SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

mytduxfan

Membre depuis
25 janv. 2017
Équipe favorite
Ducks d'Anaheim
Messages dans les forums
1457
Messages par jour
0.5
Forum: Armchair-GM23 févr. 2022 à 8 h 10
Sujet: Kapanen Trade
The Rakell deal is terrible IMO. Rakell may only be a complimentary winger and has a tendency to float around, but he's still a very capable scorer (in the right situation). Stick him on a line with a top C on a more successful team and he'll flourish. He certainly isn't a play driver, but he is capable of turning it on at times. Kapanen is a huge downgrade from that and the rest of the deal is just filler. Easy pass.

The Lindholm deal is respectable, but I'd pass. Would prefer a player closer to the league and someone less risk attached. Lindholm is a legit top pairing D-man. Some people are criminally underrating him because the team is bad. He's a legit shutdown option who plays big minutes and has years left in the tank. I presume any move would be discussed with Lindholm to ensure he's happy to stay at said team, so the excuse that he's a UFA and therefore worth less is weak. He's a trade and sign deal. IMO, ANA should do all they can to keep him.
Forum: Armchair-GM14 déc. 2021 à 6 h 25
Sujet: TDLs Part 1
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BuckoJoyde</b></div><div>Intention would be a pretty weak reason to get hold off on trading him when that intention has probably been clear since the club could extend him. That said, what team/gm wouldnt have the intention on resigning a Lindholm? Waiting till the offseason to resign is awfully risky and would leave us with in a bit of dilemma if it didn't come to fruition like it has many other times in the NHL. We shall see tho. I hope he resigns. Id offer him an 8.5X8. That might not even do it if you consider state taxes and the free agent market. Nonetheless, I do agree with your point here I just dont think its applicable to Hampus Lindholm.</div></div>

Yes, it is risky, but Lindholm hasn't expressed a desire to leave or even stated he'll test the market. If that is his plan, why not just say it is? It won't de-value any contract he'd get (open market and all) and would allow teams to prepare their finances to make a serious bid for him. He'd certainly be a prime target.

I imagine he is probably just being told to wait on re-signing with ANA. ANA (at least when GMBM was at the reigns) has traditionally driven a hard bargain when it comes to re-signs. His agent will have more leverage to get a better deal if Lindholm is literally days away from being a UFA, even if Lindholm has no intention of leaving.
Forum: Armchair-GM7 déc. 2021 à 7 h 33
Sujet: Personally Ideal
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>AntreDiAnaheim</b></div><div>I have no interest in moving Lindholm.</div></div>

Me either.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GeneralLandro</b></div><div>This is assuming he costs to much. I wouldn’t go over 6.5 mil for 6 years

Any more and I think I pass</div></div>

Why? That's a decent contract, but I'd go higher 7M x 8 would be my preferred rate, but I'd go as high as 7.5M. He's our best D-man by a longshot and makes his partner better. He's also got some really good chemistry with Drysdale. That would be our top pairing for the next 8 seasons... why mess with that to save few $$$?

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Lenny7</b></div><div>I agree that they both *should*, but the market hasn't ponied up a 1st for an expiring LD at the deadline since 2015.

Far better off extending Hampus ASAP, and moving Rakell while he's still scoring.</div></div>

That would be my strategy. Cash in on Rakell and keep the rest. I'd consider moving Manson, but don't personally see it happening.
Forum: Armchair-GM4 déc. 2021 à 17 h 46
Sujet: My Predicted Long Term Outlook
Hopefully we'll get a few more forward prospects with higher upside by the time Zellweger is on the first pairing. Not a fan of Milano on the top line, nor Tracey being in the line-up (so vanilla). I'm still hopeful that Comtois comes back from having his surgery with his old scoring prowess. He needs to improve his overall game. However, if he can put it all together, he could be a solid top line option. Having said that, W is really weak for us. C is fine, but I'd still prefer to be deeper. Getting a franchise C, like a Wright or Bedard, would really put this team over the top. D is fine. I don't see Lindholm going anywhere (Rakell, maybe). GT is stella.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>I think that the Ducks might make an effort to keep Hampus Lindholm, and might make a Philip Danault-type signing.</div></div>

Why does everyone think we won't re-sign Lindholm? Injury-prone? So strange. He's our best D-man by a long shot (although I think Drysdale surpasses him, eventually) and one of the more battle-hardened playoff performers. He's not a scoring machine, but I think he compliments Drysdale extremely well... or Drysdale compliments Lindholm. One or the other.
Forum: Armchair-GM11 mai 2021 à 18 h 46
Sujet: Next years line-up
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jah1722</b></div><div>I think the ducks need to move Manson before the expansion draft. If they find a deal they won’t lose anything of significance. Manson still has decent trade value even if it isn’t the 1st rounder GMBM was looking for. If he gets moved all the young fwds can be protected and the 3 LHD, Lindholm Fowler and Fleury. If Manson isn’t moved they may be forced to go 4-4-1.

It sounds like if Eichel gets traded Reinhart will want out too. They should look at both of them. If Eichel’s price is too rich then Reinhart is still quality enough to go after. Personally I think the ducks need another top line fwd as I think Comtois and Terry shouldn’t both be top liners. I feel like they’re more 4th fwds that could handle top line but on a playoff team are more suited for 2nd line.</div></div>

Don't see Eichel as reachable (we'd never give up the assets to acquire him), but would gladly give up this year's 1st+ to get him. I expect they'll want Zegras+, which I would do of course. I think an offer of Zegras + 1st + another roster player would be a very strong offer and not as punishing as people may think. Of course the high pick in the draft is nice, but if you're going to give up a high pick this is the year to do it and for an elite franchise C. That said, you've got to wonder about Eichel's health and his desire to play for another current bottom-feeder.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BuckoJoyde</b></div><div>Grant?!?!?!? He was our worst player this year. numbas dont lie.

For the post

1. I would only want OP in the 2-4 range. Really prefer Beniers(cant spell) over anyone in the top 4. Could see Hughes being a possibility.
2. I love the idea of using jones, Steel, Milano, or Lundeström as trade bait to have Seattle swallow up a contract. Very unlikely tho. If we had to lose a player straight up Mahura is the likely candidate. Wouldnt mind if its Steel. Dont see him having a future with this team.
3. Warm body? Ouch...he wasn't that bad this year. We sent him to production hell with grit and veteran presence on the 4th line there.
4. No big signings...... no big trades. You know the deal this is ducks hockey.</div></div>

1. I like Hughes, but now I am higher on Clarke. The injury to Hughes is a concern and Clarke already has shown he can play men's hockey.
2. I'd be okay with losing Mahura. He's a good player, but never stuck it at the NHL level and he's behind Lindholm and Fowler on the depth chart. Not to mention Lacombe coming through, and maybe Owen Power if drafted. Mahura wouldn't be the worst player to lose given our depth at D.
3. He wasn't bad, but he doesn't really do much at this point. Too slow for the modern league. Essentially, I wouldn't prioritise his signing or be too concerned about making space for him. Let the kids play and learn.
4. I hear ya! However, it isn't the lack of off-season signings that bothers me. It is the lack of TDL trades when we are pushing for the cup. Old memories now of course.
Forum: Armchair-GM11 mai 2021 à 15 h 56
Sujet: Next years line-up
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>I agree with everything here except part of #2: I would protect both Jones and Steel.

COMMENTERS PLEASE NOTE THE DISCLAIMER ABOUT THE DOLLAR VALUE OF THE RE-SIGNINGS!!</div></div>

Who do you think ANA exposes? I'm very much a Lindholm, Fowler, Fleury guy. I'm over Manson getting caught flat footed. He's not the worst D-man we have (Shatty) and certainly goes up against some of the tougher competition, but decisions have to be made and, like I said, I'm not even sure Seattle would take him. I wouldn't be against exposing Henrique or SIlf either and, whilst I like the energy Jones brings, he is irreplaceable. I'd give Steel a little more time before giving up on him being an impact player. He has been mismanaged, but he needs to work on his skating and overall intensity.
Forum: Armchair-GM22 mars 2021 à 0 h 46
Sujet: Next Year without Getzlaf
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BuckoJoyde</b></div><div>Zegras is gonna stay a winger unfortunately. I think he has a greater offensive impact at center but the guy lacks the physical capability to be a prominent top 6 center.

Getz is gonna come back another year or 2 without a doubt.

Also I would start consider adding John Gibson to that list of possible trade candidates. Maybe not at the deadline but, eventually he'll be a trade piece. Same for Steel especially if it was for classic GMBM 1 for 1 swap.

Wouldn't be surprised if Cam Fowler is exposed at the expansion over a Mahura. That contract is very tough irregardless how well he plays currently.

Not really looking forward to the draft this year. 1-3 seems to only get muddier. All I know is we need a center, a right handed shot forward and a player who can keep up with the physicality of the NHL.</div></div>

Can't agree with this take at all.

1. Zegras not physically capable? Of course he isn't. He literally just turned 20. You can't build muscle that quickly. Don't see him as a true #1 on a contender, but he's definitely got the skills to be 1/2C.
2. Unless he puts in a trade request, Gibson isn't going anywhere.
3. Fowler isn't going anywhere and certainly isn't being exposed at the draft (ridiculous!). Manson, Shattenkirk and Larsson can all go before Fowler.
4. Luke Hughes and Bradt Clark have legit top 2 potential. I'd gladly take either and hope we suck enough next year to get Shane Wright as a future franchise C. Using this year to solidify our back four for the next 10 years would be amazing.
Forum: Armchair-GM1 févr. 2021 à 4 h 56
Sujet: Time To Send a Message
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeastModeUnknown</b></div><div>Name one generational player on the Blues team.</div></div>

Okay bro... nice wind up. :D

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeastModeUnknown</b></div><div>Tarasenko is injured hasn't been playing over the past 2 seasons. Bergeron still arguably better, quite a few people would argue about 5-6 other centers better. O'Reilly maybe hits 15th in the league.</div></div>

Tarasenko had 30 season and 11 playoff goals in your SC winning season and ROR won the Selke and Conn Smythe. There is no denying their impact in the years you've been a competitive team... and the seasons they haven't been good you've been decidedly worse... and you had Pietrangelo for years, an elite 1D. Anyway, I'm not going to sit here arguing that STL has had elite players on the team that were pivotal to their success.

Good luck to STL in the season. I'm sure you're going to do well playing multiple bottom-feeder teams in ANA, LA, SJ and ARI for most of the season. I'm not sure it really proves that STL are legit contender, but we'll see when we get to the playoffs.
Forum: Armchair-GM31 janv. 2021 à 20 h 2
Sujet: Time To Send a Message
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeastModeUnknown</b></div><div>Blues don't have a Generational Talent, it's just a good depth squad. You don't need a top end player, but I do know none of the players you have are working, and the coaching staff you have hasn't worked.</div></div>

At no point did I mention "generational". In fact, I said non-generational. Kind of ridiculous to say that STL is a team of depth. Whilst STL has talent throughout the lines, they also have ROR, arguably the best 2-way C in the league, and an elite winger in Tarasenko. The Ducks best forward doesn't sniff either of those players jockstrap. You also had an elite 1D in Pietrangelo for many years, alongside an already strong D-core. Again, we don't have any of that.

It is nonsensical to suggest that you can be a competitive team without elite talent in the line-up. Even the Ducks 2003 team had Paul Kariya and he was pivotal in our deep run.
Forum: Armchair-GM31 janv. 2021 à 7 h 47
Sujet: Time To Send a Message
I think expectations are way too high for this team and I think fans underestimate the power of elite talent. I mean we Duck fans see first hand what a truly elite player in Gibson is capable of doing (literally stealing games), but then assume a bunch of 2nd line forwards should be able to match that level of play without any support. I truly believe that elite players, particularly Cs, lift an entire team. You see that with teams like NYI (didn't bat an eyelid losing JT because they had Barzal), TOR (Matthews), EDM (He who shall not be named), CAR (Aho)... I mean, why do people think that, even after going all the way the SCF, Vegas has continued to add elite wingers to their team in Pacioretty and Stone? It is because they know that elite players lift and team and, despite their deep run, they didn't have enough proven elite talent... and now they've solidified themselves as one of the top teams in the league. We don't have any elite talent outside of Gibson. Honestly, having at least 1 elite level forward would do us a world of good.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MOTDux</b></div><div>I’ve been saying this for a while, Eakins is not NHL caliber coach. He never was and shouldn’t be our coach.</div></div>

Genuinely interested to hear your reasoning behind this opinion. IMO, he's got arguably the worst constructed team in the league to work with and it was no better in EDM, but please do provide specifics on Eakin's deficiencies as an NHL coach.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeastModeUnknown</b></div><div>Idk but it's been a downfall since they fell off a cliff in 2019. The team has been going downhill from there. I think the team needs to just rebuild from scratch to be real honest, and that starts with management and coaching.</div></div>

The team was in downfall before then, probably since we lost in WCF to Chicago in 2015. The run in 2017 with RC was a result of the poor teams we faced in rounds 1 and 2. Facing a real team in NSH was proof of that.

I disagree with the "start from scratch" approach. I mean, how many teams have been lifted by adding a truly elite talent? I'm not even talking about the McDavids. Look at guys like Barzal, Matthews, Aho... all non-generational talents but who have lifted their teams from mediocrity. We don't have that in our line-up. Perhaps Zegras is our saving grace. Who knows? I think there is a good argument for moving on from GMBM, but I'd given Eakins are couple more years.
Forum: Armchair-GM12 oct. 2020 à 19 h 53
Sujet: Ready for Training Camp
I agree those will likely be our lines. How depressing, eh? IMO, the team looks very, very weak. I think we're looking at a very tough year and may end up at the very bottom of the standings. I just have not been impressed with any of our young guys. Steel is smart and has excellent vision, but his skating is just too average. I think we need to see some significant improvement out of him this coming season or we move him to wing and into more of a two-way role (Steel - Lundestrom - Silfverberg = could be good as a smart, two-way, shutdown line). Jones is just an energy guy for me. I think his best place on the depth chart is the 4th line. I've been most disappointed with Terry's progression. He's 23 and still looks like a kid against men. He's got the tools, but doesn't utilise them effectively at this level and has no board game whatsoever. Some of that could be the team's system (I think Terry would work better on more of a run-and-gun team) so I'm still tentatively hoping for improvement as Eakin's system is further adopted. As far as Larsson, he's a soft, third pairing guy and just very vanilla. He's more of a compliment to a legit 3rd pairing PP QB (I'm thinking Shatty or Vatanen) than a standout talent. I guess that's okay, but not what you hope for out of 1st round picks, even late ones, especially considering how Theodore turned out. Tracey is another vanilla player I'm not that high on. On a more positive note, I really like Zegras, Comtois and Lundestrom (I like Steel too, but just not as a top 6C - which leaves a gap), and I really like the addition of Drysdale and Perreault. I guess one shouldn't be surprised that the better prospects were drafted more recently and higher up the draft rankings.

Milano and Heinen are okay additions. I don't think they belong in the top 6 and I certainly wouldn't have them on my team. I think Milano looked good over a short stint, but I am confident he'll disappear again after the "honeymoon period" most players have during the first few games on a new team. Heinen, again, is just very vanilla. Not really that excited about him. I am still a fan of Silf, Grant, Henrique, Lindholm and Fowler. Manson needs to step his game up and cut out those errors. Shatty will be a nightmare anywhere except the bottom pairing. We are not the offensive powerhouse that TB is and we can't afford to shelter him the way they did. I fully expect Djoos to be forcing Larson out the line-up most nights. Gibson is a god amongst mortals.

IMO, we still need a franchise C and I wouldn't mind adding another high-end D prospect (Brandt Clarke?). I think we should also trade Rakell for help on the RW. It is probably not likely now, but I did like the proposed idea of trading Rakell+ for Nylander. We get the better player in a position of more immediate need and TOR gets a good replacement on a sweetheart deal. Like I said, TOR seems to be okay capwise now, so that deal doesn't seem likely. Ideal lines in the future would have been the following:

Comtois - Franchise C - Nylander
Henrique - Zegras - Perreault
Steel - Lundestrom - Silfverberg
Jones - Grant - Tracey

Lindholm - Drysdale
Fowler - Manson
Larson/Djoos - Shattenkirk

Gibson - Dostal.

Complete overkill centre depth is key for me, followed by a deep, high-end D-core. Hence my desire to add a franchise C (even though I think Zegras has elite, 1C potential), and another high-end D-man. Anyway, I'm just thinking outside my head at this point. I'm sure lots will change with this coming season. Although I don't expect this team to perform well, a win for me would be one of the above taking their game to the next level + getting a little luckier in the draft (I'd like top 3). We'll see how it goes.
Forum: Armchair-GM12 oct. 2020 à 19 h 9
Sujet: Flower
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>hardrock2580</b></div><div>I think this is in response to the Lebrun story this morning that stated Miller is not restricting himself to just Anaheim if he's to play next season. Vegas was mentioned as a team that has talked with Miller, along with Detroit and one other team I can't mention (that has already signed a goalie, like Detroit)...

I came here to look at how the money would look for a Fleury to Anaheim trade with 50% retained. Hypothetically; if this were to happen, it would pretty much be taking Fleury and his contract for a mid-round pick so Vegas could sign Miller on the cheap. Would it create enough space for Pietrangelo in Vegas though? Probably not unless they can deal another dman. But also for the Ducks they would be risking an extra year of expensive goaltending if Fleury wasn't taken by Seattle in the Expansion Draft.

Probably the one change I would make is Larsson up for Welinski, but we'd still have about 3 mil in cap space with Kesler on LTIR...

Thanks for posting this so I didn't have to, HadesOfSoCal :)</div></div>

It wouldn't be enough for LV and ANA really has no reason to take Fleury, even with MIller not returning. Gibson is our #1 and Fleury isn't a back-up. In any event, that money would be better spent nabbing another forward from the FA market on the cheap or, at the very least, to take on a cap dump for an asset.
Forum: Armchair-GM3 août 2020 à 11 h 0
Sujet: Rakell Price - Make Offers
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Kotkaniemi15</b></div><div>I’m a habs fan, I’ve been watching Chucky for years, I don’t need to “check his numbers”. He hasn’t been as good since he got injured from the knee-on-knee with Kopitar. Galchenyuk didn’t work out in Arizona, he didn’t work out in Pittsburgh, and I’m not saying he won’t be useful for Minnesota, but the reason he was in that trade was to get the cap to work out for the Pens.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">No salary retained either way in the deal. Mind you, Minny taking Galchenyuk in the deal makes it work cap wise for Pittsburgh <a href="https://t.co/Xz81Pb37hT">https://t.co/Xz81Pb37hT</a></p>&mdash; Pierre LeBrun (@PierreVLeBrun) <a href="https://twitter.com/PierreVLeBrun/status/1227042608930861056?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div></div>

So you think 19 goals and 41 pts in 72 games for ARI = didn't work out? SMH! I have no idea how you can call a player with 4 months left on contract a "cap dump", especially one that is only 26 years old and producing 15-20 goals and 40-50 pts a season. Literally makes no sense, but whatever fits your narrative (Galc was a letdown in MTL and you hate him - we get it!)

What does that tweet prove? Moving/taking on cap to make a deal work isn't the same as trading a "cap dump". In fact the tweet refutes your point by confirming that Galc was moved to make the cap work. Your argument would hold more water if PIT didn't need to move Galc for cap reasons, but did anyway to be rid of his cap. However, the opposite is true and the deal literally could not have happened without cap going the other way to MIN... LMFAO!!