Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, nieder said:

Shea Weber in 2012.

I would like to see more offer sheets, it makes the offseason a bit more lively.

I don't think Philly cared about screwing with Nashville's cap since they were in different conferences, but Montreal and Carolina are in the same conference and Carolina beat out Montreal for a wildcard spot in the 2019 playoffs by 3 points, and I'm sure Bergevin had that in mind when he gave Aho the offer sheet.

I agree that it would be great to see more offer sheets. Especially in a flat cap era, where teams could really jerk around with their conference rivals by offer sheeting their best RFAs. It's not like rivals trade with each other very often anyway, so if you make your rival team's GM upset by offer sheeting one of their best young players, what do you really have to lose?

Edited by dtsdlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't afford to sign another high-cost defenseman while having Fowler and his expensive contract on the roster. Plus Lindholm is due to big pay raise after next season. One of them have to be traded. The common sense tell me it should be Fowler - older, non-physical player with no leadership skills. But our GM not always does things per common sense.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, FanSince1993 said:

We can't afford to sign another high-cost defenseman while having Fowler and his expensive contract on the roster. Plus Lindholm is due to big pay raise after next season. One of them have to be traded. The common sense tell me it should be Fowler - older, non-physical player with no leadership skills. But our GM not always does things per common sense.

But there are some rumors are out there Lindholm may walk. Something about where his girl lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha ok i see i see (ive never had so many respond to my comment lol)...maybe it's just me then who views offer sheets as annoying :P  ...but yes, interesting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Eichel stuff....

If I'm BM -- and Eichel looks to be OK -- I'm offering:

3rd Overall, 1 recent prospect from late 1st round/early 2nd round, 1 of Steel/Jones, Rakell

That's reasonable, right? For both sides? I think it's on BM to sell these players as still developing and the potential they have, and that Rakell had an off year.

But I look at that offer and feel it's basically all futures with a younger roster player that still has much to develop and a roster player in their prime. I dunno...and theyre all within that "1st round" window

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ike8228 said:

But there are some rumors are out there Lindholm may walk. Something about where his girl lives.

They broke up.

  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ike8228 said:

But there are some rumors are out there Lindholm may walk. Something about where his girl lives.

Who would blame him lol? Yeah, Lindholm walking has always been a very real possibility (sans his personal life) which is why they should move him this offseason if they want him back but he doesn't sign an extension. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heiskanen locked up at 8yrs x $8.45M. That pretty much ensures Makar will be a $10M player, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:

Heiskanen locked up at 8yrs x $8.45M. That pretty much ensures Makar will be a $10M player, no?

I would say that COL will probably offer him Rantanen's contract at $9.25 ml for 8 years.  That doesn't make him the highest paid player on the roster - just tied (!) - and it helps when MacKinnon's contrat comes due, and to a lesser extent helps negotiations with Landeskog.

Plus, any offer sheet would not really beat that deal, because they can only be 7 years. So, to match that, or just beat it,, a team would have to offer $10.6 mil, or better.

He's gonna get paid, even if he takes a discount to give them cap flexibility.

Edited by tommer-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

Rumors the Ducks are circling back on Eichel. Oh dear lord, nooooooo! Disconnect Murray’s phone line and wi-fi connection!

The #3 pick would be in there, for sure. I'm okay with that.

I don't see how Drysdale could be in a package, seeing as how they just lost Fleury.

Not a chance Zegras would be in there. Makes no sense to trade a high-end young C for a high-end young C when you have a dearth of high-end young C's.

So maybe this year's #3 overall, next year's first, Sam Steel or Isac Lundestrom and maybe another asset? I don't know...

Edited by tommer-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:

The #3 pick would be in there, for sure. I'm okay with that.

I don't see how Drysdale could be in a package, seeing as how they just lost Fleury.

Not a chance Zegras would be in there. Makes no sense to trade a young C for a young C when you have a dearth of young C's.

So maybe this year's #3 overall, next year's first, Sam Steel or Isac Lundestrom and maybe another asset? I don't know...

yeah id be ok with that, too. like ive said in other posts, this is the draft to give up the #3 spot. If it involves NEXT years first round, too....id be a little less into it...

by all means take steel though haha

i wonder if Bob could make a play to get a later 1st rounder for 2021 if we give up the #3....or a mid first rounder...although that's just me wishing knowing that'll be unlikely.

Unless we can grab the rangers #16 for FrenchyD???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:

The #3 pick would be in there, for sure. I'm okay with that.

I don't see how Drysdale could be in a package, seeing as how they just lost Fleury.

Not a chance Zegras would be in there. Makes no sense to trade a high-end young C for a high-end young C when you have a dearth of high-end young C's.

So maybe this year's #3 overall, next year's first, Sam Steel or Isac Lundestrom and maybe another asset? I don't know...

If this is really happening and BM has no intention of moving Zegras & Drysdale I´m pretty sure our package includes #3, Comtois (would hate to lose him) & Henrique (cap purposes, chemistry with Comtois in the WC & buffalo possibly losing Reinhart).

They draft beniers at #1 and Power at #3 should seattle pass on him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DucksFan_08 said:

If this is really happening and BM has no intention of moving Zegras & Drysdale I´m pretty sure our package includes #3, Comtois (would hate to lose him) & Henrique (cap purposes, chemistry with Comtois in the WC & buffalo possibly losing Reinhart).

They draft beniers at #1 and Power at #3 should seattle pass on him. 

I would make that deal, depending upon what the 4th asset was. I wouldn't want to include next year's first in that package. Comtois is going to be a goal scorer.

I'm not sure BUF would want Henrique back, but maybe to make the $$$ work better he would have to be in there.

Share this post


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

The #3 pick would be in there, for sure. I'm okay with that.

I don't see how Drysdale could be in a package, seeing as how they just lost Fleury.

Not a chance Zegras would be in there. Makes no sense to trade a high-end young C for a high-end young C when you have a dearth of high-end young C's.

So maybe this year's #3 overall, next year's first, Sam Steel or Isac Lundestrom and maybe another asset? I don't know...

Murray trading next year’s first would give me an aneurism. You’re giving up at least the 3OA, Comtois, Perreault and Henrique which is still nuts for the Ducks to give up, imo 

If he can get Eichel for Deslauriers straight up, then ok, go for it.

funny enough, the Ducks Twitter is mostly them doing profiles on top prospects and the third overall pick. Lots of mixed signals lol

 

 

Edited by BombaysTripleDeke
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tommer-1 said:

I don't see how Drysdale could be in a package, seeing as how they just lost Fleury.

Why would a half-decent 3rd pairing guy have any impact on what is done with a future solid star?

I hope he's not traded, either way, but this sentence just stopped me in my tracks a bit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gotchabari said:

Why would a half-decent 3rd pairing guy have any impact on what is done with a future solid star?

I hope he's not traded, either way, but this sentence just stopped me in my tracks a bit.

So going from D depth of:

 

Fowler, Lindholm, Manson, Shattenkirk, Fleury, Drysdale, Larsson  /  Mahura, Benoit, Guhle

 

To:

Fowler, Lindholm, Manson, Shattenkirk, Larsson, Mahura, Benoit  /  Guhle, Drew, Andersson

 

is the same in your eyes?

 

And Fleury was not a 3rd pairing guy with ANA, and is far from half-decent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

Murray trading next year’s first would give me an aneurism. You’re giving up at least the 3OA, Comtois, Perreault and Henrique which is still nuts for the Ducks to give up, imo 

If he can get Eichel for Deslauriers straight up, then ok, go for it.

funny enough, the Ducks Twitter is mostly them doing profiles on top prospects and the third overall pick. Lots of mixed signals lol

 

 

yes, agreed. next years first needs to be protected AT LEAST if we are giving it up. ... and i think the twitter account is just doing what they would be doing if there were no rumors...I don't think they know anything that's going on behind closed doors...might even know less than some of us lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tommer-1 said:

So going from D depth of:

 

Fowler, Lindholm, Manson, Shattenkirk, Fleury, Drysdale, Larsson  /  Mahura, Benoit, Guhle

 

To:

Fowler, Lindholm, Manson, Shattenkirk, Larsson, Mahura, Benoit  /  Guhle, Drew, Andersson

 

is the same in your eyes?

 

And Fleury was not a 3rd pairing guy with ANA, and is far from half-decent.

Why does thw roster have to stay the same.  He didn't even PLAY much in Carolina, so was a third liner ONLY in Anaheim, and that was because Lindholm and Manson were hurt for most of it.

Why would you not replace a replaceable player through trade?  Why is the depth chart fixed because you lost someone off the bottom of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jasoaks said:

yes, agreed. next years first needs to be protected AT LEAST if we are giving it up. ... and i think the twitter account is just doing what they would be doing if there were no rumors...I don't think they know anything that's going on behind closed doors...might even know less than some of us lol

Our 2021, 2022 and 2023 first round picks shouldn't be going anywhere, IMO. The Ducks are likely to be butt next year and there's no guarantee they make a quantum leap to the playoffs by 2023, so it would be nice if we kept our chance to land Bedard or Michkov. 

I just think it will look a bit funny if they touted all these potential picks with the 3rd overall (first top-5 pick in 16 years) only to trade it away. I'm hyped for the draft and hope that we have a pick to make tomorrow!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

Our 2021, 2022 and 2023 first round picks shouldn't be going anywhere, IMO. The Ducks are likely to be butt next year and there's no guarantee they make a quantum leap to the playoffs by 2023, so it would be nice if we kept our chance to land Bedard or Michkov. 

I just think it will look a bit funny if they touted all these potential picks with the 3rd overall (first top-5 pick in 16 years) only to trade it away. I'm hyped for the draft and hope that we have a pick to make tomorrow!

I wouldn't mind losing 3rd overall in an Eichel deal if it's healthy Eichel and depending on what the rest of the package looks like. That's what bothers me more. But I think it's safe to say 3rd overall won't be as good as a healthy Jack Eichel. 

Having said this I still prefer BM to just let this one pass. We have some decent looking prospects coming up in the not too distant future and we're in a prime spot for a possibly franchise changing lottery pick next year. 
Let us suck one more year. Add a couple of bad contracts in exchange for picks and strike next year in the draft and free agency. Contender in 22-23, Stanley Cup in 23-24 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DucksFan_08 said:

I wouldn't mind losing 3rd overall in an Eichel deal if it's healthy Eichel and depending on what the rest of the package looks like. That's what bothers me more. But I think it's safe to say 3rd overall won't be as good as a healthy Jack Eichel. 

Having said this I still prefer BM to just let this one pass. We have some decent looking prospects coming up in the not too distant future and we're in a prime spot for a possibly franchise changing lottery pick next year. 
Let us suck one more year. Add a couple of bad contracts in exchange for picks and strike next year in the draft and free agency. Contender in 22-23, Stanley Cup in 23-24 😄

Preaching to the choir! 🙏We don’t even need to try and suck! Just load up on assets and start pulling the trigger next summer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DucksFan_08 said:

I wouldn't mind losing 3rd overall in an Eichel deal if it's healthy Eichel and depending on what the rest of the package looks like. That's what bothers me more. But I think it's safe to say 3rd overall won't be as good as a healthy Jack Eichel. 

Having said this I still prefer BM to just let this one pass. We have some decent looking prospects coming up in the not too distant future and we're in a prime spot for a possibly franchise changing lottery pick next year. 
Let us suck one more year. Add a couple of bad contracts in exchange for picks and strike next year in the draft and free agency. Contender in 22-23, Stanley Cup in 23-24 😄

thats certainly the safe way to go.... if we make the trade for Eichel with our 3rd and don't lose any of our main young prospects...then it'll be easy as hell to see if it was the right move. We can see how the players we used to have will do and will see how Eichel does with us. If he flourishes with us, then it was worth it. If he doesn't...and the other players do, well....fans wont be too happy lol

But the other way around...Eichel goes somewhere else and flourishes -- well, impossible to know if he would have here. Still could have been injured. If our #3 pick is a bust...oh well. We also would never know who the other players would have been so it's just impossible to compare what could have happened if we did make the trade in this scenario.

If we can get Eichel with our 3rd and not give up Z, Dry, Gibson, Comtois, Terry, and next years 1st rounder...id say go for it! Give up Rakell, Rico, Lundestrom, Steel, Jones, Perrault, Tracey, or whoever else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DucksFan_08 said:

I wouldn't mind losing 3rd overall in an Eichel deal if it's healthy Eichel and depending on what the rest of the package looks like. That's what bothers me more. But I think it's safe to say 3rd overall won't be as good as a healthy Jack Eichel. 

Having said this I still prefer BM to just let this one pass. We have some decent looking prospects coming up in the not too distant future and we're in a prime spot for a possibly franchise changing lottery pick next year. 
Let us suck one more year. Add a couple of bad contracts in exchange for picks and strike next year in the draft and free agency. Contender in 22-23, Stanley Cup in 23-24 😄

Unless there's another year of season ending injuries to a # of key players, by default we should be better next year. We'll have a full year with Zegras and Drysdale.  Unless trades occur, a healthy Lindholm, Manson, Silf. Assume continued growth with Lundestrom, Jones, Comtois, Terry, and hopefully Steel. We have new coaches to improve the PP and PK. The lottery gods never shine down on the Ducks, why should next year be any different? We couldn't jump to #1 this draft, not gonna happen next year. No way I see this team a bottom feeder next season. May not make the playoffs, but don't see them bottom 5.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, dukitup said:

Unless there's another year of season ending injuries to a # of key players, by default we should be better next year. We'll have a full year with Zegras and Drysdale.  Unless trades occur, a healthy Lindholm, Manson, Silf. Assume continued growth with Lundestrom, Jones, Comtois, Terry, and hopefully Steel. We have new coaches to improve the PP and PK. The lottery gods never shine down on the Ducks, why should next year be any different? We couldn't jump to #1 this draft, not gonna happen next year. No way I see this team a bottom feeder next season. May not make the playoffs, but don't see them bottom 5.

I understand what your´re saying and I actually agree with you. We have no reason to suck as badly as we did this past season but Eakins still runs the team. And that alone gives me reason to believe we´ll continue the suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, dukitup said:

Unless there's another year of season ending injuries to a # of key players, by default we should be better next year. We'll have a full year with Zegras and Drysdale.  Unless trades occur, a healthy Lindholm, Manson, Silf. Assume continued growth with Lundestrom, Jones, Comtois, Terry, and hopefully Steel. We have new coaches to improve the PP and PK. The lottery gods never shine down on the Ducks, why should next year be any different? We couldn't jump to #1 this draft, not gonna happen next year. No way I see this team a bottom feeder next season. May not make the playoffs, but don't see them bottom 5.

We should be better because they can’t be much worse. Though isn’t last season just a continuation of the decline that started two years prior? The lottery Gods haven’t shined on us yet but we are sure going to give them a chance to do so. The playoff gap is way too large for them to close this year regardless of moves they make, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:


why can’t we do this?? I’d Manson’s bags for this kind of a return!

What exactly do you think Manson's value is? Risto has been a consistent 40+ point D-man on a terrible team, and even then this looks like a substantial overpay. If Bob could get a 1st, a 2nd, and a former 2nd rounder for Manson, I'm sure he'd do it. But that's a pipe dream.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...