Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

liquid13

Expansion Draft

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, nieder said:

His comment was pretty pervy. He's old though, what are you gonna do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DT2008

Where they get drafted is one thing.  What they do when they get there is completely another topic.  For how the Ducks are composed, Manson serves a bigger need than Theo.  He showed sigificant improvement past season and plays with the right amount of edge and physicality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AustinDuck27 said:

We need to rescue Perron.

With the cap space now available I will be very happy with perron AND eaves. They both have good chemistry and we can keep out defense intact for another run. Plus we just added potentially 40 goals between them. 

And if Perry and Vats are back to normal, the ducks could be adding another 60 goals to their roster next season combined. And since I'm greedy, we sign bonino as our 3c and all the sudden we are very deep on paper ? 

Perron-getzlaf-perry

Cogliano-kesler-silfverberg

Eaves-bonino-rakell

Ritchie-Vermette-shaw 

I haven't crunched the numbers yet but might as well go all in while having despres, stoner and bernier off the books. No significant contracts coming up, perron with two more years with Bieksa and Vermette coming off the books in one allows us to slowly bring in the youth and re-sign fowler and can flip Vats at any time. 

Fowler-montour

Lindholm-manson

Larsson-bieksa

to start the season with Vats out longer. But the ducks very well could be an absolute force this year if cards are played right. But alas this is just my pipe dream. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Spike1981 said:

If you look only ad ED, it was a good move and I happy they don't give an other high draft pick as CBJ, PiTS or NYI did it.

but as AustinDuck27 said, it was a little lack of pre-ED-work.

If you trade Vatanen for a forward, who will miss the half next season, and Bieksa waived his NTC, Manson would be protected and the traded Forward also would be protected instead of Vermette.

1 week and we lost 3 defenders. now the depth isn't no more here. we haven't two of them the half season (Lindholm and Vatanen)...

who are our defenders to start the season?

Fowler, Montour, Manson, Bieksa and I think Larson will be the 5th, but who is the 6th? imagine an other injury... so we have to sign a BU-Goalie, at least 1 defender and 1-2 Forward (Eaves and if ist possible a scorer)..

now we have no depth in offense and no depth in defense... thats the bad news after the ED.

 

Lindholm isn't expected to miss much of the season. Vats is the one with the more serious injury by all accounts.

You're right that we lost some depth, but I think it was a foregone conclusion that Despres had already played his last game for Anaheim, and Stoner was either gone this off-season or next. Really the only depth piece we lost is Theodore.

We still have kids coming up through the system that are going to be good in a few years, we just might not have the same immediate depth that we did before.

The point about there being very few trading partners before the draft for Vats has been beaten to death already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm only just now reading through how this stuff unfolded, but this specific piece reeks of NHL backdoor shenanigans:

Quote

https://www.nhl.com/news/vegas-golden-knights-seem-to-achieve-twin-objectives-at-expansion-draft/c-290058334?tid=289242400

"He wanted to come here," McPhee told the Vegas fans Wednesday, drawing cheers. "He kept letting us know that he wanted to come here. And so Pittsburgh made sure that it happened. They gave us a pick to make sure it happened, and it was going to happen anyway."

Why would you give them a pick if it was gonna happen anyway??? Come on now, this isn't kindergarden. I wouldn't be surprised Fleury is gone at the Draft, after July 1st or the TDL. And half of the players they selected, too. Theo's gonna stick, though. Still, a smaller price to pay to get done with this horrible affair, Bob did good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what PITS (2nd rounder 2020), CBJ (1st and 2nd) and NYI (1st and 2nd and Bischoff) gave I don't understand, way too much.. also Tampa with 2nd, 4nd and Gussev too much...

only thing that BM may can do better is pre-ED-Trades... one trade (Vatanen) and then Bieksa waive his NTC and protect Manson, so Theodore would be still here and we lose one of Wagner/Shaw/Kerdiles... good, if they wanted Eaves, then BM should made an trade...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points everyone.  

I'll just supplement the above by saying that trading Vats at any time that it could have happened prior to the ED would have been much worse for the team.  If there's even a 50-50 chance that Vats gets healthy and plays like his better self for us starting in December, then trading Theo for that chance was a solid, solid move.

And, Stoner isn't chump change.  If Stoner could have upped his game a bit, imagine how imposing it would have been to have him and Manson on a D-line?  Sheesh.  Still, we did pretty well without him last season, and the extra cap space is very welcome.

BM still has some work to do to use that cap space to fill some holes THIS season, and to lock in some players going forward, but while there might be some ideal choice selection that would have made you happier for the team's prospects, I think if you measure BM's results this ED against ANY of the other GMs, on paper at least, he's probably at least in the top 5.  I bet the other GMs would rank him very high as well.

If you look at your own best/ideal trade scenario, at least take a few seconds to evaluate whether your expected trade partner would have really allowed you to consummate the trade you wanted; take a few seconds to see if the trade partner had the protection space and the cap and the desire (were they conference or division competitors?) and everything else lined up to do the trade.

And, frankly, if you're lumping Despres into this evaluation of BM, a player whose disposition was pretty much determined BEFORE there was any talk of an ED, then you're really just saying you don't like BM based on your perception of his career track record, and not really focusing on the ED (or, really, on the team's performance relative to most of the rest of the league over the past few years).  

If Theo turns into a tall Scott Neidermeyer 2 seasons from now, then rather than think badly of BM, I'll probably just think that Theo was placed in a better environment at LV and was allowed or was trained to become the type of player he wasn't making progress on while a Duck.  Team needs and a player's skill need to match up for magic like Neidermeyer to happen.  Once it does happen, the best players can carry that magic with them from team to team, but it has to be nurtured, and based on Theo's development last year (which wasn't all negative by any means), his magic wasn't being properly nurtured here.  It didn't help that he was bouncing up and down as much as he was, but that was part of what the team needed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Fisix said:

If you look at your own best/ideal trade scenario, at least take a few seconds to evaluate whether your expected trade partner would have really allowed you to consummate the trade you wanted; take a few seconds to see if the trade partner had the protection space and the cap and the desire (were they conference or division competitors?) and everything else lined up to do the trade.

 

I feel like you and I have been alone on an island with regard to this point, Fisix. There's a reason there were almost no trades that involved player-for-player prior to the ED. Deals like that are already extremely difficult in the cap era. Add in the crazy ED/exposure requirements, and now we hear that teams were bound by an agreement with GMGM that if they struck a deal prior to the ED with Vegas that they wouldn't make ANY other moves that might impact who Vegas could/would select in the ED. Meaning that if a team struck a deal with Vegas to protect one of their own players, they couldn't later make a trade for a player from another team, because that would affect who the other team exposed. The ripple effect of that alone probably killed off any remaining chance of a trade. And it didn't help that the league set a deadline of June 12th for asking a player to waive their NMC, but allowed until June 16th (one day before the ED lists were due) for the player to make the decision whether they wanted to waive it. I get that people are unhappy BM didn't make a trade to better manipulate our exposure list, but it just wasn't in the cards. I really believe that we should be relieved that we didn't lose a more important piece than Theo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dtsdlaw said:

I feel like you and I have been alone on an island with regard to this point, Fisix. There's a reason there were almost no trades that involved player-for-player prior to the ED. Deals like that are already extremely difficult in the cap era. Add in the crazy ED/exposure requirements, and now we hear that teams were bound by an agreement with GMGM that if they struck a deal prior to the ED with Vegas that they wouldn't make ANY other moves that might impact who Vegas could/would select in the ED. Meaning that if a team struck a deal with Vegas to protect one of their own players, they couldn't later make a trade for a player from another team, because that would affect who the other team exposed. The ripple effect of that alone probably killed off any remaining chance of a trade. And it didn't help that the league set a deadline of June 12th for asking a player to waive their NMC, but allowed until June 16th (one day before the ED lists were due) for the player to make the decision whether they wanted to waive it. I get that people are unhappy BM didn't make a trade to better manipulate our exposure list, but it just wasn't in the cards. I really believe that we should be relieved that we didn't lose a more important piece than Theo.

I don't know if you saw it, but McPhee actually extracted a pledge from any GMs he did business with that they would not make a trade with another team prior to the ED.  So it wasn't just difficult; McPhee made it impossible to do without breaking a pact.  An informal pact, but a pact nonetheless.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/article/how-mcphee-held-gms-hostage-to-acquire-assets-1.785884

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gorbachav5 said:

I don't know if you saw it, but McPhee actually extracted a pledge from any GMs he did business with that they would not make a trade with another team prior to the ED.  So it wasn't just difficult; McPhee made it impossible to do without breaking a pact.  An informal pact, but a pact nonetheless.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/article/how-mcphee-held-gms-hostage-to-acquire-assets-1.785884

Yeah, that's what I was referencing when I mentioned "that teams were bound by an agreement with GMGM that if they struck a deal prior to the ED with Vegas that they wouldn't make ANY other moves that might impact who Vegas could/would select in the ED."  GMGM really had the other teams over a barrel.  I'm curious now if the GMs will do a lot of deals with him to help him shape his roster, or if they'll now extract a pound of flesh and stymie him at every turn.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...