, then we are operating under fundamentally different definitions of the word "better." Sports (and hockey games in particular) are subject to a lot of luck. In every game I watched of the last two rounds, outside of maybe game 1 in this series, Vegas outplayed its opposition. Dallas is lucky to be moving on.
  9. For everyone who doesn't think small sample size and luck play a part in the winner of these series, here's Exhibit A. Vegas was clearly the better team, up and down the lineup, but a hot goalie and some bad timing and they're out. I'm happy for Cogliano, but it's still Dallas.
  10. Dallas is so frustrating. Not that I'm a huge fan of Vegas, but I'd rather see the better team advance. Vegas has outshot Dallas 73 to 43 over the last two games and lost both of them by one goal. Khudobin:Vegas::Rinne:Anaheim. Hopefully Vegas can get back in the series tonight. I think Tampa will steamroll Dallas in the finals if that's the matchup.
  11. Lehner gave up some soft goals in this one. Radulov's OT goal was a complete snipe, but the other two goals were ones he probably should have kept out of the net. Vegas is clearly the better team, but they're having trouble getting the puck in the net lately.
  12. I feel the exact same way. NONE of the Ducks defensemen on their Cup-winning team were right-handed (unless you want to count Ric Jackman, which I don't). I agree it's not as important when you have two Hall of Famers back there, but I never heard it mentioned as a big deal. Beauch and O'Donnell played the right side just fine. Yes, there are advantages to having some RHD and some LHD, but those advantages don't overcome talent. I've wondered the same thing in the last 8 - 10 years. Where did this focus on handedness come from?
  13. Sean McIndoe, in his latest piece at The Athletic, makes a full roster from the 20 eliminated teams with one disappointing player from each team. Here's his Bruins entry: Nick Ritchie, BruinsPierre LeBrun wrote an interesting piece recently about how many players acquired at this year’s deadline are having big playoff runs with their new teams. Not mentioned in that piece: Nick Ritchie or Ondrej Kase, who combined for one goal and four assists in 19 playoff games after coming over in February. Kase cost a lot more, but we’ll give the nod to Ritchie and his one point; we can’t say he didn’t make an impact with the season on the line, but it wasn’t the good kind. Yeah, that seems about right for Ritchie. I'm glad he screwed up the Bruins' postseason.
  14. I just can't bring myself to root for Dallas, especially with Cogliano sitting out. I was really rooting for Colorado. But they're young. They'll have plenty more opportunities.
  15. That was a crazy game 7, but not a very well played one. Colorado played with their hands wrapped around their necks for that entire third period. They got lucky on the one goal they scored, but then they immediately made a terrible play right off the faceoff. How do you give up a 4-on-2 off of a center ice faceoff when you're up by a goal with 3 minutes left in game 7? I'm not all that excited about Dallas moving on, but I do think that Colorado would have struggled with Landeskog and Johnson out. In the other series, Demko has stolen two games in a row for Vancouver. I'm not really sure who I want to win. Ideally, I'd love to see a Tampa - Vegas finals. I think that would be the most entertaining.
  16. Vegas is playing really well, but I think Colorado could exploit their defense. We'd see some high scoring games, anyway. I don't think Dallas would stand a chance.
  17. With every great play Theodore makes, I hate Bob Murray a little bit more. I'm almost to loathing now.
  18. I know the Ducks need scoring, but Laine is way too streaky for me. When he's not scoring goals, he's a detriment to the team. And I'm not a huge fan of his attitude in the past. Laine is very good, don't get me wrong, but I think he'll cost more than he'll be worth to the Ducks.
  19. I get annoyed with Pierre McGuire when he's riding the jock of DUCKS' players. But to listen to him gush (rightfully so) about Shea Theodore last night was just too much for me to take. Every crisp, smart pass Theodore made was another knife in my gut; I didn't need Pierre waxing eloquent about each one.
  20. Well spoken and well thought out, but there's too much money at stake for owners and players. I certainly don't think a cancelled season is out of the question, but I do think it's at least 50/50 that a season happens, and probably closer to 70/30. They'll figure out a way to make it work so that they can make money.
  21. I guess I don't understand the comparison to baseball. Yeah, there have been some postponed games, but the season is still happening. And it's very unlikely to be canceled. So if the comparison is to baseball, that makes it very likely a season will happen. Of course, Getzlaf could still very well opt out, and I wouldn't blame him. But I think putting an NHL season at 25% is really, really low.
  22. I hadn't considered this possibility, but it sounds plausible, and it makes me really sad. I love Getzlaf; he's probably my second favorite Duck of all time behind Selanne. It would be a shame if his Ducks career ended without the opportunity to say goodbye and celebrate everything he's given to the franchise.
  23. The sad thing is that Karlsson HAS become a good defensive player. I guess I'm speaking before looking at the numbers, but I know Vegas uses him that way. Look at Karlsson's stats once he got to Vegas. Then look at Ryan Kesler's stats from the same age (25 - 27). They're almost the same player.
  24. Right, because no children have been killed or are experiencing potentially long-term health difficulties because they've contracted the disease. I'm glad you're not forcing my children to attend school before we've got this illness under control.
  25. I'm now questioning this. I think it was Garbutt that took out Robidas. Not that it matters. They were both awful.
  • Create New...