SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

ARIK7700

Member Since
Feb. 28, 2016
Favourite Team
Anaheim Ducks
2nd Favourite Team
Washington Capitals
Forum Posts
95
Posts per Day
0.0
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 9 at 5:09 a.m.
Thread: Zegras
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>qc14</b></div><div>There's a difference between putting up points and driving play / a line. Zegras has been consistently horrible at controlling play, even while his main running partners have been very good (Terry) to average (McTavish, Carlsson) at doing so. Even just looking at his boxcars while he's certainly producing at a top 6 winger's rate, its not close to being an elite top 6 winger's rate. It's not uncommon for young players with this profile to stall out a bit: Domi, Drouin, Boeser are some recent examples.



It may not be the type of package ANA would be looking for, but it is definitely not spare parts. Lapierre and Iorio are two high draft picks who have proven they are at the minimum serviceable NHLers, Jensen is salary filler you would have to take in almost any deal, and any first round pick -- especially the Caps' given how bad they are -- is very valuable.</div></div>

I guess the biggest question I'd have is why would the Ducks do this? Even assuming that the return is fair (a sentiment I question) what's the point? Everyone seems to have this belief that because Drysdale was traded, that must mean Verbeek is on the war-path to ship out the previous guy's picks that gave him a bit of a headache. I see no evidence of that. The point of that trade was to move a strength for a weakness. Trading Zegras in almost any circumstance would undo that.

But let's say this trade comes along anyway, it may not be spare parts but it's close and contextually a pretty bad deal for the Ducks. Chesley could be a decent prospect but to the Ducks he's just a hat on a hat. The whole reason for trading Drysdale is because they already have too many defensive prospects and taking one back for a top-6 forward defeats the purpose of the first trade. Jensen is for the money like you said, but let's not pretend like he's gonna move the needle on this. Lapierre may play games, but is steps down from Zegras at best, which means all you've done is exacerbate a team weakness. And yes 1st round picks are valuable, if they're high enough, and the Caps are only 2 points out of a playoff spot so I'd bet that pick is more likely to be 20-something than in the top 10 which is where the real valueable picks are.
Forum: Fauteuil - DGJan. 9 at 4:37 a.m.
Thread: You Gotta Replace Drysdale in the Pipeline Right
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Shibbal18</b></div><div>Maybe a protected 1st instead of the 2nd, I don't think it's too rediculous, especially with Verbeek</div></div>

I'm not sure what you're implying here. Is it that the players are right up Verbeek's alley? Or that they're just that good? Cause depending on what you mean, I could point you to which reason I think you're wrong.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>batman</b></div><div>you finna get hate on this one mate. ducks fans finna go crazy on you. its fair tho. wouldn't give much more than that. not very thrilled to lose mailloux but would do it.</div></div>

To be perfectly fair, before even getting to the players involved a lot of Ducks fans are gonna have a problem with the why of all this.

I find it odd that so many people's first conclusion is that this must mean Zegras has to go too. The reason the Ducks made the trade was because the group of young forwards the team had in house was lacking. You trade Drysdale because you believe the back end depth can absorb it. If you trade away Zegras you've defeated the purpose of the whole thing, especially if the big piece coming back is a puck moving offensive defenseman.
Forum: Armchair-GMDec. 29, 2023 at 2:35 a.m.
Thread: big splash
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Larrylnh</b></div><div>I analyze couple of game of Zegras because I was wondering if he was that good and for real, his defensive play was his big weakness and I don't know, I feel like he didn't play with his hearth.
Since the start of December, Slafkovsky is on a whole other level go check his stat but not just his stat, how he play. He is by far the best player in Montreal. Big player like Byfield, Lafrenière, Slafkovsky is longer to develop.</div></div>

Depending on what games you watched, there is a more than decent chance Zegras was nursing the injury that shelved him for something like 20 games. Not only that but the fancy stats indicate that he's been playing some of the best defensive hockey of his career and the eye test shows him flashing some defensive ability that you just didn't see years prior. So he's more than just flashy, flippy-puck guy.

I'll admit I don't watch much Canadiens hockey, but if Slafkovsky has been tearing it up since the start of December it leaves me uncomfortable with how bad he was before then, because the counting stats now are just ok. Now if there is some exigent circumstance to explain that I'm willing to conced to it. If not, the fact he's big isn't enough (for me) to overlook the idea of his career being one large, barf enducing, roller-coaster ride.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 15, 2023 at 5:36 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 29, 2020 at 6:31 p.m.
Thread: Deadline moves
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MG1986</b></div><div>I cannot see a world in which Manson makes it through the entirety of this deal with the Ducks. At some point, he's going to get moved, his age and skill set are the kind that makes him valuable, especially now, to competitive teams. Now, futures help everyone. I am not sure exactly where the Ducks are per say, but I know whether it's a slightly less strenuous retool (which doesn't always work) or scorched earth rebuild, this is going to take time. Having them acquired young NHL talent, if nothing else, moves up that timeline just a little bit because they are not waiting for as many roster spots to be drafted and developed internally. So, that's basically why I think this deal could work for both teams. Even with all that said, I think he ends up in Vegas.</div></div>

I agree Manson's contract expires somewhere other than Anaheim. And with the way the kids they have up now performed, unless there is exceptional improvement next year by all of them this is going to take at least the length of Johnsson's current contract. That's why I feel any trade has to be Manson ( or anyone one else) only going out, regardless of where they're traded to.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 29, 2020 at 6:04 p.m.
Thread: Deadline moves
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MG1986</b></div><div>As part of any good rebuild, the team needs to have a solid young foundation. Johnsson and Dermott certainly helps there. I mean, I am sure there is a team out there willing to give up some futures for Manson, but I think young, controllable NHL-ready pieces do a good, if not better job, at moving this rebuild along.</div></div>

The question then is, have the ducks bottomed out or are they close to bottoming out. If the answer to that is yes, then I'll concede that premise (though I'm not totally convinced TOR is the answer to that). If they're still a year or even 2 from bottoming out, giving up anything that could be considered a future asset (ie prospects or draft picks) I feel is probably I'll advised.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 13, 2017 at 5:06 p.m.
Thread: GMBm and his Tricks
Bob McKenzie tweeted that ANA and Vegas have a deal put together which he believes would negate the need for Bieksa to wave his NMC. But this would fly in the face of many other reports of the Ducks having already having Bieksa waving the NMC. I personally believe it would be advantageous for the Ducks to still move Vatanen if for no other reason that to be able to sign the RFAs next year, and in the more immediate the asking price to Vegas would be less to not take someone of a lesser caliber.

I personally believe the Ducks do have a side deal with Vegas, but that doesn't mean that Bieksa won't wave his no move. I think the plan looks like what a lot of people thought it would be (trade Vatanen and ask Bieksa to wave) but this side deal could be to try and protect the likes of Kerdiles (losing more forward depth isn't ideal) or Megna (a bigger, younger, cheaper Stoner).

So as apposed to trading a 1st or top end prospect to protect Vatanen or Manson, it's a 3rd/4th or B/C level prospect to take a Despres or someone of the like.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 13, 2017 at 9:46 p.m.
Thread: NHL Offseason Post Lottery (ANA)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>bonanca32</b></div><div>Someone please tell me why Vatanen is traded instead of Fowler. Maybe I'm missing something. Why would management choose a more expensive LHD when they have an abundance of good LHD prospects? They lack on the right side and you have cheap control of Vatanen.

P.s please save the "Fowler will resign with ANA" stuff. I already understand that. This is more of a business decision than "who I like more" decision.</div></div>

In my opinion it has more to do with return. Teams always look for mobile RHD and Vatanen has term. Fowler would either need to sign an extension and then be traded to get good value, or they'd have to take less because of the 1 year.

Plus the FO and coaching staff seems to really like him, which would in turn balloon the asking price for him. And what they'd ask for would probably be more than what anyone would want to pay. So it would just be easier to trade Vatanen, who they do have a replacement for in Montour.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 9, 2017 at 9:40 a.m.
Thread: My Knights Roster
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>jasongura25</b></div><div>Expansion Draft For Vegas Knights Is Next Month And The Next Step Is To Found Minor NHL Team For The Vegas Golden Knights Maybe In Reno Carson City And Out Of State Like Oklahoma City</div></div>

I read somewhere that Vegas plans on sharing an AHL team with someone because there's no way they're going to be able to fill out an entire AHL roster. I think they planed on sharing with the Blues but i might be wrong on the specific team. And with all the money Foley has been handing out for this team I'm not sure he'd be willing to stomach creating a new affiliate and having to pay for that. I think they'll just contract out with one of the independently owned AHL teams for the foreseeable future.