Sign in to follow this  
gotbeer

The Official 2018-2019 Anaheim Ducks Thread

1,036 posts in this topic

8 minutes ago, nate said:

I don't see Perry being traded, can't imagine teams would take on the salary, and at the point where you are retaining so much of it, it would be better to buy out.

The way I look at it.  Buyout would be about $4 million a year.  Not including the extra years.  So would he be worth $4.6 million a year to a team?  Or does Calgary want to unload one of their contracts?  Not sure who, but Frolik looks the most possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perry's not going to accept a trade unless it's to a location he prefers over Anaheim. Why would he? The guy's just clicking his years off here. 

I don't think Perry would mind being bought out at all. 

He's also not going to play on the Duck's fourth line. The Ducks would buy him out instead. The guy kind of dogs it now. Imagine how he would preform if the Ducks did that to him. You would easily be able to pick up a player in the 1-2 million range that would out play him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

more LoLz.  Fucking guy gets injured literally not doing anything.  Looking forward to agonizing through his shit next year.  Told you guys. Ducks should have just eaten the shit pie and been done with it when he was diagnosed with that disease. 

Share this post


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

Sounds like RC is going to be retained.  What a bunch of crap.

Wow. It might be time for the Ducks director of scouting to take over as GM & fire Murray if he really believes in keeping Carlyle around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exit recap, Hockey Writers.

Where the Anaheim Ducks Went Wrong

LA Daily/OC Register Eric Stephens  take on things.

GM Bob Murray says Ducks have to get faster to compete

And I agree with this.  Grant was fine in the 4th line, and would be cheap.

Quote

They’re expected to jettison older free agents such as Kevin Bieksa, Antoine Vermette, Jason Chimera and Chris Kelly. Murray did rave the work of fourth-line center Derek Grant and would like to re-sign him.

Times take on things.

Ducks enter the offseason looking to adjust to NHL's evolving game

Overall, my opinion on the comments.  

First line will be Rakell/Getzlaf/Eaves.  Which I'm fine with.

After that, it gets murky.  Fast tempo, and smart hockey.  You aren't getting rid of Kesler, and I think if you surround him with speed, he will be just fine.   Cogs does play an extremely fast tempo game.  But does Silfverberg?  He's owed $3.75 and is a UFA after this season.  I think as trade chips go.  You can get a lot still for him.  And get someone in FA'cy that does fit the mold.  I still think it's going to be JVR that is going to be that fit.  

third line.  Henrique, Kase.  Need to sign Kase to a Rakell deal.  But those two sure does seem to be that fast tempo game.  Then you have Ritchie.  At times he played well on the boner line.  But it sure does seem like he's ticketed for the 4th line or traded.  Just got to figure out who.  

Fourth line.  Start with Grant.  He's nothing flashy.  But showed some speed.  And is perfectly capable as a 4th line center.  I'd like to see this line be used as a developmental line like so many hockey teams have.   And not go the veteran slow ass shit route with grinders.  So I say go young and look at the Gulls to fill this line.  We might find another Kase that just came out of nowhere.  But we won't know unless we start playing those kids instead of the geriatric cones.  I mean, remember Roy?  He'd probably fit on the 4th line, and his style of play is definitely on the fast side.  Kossilla, Tropp, Kerdiles, Carrick were all our top scorers last season.  One of them has to fit.  More likely Kossilla or Kerdiles, since at least their penalty minutes were on the lower side compared to Tropp and Carrick.  

So on offense.  I really think the odd men out are going to be Perry, Silfverberg and Ritchie.  

Defense.

While we bag on him.  Lindholm is probably not going anywhere.   51 CF FF, +16, 22 minutes.  He has holes in his game, but he'll get better.  And Manson.  The stay at home defenseman will also just get better.  Both are signed long term, and should work well.

Fowler and Montour.  Just need to get Montours long term contract done.  Probably looking at a bit less than Fowlers $4 million a season for 6 years?  Since Fowler did all his stuff when he was in his teens and Montour is 24.  

So top 2 are set.  Pettersson, while not spectacular, was fine IMO for a 3rd line defensemen.  And at 21, should get better with more experience.  You could go to the wealth of young players at the Gulls.  Wellinsky, Megna, and now Larsson.  I think with a season at AHL under his belt, next season we have to take a look at a Pettersson/Larsson combo.  

But as D goes.  That IMO we should be good.  But the big thing that the D has to work on is their point shot.  They need to recognize when to do it better, and realize that you don't always have to shoot it at the net.  Take a page from the Sharks, and work on the redirected shots.   

Overall, I don't think we are that far away from playing a faster paced style of play.   And it's really attainable.  But I do think we have to subtract more than we add.  With one big subtraction that needs to occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More from the Hockey writers. 

Where the Anaheim Ducks Went Wrong

Not too much in it.   But he does bring up some numbers.

Quote

The Ducks’ 5-on-5 Corsi-for percentage in the regular season was only 48.62 percent, which was ranked 22nd in the league. They gave up 3,860 total shot attempts at 5-on-5—the 10th-highest total in the NHL. 

Quote

Even so, the sheer volume of scoring chances against Anaheim suggests that a systematic problem was very much in play. Yielding that many shot attempts, and high-quality ones at that (their 764 high-danger shot attempts against at 5-on-5 were the eighth-most in the league), speaks to something inherently flawed with a style of play as well as issues with depth/personnel.

The Corpse of the Anaheim Ducks

This one is a bit on the harsh side.  And screams I like SJ.  But there is some truth to it. 

I don't think we need to blow up like he suggests and getting rid of Getzlaf, Perry, and Kesler.  But I do think that possibly the reason why we aren't a cohesive group is that on 5 men on the ice, 1-2 were always not on the the same page.  Of course you have the three cones.  But when you really look deep down on this team, IMO.  When the top line was out there.  You had 4 men on the ice.  3 men if a cone was on defense.  How effective can you be when you are short.  You look at Rakell and Getzlaf, they are moving the puck, looking for opportunities.  And Perry is just standing around waiting for an opportunity to come.  

And maybe the second writer is right.  Nothing wrong in the style we play.  It's just how we play that is the problem.  And with our style, first line.  You can't have one guy picking daisy's.  Second line.  For all that Silfverberg is.  And I want him to be really good.  But when have you seen him on the boards like Cogs and Kes, and winning pucks and cycling it?  It's almost like he's following Perry's lead.  And maybe that is a coaching problem?  Third line.  And as much as I like Ritchie.  My patience with him is really about done.  For as big and strong as he is.  I don't think I recall a player that has been as dominated on the boards as he has.  And if you are playing the physical style, you have to know how to protect the puck and cycle the puck on the boards.  Which he seems to be unable to do.  

As far as this offeason goes.  As I said, I don't know about Ritchie anymore.  Can you teach the board style he needs?  So that's one.  Eaves will replace Perry.  At least Eaves will get his nose dirty, even in his fragile state.  So that's two.  Silfverberg is still a fence guy.  He should be better.  But he's not.  And it's pretty much decision time on him.  Is he a part of the future?  And right now, I'd say no.  I think what we see is what we get, and we need better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy needs to explain what “system” a defense manned by guys like Francois Beauchmin and Kevin Bieksa would be workable.  There is no system.  the personnel sucked.  The problem with the Ducks has and continues to be a massive gulf in talent between the good players on the team and the bad.  The good news is that a bunch of the shitty guys will be gone.  The bad news is that we can’t really have any idea who replaces them.  Sticking Larsson and Petterson into primary roles is a bad idea.  Petterson looked terrible at times.   He’s young,  and I like some of the tools but we need reliable guys if we’re going to compete next year.  Larsson the Ducks didn’t have confidence In to call up the entire season.  That’s the problem.  We need money for Gibson, so we’re kind of up against it.  We need to win now because guys like Kesler and Getzlaf are aging out.  In order to win now we need money to pay reliable players.  I have very little confidence that we’ll be able to do so.  If the goal is to win a Stanley cup.  It’s tough to be optimistic in the short term.  We have too many B and C players sucking up payroll.  

Edited by UndertheHalo

Share this post


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

Trent yawny will not be retained. We'll see if that's it. 

I think that guarantees that RC will be back, otherwise they would let the new coach make assistant changes.

Share this post


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

Generally I think he correctly outlines the problems but it’s also pretty clear that he doesn’t actually know a lot about these teams specifically.  He doesn’t talk about a bunch of the Ducks young defensemen.  Especially Montour who I think proved himself competent and more.  He also significantly over rates Lindholm.  Describing him as a difference maker like Doughty. Laugh.  This is what I’m talking about with perception and Lindholm.  The Ducks need to look at that and see just what is possible in a Lindholm trade.  If some sucker GM wants to pretend Lindholm is an elite “impact” defenseman.  Let them pay up that way.  That would be the best thing possible for the Ducks. 

Anyway, the defense (with 1 or 2 good smart additions) and Gibson are the lone bright spots.  The forward core is bad.  The farm is mostly bad.

I know I keep saying it.  This article does also.  The Ducks need a big shake up right now.  Somehow get rid of Perry.  Trade Lindholm.  Something.  Otherwise we’re looking at an extended rebuild at some point in the near future. 

Edited by UndertheHalo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 years of nothing better than a #8 pick is starting to show up. I think the Ducks did the smart thing by drafting more defensive players because of the best player available philosophy. But, Murray's inability to trade for talent doesn't overcome the lopsidedness of our talent pool. 

I don't know what they're going to do. I'm concerned about BM's ability to fix this in the next couple years. I feel the NHL talent level has noticeably increased in the last couple years and we've been left behind. Hockey isn't a good sport to sign free agents in anymore (High cost; long terms; players who have taken a lot of abuse and therefore are iffy going forward). Decent first round picks are too difficult to acquire with the lottery in place. It doesn't look promising.

Does anyone else feel that BM needs to show some serious moves forward in the next year (two at the most) or the Samueli's will move on from him. I don't see how his time couldn't be coming to an end unless he fixes this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, deepdrive said:

10 years of nothing better than a #8 pick is starting to show up. I think the Ducks did the smart thing by drafting more defensive players because of the best player available philosophy. But, Murray's inability to trade for talent doesn't overcome the lopsidedness of our talent pool. 

I don't know what they're going to do. I'm concerned about BM's ability to fix this in the next couple years. I feel the NHL talent level has noticeably increased in the last couple years and we've been left behind. Hockey isn't a good sport to sign free agents in anymore (High cost; long terms; players who have taken a lot of abuse and therefore are iffy going forward). Decent first round picks are too difficult to acquire with the lottery in place. It doesn't look promising.

Does anyone else feel that BM needs to show some serious moves forward in the next year (two at the most) or the Samueli's will move on from him. I don't see how his time couldn't be coming to an end unless he fixes this. 

Yep been saying it.  I think BM needs to go because I don’t think he’s the guy to do major surgery on what he’s built.  That is the major reason.  Also, I’m critical of a bunch of things he’s done (or not done)  The Ducks just have to go in a different direction.  He’s been in the GM chair for a long time. 

I will give Bob credit for drafting relatively well given the teams success. They haven’t had great draft position for a long time....it’s tough when it’s like that. 

Edited by UndertheHalo

Share this post


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

 

I don't know what they're going to do. I'm concerned about BM's ability to fix this in the next couple years. I feel the NHL talent level has noticeably increased in the last couple years and we've been left behind. Hockey isn't a good sport to sign free agents in anymore (High cost; long terms; players who have taken a lot of abuse and therefore are iffy going forward). Decent first round picks are too difficult to acquire with the lottery in place. It doesn't look promising.

I don't think the talent level has increased.  But just my take on things.   

Two things, at least last season were going against us.  One thing might get solved, but the other is a philosophical team thing. 

First thing.  We were top heavy of players past the twilight of their careers.  Bieska and Beauchemin, 1/3 of our defense.  We should have let Vegas have Bieska and we never should have signed Beauchemin.   And this goes to the second thing.  But then we have Vermette, and the new cone Perry.  It also doesn't help that Ritchie hasn't really progressed like we thought he would.  So that's pretty much one Oman on each line that isn't very beneficial, and 2 are old and one is just big.  

Second thing.  And this might be why it feels that the NHL talent is passing us by, and we only get more older and expensive.  It's the team philosophy of developing and developing people in the minors.  Do you think any other team would have kept Steel in the Juniors with the year he was having?  Or Jones?  Would any team have chosen to sign Beauchemin instead of bring up Larsson (especially with his short stint 2 years ago for something like 7 games when he didn't look bad at all)?  To me, this is why other teams seem to be passing us up.  The sharks pretty had their developmental 4th line kick our ass and get experience, while our young guys are "learning" in the minors.  You look at other teams 4th lines, and the good teams don't have castaways and has beens anymore.  They have their young studs trying to prove themselves.  Guys that are hungry, with young legs.  

This is why I think you have to go Pettersson and Larrson next season on D.  Heck, I'd even go with Grant/Jones/Steel as our 4th line, or Grant/Roy/Blandisi.  Could even not go with Grant at all and go Roy/Blandisi/Steel-Jones.  What use is drafting, and having a minors if all you are going to do is keep them down?  We really need to use them, then use FA'cy to get things we don't have.  That really then would help us to sign JVR (yeah, I still think he is a fit for that line)  for the Kesler/Cogs line.   Move Silfverberg to the 3rd line, or trade him and Ritchie and get someone else in FA'cy.  Hmm, the boner line of Henrique/Kase/Roy would just be flying all other the place.

But of course that is if BM changes.  And he probably won't.  So we will go dumpster diving for the 4th line, spending cap money.  Then dumpster dive for at least one of the D positions.  Or he will blow his budget on the D position and we won't have money for any O help.  

We do have some people we need to sign.  But they aren't going to be as expensive as you all think.  Kase profiles as a similarity close to Rakell.  So I can see the Ducks signing him to a 6/$22.8 deal that Rakell got, $3.8 a year.  I think that buys out 1 or 2 years of UFA.  Montour is a tricky one.  He doesn't really compare to Fowler, since Fowler was much younger and had a much higher scoring total.  But you are buying out a few years of FA'cy, so maybe 5/$20 that Fowler got in his first contract would be a reasonable figure, or $4 million a year.   Then that would leave Gibson.  For him, I'd look at Fleury or Quick.  Fleury coming out of RFA was a 7 year/$35.  Quick was a 10/$58.  So we are looking at $5-5.8 million a year.  The big question with Gibson is really how long do you want to go.  He's not exactly a healthy dude already.  

So for that trio, that would be $2.3 gibson (he still has a year to RFA), $3.8 Kase, $4 Montour.  Total of $10.2.   Capfriendly as us $9.2 under the cap ATM.  So just shows that we will need to move people if we want to get better.   And if we can do Silfverberg, Ritchie and only be on the hook for $4 of Perry's contract.  That's $8.3 million to get a good upgrade on O.  

Share this post


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

We should have let Vegas have Bieska

Huh?  Bieksa had a NMC.  Vegas wasn't going to take Bieksa.  They would have taken Vats but we gave them Theodore so they would take Stoner in the draft.  i didnt like the deal but we were never going to lose Bieksa unless we bought him out.  

Share this post


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

Huh?  Bieksa had a NMC.  Vegas wasn't going to take Bieksa.  They would have taken Vats but we gave them Theodore so they would take Stoner in the draft.  i didnt like the deal but we were never going to lose Bieksa unless we bought him out.  

That was in reference to someone earlier saying that Vegas would have taken Bieska.   I just thought it was moronic of the Ducks to not have him waive his NMC for the draft, so that we could have protected all our Dmen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • AngelsWin.com Ad-free Membership Options