Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks

Fisix

Members
  • Content Count

    6,387
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Fisix last won the day on September 8 2020

Fisix had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,686 Excellent

1 Follower

About Fisix

  • Rank
    Ultimate Ducks Fan

Recent Profile Visitors

3,512 profile views
  1. he's taking a roster spot or cash or mindspace from some other player who doesn't get taken out of 2/3rds+ of a shortened season. under what metric is he more valuable to this team? for us, he doesn't have any value we can rely on, just ongoing "potential" that's just as ethereal as a 6th round pick. we could have cycled 2-3 additional players through the Show since we've hung on to him. the sad thing is that if his issues are concussion related, we must be running him through the same doctor who handled Despres, with similar results.
  2. why spend more time on him when we can use that time to evaluate a different player that might be durable enough to evaluate on consistent skill level and ability? if there's anything that's fairly consistent with this team, we tend to hang on to personnel longer than we should instead of playing the field a bit more. how long did we hang on to Kase? he's played 2 games for Boston this season, and 6 last season. sure, he played more games for us, but he was always fragile. he had basically one decent season (if we're measuring against forwards from competitive teams). same with Nick Ritchie (I'm focused on Boston for some reason) - he's doing 1/2 a point per game average (half his points came on power play, interesting), but he's -10, and his ratio of PIM:games is above 1:2. I guess that's sort of interesting - NR's PIM:games this season is his best ever, by a fair margin. LOL he played 7 games last season with Boston and had 19 PIM. don't get me started on Despres. anyway, you get the gist. we have a tradition of holding on that hasn't really helped us in the long term. we've dropped a few players we didn't have to that stings now, but relatively few compared to how many we've delayed action on for far too long.
  3. that has to be part of the evaluation - if he can't play long enough to judge him based on his skill, then that's worse than being a (relatively) unskilled player. (separate conversation) - does Yzerman have a good relationship with players, where they want to go where he is, and so with that added pressure from the players (or even just acceptance vs. rejection), those deals get greased more easily? -KW
  4. excellent, then i think that opens up the following possible ED strategy (though team politics might suffer): F - Silf, TT, Lundestrom, RR. D - CF, HL, Manson, Mahura.
  5. lets see if we can confirm this. i know i've read somewhere that Getz being an FA doesn't magically protect him from the ED. i think the deal with FAs who aren't under contract for the next season is that the team with the expiring contract doesn't have to protect them based on an NMC in that player's contract (the NMC expires before the ED, essentially). and, maybe by selecting an FA, Seattle still needs to negotiate a contract price or they've wasted their pick, which can sour the milk a bit (why potentially waste a pick when they can get a sure thing through a roster pick or a deal). but, Seattle can still select them.
  6. Hank has a modified NTC and, apparently, has already asserted it once this season. i don't know for certain, but i also don't think Hank is up for doing BM any favors right now. moreover, TOR had to work a deal with 2 other teams to get Fog... it was a complex deal and would be difficult to replicate with a different player (and Fog is arguably a better add than Hank, where TOR needs him). finally, and this is probably the most important - anyone taking on Hank takes on a multi year contract. Fog is a rental - his contract is up at the end of the season. TOR can't take on any contracts in the ball park of Fog's or Hank's for more than the remainder of this season. so... Hank was never in the running for the Fog transaction. and, more importantly, with the flat cap and the ED coming up, i can't think of a team with something we want in return who would want a multi-year contract like Hank's. so, that's why BM couldn't swing a deal for Hank similar to the Fog transaction.
  7. i just went through the capfriendly list, and we could just go with 8 players (assuming the Shatt doesn't need protection - I'm pretty sure I read that when the trade went through): F - Getz (required by contract?), RR, TT, Lundestrum. D - CF, HL, Manson, Mahura what i don't know is whether Hank and Silf need to be protected because of their NTCs, or if they'd waive. if we need to protect Hank and Silf, then: F - Getz, RR, TT, Lundestrum, Silf, Hank, MaxJ. D - CF, HL, (Mahura or Manson) with the moves BM just made... i think he's setting Seattle up to get Shatt and Fleury (cap sink and prospect) in order to keep off Mahura/Manson. Mahura is a better prospect than Fleury - Mahura is cheaper and younger with a longer cheaper contract, and I think he's better game stats-wise (so far). Larsson was supposed to be the bait, but that didn't materialize, and Hutton didn't step into those shoes either. Now, all we need is Fleury to show at least SOME success on the ice in the remaining games (after we can ice him), and then I think Seattle takes the deal, maybe sweetened by a later-rounds pick. it's either that, or one of the forwards is involved. personally, I'd take MaxJ over any of our defensive rooks. MaxJ is ~Cogs with a little extra swagger, and damn i hope he ends up with a better shot percentage eventually.
  8. Mahura over Manson? not sure we can protect either Mahura or Fleury without a top 3 trade first.
  9. yeah, that was the only thing about TOR signing Fog - they used up their 1st, which meant that they didn't have much they could give us for Getz (if they could work out the financials). frankly, i would have accepted a 1st in 2022 and a prospect, or a 1st in 2022 and a first or second in 2023. i think Getz would have loved to be on that team for their cup run, and we'd have shored up the tail end of our rebuild, either with tradeable picks or another prospect. and, while no team wants to trade away their future picks too heavily... TOR has been waiting forever for a decent postseason performance, and most of their cap present and future is dedicated to young players that, if needed, could be traded for multiple picks back. they surely won't be needing a rebuild within the next 4-5 years, and getting Getz on their team doesn't mess with their ED strategy in any way I can see. but... that team is already ridiculous with young and old talent, and they've basically bent every cap rule to get there already. i could imagine some pretty hefty chirping and maybe even some political ramifications if they load up even more. shrug. i would have rooted for them and Getz.
  10. didn't BM sign the Shatt in a way where we don't have to protect him, contractually? if what i remember is true... i can't imagine any scenario where we waste a protection spot on the Shatt.
  11. i think Shatt and Fleury makes a lot of sense - we'll get to see whether Fleury can hustle pretty much right away, and he and the Shatt getting PP time (and hopefully some positive offensive stats) is good for the ED. Fleury's TOI this season isn't encouraging for a 23 year old, but we'll see. i'm not sure it makes as much sense to put two just-off-IR players together, at least not at first. i'm treating both 42 and 47 as pretty fragile until next preseason. thinking about it, if they want to keep 42, 47 TOI down a bit, they might get paired with Drys and Fleury, which leaves barfy 4-22/Larsson, though maybe Mahura would get cycled in (and we play with 7 D some more games).
  12. amazing how authoritative i sound after reading one of your posts. (aimed at dtslaw, but really applies to a lot who post on this board)
  13. I'd love to see 4-34 committed to for a few games. i don't hold out much hope, because of what's happened before. i think it'll likely be a disappointingly predictable 4-22, but now is the perfect time to see a few 4-47, with 34-42 and 22-Flurey.
  14. now i get it, thanks! so, do we see Larsson every game night from here on out, or does he sit through to next preseason (perhaps on an expansion team or their AHL affiliate)?
×
×
  • Create New...