Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks

gorbachav5

Members
  • Content Count

    6,759
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    140

Everything posted by gorbachav5

  1. Sure, but if you were then approached by the league and asked what led you to that call, would you throw your linesman under the bus? I haven't reffed in hockey, but I've umpired plenty in baseball, and if I made a call based on what my base umpire saw, I would own that call and take responsibility for it. All I'm saying is that it's conceivable that the referees from that game were given the boot because of their mismanagement of the situation, while the linesmen were allowed to continue.
  2. It falls on the referee to overrule the lineman. So even if the lineman said "I saw a crosscheck," it's the referee's job to determine whether a penalty should result and what that penalty should be.
  3. The point is that Eakins isn't too proud to have learned from his mistakes. One of the big ones he made was alienating everyone around him by trying to revolutionize the team culture overnight. When it didn't work, he had no allies and a bunch of players who didn't respect him. It sounds like he understands that and knows that approach won't work. I've said all along that I don't know if he's the right man for the job. It's not like he's done wonders with the Gulls. The players love him, but the actual performance has been good, not great. I'm confident he'll be better than Carlyle, and I'd rather give Eakins a shot than a retread like Yeo. However, I think there are almost certainly going to be better candidates available. Those candidates might carry more risk because they're unknowns while Eakins is a known quantity. I'm not going to post a long string of censored expletives if he's hired (like I did when Carlyle was rehired), but I'll be a little bummed the Ducks didn't take a chance on an up-and-comer with a higher coaching ceiling. Eakins seems like a good guy though, and there's no denying the current group of youngsters really likes playing for him.
  4. This is not true. They played better over a four-game series. Tampa played better over an 82-game season. I know which sample size I'm trusting.
  5. I could not disagree more with this. There is zero doubt in my mind that Tampa Bay was and is a better team than Columbus. And short of playing 10 more games (at least) between the two teams and watching Columbus win the majority of them in convincing fashion, nothing will convince me that Columbus was the better team. Columbus played their best hockey of the season and Tampa played their worst. It happens in short series. But it doesn't tell us much about the overall quality of either team. Tampa wasn't "arrogant." They had the best roster in the NHL by a large margin. They didn't make pointless trades to "fix" a roster that didn't need fixing. I can't blame them for that. It was smart.
  6. These playoffs are weird. They're definitely not bad, but they're just strange. I'm cool with upsets here and there (especially when they happen to Nashville), but the number of "upsets" this year has been crazy, and not in a good way, in my opinion. Sean McIndoe wrote a good piece about this on The Athletic (subscription). I know the playoffs are fairly random because you get a bunch of good teams with the ability to get hot, but this seems a little TOO random. Three out of four Wild Cards are already moving on, and the fourth just forced a game seven against the defending Cup champions. If you read that piece, I'm definitely a Door #2 guy, and these playoffs have been a bit of a letdown because I want some of the good teams to win just to show that there's order in the world. I like parity to an extent, but this is too much.
  7. Johnny Gaudreau has no idea how to play in the playoffs. He gets hit, pushed around, muscled off the puck by the more physical style of play, and then looks around like a sad, lost puppy. Outside of one game against Vancouver in 2015, he's put up 9 points in 19 games, with no more than one point in any of those games.
  8. Assuming all of the teams currently ahead in their series win, it would be 23. Lightning 22. Calgary 21. Boston 20. San Jose 19. Nashville 18. Pittsburgh 17. Winnipeg 16. Carolina With Dallas vs St. Louis Vegas vs. Colorado Washington vs NYI Columbus vs Toronto If that happens, San Jose will end up at pick 23, no matter who wins any of those series. Also, if that happens, even if St. Louis loses, the highest pick they could get is 18, so that doesn't help. If we want St. Louis to end up at 20, we need San Jose and Nashville both to come back in their series, and then Columbus, Colorado, and St. Louis all to lose their next series.
  9. Martin St. Louis was 5'6", I thought. He is actually listed at 5'8". I thought there was another tiny guy who was pretty good. Theo Fleury, maybe? Checks: Ha! Fleury is listed at 5'6".
  10. Yeah, there's no excuse for Kadri there. That's garbage that I don't want on the Ducks.
  11. If Tampa is going to leave the net open, I don't have any problem with the Blue Jackets scoring into it, despite what the score is. I'm normally one to be sensitive to unsportsmanlike conduct, but this is the playoffs and the Lightning were, arguably, the best team in 25 years. I don't see anything unsportsmanlike about it. That's not to say Duchene is a model of maturity - don't forget, he was one of the guys in the Senators Uber incident - but I don't think the empty net goal is any sort of sign one way or the other.
  12. I didn't watch the whole series, but from everything I've seen and read, they outplayed them. Not by a lot, but they were the better team. After the first period of game 1, Bobrovsky was really good, but he didn't steal them every game.
  13. I do not. I think that was a huge fluke, and Columbus is a very good team that underperformed all season. Cooper is going to get at least one more year.
  14. I think it's too early to write him off. But I don't disagree with you that he was really bad last season. I think average is way overselling it. His trade value right now might still be above zero, but it can't be by much.
  15. From everything I've read, there's not really a can't-miss prospect after you get past Kakko/Hughes. The guys from 3 - 10 are all fairly similar. I don't think it makes sense to give much to move up.
  16. It was in The Athletic. And this happens all the time with young players. It doesn't surprise me at all.
  17. Sprong actually spoke about this in an interview - he needed to develop his defensive game, and Murray wanted him to sit in the pressbox to get a different perspective on how he needed to do that.
  18. He might literally start licking people. Man, I hate Boston. I hope the Leafs sweep that series.
  19. It doesn't at all. I'm talking about the organization, i.e. "the team." If you've seen any of my posts here over the last couple of months, you know that I agree the players will still play hard. The team should strive to continue to win and the fans should be given something they can cheer for, not this garbage we have now where every win sends fans to message boards to complain about how bad their team is at losing on purpose. It's terrible. It's not different at all. Some teams make the playoffs because their conference is weaker. Why would it be inconsistent if the draft carried some of those same implications? I don't see a problem with it.
  20. When you say "might be cool", I assume you mean "will be awful."
  21. If we award playoff spots based on conference strength, I don't see any reason to do differently for the draft. The point is that even after a team has nothing to play for, they continue to try to win. And it has the side benefit that it will be generally true that if you are eliminated earlier, your conference is stronger and you need the help more in order to get back into playoff contention. It's not perfect, but it works and I love the idea that fans get to root for their teams to win at the end of the season.
  22. Your number 1 argument is valid, although I disagree with it. I don't consider the trade deadline any sort of tradition worth keeping around. It's an arbitrary date so that rosters can be set a meaningful time before the playoffs. I do agree that this would decrease the sell off of assets from terrible team to good teams, but it might actually increase the number of legitimate hockey trades that are made. Your number 2 is an incorrect assumption. Detroit actually won the Gold Plan standings this season and they were nowhere near making the postseason. But they continued to play hard, they didn't sell everything at the deadline, and they should be rewarded for that. The Ducks would have gotten a better lottery seed going by this plan. The beauty of the plan is that it is heavily biased toward bad teams (because if you're terrible, you're eliminated early and have lots of opportunities to rack up points) but it encourages teams to continue to try to win games at the end of the season. Players get to play for something and you don't have as great a risk of a Buffalo situation. Fans get to root for their teams to win. I don't think the Gold Plan would completely eliminate tanking, but it would go a long way toward mitigating it and would solve a lot of the issues tanking currently causes while still helping bad teams get better.
  23. Screw tanking. If the Ducks hadn't blown that game to the Blues and the Kings they'd be picking third right now. Or if the Ducks had told their players to just stop playing hard, like I'm sure the Rangers did, maybe they could have managed to finagle themselves into just the right position to pick 2nd. There's just no way to know how these things play out. Hopefully they get a stud at #9.
  24. I'm not sure if you misunderstood my comment, but I hate the Red Wings. I liked the Avs in part because they also hated the Red Wings.
×
×
  • Create New...