Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks
Spike1981

what is now?

Recommended Posts

now they played better in the last couple games. but what's now? you want to be a Seller or want to try the playoffs to fail after round one?!

I don't understand, we make the second time in a row the same mistake. we were 30. at the start of 2020. and now we go to no-mans-land, no playoffs, no top 10 draft pick... so our rebuild goes longer and longer… either you are a contender or you go after the picks/prospects and make a REAL rebuild (what one year before the ED Seattle Draft not the badest thing is)...

and the St. Louis wonder isn't now good for us, because BM maybe now thinks: they won the Cup and they were last in January… maybe we can do the same....

sorry no chance, we don't have the potential and talent!

almost every SC winner in the last years has at least one top (if not more) draft pick! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the recent road trip, the team is in build for the future mode.  I don’t see a lot of trade ready talent on the roster beyond Silf and Henrique. Best case scenario is taking in A couple of bad contracts along with prospects in exchange. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as Spike said, I don't see where our Ducks are heading at this point. After falling out of playoff race, they start winning meaningless games. Seems like the last year situation will be repeated again: no playoffs and no franchise player in the upcoming draft day. Once in a while a watch a Hollywood team, and I noticed a tendency: they play very good against top NHL teams but at the end of third period they always find a way to lose. At least, the have a clear vision: to get a franchise player thru top draft picks. And what about us? We don't need another average mid-round Ritchie/Larsson/Lundestrom/Jones type of player, we already have enough of them. I want a sniper on our team, someone who opposing teams would fear to play against. I want another Paul Kariya on our roster. Someone who will sell the tickets to fill up half-empty Honda center.  It's not going to happen thru the trade (not part of BM ability and/or personality) and chances are slim it's going to happen thru the 10 thru 15 overall pick. What other options do we have?

Edited by FanSince1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't worry. The same group that complains non stop about the Ducks when they lose, will complain if they start winning too ("draft pick position, draft pick position").

Just as I predicted.

Edited by dukitup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s pretty simple.  BM should be a seller at the deadline, trading experienced player(s) for good draft picks.   Losing the experience facilitates a lower finish this season and a better picks at this year's draft.  You can’t expect players to intentionally lose games and I doubt the Kings are.  
 

I am encouraged that the Ducks younger players are producing more in the last 10 games because that bodes well for the future.  If the team were abysmal all the way through it would take forever to rebuild.

Edited by CAsFirstCup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ducks are currently slotted into the #6 pick, and even if they start playing playoff caliber hockey for the final 26 games I don't think they would be able to finish any lower in the draft than the #8 pick given the current points gap to the teams above them, most of whom are still pushing to make the playoffs. In fact, aside from Buffalo (for some reason the OP really wants the Ducks to create a losing culture to be just like them), I think most of the teams within striking distance of the Ducks in the standings are going to keep pushing hard for the next month until they're actually out of the playoff race. The Ducks could also easily slide up to the #4 pick since the Sharks are 1 point back with a game in hand (and could make a push just based on veteran pride) and New Jersey is 3 points back with two games in hand and is 3-0-3 since the all star break (and just had B2B 5-0 and 3-0 wins over Philly and LA).

The best and fastest way to turn this thing around is to (1) create the right culture and confidence through an effective system, good coaching, and WINNING, (2) use that upcoming top-7 pick in the 2020 draft to bring in a high impact prospect, and (3) use the abundance of picks and redundant prospects we currently have in the system to trade for 1-2 more high impact players. The worst and slowest way will be to create a losing culture (ala Buffalo), trade highly productive core players for the chance that a late 1st or 2nd round draft pick works out 4-5 years from now, and then pee away the prime years of Gibson, Lindholm, Fowler, Rakell and Silfverberg and the last productive years of Getzlaf.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off...BM is in no way shape or form thinking this team is a contender and can pull off a "st. louis" run... 2nd off...just like dtsdlaw said...let's NOT encourage a losing culture -- if there are players who aren't trying 'cause they want to get a low draft pick, trade them. they have the wrong attitude and will develop terrible habits and when we are better, they wont be. 3rd off -- who's to say Zegras ISN'T a franchise player? We ended the season well last year and got Zegras! While the jury is still out till they come to the NHL and see how they do -- right now -- that aint bad. and face-off -- to piggyback on dtsdlaw...the best way to turn things around...is to be WINNING, not losing.

You can make the playoffs 20 years in a row and win cups while doing it...you could also make the playoff 20 out of 21 seasons and win nothing. You could be terrible FOR YEARS and get a bunch of no. 1 picks and then win 3 cups in 10 seasons....you could also be terrible for years and get a bunch of no. 1 picks with the best player in the world and win nothing.

I think very little happens with us at the TDL...maybe we pick up those bad contracts that Bob had mentioned he's open to...maybe we let a rental go...but I don't think much changes.

EDIT: I actually think FrenchyD goes somewhere...he's got grit and toughness some of these teams might like for a playoff run.

Edited by Jasoaks

Share this post


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

The Ducks are currently slotted into the #6 pick, and even if they start playing playoff caliber hockey for the final 26 games I don't think they would be able to finish any lower in the draft than the #8 pick given the current points gap to the teams above them, most of whom are still pushing to make the playoffs. In fact, aside from Buffalo (for some reason the OP really wants the Ducks to create a losing culture to be just like them), I think most of the teams within striking distance of the Ducks in the standings are going to keep pushing hard for the next month until they're actually out of the playoff race. The Ducks could also easily slide up to the #4 pick since the Sharks are 1 point back with a game in hand (and could make a push just based on veteran pride) and New Jersey is 3 points back with two games in hand and is 3-0-3 since the all star break (and just had B2B 5-0 and 3-0 wins over Philly and LA).

The best and fastest way to turn this thing around is to (1) create the right culture and confidence through an effective system, good coaching, and WINNING, (2) use that upcoming top-7 pick in the 2020 draft to bring in a high impact prospect, and (3) use the abundance of picks and redundant prospects we currently have in the system to trade for 1-2 more high impact players. The worst and slowest way will be to create a losing culture (ala Buffalo), trade highly productive core players for the chance that a late 1st or 2nd round draft pick works out 4-5 years from now, and then pee away the prime years of Gibson, Lindholm, Fowler, Rakell and Silfverberg and the last productive years of Getzlaf.

I wasn’t aware the Ducks had a lot of picks and redundant prospects stockpiled.  Could you make a list of them? And If they are enough to land 1-2 high impact players, how competitive would that make the Ducks next couple seasons?  A playoff contender?  A Cup contender?  I respect your opinion so I’m asking, not challenging.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, CAsFirstCup said:

I wasn’t aware the Ducks had a lot of picks and redundant prospects stockpiled.  Could you make a list of them? And If they are enough to land 1-2 high impact players, how competitive would that make the Ducks next couple seasons?  A playoff contender?  A Cup contender?  I respect your opinion so I’m asking, not challenging.

I view the Ducks LW depth long-term as: Rakell (26), Ritchie (24), Jones (21), Comtois (20), and Tracey (18). All were 1st round draft picks except for Comtois (who is actually ranked as our 2nd best prospect behind Zegras by the Athletic's Scott Wheeler). Further, Rico is a better LW than he is a center IMO, and could easily be moved to a top-6 LW role if the Ducks had a good 2C behind Getzlaf. But even not counting Rico, that's too many LWs even for the next 2-3 years.

I view the current Ducks LHD long-term depth as: Lindholm (26), Fowler (28), Guhle (22), Mahura (21), Larsson (22), Benoit (21) and Thrun (18). Hampus and Cam aren't going anywhere any time soon, and so far I haven't seen ANY of these guys show much ability to play on their off-side, so for all intents and purposes they're all vying for left-D spots. I think there's a good chance we lose either Mahura or Guhle to Seattle in the expansion draft, but it sounds like Thrun may be a real-deal, and if so have too many young LHDs vying for one spot on the bottom pair over the next 6 years.

If I'm running the team, this summer I'm putting Ritchie, one of Comtois/Jones/Tracey, and a D prospect (I think Mahura gets the best return and is most likely to be stolen in the ED anyway) on the block to upgrade at certain NEEDED positions (i.e. high-end scoring RW, #2C, RHD that can run the PP). I'd also put our 2nd rounder in 2020 in play since it will likely be in the top-38 picks and will be valuable to a team that just sold assets at the TDL for a Cup run. Also, I'm making that deal to take on Backes' contract from Boston in exchange for either a late 1st rounder or multiple 2nds. That would give us even more assets to play with in the trade market or to use on higher-end prospects, and Backes-Grant-Rowney would be a fine energy line in 2020-21 while the kids continue to develop.

And last thought on this: Kase, Ritchie, Jones, Steel, Comtois, Mahura, and Lundestrom will all be up for new contracts during the summer of 2021, which is the same summer that Getzlaf's contract is up, which is the same summer as the expansion draft. Does anyone really see GMBM wanting to negotiate all of those RFA deals that summer? I don't.  

[ps challenges are always welcome :P]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What is Now?"....Simple Let me say this...for our Ducks They must keep Winning and be the dreaded spoilers for any team they face, for next 2 months.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

Share this post


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

First off...BM is in no way shape or form thinking this team is a contender and can pull off a "st. louis" run... 2nd off...just like dtsdlaw said...let's NOT encourage a losing culture -- if there are players who aren't trying 'cause they want to get a low draft pick, trade them. they have the wrong attitude and will develop terrible habits and when we are better, they wont be. 3rd off -- who's to say Zegras ISN'T a franchise player? We ended the season well last year and got Zegras! While the jury is still out till they come to the NHL and see how they do -- right now -- that aint bad. and face-off -- to piggyback on dtsdlaw...the best way to turn things around...is to be WINNING, not losing.

You can make the playoffs 20 years in a row and win cups while doing it...you could also make the playoff 20 out of 21 seasons and win nothing. You could be terrible FOR YEARS and get a bunch of no. 1 picks and then win 3 cups in 10 seasons....you could also be terrible for years and get a bunch of no. 1 picks with the best player in the world and win nothing.

I think very little happens with us at the TDL...maybe we pick up those bad contracts that Bob had mentioned he's open to...maybe we let a rental go...but I don't think much changes.

EDIT: I actually think FrenchyD goes somewhere...he's got grit and toughness some of these teams might like for a playoff run.

Players aren't actively trying to play bad. They have pride and are playing for contracts at the end of today. They have struggled this year which shouldn't be much a surprise. 

23 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:

I view the Ducks LW depth long-term as: Rakell (26), Ritchie (24), Jones (21), Comtois (20), and Tracey (18). All were 1st round draft picks except for Comtois (who is actually ranked as our 2nd best prospect behind Zegras by the Athletic's Scott Wheeler). Further, Rico is a better LW than he is a center IMO, and could easily be moved to a top-6 LW role if the Ducks had a good 2C behind Getzlaf. But even not counting Rico, that's too many LWs even for the next 2-3 years.

I view the current Ducks LHD long-term depth as: Lindholm (26), Fowler (28), Guhle (22), Mahura (21), Larsson (22), Benoit (21) and Thrun (18). Hampus and Cam aren't going anywhere any time soon, and so far I haven't seen ANY of these guys show much ability to play on their off-side, so for all intents and purposes they're all vying for left-D spots. I think there's a good chance we lose either Mahura or Guhle to Seattle in the expansion draft, but it sounds like Thrun may be a real-deal, and if so have too many young LHDs vying for one spot on the bottom pair over the next 6 years.

If I'm running the team, this summer I'm putting Ritchie, one of Comtois/Jones/Tracey, and a D prospect (I think Mahura gets the best return and is most likely to be stolen in the ED anyway) on the block to upgrade at certain NEEDED positions (i.e. high-end scoring RW, #2C, RHD that can run the PP). I'd also put our 2nd rounder in 2020 in play since it will likely be in the top-38 picks and will be valuable to a team that just sold assets at the TDL for a Cup run. Also, I'm making that deal to take on Backes' contract from Boston in exchange for either a late 1st rounder or multiple 2nds. That would give us even more assets to play with in the trade market or to use on higher-end prospects, and Backes-Grant-Rowney would be a fine energy line in 2020-21 while the kids continue to develop.

And last thought on this: Kase, Ritchie, Jones, Steel, Comtois, Mahura, and Lundestrom will all be up for new contracts during the summer of 2021, which is the same summer that Getzlaf's contract is up, which is the same summer as the expansion draft. Does anyone really see GMBM wanting to negotiate all of those RFA deals that summer? I don't.  

[ps challenges are always welcome :P]

Another huge issue is in 2022 when Rakell, Lindholm and Manson are all scheduled to be UFA's. I'm of the belief that the Ducks will not re-sign all three of them and therefore, that Manson and/or Rakell could get dealt before then. I'm not necessarily concerned with Murray handling all of those RFA's since the Ducks have almost all of the leverage and Murray has handled RFA's pretty well in the past. Plus, like you said, one or two of those guys may not be on the Ducks next summer. I'd love for Murray to take on Backes' contract and get the type of assets you mentioned. One of the hiccups, even if the teams could agree on a deal, is that Backes has a 8-team trade list, so the odds are that he would have to agree to waive for Boston to dump his contract in Anaheim.

On the defensive side, I'm actually for a shake-up with our top-3. They have been together for six seasons now, so I think we know what they are at this point, which isn't quite good enough to get back to the promised land. I think moving on from one of them (Manson being the most likely) isn't the worst idea. If the Ducks are going to keep them together, then I they should trade Mahura as you suggested. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Players aren't actively trying to play bad. They have pride and are playing for contracts at the end of today. They have struggled this year which shouldn't be much a surprise. 

Another huge issue is in 2022 when Rakell, Lindholm and Manson are all scheduled to be UFA's. I'm of the belief that the Ducks will not re-sign all three of them and therefore, that Manson and/or Rakell could get dealt before then. I'm not necessarily concerned with Murray handling all of those RFA's since the Ducks have almost all of the leverage and Murray has handled RFA's pretty well in the past. Plus, like you said, one or two of those guys may not be on the Ducks next summer. I'd love for Murray to take on Backes' contract and get the type of assets you mentioned. One of the hiccups, even if the teams could agree on a deal, is that Backes has a 8-team trade list, so the odds are that he would have to agree to waive for Boston to dump his contract in Anaheim.

On the defensive side, I'm actually for a shake-up with our top-3. They have been together for six seasons now, so I think we know what they are at this point, which isn't quite good enough to get back to the promised land. I think moving on from one of them (Manson being the most likely) isn't the worst idea. If the Ducks are going to keep them together, then I they should trade Mahura as you suggested. 

I betcha Backes will go anywhere that will give him a chance to play. He cleared waivers and then refused to report to Providence because he doesn’t want to play in the AHL. He wants to be in the NHL. I think the Ducks could give him that, and he might even be a good mentor for some of the kids. He’s apparently a good locker room guy. 

I’m also opposed to shaking up the top-3 D and I also don’t see any reason why 42, 47 and 67 can’t be re-signed if the team is trending in the right direction by then. So agree to disagree there. But if one guy goes, I think it’ll be Rakell, and I also think it will be because Comtois, Jones and Tracey have made him expendable by then. In contrast, we have ZERO RHDs in the system. Manson will not be expendable unless he (a) sucks by then, or (b) has been replaced through trades and UFA signings (not likely).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ducks need roughly 75% of the remaining points available, in order to make the playoffs.  Not out of the realm of possibility, but quite unlikely.  As of now, if they get every point possible, they would end up with 105 points.  They can probably afford to lose 6 games in regulation the rest of way.  Not much room for error, but they're technically not without a chance.

Share this post


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

Players aren't actively trying to play bad. They have pride and are playing for contracts at the end of today. They have struggled this year which shouldn't be much a surprise.

this is true. i was just more saying that the whole "strategy" of fail to get a high draft pick is massively flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just some optimism. Through growing pains, there has been sizable improvement to how the Ducks have played this year, compared to last year 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:

this is true. i was just more saying that the whole "strategy" of fail to get a high draft pick is massively flawed.

I wouldn't say it's massively flawed.  The odds are definitely slanted in favor of teams who have the worst records.  And I believe that you can only drop around 3 slots from your overall standings position, meaning the worst team is guaranteed at least a top 4 pick.  The players have Zero incentive to play to lose, so it's pointless to take the position that they should be piddleing away games.

The reality is though, that there is more inherent benefit to a team going forward, to finish last in the conference rather than 9th.  Either way, the team is clearing it's lockers in mid-April, but the last place team at least has the opportunity to land a higher ranked prospect in the draft.

Edited by HockeyIzCool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have enjoyed watching hockey more in the last couple weeks than the rest of the season combined.  And that includes an entertaining beginning of the season.  That's worth something to me.  If management wants to sell off a couple of non-fundamental pieces for future assets, I understand the strategy.  This season is lost.  But I'm enjoying the better hockey, and I hope they continue to play this way.  The draft pick will fall where it may.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I wouldn't say it's massively flawed.  The odds are definitely slanted in favor of teams who have the worst records.  And I believe that you can only drop around 3 slots from your overall standings position, meaning the worst team is guaranteed at least a top 4 pick.  The players have Zero incentive to play to lose, so it's pointless to take the position that they should be piddleing away games.

The reality is though, that there is more inherent benefit to a team going forward, to finish last in the conference rather than 9th.  Either way, the team is clearing it's lockers in mid-April, but the last place team at least has the opportunity to land a higher ranked prospect in the draft.

but im saying more that like....you can find an example where getting that #1 pick has helped....and where it hasn't helped. I don't think (and maybe im wrong...) that there is conclusive evidence that suggests having a #1 pick in a draft will turn your team around. Not even necessarily having 2 or 3 high picks in a row. I think the teams that are successful from that are doing other things that are actually making them successful. I don't know what those are lol but they're doing something.

and the same with consistent successful teams -- what they do to become successful isn't involved with having high draft picks.

So, what im trying to say is that the money lost on having a bad season, the cultivating of a losing vibe, destroying young players confidence...isn't worth it for a #1 or #2 pick instead of a #9 or #10 pick. We are better off winning more games than not and getting a higher pick than a lower pick.....or.....a lower pick than a higher pick? lol you know what i mean. High # draft pick does not = success. It can help -- but im questioning is it worth it.

Right now, I'd say no.

When I have more time id actually like to do a study to see how successful it has or has not really made a team.

EDIT: i guess what im really trying to say as fans...let's not root for them to lose lol

Edited by Jasoaks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:

but im saying more that like....you can find an example where getting that #1 pick has helped....and where it hasn't helped. I don't think (and maybe im wrong...) that there is conclusive evidence that suggests having a #1 pick in a draft will turn your team around. Not even necessarily having 2 or 3 high picks in a row. I think the teams that are successful from that are doing other things that are actually making them successful. I don't know what those are lol but they're doing something.

and the same with consistent successful teams -- what they do to become successful isn't involved with having high draft picks.

So, what im trying to say is that the money lost on having a bad season, the cultivating of a losing vibe, destroying young players confidence...isn't worth it for a #1 or #2 pick instead of a #9 or #10 pick. We are better off winning more games than not and getting a higher pick than a lower pick.....or.....a lower pick than a higher pick? lol you know what i mean. High # draft pick does not = success. It can help -- but im questioning is it worth it.

Right now, I'd say no.

When I have more time id actually like to do a study to see how successful it has or has not really made a team.

EDIT: i guess what im really trying to say as fans...let's not root for them to lose lol

I think it’s strangely lost that we already do have a lot of high upside kids right now. Steel, Terry, Jones, Sprong, Comtois, Lundestrom, Zegras. I would rather cultivate them and get them confidence and some game than lose at a chance to get the #1 pick when we can still get a solid player at 6-10

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:

but im saying more that like....you can find an example where getting that #1 pick has helped....and where it hasn't helped. I don't think (and maybe im wrong...) that there is conclusive evidence that suggests having a #1 pick in a draft will turn your team around. Not even necessarily having 2 or 3 high picks in a row. I think the teams that are successful from that are doing other things that are actually making them successful. I don't know what those are lol but they're doing something.

and the same with consistent successful teams -- what they do to become successful isn't involved with having high draft picks.

So, what im trying to say is that the money lost on having a bad season, the cultivating of a losing vibe, destroying young players confidence...isn't worth it for a #1 or #2 pick instead of a #9 or #10 pick. We are better off winning more games than not and getting a higher pick than a lower pick.....or.....a lower pick than a higher pick? lol you know what i mean. High # draft pick does not = success. It can help -- but im questioning is it worth it.

Right now, I'd say no.

When I have more time id actually like to do a study to see how successful it has or has not really made a team.

EDIT: i guess what im really trying to say as fans...let's not root for them to lose lol

Getting the #1 pick is going to help a lot more than it will hurt more often than not simply because the odds of getting a franchise building block are much higher. I’ve said in earlier posts that most Cup winning teams have drafted in the lottery and more than once. Of course if you have horrible management (ie Edmonton, Buffalo) then you can absolutely squander that talent and not be successful.

52 minutes ago, Sexlaf15 said:

I think it’s strangely lost that we already do have a lot of high upside kids right now. Steel, Terry, Jones, Sprong, Comtois, Lundestrom, Zegras. I would rather cultivate them and get them confidence and some game than lose at a chance to get the #1 pick when we can still get a solid player at 6-10

I don’t think we have a lot of high upside guys outside of Zegras. None of the current crop look like the next Getzlaf/ Perry but rather a bunch of middle-6 guys that can be decent NHLers but aren’t going franchise cornerstones. We can get a solid pick from 6-10 and I think this draft is just like last years where the first two picks are locks and then the talent gap starts to narrow. That said, getting Lafreniere or even Byfield is far more likely to fast track the Ducks rebuild more than another solid 6-10 pick.

All to say that I’m rooting the lottery more than anything lol

Share this post


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

Getting the #1 pick is going to help a lot more than it will hurt more often than not simply because the odds of getting a franchise building block are much higher. I’ve said in earlier posts that most Cup winning teams have drafted in the lottery and more than once. Of course if you have horrible management (ie Edmonton, Buffalo) then you can absolutely squander that talent and not be successful.

I don’t think we have a lot of high upside guys outside of Zegras. None of the current crop look like the next Getzlaf/ Perry but rather a bunch of middle-6 guys that can be decent NHLers but aren’t going franchise cornerstones. We can get a solid pick from 6-10 and I think this draft is just like last years where the first two picks are locks and then the talent gap starts to narrow. That said, getting Lafreniere or even Byfield is far more likely to fast track the Ducks rebuild more than another solid 6-10 pick.

All to say that I’m rooting the lottery more than anything lol

Looking at Hughes/Kaako I’m not expected much immediate impact from this years top 2. Steel probably being a second line center, Terry shows flashes of dominance. Jones looks like he’ll be a 2nd/3rd liner. Comtois is hard to gage. I think adding first line talent isn’t a lock no matter where you pick. Why not make sure what you do have already can be the best they can. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to add on. I don’t think having 2-3 of those guy being middle six is the worst thing? Look at Toronto and Edmonton. They got their high draft picks and hit on them, but don’t have the money or ability in the middle of their line up. Toronto is so handicapped by their top end talent making the money they do, they don’t have the money to get a capable back up goalie or bottom end defensemen. Edmonton has almost zero talent outside of McDavid and Draisitl. Getting capable 2nd and 3rd line talent is just as important, especially with the price tag on those guys in FA blowing the heck up 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Sexlaf15 said:

Looking at Hughes/Kaako I’m not expected much immediate impact from this years top 2. Steel probably being a second line center, Terry shows flashes of dominance. Jones looks like he’ll be a 2nd/3rd liner. Comtois is hard to gage. I think adding first line talent isn’t a lock no matter where you pick. Why not make sure what you do have already can be the best they can. 

 

12 minutes ago, Sexlaf15 said:

And to add on. I don’t think having 2-3 of those guy being middle six is the worst thing? Look at Toronto and Edmonton. They got their high draft picks and hit on them, but don’t have the money or ability in the middle of their line up. Toronto is so handicapped by their top end talent making the money they do, they don’t have the money to get a capable back up goalie or bottom end defensemen. Edmonton has almost zero talent outside of McDavid and Draisitl. Getting capable 2nd and 3rd line talent is just as important, especially with the price tag on those guys in FA blowing the heck up 

If they don't have an immediate impact right away then that's fine. Very few players come in at 18 and establish themselves as legit players, let alone stars. Those are usually only the Crosby's/McJesus' of the world. Right now, Steel still has a very long way to go if he's ever going to be a 2C. If he reaches that potential then that would be a major boost to the Ducks. If he doesn't take another step forward next season, then he's going to have Zegras and Lundestrom  eventually nipping at his heels for a center position spot.

I'm not saying that having some of those guys being middle-six players is bad. You certainly need those kind of players and I think that a couple of the young guys will fill those roles. Right now, we project to have too many of them and still need the first-line caliber of players will carry this team forward, Those players are considerably harder to get and are more valuable.

Edmonton doesn't have talent around McDavid and Draisaitl because Chiarelli made so many categorically stupid decisions that he ruined a team with two of the best players in the entire NHL. It's not because those two make too much money. He makes me appreciate Bob Murray. Toronto has an extremely talented team that took the Bruins to 7-games in the playoffs last season. They added Jack Campbell to help their backup situation and haven't been helped at all with Reilly and Freddie being hurt. Dubas has gone all in to try and get the Maple Leafs over hump because their window is now. Unfortunately, the timing could not be worse as there are a handful of juggernauts in the East right now.

Share this post


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

Dubas has gone all in to try and get the Maple Leafs over hump because their window is now.

he has....and to me that just seems so misguided....getting Tavares was such a strange move if you ask me...they needed leadership and maturity to help these young guys, but they really payed a lot to get tavares and it's hurting them.

they have some AMAZING young players and they have many years to go before they're all even in their top form...their cup window JUST opened and would be opened for a while and the "win now" mentality didn't have to really come so soon...where you sacrifice a lot to win THIS season...poor judgement if you ask me on Dubas part.

The Tavares money could have been used to get veteran leadership/skill on the blueline. And some good supporting players. It's just another GM not really addressing the actual issue his team has (but hey, at least he's trying to unlike Wilson lol)

Share this post


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

but im saying more that like....you can find an example where getting that #1 pick has helped....and where it hasn't helped. I don't think (and maybe im wrong...) that there is conclusive evidence that suggests having a #1 pick in a draft will turn your team around. Not even necessarily having 2 or 3 high picks in a row. I think the teams that are successful from that are doing other things that are actually making them successful. I don't know what those are lol but they're doing something.

and the same with consistent successful teams -- what they do to become successful isn't involved with having high draft picks.

So, what im trying to say is that the money lost on having a bad season, the cultivating of a losing vibe, destroying young players confidence...isn't worth it for a #1 or #2 pick instead of a #9 or #10 pick. We are better off winning more games than not and getting a higher pick than a lower pick.....or.....a lower pick than a higher pick? lol you know what i mean. High # draft pick does not = success. It can help -- but im questioning is it worth it.

Right now, I'd say no.

When I have more time id actually like to do a study to see how successful it has or has not really made a team.

EDIT: i guess what im really trying to say as fans...let's not root for them to lose lol

Where was Pitts before Malkin/Crosby? Wsh has Ovechkin, Chicago has Kane... they are the most dominant teams in the last 10 years... and where they picked their superstars? Top 2 overall... 

so almost every Champ in the past has at least one top 3 pick.  

you don’t have to look at Oilers or Sabres. 

The best would be, play 40-50 minutes and then let them win...

so you dont have this losing mentality like the Sabres (O‘Reilly said it too before he got traded)

Share this post


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

he has....and to me that just seems so misguided....getting Tavares was such a strange move if you ask me...they needed leadership and maturity to help these young guys, but they really payed a lot to get tavares and it's hurting them.

they have some AMAZING young players and they have many years to go before they're all even in their top form...their cup window JUST opened and would be opened for a while and the "win now" mentality didn't have to really come so soon...where you sacrifice a lot to win THIS season...poor judgement if you ask me on Dubas part.

The Tavares money could have been used to get veteran leadership/skill on the blueline. And some good supporting players. It's just another GM not really addressing the actual issue his team has (but hey, at least he's trying to unlike Wilson lol)

Tavares is by all accounts a veteran leader. He was captain of the Islanders and one of the best players in modern history (outside of Niedermayer) to hit free agency. Having a one-two punch of him and Matthews down the middle makes a lot of sense and he's been very good for them. The Leafs were going to run into problems of keeping all of their top guys while bolstering their defense even without Tavares. They lost JVR, will likely not be able re-sign Barrie (if they even want to) unless the move out someone like Nylander. I think Dubas was trying to thread the needle by going on a two-year run while Nylander and Marner were on ELC's. His job is also on the line to make something happen with the talent the Leafs have now rather than later. The irony is that he has assembled one of the most talented Leafs teams in who knows how many years and could have nothing to really show for it.

I do think that if the Leafs get healthy and Freddie gets hot, then they are in the mix in the East.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, HockeyIzCool said:

I wouldn't say it's massively flawed.  The odds are definitely slanted in favor of teams who have the worst records.  And I believe that you can only drop around 3 slots from your overall standings position, meaning the worst team is guaranteed at least a top 4 pick.  The players have Zero incentive to play to lose, so it's pointless to take the position that they should be piddleing away games.

The reality is though, that there is more inherent benefit to a team going forward, to finish last in the conference rather than 9th.  Either way, the team is clearing it's lockers in mid-April, but the last place team at least has the opportunity to land a higher ranked prospect in the draft.

This simply  (the bold) is not true.  All three top picks last year dropped 3 slots..   The #1 pick has a 50.6% chance of moving to 4th.

That means they have a 49.4% chance of finishing 1-2-3 in the lottery.

http://www.tankathon.com/nhl/pick_odds

The Ducks, at #6 now, has a 23.5% chance of finishing 1-2-3.    That's not too far away from what the #1 team gets.

The kicker is the Ducks have a 58.3% chance at #6 of dropping to #7 or #8.

The odds are set up that it does not pay to lose.

These young Ducks are learning how to win together at this level.  They've played very well the last 10 games. Vast improvement and playing much more as a team.

Zegras was chosen at #9 as is a franchise player. We can do it again this year, no matter where we pick. 

Edited by JiggyToTheCup
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

If they don't have an immediate impact right away then that's fine. Very few players come in at 18 and establish themselves as legit players, let alone stars. Those are usually only the Crosby's/McJesus' of the world. Right now, Steel still has a very long way to go if he's ever going to be a 2C. If he reaches that potential then that would be a major boost to the Ducks. If he doesn't take another step forward next season, then he's going to have Zegras and Lundestrom  eventually nipping at his heels for a center position spot.

I'm not saying that having some of those guys being middle-six players is bad. You certainly need those kind of players and I think that a couple of the young guys will fill those roles. Right now, we project to have too many of them and still need the first-line caliber of players will carry this team forward, Those players are considerably harder to get and are more valuable.

Edmonton doesn't have talent around McDavid and Draisaitl because Chiarelli made so many categorically stupid decisions that he ruined a team with two of the best players in the entire NHL. It's not because those two make too much money. He makes me appreciate Bob Murray. Toronto has an extremely talented team that took the Bruins to 7-games in the playoffs last season. They added Jack Campbell to help their backup situation and haven't been helped at all with Reilly and Freddie being hurt. Dubas has gone all in to try and get the Maple Leafs over hump because their window is now. Unfortunately, the timing could not be worse as there are a handful of juggernauts in the East right now.

I disagree with the Toronto assessment. Dubas went all in trying to out score his opponents. I think he really needed to add defensive help and added a offensive defensemen in Barrie and Cody Freaking Ceci. He kept Babcock wayyyyy too long. He’s so handcuffed by Nylander, Tavares, Marner, Matthews. He really should’ve flipped Nylander for a young defensive stud. Save the money, cover a need. But he and the fans insisted they keep all the kids. I think that it was a large mistake. Toronto knew they needed a back up goaltender, let Sparks walk and had to trade for Campbell, who’s been very meh, they knew they needed a defensemen and all the injuries have just highlighted the decision to not cover their need and instead commit to our scoring their problems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be interesting to see if Toronto moves any big F before the deadline.  Their problem is that not a lot of teams want to trade away from their safe ED space.  A big deal is what TOR needs, and big deals are disfavored in this environment.

Share this post


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

Tavares is by all accounts a veteran leader. He was captain of the Islanders and one of the best players in modern history (outside of Niedermayer) to hit free agency. Having a one-two punch of him and Matthews down the middle makes a lot of sense and he's been very good for them. The Leafs were going to run into problems of keeping all of their top guys while bolstering their defense even without Tavares. They lost JVR, will likely not be able re-sign Barrie (if they even want to) unless the move out someone like Nylander. I think Dubas was trying to thread the needle by going on a two-year run while Nylander and Marner were on ELC's. His job is also on the line to make something happen with the talent the Leafs have now rather than later. The irony is that he has assembled one of the most talented Leafs teams in who knows how many years and could have nothing to really show for it.

I do think that if the Leafs get healthy and Freddie gets hot, then they are in the mix in the East.

 

okay, yeah having that 1-2 punch down the middle is good. but forward scoring wasn't their issue. it just does not address their actual problem areas. Now they could have gone with Tavares and have that strength down the middle and leadership, but then they needed to use their other young guy (Nylander probably) to get address their D.

and yeah, a hot goalie changes everything. Hell if Gibson got hot he could take us to the post-season lol remember Andrew Hammond? Guy went like 20-1-2 down the stretch! it was crazy! that team had no business being in the playoffs and they showed it in the playoffs lol

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...