Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks
Fisix

Listening to Bob M this morning.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, gorbachav5 said:

I think the Ducks would be better served spending either Silf or Henrique's money, along with additional funds, on a guy who can put the puck in the net more than either of them can.  Ritchie at $1.9 million is good value.  Silf and Henrique at $5+ million are not.  They're fine players and add something to the team, but that money can be better spent on players who will do more to move the needle.  They're not BAD value, they're just not good value.  On a team with a few guys making a ton of money without contributing elite production, Ritchie is a more valuable asset.

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.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there's also a more comprehensive value metric worth thinking about when talking about a player like Ritchie. 

each player has a salary/season cost, but they also have a 1/23 of the roster cost. 

sometimes that 1/23 cost is too expensive, no matter how cheap the salary/season cost is.

Share this post


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

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.

If we want to change terms, that's fine.  Silf is a better player, yes, but I'd rather have Ritchie on his contract.  My main issue is that the Ducks desperately need higher end talent.  To get it, they'll either have to sign it or trade for it (or get lucky and draft it), and either way, it's going to be expensive.  Ritchie on his contract allows us to afford it.  Silf on his makes that difficult, unless he's one of the players going the other way.

As for Perry, he has a NMC.  He's not going anywhere.  I don't really consider that an option.  But yes, he's one of the least valuable or lease cost-effective players on the team.

Fowler is an option to be traded, but the Ducks are now very light on top 4 d-men.  They have Lindholm, Manson (who struggled this year), and Fowler.  If you're going to dump Fowler, you'd better add something to get an even better defenseman in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:

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.

Don't touch Fowler and Perry. The are the LEGENDS. I made a couple critical comments about them few weeks ago and got a flurry of negative responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FanSince1993 said:

Don't touch Fowler and Perry. The are the LEGENDS. I made a couple critical comments about them few weeks ago and got a flurry of negative responses.

Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, gorbachav5 said:

If we want to change terms, that's fine.  Silf is a better player, yes, but I'd rather have Ritchie on his contract.  My main issue is that the Ducks desperately need higher end talent.  To get it, they'll either have to sign it or trade for it (or get lucky and draft it), and either way, it's going to be expensive.  Ritchie on his contract allows us to afford it.  Silf on his makes that difficult, unless he's one of the players going the other way.

As for Perry, he has a NMC.  He's not going anywhere.  I don't really consider that an option.  But yes, he's one of the least valuable or lease cost-effective players on the team.

Fowler is an option to be traded, but the Ducks are now very light on top 4 d-men.  They have Lindholm, Manson (who struggled this year), and Fowler.  If you're going to dump Fowler, you'd better add something to get an even better defenseman in return.

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FanSince1993 said:

Don't touch Fowler and Perry. The are the LEGENDS. I made a couple critical comments about them few weeks ago and got a flurry of negative responses.

Legends?.....They need to do alot to earn to be called Ducks Legends.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

Share this post


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

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.

I think you've missed my point entirely.  The point of not re-signing Silf is to get better talent in the door.  The team needs to get better.  Silf doesn't do that, but he takes up a significant amount of cap space.  That's the reality.  If you think the only higher quality player we're getting in the next couple years is from the draft, then we either better get lucky with ping pong balls (or scouting) or some of our young guys better take unexpected leaps.  Otherwise, we'll improve next year under a new coach and compete for a playoff spot but won't be anywhere near a division or conference title contender.  

The team could get back to being a contender very quickly, but the only way to do so is by adding high end talent.  That's the difference between what I'm proposing and the comparison to the Coyotes.  The Coyotes never used their cap space for elite players.  The Ducks need to do that, but they don't have much cap space left.  Or budget space, if the Samuelis tighten things up after a dismal season.

Share this post


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

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.

I don't think anyone wants to be the Yotes. The situations are way different. They don't spend nearly as much as the ducks, which is why they like good players on cheap contracts. I'm not in favour of trading Ritchie but if an opportunity arises then I'd be fine with that too. I'm not happy with the way the ducks use their assets. The player hasn't reached his full potential and we trade him a la Palmieri. The same applies to Richie. You can't say that he didn't take a step forward this year from the one before. Keep him for at least another year then we can evaluate what we have with him. We're not cup contenders with our without him at this point so I don't see why it's a pressing issue to trade him. 

I also think that we will be making the playoffs for the next few years until the big three contracts expire. Then we can set ourselves up to really make a push to compete for the cup. Unless Kesler goes on LTIR for the rest of his contract, we aren't going to be able to do much. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, gorbachav5 said:

I think you've missed my point entirely.  The point of not re-signing Silf is to get better talent in the door.  The team needs to get better.  Silf doesn't do that, but he takes up a significant amount of cap space.  That's the reality.  If you think the only higher quality player we're getting in the next couple years is from the draft, then we either better get lucky with ping pong balls (or scouting) or some of our young guys better take unexpected leaps.  Otherwise, we'll improve next year under a new coach and compete for a playoff spot but won't be anywhere near a division or conference title contender.  

The team could get back to being a contender very quickly, but the only way to do so is by adding high end talent.  That's the difference between what I'm proposing and the comparison to the Coyotes.  The Coyotes never used their cap space for elite players.  The Ducks need to do that, but they don't have much cap space left.  Or budget space, if the Samuelis tighten things up after a dismal season.

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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making any trades without bringing in a new coach first to evaluate his team doesn't make sense to me. There isn't any urgency to make moves. The Ducks are not a Cup contender. Besides that, the Ducks don't have a ton of cap space. Some of that will be eaten up if Miller is re-signed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

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.

 

I think we’d have to move a big contract out either via trade and/or buyout Kesler to add that a key piece. Plus, a new coach isn’t going to give this team the necessary scoring to actually contend. If the Ducks get a lottery pick then it’s a whole new situation. The Ducks aren’t contending while not getting production from guys Kesler or Perry so I think more money is getting moved out one way or another. I mean, they moved montour to help get the space to re-sign Silf. I just don’t know what Murray’s plan is. We need our prospects to be good but where is Terry going to get the NHL minutes next year? Or Sprong?

The draft could be a game changer if we get a lottery pick, but outside of that we’re not likely to get an impact player to contribute next year.

Share this post


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

Making any trades without bringing in a new coach first to evaluate his team doesn't make sense to me. There isn't any urgency to make moves. The Ducks are not a Cup contender. Besides that, the Ducks don't have a ton of cap space. Some of that will be eaten up if Miller is re-signed.

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.

7 minutes ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

I think we’d have to move a big contract out either via trade and/or buyout Kesler to add that a key piece. Plus, a new coach isn’t going to give this team the necessary scoring to actually contend. If the Ducks get a lottery pick then it’s a whole new situation. The Ducks aren’t contending while not getting production from guys Kesler or Perry so I think more money is getting moved out one way or another. I mean, they moved montour to help get the space to re-sign Silf. I just don’t know what Murray’s plan is. We need our prospects to be good but where is Terry going to get the NHL minutes next year? Or Sprong?

The draft could be a game changer if we get a lottery pick, but outside of that we’re not likely to get an impact player to contribute next year.

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. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I think we’d have to move a big contract out either via trade and/or buyout Kesler to add that a key piece. Plus, a new coach isn’t going to give this team the necessary scoring to actually contend. If the Ducks get a lottery pick then it’s a whole new situation. The Ducks aren’t contending while not getting production from guys Kesler or Perry so I think more money is getting moved out one way or another. I mean, they moved montour to help get the space to re-sign Silf. I just don’t know what Murray’s plan is. We need our prospects to be good but where is Terry going to get the NHL minutes next year? Or Sprong?

The draft could be a game changer if we get a lottery pick, but outside of that we’re not likely to get an impact player to contribute next year.

I don't disagree with buying out Kesler at all but the owners said Bob could do whatever he needed to do but then I guess he said they don't like buyouts. Kind of a mixed message to me. I don't agree with trading Ritchie, yet, or Fowler or really anybody until we actually see this team in a system that works. My concern moving forward is Bob's new coach. He's missed out on some good ones. He needs someone who can get the best out of the kids. If Perry's minutes go down to give Sprong or Terry more then that's life.

If we get Hughes in the draft, then where does he fit? He's another LW. Kakko I guess is a LW playing on the off side. Same with Podkolzin. Dach and Couzens could just turn out to RW's. Turcotte, I think is the only C in the top 5 or 6 and he's going to college. I'd bet dollars to donuts that if BM doesn't get a top 3 pick, he'll trade down with the first pick.

Share this post


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

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.

His vision didn't work out so well with Carlyle. If it's not Eakins getting promoted, then I hope it's not a re-tread. Not that I'm in favor of Eakins for the next HC. Who knows, maybe Bob is the new HC...LOL

Share this post


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

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. 

 

Because cap space had to be freed up to fit in Silfverberg’s extension. Whether via montour or someone else. Haven’t the Ducks have spent near the cap the last couple of seasons? They are farther from a Cup than at any point since so I see them moving more salary out during the offseason especially if they are going to add a key piece that’s not through the draft. I just don’t see the Samueli’s keeping the checkbook open and committed to largely the same roster.

Share this post


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

I don't disagree with buying out Kesler at all but the owners said Bob could do whatever he needed to do but then I guess he said they don't like buyouts. Kind of a mixed message to me. I don't agree with trading Ritchie, yet, or Fowler or really anybody until we actually see this team in a system that works. My concern moving forward is Bob's new coach. He's missed out on some good ones. He needs someone who can get the best out of the kids. If Perry's minutes go down to give Sprong or Terry more then that's life.

If we get Hughes in the draft, then where does he fit? He's another LW. Kakko I guess is a LW playing on the off side. Same with Podkolzin. Dach and Couzens could just turn out to RW's. Turcotte, I think is the only C in the top 5 or 6 and he's going to college. I'd bet dollars to donuts that if BM doesn't get a top 3 pick, he'll trade down with the first pick.

 

Hughes is a Center and Kakko plays LW and has played center before. If you get either player then you make room for them. Murray doesn’t draft Russians so I’m already crossing Podkolzin off our list lol. If we aren’t drafting in the top 2 then whoever we select is less likely to be in the team next season and contribute.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't sound like BM is expecting Kesler to return this year.

https://www.nhl.com/news/ryan-kesler-could-be-out-for-season-with-anaheim-ducks/c-305813214

"I don't know if we're going to see him again this year," Ducks general manager and coach Bob Murray told the Orange County Register. "I don't know when he's coming back. He's hurting pretty good."

Kesler, who has eight points (five goals, three assists) in 60 games this season, played his 1,000th NHL game March 5 against the Arizona Coyotes but has been dealing with the hip issue all season.

"I get why he wanted to do that," Murray said. "It would have been very difficult to say no (to playing in 1,000 games)."

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Hughes is a Center and Kakko plays LW and has played center before. If you get either player then you make room for them. Murray doesn’t draft Russians so I’m already crossing Podkolzin off our list lol. If we aren’t drafting in the top 2 then whoever we select is less likely to be in the team next season and contribute.

 

I don't think Hughes is going to make it as a center in the NHL. He's already being projected as a LW . Kakko and Podkolzin are listed as RW's so I'm just going off that. Not drafting Podkolzin just for being Russian would be kind of dumb if that was his rationale.

Share this post


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

Because cap space had to be freed up to fit in Silfverberg’s extension. Whether via montour or someone else. Haven’t the Ducks have spent near the cap the last couple of seasons? They are farther from a Cup than at any point since so I see them moving more salary out during the offseason especially if they are going to add a key piece that’s not through the draft. I just don’t see the Samueli’s keeping the checkbook open and committed to largely the same roster.

The bolded isn’t true. Take a look at Capfriendly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, perry_mvp said:

I don't think Hughes is going to make it as a center in the NHL. He's already being projected as a LW . Kakko and Podkolzin are listed as RW's so I'm just going off that. Not drafting Podkolzin just for being Russian would be kind of dumb if that was his rationale.

Hughes as a LW? Interesting. I’ve only seen him projected as a center.

8 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:

The bolded isn’t true. Take a look at Capfriendly.

So if Montour hadn’t been moved the Ducks would have about $5.7 mil with 4 players to sign this offseason. Yeah, they could have made that work. Though they’d have very little flexibility which I’d think that want more of. I’m just not expecting ownership to keep spending near the cap to ice mainly the same non-contending roster. 

Share this post


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

Hughes as a LW? Interesting. I’ve only seen him projected as a center.

He's being called the next Patrick Kane by some so I guess you just take it for what it's worth. These pundits will probably have him playing goalie by the final rankings.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Hughes as a LW? Interesting. I’ve only seen him projected as a center.

So if Montour hadn’t been moved the Ducks would have about $5.7 mil with 4 players to sign this offseason. Yeah, they could have made that work. Though they’d have very little flexibility which I’d think that want more of. I’m just not expecting ownership to keep spending near the cap to ice mainly the same non-contending roster. 

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.

Share this post


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

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.

Has there been talk about an Eaves buy out? I'm all for that.

Share this post


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

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.

Eaves saves just over a mil so it helps but still isn’t great. I can actually see the Ducks keeping Shore as a hedge at center and/or LW if Comtois isn’t ready. Comtois has only played 10 NHL games so he’s going to have to be very very good to not spend a year in SD.

Share this post


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

Eaves saves just over a mil so it helps but still isn’t great. I can actually see the Ducks keeping Shore as a hedge at center and/or LW if Comtois isn’t ready. Comtois has only played 10 NHL games so he’s going to have to be very very good to not spend a year in SD.

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.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

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.

Steel just may need some more time in the AHL and Comtois is behind four LW’s on the depth chart as of now. Keeping Shore isn’t the worst thing in the world if neither is ready. He’s serviceable. Maybe Murray will trade him for Derek Grant at some point next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eaves has 2 assists in 7 games with 0 goals since moving down, not exactly setting the league alight.

Edited by BritDuck168

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2019 at 7:23 PM, perry_mvp said:

Making any trades without bringing in a new coach first to evaluate his team doesn't make sense to me. There isn't any urgency to make moves. The Ducks are not a Cup contender. Besides that, the Ducks don't have a ton of cap space. Some of that will be eaten up if Miller is re-signed.

First Hire New Coach then make some move to Jumpstart and Spark the Soul of the team.

DuckPride 4ever

mooseDuck

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...