Jump to content
The Official Site of the Anaheim Ducks
turnonthejets87

Looking ahead (draft)

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

Wants to do a Pronger/Niedermayer situation with the current group when asked about free agency?

not sure I fully understand what this means...when asked about free agency....he said he wants that kind of duo in the current players?? i don't understand. as in, he doesn't want to sign someone? who does he think would be our Pronger/Scotty?

22 hours ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

-Comtois and Terry were not happy about being sent down to SD. (I absolutely understand why Terry would be)

yeah, i bet not! I hope it doesn't hurt their attitude coming back...it better not. Hopefully it lights a fire under them when they come back.

22 hours ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:

-The PP is his biggest concern

then get new assistant coaches!

14 hours ago, Fisix said:

BM was more rueful than it came across in the linked article about not getting a higher pick for Grant. 

he should be! why was he not talking with Tampa Bay??? they apparently wanted to over pay for a 3rd/4th line player. Why wouldn't Tampa have wanted Grant over Goodrow???

11 hours ago, hoxxey said:

Take responsibility for the crap assistant coaches.

YES! 100% yes!!

Share this post


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

Don't think they were referring to Sprong here. He wasn't with the team too much to warrant that IMO.  However, in The Athletic article done on him after the statt of the season, they commented that his attitude was pretty bad the first 2-3 weeks of the season in SD.  Then he finally got mostly past it, and started to play well.  The guy is a head case IMO.  Just full of himself and thinks he's too good to commit to paying a two way game. I'm glad they sat him for this.

I'm really liking what Djoos is bringing to the team.

ahh yeah, Sprong seemed to have something going on....makes sense. And YES!! I'm really happy/excited about Djoos!

Share this post


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

Would have to assume he’s talking about Ritchie here, right? Is this an admission that NR is a bad locker room guy?

Also, was there any talk about the expansion draft? Would assume/hope that the ED will be in the back of GMBM ‘s mind this summer as he crafts the roster for next season.

NR - I think so.  BM was very careful not to say exactly who, but it came up as part of the TD trades talk.  I think my ranking (most to least) on who he could have been talking about, given the surrounding context of when he brought this up, is NR, OK, Holzer, Shore, Sprong, Grant.  He SEEMED to be talking about players often in the NHL locker room.  The wild cards are Holzer and Sprong.  Kes and Juice seemed to say that Holzer was a good locker room guy, but also mentioned in the latest podcast that he would sing German songs joking about losing... that kind of stuff can rub a GM/new coach wrong.  Sprong has his known past issues, so there's a chance it followed him through to the TD.  BM also mentioned players needing to come in spring ready to play and stay ready to play through the season... I hope I'm not unfairly saddling NR, but that sounds like him (or maybe Sprong).  BM seemed pretty emotional about the locker room drag comment, and I think the player's success/failure he has the strongest emotional link to is NR's.  BM said as much during the talk.

That's probably way, way too much analysis.  It would be pretty surprising if it were anyone but NR, given the context.

ED - Hazy mentioned that this time all the GM's know the rules going in, whereas the last time they didn't really.  Last time, they got stuck having to make a decision and went with the veteran d-man and gave up the rookie d-man (BM's words).  This coming draft, BM feels like they have everything in place with flexibility, and he doesn't seem concerned about who we'll be protecting.  My take is that he's feeling right now that there are so many underperforming vets in the ranks that he doesn't feel super obligated to protect anyone, so he has spots open for the promising rooks and vets that want to stay and can step it up.  FrenchyD contract was specifically mentioned as fodder for the exposure requirements (2 forwards, 1 d, 1 goalie, all with variable NHL experience and contract requirements).  BM seemed to be saying that he's been crafting the roster for a while now looking forward to the ED.

Unfortunately, what he didn't talk about was GBud.  He didn't mention any particular issues on D at all.  That's a little scary.  My personal take is that a healthy CF/Gbud, HL/JM (now that Manson isn't sucking as bad) is almost a dream top 4, and I'd like us to keep that together.  I have a sinking feeling that BM doesn't share my vision in this.

Note - this is totally conspiracy theory, but I am weirded out that there's no Cam at the practices.  Is there any possibility that they're holding him out of play till June to make sure he's healthy for a super-trade after the end of the season?     

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

not sure I fully understand what this means...when asked about free agency....he said he wants that kind of duo in the current players?? i don't understand. as in, he doesn't want to sign someone? who does he think would be our Pronger/Scotty?

yeah, i bet not! I hope it doesn't hurt their attitude coming back...it better not. Hopefully it lights a fire under them when they come back.

then get new assistant coaches!

he should be! why was he not talking with Tampa Bay??? they apparently wanted to over pay for a 3rd/4th line player. Why wouldn't Tampa have wanted Grant over Goodrow???

YES! 100% yes!!

Yeah, does this mean he's looking to make a big splash at free agency by bringing in a big name player? Pietrangelo anyone?

I would be surprised if the assistants are not gone this off-season, especially if Murray is saying the PP is his biggest concern.

Share this post


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

First bold, what the heck does this mean? Should we be calling him Darth Sidious from now on?

i get this. you gotta let your coach, coach. even if you disagree with it and see how it wont result in a win or whatever. not doing so will fester an environment that would do more damage long term. the people you hire need to feel they can do their work, they are trusted, but also that they got their opportunity to try their ideas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

i get this. you gotta let your coach, coach. even if you disagree with it and see how it wont result in a win or whatever. not doing so will fester an environment that would do more damage long term. the people you hire need to feel they can do their work, they are trusted, but also that they got their opportunity to try their ideas.

Why say the "I foresaw it" thing though? Doesn't this kind of infantilize his head coach?

"It's ok, Eakins. You have no significant positive NHL experience and I knew you'd make those mistakes. I foresaw it. [pats him on head]"

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

i get this. you gotta let your coach, coach. even if you disagree with it and see how it wont result in a win or whatever. not doing so will fester an environment that would do more damage long term. the people you hire need to feel they can do their work, they are trusted, but also that they got their opportunity to try their ideas.

yeah, this is what BM meant.  he wasn't setting Eakins up for failure, he just wanted Eakins to make his own judgements with players and then get to the same conclusion (and, I think BM wanted a second opinion and a second chance for some players with a new coach).  

on the player i was talking about in practices - it was Sherwood who was lacking some stick skills, visibly, during the drills.  there's always a function of who you're drilling with... but that didn't seem to be the issue.  the main drill i'm thinking of is two players going head to head at high speed starting from the two defensive zones - first player with the puck passes hard to second player just coming out of the d-zone on the other side of neutral, and the receiving second player is supposed to stop the puck and leave it motionless (stop/drop) for the oncoming rush (original passing first player) so that the first player can enter the d-zone that the second player just exited, but with significant speed AND puck control.  Sherwood cycled through that drill 3-4 times while i was watching, and he fraked up the puck stop/drop every time, which tripped up the oncoming rush.  i don't understand how this could be true of an AHLr, but then again, I still have no idea how we don't have vets that can 1-time (to the extent that BM harped on it during the discussion session).

unfortunately, this was a short practice between 2 games in 3 days, so there could be a chance they weren't practicing "for reals"... so take this all with a grain of salt:

until the drills became more like full line v. line scrimmages (players seemed to dig in during the scrimmages, because they're more fun?), there was a LOT of players just 'completing' drills but not really pushing themselves during the drills... which I think is a waste.  I don't have a leg to stand on, coaching wise, but I've always enjoyed the Wooden take on sports - start as fundamental as you can, do it exactly right (or keep practicing until you do), and then build on that.  i did NOT see a lot of commitment in the non-scrimmage, more basic drills.  i wouldn't think much of it, but it goes hand in hand with our very apparent weaknesses on the ice.  The rooks tended to put more energy into the more basic drills, but still not enough in my view.  

i didn't see too many players taking their own development in hand.  Gbud did a bit, but I think he's still working on getting healthy, so I'm not sure that counts.  The ice isn't huge, so there's not a lot of room for individual skating, and I didn't stay too long after players started to dribble off the ice.  I don't know: if Cogs had been there, at least I could have normalized based on his output. 

FrenchyD did a good job at going around trying to make people have fun during the practice, in a good way.  Getz and Gbud seemed to hang off together on the side and stand with sort of a leadership stature, overlooking the lines taking runs.  it looked very natural for them to hang together in that way. 

Eakins and the two assistants were on the ice all the time with the players, Eakins mainly doing the whistle blowing for the drills.  There were what looked like PP D and O drills, basically runs at net 3 on 2, then whistle blows and they switch O and D, something like that.  not super organized.  it might have just been a regular drill.  Eakins was in on every drill, so... well, there's that.  Again, short session, so maybe not a lot of PP-specific stuff.  who knows.

That's all i can remember right now.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

NR - I think so.  BM was very careful not to say exactly who, but it came up as part of the TD trades talk.  I think my ranking (most to least) on who he could have been talking about, given the surrounding context of when he brought this up, is NR, OK, Holzer, Shore, Sprong, Grant.  He SEEMED to be talking about players often in the NHL locker room.  The wild cards are Holzer and Sprong.  Kes and Juice seemed to say that Holzer was a good locker room guy, but also mentioned in the latest podcast that he would sing German songs joking about losing... that kind of stuff can rub a GM/new coach wrong.  Sprong has his known past issues, so there's a chance it followed him through to the TD.  BM also mentioned players needing to come in spring ready to play and stay ready to play through the season... I hope I'm not unfairly saddling NR, but that sounds like him (or maybe Sprong).  BM seemed pretty emotional about the locker room drag comment, and I think the player's success/failure he has the strongest emotional link to is NR's.  BM said as much during the talk.

That's probably way, way too much analysis.  It would be pretty surprising if it were anyone but NR, given the context.

ED - Hazy mentioned that this time all the GM's know the rules going in, whereas the last time they didn't really.  Last time, they got stuck having to make a decision and went with the veteran d-man and gave up the rookie d-man (BM's words).  This coming draft, BM feels like they have everything in place with flexibility, and he doesn't seem concerned about who we'll be protecting.  My take is that he's feeling right now that there are so many underperforming vets in the ranks that he doesn't feel super obligated to protect anyone, so he has spots open for the promising rooks and vets that want to stay and can step it up.  FrenchyD contract was specifically mentioned as fodder for the exposure requirements (2 forwards, 1 d, 1 goalie, all with variable NHL experience and contract requirements).  BM seemed to be saying that he's been crafting the roster for a while now looking forward to the ED.

Unfortunately, what he didn't talk about was GBud.  He didn't mention any particular issues on D at all.  That's a little scary.  My personal take is that a healthy CF/Gbud, HL/JM (now that Manson isn't sucking as bad) is almost a dream top 4, and I'd like us to keep that together.  I have a sinking feeling that BM doesn't share my vision in this.

Note - this is totally conspiracy theory, but I am weirded out that there's no Cam at the practices.  Is there any possibility that they're holding him out of play till June to make sure he's healthy for a super-trade after the end of the season?     

Hopefully this means that he's overall happy with the D and that his focus is really on improving the offense and PP.

Any thoughts on what he meant with respect to the Niedermayer/Pronger comment? Pronger was a trade, not a UFA signing, and it cost us Lupul (former #7 overall), Smid (former #9 OA), two 1st rounders (2007, 2008) and a 2nd rounder (2008). Was he hinting that he might deal a whole bunch of assets for an elite player to accelerate the rebuild?  

Share this post


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

NR - I think so.  BM was very careful not to say exactly who, but it came up as part of the TD trades talk.  I think my ranking (most to least) on who he could have been talking about, given the surrounding context of when he brought this up, is NR, OK, Holzer, Shore, Sprong, Grant.  He SEEMED to be talking about players often in the NHL locker room.  The wild cards are Holzer and Sprong.  Kes and Juice seemed to say that Holzer was a good locker room guy, but also mentioned in the latest podcast that he would sing German songs joking about losing... that kind of stuff can rub a GM/new coach wrong.  Sprong has his known past issues, so there's a chance it followed him through to the TD.  BM also mentioned players needing to come in spring ready to play and stay ready to play through the season... I hope I'm not unfairly saddling NR, but that sounds like him (or maybe Sprong).  BM seemed pretty emotional about the locker room drag comment, and I think the player's success/failure he has the strongest emotional link to is NR's.  BM said as much during the talk.

Just listened to the Kes and Juice podcast. The exact quotes were:

Quote

Bieksa: One of the best dressing rooms guys out there though, right?

Kesler: Probably THE best.

His German song about losing notwithstanding, they sure didn't make it sound like Holzer is a guy who drags down a locker room.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

yeah, this is what BM meant.  he wasn't setting Eakins up for failure, he just wanted Eakins to make his own judgements with players and then get to the same conclusion (and, I think BM wanted a second opinion and a second chance for some players with a new coach).  

on the player i was talking about in practices - it was Sherwood who was lacking some stick skills, visibly, during the drills.  there's always a function of who you're drilling with... but that didn't seem to be the issue.  the main drill i'm thinking of is two players going head to head at high speed starting from the two defensive zones - first player with the puck passes hard to second player just coming out of the d-zone on the other side of neutral, and the receiving second player is supposed to stop the puck and leave it motionless (stop/drop) for the oncoming rush (original passing first player) so that the first player can enter the d-zone that the second player just exited, but with significant speed AND puck control.  Sherwood cycled through that drill 3-4 times while i was watching, and he fraked up the puck stop/drop every time, which tripped up the oncoming rush.  i don't understand how this could be true of an AHLr, but then again, I still have no idea how we don't have vets that can 1-time (to the extent that BM harped on it during the discussion session).

unfortunately, this was a short practice between 2 games in 3 days, so there could be a chance they weren't practicing "for reals"... so take this all with a grain of salt:

until the drills became more like full line v. line scrimmages (players seemed to dig in during the scrimmages, because they're more fun?), there was a LOT of players just 'completing' drills but not really pushing themselves during the drills... which I think is a waste.  I don't have a leg to stand on, coaching wise, but I've always enjoyed the Wooden take on sports - start as fundamental as you can, do it exactly right (or keep practicing until you do), and then build on that.  i did NOT see a lot of commitment in the non-scrimmage, more basic drills.  i wouldn't think much of it, but it goes hand in hand with our very apparent weaknesses on the ice.  The rooks tended to put more energy into the more basic drills, but still not enough in my view.  

i didn't see too many players taking their own development in hand.  Gbud did a bit, but I think he's still working on getting healthy, so I'm not sure that counts.  The ice isn't huge, so there's not a lot of room for individual skating, and I didn't stay too long after players started to dribble off the ice.  I don't know: if Cogs had been there, at least I could have normalized based on his output. 

FrenchyD did a good job at going around trying to make people have fun during the practice, in a good way.  Getz and Gbud seemed to hang off together on the side and stand with sort of a leadership stature, overlooking the lines taking runs.  it looked very natural for them to hang together in that way. 

Eakins and the two assistants were on the ice all the time with the players, Eakins mainly doing the whistle blowing for the drills.  There were what looked like PP D and O drills, basically runs at net 3 on 2, then whistle blows and they switch O and D, something like that.  not super organized.  it might have just been a regular drill.  Eakins was in on every drill, so... well, there's that.  Again, short session, so maybe not a lot of PP-specific stuff.  who knows.

That's all i can remember right now.

 

Really good post with some hands on insight.  Cool.  Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

yeah, this is what BM meant.  he wasn't setting Eakins up for failure, he just wanted Eakins to make his own judgements with players and then get to the same conclusion (and, I think BM wanted a second opinion and a second chance for some players with a new coach).  

on the player i was talking about in practices - it was Sherwood who was lacking some stick skills, visibly, during the drills.  there's always a function of who you're drilling with... but that didn't seem to be the issue.  the main drill i'm thinking of is two players going head to head at high speed starting from the two defensive zones - first player with the puck passes hard to second player just coming out of the d-zone on the other side of neutral, and the receiving second player is supposed to stop the puck and leave it motionless (stop/drop) for the oncoming rush (original passing first player) so that the first player can enter the d-zone that the second player just exited, but with significant speed AND puck control.  Sherwood cycled through that drill 3-4 times while i was watching, and he fraked up the puck stop/drop every time, which tripped up the oncoming rush.  i don't understand how this could be true of an AHLr, but then again, I still have no idea how we don't have vets that can 1-time (to the extent that BM harped on it during the discussion session).

unfortunately, this was a short practice between 2 games in 3 days, so there could be a chance they weren't practicing "for reals"... so take this all with a grain of salt:

until the drills became more like full line v. line scrimmages (players seemed to dig in during the scrimmages, because they're more fun?), there was a LOT of players just 'completing' drills but not really pushing themselves during the drills... which I think is a waste.  I don't have a leg to stand on, coaching wise, but I've always enjoyed the Wooden take on sports - start as fundamental as you can, do it exactly right (or keep practicing until you do), and then build on that.  i did NOT see a lot of commitment in the non-scrimmage, more basic drills.  i wouldn't think much of it, but it goes hand in hand with our very apparent weaknesses on the ice.  The rooks tended to put more energy into the more basic drills, but still not enough in my view.  

i didn't see too many players taking their own development in hand.  Gbud did a bit, but I think he's still working on getting healthy, so I'm not sure that counts.  The ice isn't huge, so there's not a lot of room for individual skating, and I didn't stay too long after players started to dribble off the ice.  I don't know: if Cogs had been there, at least I could have normalized based on his output. 

FrenchyD did a good job at going around trying to make people have fun during the practice, in a good way.  Getz and Gbud seemed to hang off together on the side and stand with sort of a leadership stature, overlooking the lines taking runs.  it looked very natural for them to hang together in that way. 

Eakins and the two assistants were on the ice all the time with the players, Eakins mainly doing the whistle blowing for the drills.  There were what looked like PP D and O drills, basically runs at net 3 on 2, then whistle blows and they switch O and D, something like that.  not super organized.  it might have just been a regular drill.  Eakins was in on every drill, so... well, there's that.  Again, short session, so maybe not a lot of PP-specific stuff.  who knows.

That's all i can remember right now.

 

Pretty disappointing to hear about the lack of effort at practices. You watch Ducks games versus games with decent teams in the league, and other teams just do the basics so much better. Tape to tape passes etc. This is stuff they should be working on.

Sherwood is a hustle player similar to Cogs which I guess is why he's a fan favorite, because he puts the effort in. But he just doesn't have the hands to be anything more than a 4th liner at best or the 13th forward on any given night.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, nieder said:

Pretty disappointing to hear about the lack of effort at practices. You watch Ducks games versus games with decent teams in the league, and other teams just do the basics so much better. Tape to tape passes etc. This is stuff they should be working on.

Sherwood is a hustle player similar to Cogs which I guess is why he's a fan favorite, because he puts the effort in. But he just doesn't have the hands to be anything more than a 4th liner at best or the 13th forward on any given night.

We're around game 68 or 69 here.   Players are going to be worn down by the season.   lack of effort could simply be tired.  If the coach isn't making a big thing about it at that practice, I would not worry about it.   

The effort I've seen since the trade deadline is much greater than before it. Almost all the games have been really fun to watch and the compete level has been high.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I thought maybe Shore too, but the original article said this:

That made it sound like Ritchie exudes some negativity that affects the guys around him.

I was completely kidding.  I'm sure Shore was fine.  As fine as the worst hockey player in history can be, anyway.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

I was completely kidding.  I'm sure Shore was fine.  As fine as the worst hockey player in history can be, anyway.

I thought you were kidding... Ha Ha

Share this post


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

Yeah, does this mean he's looking to make a big splash at free agency by bringing in a big name player? Pietrangelo anyone?

I would be surprised if the assistants are not gone this off-season, especially if Murray is saying the PP is his biggest concern.

Man, Pietrangelo would be amazing....although he was going after Shattenkirk and Faulk...both of which aren't really the same as getting Pietrangelo...and i hope you're right about the assistant coaches!!

2 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:

Why say the "I foresaw it" thing though? Doesn't this kind of infantilize his head coach?

"It's ok, Eakins. You have no significant positive NHL experience and I knew you'd make those mistakes. I foresaw it. [pats him on head]"

haha that's a fair point...but im guessing there was a convo with Eakins about it. Like at my work I get some freedom to make decisions that the boss disagrees with -- he tells me before hand lol he definitely does...but if I feel strongly about it he lets me do it any way...and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

2 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:

Hopefully this means that he's overall happy with the D and that his focus is really on improving the offense and PP

thats what im hoping, too!! i share his same optimism...i think when healthy, Cam, Lindholm, Manson, Gbud, Juice, and... ??? Mahura? Some big guy we trade for? Could be a scary defense...

1 hour ago, JiggyToTheCup said:

The effort I've seen since the trade deadline is much greater than before it. Almost all the games have been really fun to watch and the compete level has been high.

i've felt the same!!

Share this post


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

We're around game 68 or 69 here.   Players are going to be worn down by the season.   lack of effort could simply be tired.  If the coach isn't making a big thing about it at that practice, I would not worry about it.   

The effort I've seen since the trade deadline is much greater than before it. Almost all the games have been really fun to watch and the compete level has been high.

It was almost someone revived our Ducks with Bolt of Lighting....Like you said it's fun to watch them play and Compete Level is High and their Motivation is there.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

Share this post


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

Hopefully this means that he's overall happy with the D and that his focus is really on improving the offense and PP.

Any thoughts on what he meant with respect to the Niedermayer/Pronger comment? Pronger was a trade, not a UFA signing, and it cost us Lupul (former #7 overall), Smid (former #9 OA), two 1st rounders (2007, 2008) and a 2nd rounder (2008). Was he hinting that he might deal a whole bunch of assets for an elite player to accelerate the rebuild?  

D - I think that's what he meant.  The question is: what is he happy about?  He may be indicating he's happy with the trade bait we have within the D-ranks as they stand now, and not really the overall performance.  The funny thing is that I think he's not too put out with the injuries.  It keeps us below average on team wins and gives him a chance to see the newbs and youngsters play hard games in the stretch.  

His multiple-mentioned focus moving forward is shooters.  We have too many play makers (BM stated this, with a chuckle, but with some underlying frustration).  That said, while BM wouldn't name who we are going for in the draft, he said "there's a really good player going early!  He can shoot and play-make and do it all."  After that sort-of LOL moment, BM mentioned that there are also a couple draft forwards/prospects who can shoot more than play-make, and that there are a good 7-9 D prospects who seem to be good shooters - offensively minded D.  There's a... small chance he's playing coy with a possible trade up to #1 once the lottery happens (just a hint of a feeling on my part).

Neids/Pronger comment - this was in the context of looking for free agents, but it was solely a hand-wavy example of what the organization has done in the past, not what he is specifically looking for.  Basically, he was saying that the organization has searched out and acquired top end talent before now, in bunches, and they are open to looking for similar opportunities moving forward.  I think the comment led directly into BM making the first larger point that ownership is behind purchasing UFA talent.  The follow up caveats were brief, but maybe unrealistic?  BM doesn't want to give 8 years $10M to a 30 year old (or 7 years to a 29 year old).  He noted that when they signed Getz and Perry for the amounts they did, "we were betting on one of them making through the end of the contracts."  The second larger point seemed to be that the organization is willing to trade talent we have now to get the sweetheart target.  So, yes, assets to get an elite player to accelerate the rebuild, but not announced with the thoughtful logic and vocal/voice-timbre of full commitment I generally expect from a committed BM (purely my interpretation).  I'm tentatively chalking this up as another one of those "we're willing if the sweet deal comes along" sort of throw away statements.

I mean, come on, though.  He can't tell the world he's going to give up the shop for a Mitch Marner and expect to make a good deal.

Oh, i should mention - BM talked briefly about that one time "we thought we'd won the lottery, but it turned out not.  Sidney's a good player."  that comment was part of meandering around the question whether we'd be looking for franchise players in the draft or by UFA/trade.  Hazy made a really good point about how few top 5 picks we've had... i think he said the last top 5 pick was in 2003?  basically, we all agreed that we'd put together a great team without languishing in the bottom for a long time.  Edmonton and another team were mentioned.  Sorry, can't remember the other one. 

I know someone has mentioned this before, but BM explicitly noted that he started the rebuild a year late - this was a fairly early comment in the discussion, so almost all (all?) the above was sort of under that umbrella.  Just think about what that means... BM is thinking now that he should have fired RC and brought up Eakins a year earlier, before Cogs was traded, etc.  That's... pretty interesting to consider.  Not that I want to spend endless time on the board reading about what could have been (please guys, let's not go there in any large way), but right now, I feel like waiting the extra year has helped us shed some players we might not have shed otherwise, which has opened up some new prospects that... might have been for the best for a new coach trying to change the team's direction - it was always going to hurt, regardless.  Eakins will never be blamed for losing Cogs, and that's probably a good thing.  Also, BM is shouldering whatever burden he can so that Eakins get a solid, fair chance.  That's a pretty cool/selfless thing to do (even if it's all BM's fault regardless, but you know what I mean).

Someone in the audience thanked BM for doing the talk, especially this year.  The audience member said that not all GM's do this sort of thing.  I'm not sure how true that is, but man, I really enjoy the access we get at least once a year.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fisix said:

D - I think that's what he meant.  The question is: what is he happy about?  He may be indicating he's happy with the trade bait we have within the D-ranks as they stand now, and not really the overall performance.  The funny thing is that I think he's not too put out with the injuries.  It keeps us below average on team wins and gives him a chance to see the newbs and youngsters play hard games in the stretch.  

His multiple-mentioned focus moving forward is shooters.  We have too many play makers (BM stated this, with a chuckle, but with some underlying frustration).  That said, while BM wouldn't name who we are going for in the draft, he said "there's a really good player going early!  He can shoot and play-make and do it all."  After that sort-of LOL moment, BM mentioned that there are also a couple draft forwards/prospects who can shoot more than play-make, and that there are a good 7-9 D prospects who seem to be good shooters - offensively minded D.  There's a... small chance he's playing coy with a possible trade up to #1 once the lottery happens (just a hint of a feeling on my part).

Neids/Pronger comment - this was in the context of looking for free agents, but it was solely a hand-wavy example of what the organization has done in the past, not what he is specifically looking for.  Basically, he was saying that the organization has searched out and acquired top end talent before now, in bunches, and they are open to looking for similar opportunities moving forward.  I think the comment led directly into BM making the first larger point that ownership is behind purchasing UFA talent.  The follow up caveats were brief, but maybe unrealistic?  BM doesn't want to give 8 years $10M to a 30 year old (or 7 years to a 29 year old).  He noted that when they signed Getz and Perry for the amounts they did, "we were betting on one of them making through the end of the contracts."  The second larger point seemed to be that the organization is willing to trade talent we have now to get the sweetheart target.  So, yes, assets to get an elite player to accelerate the rebuild, but not announced with the thoughtful logic and vocal/voice-timbre of full commitment I generally expect from a committed BM (purely my interpretation).  I'm tentatively chalking this up as another one of those "we're willing if the sweet deal comes along" sort of throw away statements.

I mean, come on, though.  He can't tell the world he's going to give up the shop for a Mitch Marner and expect to make a good deal.

Oh, i should mention - BM talked briefly about that one time "we thought we'd won the lottery, but it turned out not.  Sidney's a good player."  that comment was part of meandering around the question whether we'd be looking for franchise players in the draft or by UFA/trade.  Hazy made a really good point about how few top 5 picks we've had... i think he said the last top 5 pick was in 2003?  basically, we all agreed that we'd put together a great team without languishing in the bottom for a long time.  Edmonton and another team were mentioned.  Sorry, can't remember the other one. 

I know someone has mentioned this before, but BM explicitly noted that he started the rebuild a year late - this was a fairly early comment in the discussion, so almost all (all?) the above was sort of under that umbrella.  Just think about what that means... BM is thinking now that he should have fired RC and brought up Eakins a year earlier, before Cogs was traded, etc.  That's... pretty interesting to consider.  Not that I want to spend endless time on the board reading about what could have been (please guys, let's not go there in any large way), but right now, I feel like waiting the extra year has helped us shed some players we might not have shed otherwise, which has opened up some new prospects that... might have been for the best for a new coach trying to change the team's direction - it was always going to hurt, regardless.  Eakins will never be blamed for losing Cogs, and that's probably a good thing.  Also, BM is shouldering whatever burden he can so that Eakins get a solid, fair chance.  That's a pretty cool/selfless thing to do (even if it's all BM's fault regardless, but you know what I mean).

Someone in the audience thanked BM for doing the talk, especially this year.  The audience member said that not all GM's do this sort of thing.  I'm not sure how true that is, but man, I really enjoy the access we get at least once a year.

Regarding the signing of Niedermayer and the trading for Pronger, BM said he would be willing to make similar moves in the future when he felt the Ducks were a Cup contender again. 

He mentioned Edmonton and Pittsburgh as teams that “went to the bottom” for 5+ years to rebuild, something he doesn’t want to do.

He also said that he hopes NR will become a player that works hard on and off the ice consistently.

Other than that I have nothing to add that others, and mostly you have already said.  Unless you were taking notes or recorded the session, you have an incredible memory!  

I have a much higher opinion of GMBM after attending the event and feel bad for what I said about him at the TDL.  I also got the chance to meet Hazy, which was something I have wanted to do for a long time.  I saw him play goalie at Cornell when I was a freshman there (a loooong time ago).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Spencer_12 said:

With the Kings winning tonight, the Ducks are equal distance from #2 and #7 (3 points). Only 13 games left. 

I noticed that and hate to say that I am actually hoping the Ducks start losing more.  Finishing 2nd from the bottom guarantees a top 5 pick, something the Ducks haven’t had since picking Bobby Ryan at #2 overall in 2005.  It would also give the Ducks a decent shot at getting the #1 pick for the first time ever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ducks play Kings three times before the end of the season and Ottawa tonight. Preverbal -4 pt games. Must lose.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Niedermayer/Pronger Duo via Free Agency?...It's going to take alot for Ducks to get that impact Duo again.....Getting Pronger was Blessing and having Scott Niedermayer was Blessing as well. True Question is why our Ducks Overpay?.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

Share this post


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

Regarding the signing of Niedermayer and the trading for Pronger, BM said he would be willing to make similar moves in the future when he felt the Ducks were a Cup contender again. 

He mentioned Edmonton and Pittsburgh as teams that “went to the bottom” for 5+ years to rebuild, something he doesn’t want to do.

He also said that he hopes NR will become a player that works hard on and off the ice consistently.

Other than that I have nothing to add that others, and mostly you have already said.  Unless you were taking notes or recorded the session, you have an incredible memory!  

I have a much higher opinion of GMBM after attending the event and feel bad for what I said about him at the TDL.  I also got the chance to meet Hazy, which was something I have wanted to do for a long time.  I saw him play goalie at Cornell when I was a freshman there (a loooong time ago).

I always forget to set it up, then feel too self conscious to record anything... and I don't want to take notes manually and miss stuff.  My memory had a lot of help from the others, even the original linked article (triggered some recall).  Thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI to all...TSN has our Ducks chance at getting No1 overall  8.5.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooo if we are going to be trying to sign Grant....we really do have the assets to get a good 2C...and RW.... AND RHD....

I wonder what is Murray's best case scenario is as far as trying to fill these roles... we have a logjam right now in center and LW and LHD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2020 at 9:31 AM, hoxxey said:

That's what I thought he meant. (ritchie)

For all we know, BM is threatening the players something like "if you don't start playing better, having better results,  showing leadership, scoring on the power play and doing what our coaching staff tell you to do -  you can forget about being protected in the entry draft and your butt will end up in Seattle"...

The Ducks are in a better position for this entry draft... instead of keeping a cup window open, they can simply assess their roster, look at who they expect other teams to expose for the entry draft, and roll with it. Hope it lights a fire under our younger 'vets', and if it doesn't, a great opportunity to reshuffle the deck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ducks are now 5-2-1 since the TDL.  That’s a 113 point pace.  Looks like GMBM did too good of a job improving the team at the TDL and will hurt his chances of getting the high pick he covets!

Share this post


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

Ducks are now 5-2-1 since the TDL.  That’s a 113 point pace.  Looks like GMBM did too good of a job improving the team at the TDL and will hurt his chances of getting the high pick he covets!

Traded Ritchie and Kase and with pretty much the entire top-4 and Gibson now hurt. The team is winning just to spite Murray at this point lol.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Traded Ritchie and Kase and with pretty much the entire top-4 and Gibson now hurt. The team is winning just to spite Murray at this point lol.

They were so lucky against Ottawa last night.  They probably should have lost that game 7 - 5.  The Ducks scored pretty much every time they had possession of the puck for more than 5 seconds in the offensive zone because Ottawa is awful at defense, but otherwise, the Senators dominated that game.

Share this post


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

Ducks are now 5-2-1 since the TDL.  That’s a 113 point pace.  Looks like GMBM did too good of a job improving the team at the TDL and will hurt his chances of getting the high pick he covets!

they are still 5th pick for the lottery.  That hasn't changed, except they were a few games at #4

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...