Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks

dtsdlaw

Members
  • Content Count

    7,193
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    170

Everything posted by dtsdlaw

  1. Sure, but those teams sucked for multiple years. Is that what you’re hoping for from this team? Strip down the whole roster and rebuild from scratch? None of those teams had just one off year like we are.
  2. Ok, first, Nathan Horton was a nice player, but he wasn't exactly a "franchise" type player that the tankers seem to think we are giving up by playing our way out of a top-2 spot. He was also the 3rd overall pick in that infamous 2003 draft, meaning that as much as he turned out to be a solid contributor, drafting him 3rd overall is actually a slight miss in hindsight. If you re-draft that 2003 class, Horton probably falls in the 15-20 range from that draft. Second, neither Horton or Wheeler were drafted by Boston. Horton was drafted by the Panthers and acquired by the Bruins for Wideman, a 1st (15th overall) and a 3rd. And Wheeler was signed by Boston after he Jultzed the Coyotes. If your position is that we should be acquiring top young talent by using assets we already have (i.e. trading current older players + draft picks for younger high-end talent), I'm totally on board. I would LOVE it if the Ducks were acquiring guys like Williams Karlsson and Kyle Palmieri in exchange for over-the-hill vets and scraps instead of the other way around. But that's not really what you've been saying, so I don't think you can point to Horton and Wheeler (or Seguin) to make the case for tanking. That Boston team was built the same way GMBM is likely going to try to build this one - i.e. with good drafting in all rounds and (hopefully) some shrewd trades. I'm confident GMBM can do the former, but we'll see about the latter.
  3. Seguin was an 18-year-old rookie who scored 22 points the year the Bruins won the Cup. Drafting him (after NOT tanking, they got that pick from the Kessel trade) did not provide some major foundation for their Cup run.
  4. The Bruins and Redwings would disagree with the bold. Also, you’re basically just looking at 3 (now 4 after Ovi) teams to make this point (while ignoring Boston and Detroit and a half dozen SC finalists over the past decade who didn’t tank before making the Finals) and the Pens, Hawks, Kings, and Caps were all catastrophically bad for multiple seasons and were built basically from scratch before turning into dynasties. But that’s also the same model that Edmonton, Buffalo and Florida have followed and it hasn’t worked at all for them, has it? Regardless, the Ducks are too talented from top to bottom and the only way the Ducks could follow that model would be to have a fire sale and trade Getzlaf, Gibson, Perry, Fowler, Lindholm, and Rakell to basically start over. But that’s not really what the tankers want, is it? As far as being a lock for a top-5 pick, Carlyle fooled people into thinking this is a bad team. It’s not. It’s actually a pretty good team that just got wrecked by injuries, a horrible system, and a coach that sucked the life and fun out of hockey for his players. If Carlyle had been fired a month earlier, we’d all be here posting about our chances as the #7 seed in the first round against Calgary.
  5. For Eaves sake, I am hoping this is just a ploy to avoid a buy out. Either way, this is not good news at all.
  6. On a related note, Perry sat out the optional morning skate due to a purple nurple.
  7. No faith in Troy Terry, eh Gorb? 😉
  8. ^^ Bryan Murray drafted 10 & 15. Burke sucked at drafting.
  9. Correct! March 2, 2019 v. today: Before: Ducks were 11 points back of the Sabres and even on games (65). Now: Ducks are 2 points back and the Sabres have two games in hand. Before: Ducks were 7 points back of the Rangers and the Ducks had one game in hand. Now: Ducks are even in points and the Rags have two games in hand. Before: Ducks were 6 points back of Edmonton and Vancouver and even on games. Now: The Nucks are 1 point ahead with two games in hand. The Oilers are 2 points ahead with two games in hand. We play both teams next week. Before: Ducks were 1 point back of New Jersey (66) and had one game in hand. Now: Ducks are 6 points ahead and the Devils have one game in hand. With the games in hand I don't know if we'll finish above all of those teams in the final standings, but we are definitely moving in a different direction than they all are. I think we'll jump at least one or two of Buffalo, New York, Edmonton or Vancouver, and no one below us has a prayer of getting more points than the Ducks.
  10. Agreed. I think it’s interesting to note though that the Ducks lost all five games Getzlaf recently missed, and that this team under Bob Murray and with a healthy Getzlaf is 9-4, and could/should be at least 10-3-1 or 11-2 but for the late collapses against Chicago and St Louis. So this is still a very good team when Getzlaf is healthy and engaged (which is also why tanking for a top-3 pick was always a pipe dream as long as Baldy was in the lineup). Getzlaf is still the straw that stirs the drink and the next coach needs to be able to reach him first and foremost. Maybe GMBM should let Getzlaf pick the next coach...
  11. No chance he retires and forfeits the money. More likely he’ll tape all of these messages to the walls of his home gym and use them as motivation to prove everyone wrong next season. That’s just who Kes is.
  12. There are a couple of teams entering full quit mode. For example, Buffalo is 2-10-2 in their last 14 games and haven’t even scored in their last three games. I expect us to pass them and maybe 1 or 2 others. The Ducks are playing decent hockey and seem to be enjoying themselves more now than they have all season. Not so for a few others.
  13. Keeping Shore makes zero sense to me. On LW he’s already behind Rakell, Jones and Ritchie, and we might even see one of Kase or Sprong moved to the left side if everyone stays and all are healthy. Plus, the only reason to keep him as a Center option is if you’re convinced Steel is not an NHL player. Nothing against Shore, but for $2.3M we would need him to be more than he is.
  14. Does that include an Eaves buy-out? I also think they should move Shore’s $2.3M cap hit and let Comtois try to make the roster.
  15. The bolded isn’t true. Take a look at Capfriendly.
  16. Nah, just starting physical therapy a few months early to be ready to start 2019-2020. Or, if you like conspiracy theories, its a ploy to make sure he doesn't get bought out in June. If he's determined by team doctors to be unfit to play now, how do they change that diagnosis in June when the buy-out window rolls around? It'd be darn near impossible. Whereas if he finished the rest of the season, they could say that he was still healthy enough to play at the end of the season so he'd be healthy enough to be bought out. Knowing what a warrior Kesler is, I think it's the first sentence I typed, but this conspiracy theory is not that far-fetched either.
  17. I will be shocked if we don't have a new coach before the draft (which is where trades are likely to go down). The next coach will also be chosen because he is on board with GMBM's vision for the team, not the other way around. We don't have to move a big contract for a player like Reinhart or Wennberg. Bettman says he's expecting an $83M cap for next season, which is a $3.5M rise in the current cap. And an Eaves buy-out plus trading Shore for a pick would net us $3.3M in additional cap space. That right there is enough for even Huberdeau to be acquired in a trade for just draft picks. Capfriendly has us estimated at $4.9M in cap space already next season, with no one up for a raise. So even if no moves are made at all, that means $8.4M in cap space to sign a backup goalie, two 5-7 D-men, and a depth forward. A trade plus and Eaves buy-out will only add to that. So we can definitely add a good player. I also don't know where you get that Monty was traded to help re-sign Silf. Monty was traded because GMBM didn't like his game and because he could get Guhle and a 1st rounder for him.
  18. I gave three options besides UFA. The upcoming draft, our current prospects, or the trade option. You completely glossed over the trade option. You may have noticed I've been pitching the idea of trading for Alex Wennberg a number of places on this board. There are other options out there too, including young players who have high-end potential but aren't hitting their stride for one reason or another (think Reinhart in Buffalo) or other players who just need a change of scenery (think Huberdeau in Florida). Even if GMBM isn't willing/able to move Fowler or Perry, we'll have 3 of the first 37 picks, an excess of youth at the RW and LW positions, and several D prospects currently in the system that could be used to make a significant trade. We'd have enough cap room for a young player like Reinhart or Wennberg too without having to move any of the big salaries, if we were shrewd with clearing some of the smaller ones (i.e. Shore, Eaves, Ritchie). In terms of budget space, with Seattle about to line the Samueli's pockets with their entrance bribe fee, it would be absurd for them to tighten the purse strings after one dismal season. We should all break out the pitchforks and torches is they do that.
  19. Outside of the Ducks, I kind of feel that way about every team near the bottom of the standings. The only lottery team I would be ok with winning is Minnesota, who is going to end up outside the playoffs only because they lost their captain (Koivu) and highest scoring defender (Dumba) to season ending injuries. The Wild also haven't had a top-3 pick since their inaugural season (2000) when they chose Gaborik at #3. I hope they slot in at #2 in this draft right behind us.
  20. The bold is basically how the Coyotes have been running their team for the past decade. I'm not interested in becoming the Coyotes. I want this team to have and KEEP their better players, not their cheaper, more cost-effective players who aren't as good. This isn't Moneyball. Besides, its not Silfverberg who makes it difficult to keep other players. He's a player winning teams need and his new contract is commensurate with his production and matches league-wide salaries for what he brings to the table. It's totally unfair to make Silf out to be some kind of scapegoat for any moves that GMBM might make that you don't approve of. That said, the Ducks aren't in dire straights next season cap-wise anyway, and GMBM wouldn't be adding a Panarin or Skinner from the UFA market even if the team did have money to burn. Our next player of higher end talent will come via the upcoming draft, from our current pool of prospects, or by trading high picks and/or a good player from our current roster. And given the direction GMBM is moving, most likely that new player will be young and not in his prime earning years until after the big-3's salaries come off the books. So this idea that Silfverberg will somehow be responsible for blocking the Ducks ability to add a higher end talent is complete fiction. The two issues are not in any way related.
  21. You seem to be using the term “valuable” as a synonym for “cost-effective”. I can’t argue with that. Ritchie is more cost-effective. He’s not more valuable in the traditional sense though. A better player is more valuable than a lesser player, especially when that better player has a skill set that isn’t redundant. If GMBM put both on the trade block tomorrow, every single GM in the league would offer more value in return for Silf than for Ritchie. So I’m struggling with your use of the term “valuable” here. Your use of the term is also making an air tight case for trading Perry. Fowler too. Both guys significantly more expensive than Silf, and both don’t score points at a rate anywhere near what their paychecks would suggest.
  22. I think the bolded is crazy talk. Having Silf or Henrique out of the lineup sends this team into scramble mode with respect to line combos and match-ups. Having Ritchie out of the lineup means that Carter Rowney probably has to switch and play on his off wing. If Ritchie were gone next season, this team would not miss a beat. On the contrary, Silf's is a unique skill set on this team. We do not have another winger who excels at the 200' game who can also consistently pot 20 goals. A winning team needs that type of player. You can't just play end-to-end hockey with the top offensive teams and expect to win playoff series. I understand the argument from people who wanted to continue to suck for a couple of seasons that trading Silf was a better long-term option for accumulating high draft picks, but if we want to be contenders again soon (which I think we will be again next season) Silf's skill set is indispensable for this team. Especially in the playoffs, where Silf has been pretty outstanding at both locking down opposing top lines and on the score sheet. So if Ritchie's redundant skill set is moved solely because Silf is still on this team, it's not a shame at all. It's the right decision.
  23. It's still a 10-game sample for a 19-year-old rookie playing in Randy Carlyle's "new" system during the first month of this abomination of a season. His fancy stats for that sample size are about as meaningful as Dan Sexton's magical two-weeks in December 2009. It's ridiculous to even bring them up as a knock against him. IMO, this is the best Ritchie we are going to get. He's a 12-15 goal/year grinder who has soft hands but who doesn't really play with much speed, which is concerning because he has really dialed back his physical/hitting game. It's great that he can pass the puck a bit, but we drafted him to be a top-6 power forward who can pot 20-25+ and wear down defenses, but he's obviously not that guy. If you want him to stick around as a 3rd or 4th line low-cost plug until he's ready to file for arbitration, I guess that's ok by me as long as he doesn't block younger players (with more complete skill sets and higher ceilings) from getting minutes. I still think it's in the best long-term interests of the team to move on from him (as long as a solid asset can be acquired for him), but we can agree to disagree on this one. We'll just have to wait and see how it plays out this summer.
  24. I agreed whole-heartedly with what you wrote above, which is why I can't understand why you bother bringing up the bolded part below. The Ducks were also without Getzlaf for 5/10 of Comtois' NHL games, and the whole team had lousy possession stats for pretty much the entirety of Carlyle's tenure in 2018-19. So I don't see how his possession stats from October mean much of anything, or his confusion about playing in a newly-implemented, extremely convoluted Carlyle system that was clearly broken from the get-go. You can't say the Carlyle effect exists and then turn around and ding a 19-year-old rookie because he suffered from it.
  25. I'm not usually one to fawn over prospects, but I've seen enough of Comtois (2G/5A in 10 NHL games) to see that he is going to be a legit NHL talent. He's got good hands and a true scorer's touch, he forechecks, he backchecks, he hits, he looked good on the PP, and he's not afraid to drop the gloves and stick up for his teammates. He would be in Anaheim already (or at a minimum San Diego if he was 4 months older) if not for the stupid rule about returning players to Juniors if they weren't 20 by September (he's a January birthday). With Ritchie, you've also got a guy who sat out part of a season following his ELC. At least with Rakell and Lindholm, GMBM got them signed well into their UFA eligibility. But Ritchie is due for another contract in two years and his QO will need to be at least $2M. He'll also be arbitration eligible by then, and does anyone here actually think that a guy who is willing to sit out part of an NHL season after his ELC won't go straight to arbitration as soon as he's eligible? He is a GM's headache waiting to happen.
×
×
  • Create New...