Spencer_12
-
Posts
9,730 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
36
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Media Demo
Gallery
Posts posted by Spencer_12
-
-
13 hours ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:
You’re right and it all depends where we draft. I think just there are four forwards that are better than any defenseman.
I’m not as confident, especially after doing some reading up on the draft. Still half a season to go though. I just wouldn’t be surprised to see Levshunov go #2 if his game doesn’t fall off in the 2nd half (or if someone else doesn’t have a crazy finish to the season).
-
4 point night tonight for Michigan State’s Levshunov. 3 of them were even strength - two primary assists, and one goal.
-
1
-
-
From what I’ve seen, Celebrini is in the Carlsson/Fantilli category. That’s all info from a few months ago though, so maybe things have changed since then.
Surprising to see Eiserman that low. Most places will have their mid season rankings released at the end of the month so it’ll be interesting to read about how players are progressing or not.
Right now I’ve got my eye on 3 F’s (Celebrini, Eiserman, and Lindstrom), and 4 D’s (Levshunov, Yakemchuk, Dickinson, and Silavey). Levshunov and Yakemchuk are both right-hand shots with good size. Levshunov’s putting up a PPG as a freshman at Michigan State, and he’s Belorussian so that would be cool for Sidorov. Considering the injury situation, it would be a small miracle if we didn’t have a shot at one of these guys.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, tommer-1 said:
I think they could have just made a statement that Cutter is still undecided, and they have their doubts about his future and his signing with them, so they reached out to the league and found a great trade for need - 2020 6th OA plus a 2nd in 2024 (which is looking like 33rd-40th OA) for the 2022 5th OA - that gives them a young RHD to go with their deep young F group. Keep it behind closed doors and professional. Not that hard.
Instead they all went bitch mode. Bad look.
Thankfully it’s a 2025 2nd rounder. Realistically I’d hope that pick next year would be closer to mid 40’s.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Sexlaf15 said:
Reported asking price for Guentzel is
1st rounder
top prospect
roster player
ill probably pass, mainly because the ducks probably shouldn’t been parting with first rounders. I’ll wait and maybe jump at free agency.
It doesn’t even make sense anyway. He’ll be 30 at the start of next season with everyone but Terry under 23. If the Ducks were going to go big for someone they need that person to at least be Terry’s age so they aren’t leaving their prime just as the young guys are entering theirs.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Sexlaf15 said:
Hope BC loses early
All depends on where we are in draft position for me. If we’ve turned it on and out of range for a top 5 pick then sure sooner the better. If it’s going to come down to the wire then I can hold off on having an influx of talent lol.
-
22 minutes ago, Sexlaf15 said:
I’m not super familiar with the prospects this year outside of Celebrini and Caden Lindsrom
I only started looking into it recently myself. Just been occasionally checking in on Celebrini and Eiserman (consensus top 2 at the beginning of the year). It’s not really worth doing too deep of a dive right now. There’s still so much time for players to show themselves and things to change, and there’s still a lot of time for draft position to change.
-
6 hours ago, Sexlaf15 said:
Obviously you can shift around some guys but on paper
Gauthier - Carlsson - Terry
Zegras - McTavish - Killorn
Vatrano - (player)/Lundy - Strome
McGinn - Lundestrom - Jones
As Soon as April of this year. Then you add a Celebrini/Lindstrom type guy at the draft? This is probably cope, but if the team can stay healthy next year, I could see them taking another legit step
I wouldn’t be surprised if they go D at the draft, especially if they pick somewhere between 3-6. It’s early though so maybe a D will sneak into the #2 spot for some people when the season is over (I’ve been seeing some hype for that 6’7” monster from Russia). There’s about 3 F prospects and 3 D prospects that are currently looking pretty good to me. We could use either one; we’ve got one spot available in our top 6 for the future core, and there’s Mintyukov, Luneau, and Zellweger looking pretty good right now for the D. I’ll add LaCombe too, though I don’t think he has the upside of the other 3. We’ve got a bunch of D prospects that could be #4-6’s, but we could draft a top 2 guy with this years pick. It’s probably easier to go out and get a 2nd line winger through trade/free agency than a high end D too. Either way though, I like the options if we stay in the top 5.
We’ve got a 9 point gap before falling out of the top 5. Given our injury situation, lack of getting wins even with guys in the lineup, Drysdale gone weakening the D, and a few guys being moved at the deadline it would take a huge effort to knock ourselves out of a top 5 pick. Not that it would be too bad of a thing if we did considering if it happens it would likely be because the young core started playing out of their minds.
-
Original timeline was 4-6 weeks. I’d be surprised if he was back before 4 weeks. They’ve been taking the long view with him from the start so I don’t see why they wouldn’t be cautious now even if his body is responding faster than anticipated.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Sexlaf15 said:
Hmm, if this is true on one hand it’s good Gauthier has a plausible reason to be upset with the Flyers, and on the other he might be feeling similar feelings after his ELC contract is up and it comes time to deal with Verbeek/Soloman’s RFA hammer lol.
-
1
-
-
What a massive, extremely rare trade. Before I read about the Flyers drama I assumed the Flyers must have been lacking someone like Drysdale both in the NHL and in their system and they were desperate to get it. Teams don’t trade #5 overall picks with the kind of talent/success that Gauthier has before even playing in the NHL. It makes sense after hearing he wouldn’t play for Philly.
It is a bit concerning that he ended up going down that route with Philly. I can’t imagine his reasoning will stay secret for long, and I’m really interested to hear that story. I’m not concerned that he won’t sign with us now; I am a bit concerned for the mid-long term future that this could happen to us one day. I hope the story comes out and the reasoning points to some kind of stars aligning situation that screwed over the Flyers. I don’t want this situation to be a potential character flaw we might have to deal with down the road.
For the Ducks, this trade has a ton of potential/risk. Flyers did well to get Drysdale + 2nd for a player that wanted out, and has never played in the NHL. At worst Drysdale will be a decent RD in their top 6 even if he doesn’t reach his full potential. He’s been looking pretty good since coming back from injury. If he takes another step you’re looking at a guy who can put up 10+ goals and 50+ points a season as a solid puck mover. For Anaheim, Gauthier could end up as a 3rd line grinder with a decent shot in the NHL. That’s the risk they are taking. Everything points to him being the real deal though. He played against men as a 19 year old in the World Championships last year, and he was tied 2nd in goals with 7.
I don’t think Verbeek makes this trade if he doesn’t believe Luneau will eventually be a mainstay on the blueline so I think this trade speaks to that as well. We’ll see how this trade works out, but it’s certainly a rare one with huge upside for the Ducks. Hopefully it works out well for us.
-
3
-
-
Just now, BombaysTripleDeke said:
He just said what we’ve all known lol. It is key that he said it and that he’s obviously got the backing of the Samuelis on the time frame.
There’s a lotttttttttt of people burying their head in the sands on this one. I mean even on this board it seems like it’s the minority of people who see what Verbeek sees. That said, I don’t think Verbeek coming out and saying this is going stop all the armchair-ing.
-
17 minutes ago, Fisix said:
some interesting quotes (read the whole thread):
I’m glad Verbeek came out and said flatly that fans shouldn’t realistically expect the team to make the playoffs for a few years. I’m guessing he’s counting this year in that projection. There are a whole bunch of Ducks fans calling for firings and other crazy suggestions not realizing where the team currently is. Obviously Verbeek has ownership approval to build the team up on the timescale he thinks is necessary for it to be as good as possible. It’s not worth complaining about everyday. Don’t like it? There’s the door. Like a lot of SoCal fans, they’ll be back when the team is good again.
-
3
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, dtsdlaw said:
Faber left college at 19 after only two NCAA seasons. He’s 21 now. And I’d put him relatively even with Luneau in terms of projections (Faber was also drafted higher). Hard to compare QMJHL stats with NCAA stats though.
Oops that’s right. I looked at his age and then his final season and mistakenly put the two together. Faber was drafted #45 and Luneau was #52. There’s no difference there. Luneau was getting 1st round draft grades in the final rankings, and Faber wasn’t. He was ranked in the 100’s at some places. I saw a lot of Faber at Minnesota because I caught a lot of games when LaCombe was there. He never showed a dynamic level of play that Luneau has, and he doesn’t have the ceiling that Luneau has offensively. I’m pretty confident from what I’ve seen that if Faber was dropped into the QMJHL at the same age Luneau was last season he wouldn’t have come close to producing like Luneau did.
-
5 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:
Absolutely agree regarding Mintyukov, especially since he was a high 1st round pick.
OZ, Luneau, Warren, etc all compare reasonably with Faber though. You can’t necessarily wait on all of them so see what kind of pros they’ll be if the right deal comes along.
If you’re looking for a good comp for Faber it’s LaCombe. Warren is below Faber, and Zellweger and Luneau have a much higher ceiling. LaCombe and Faber had similar production at the NCAA level during their age 21 seasons (Faber’s last).
-
15 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:
Kevin Fiala <—> Brock Faber + 1st rounder
You dont always get to wait to see what a guy looks like as a pro before the time comes to pull the trigger.
#1. Faber wasn’t in the same prospect tier as Mintyukov and Zellweger.
#2. Kings were in a much different position at the time of trade than the Ducks were this summer. The Kings were pressed with time concerning Doughty and Kopitar.
It’s not a good comparable. That said, one of the guys floated in the original hypothetical (Boeser) works well with our timeline (turns 27 next year). With Mintyukov emerging, and seeing Zellweger in the AHL so far, I could get around moving Zellweger for Boeser (assuming Boeser isn’t unwilling to sign long term).
-
4 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:
If you are always waiting around to see what your prospects will be like in the NHL, well, then you are gonna miss out on some deals.
I also think in this unique circumstance, with three kid D that each were the best in their respective junior league (Mintyukov, Zellweger, Luneau), you are dealing from a strong position in terms of being able to make a move.
There was no reason to make a deal like that this summer because the Ducks aren’t competing. There’s no rush, no worry to miss out on a deal because there will always be deals available in any given year. The Ducks are in a perfect position to let things play out and continue to track how their players are developing.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:
And who would you have picked if that scenario arose this off season?
Nobody. I’ve always been against trading any of our top defensemen until they’ve had more time to show what they could do at the pro level. Mintyukov exploding on the scene is the perfect example for the reason why.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:
So here's a hypothetical:
Another team is willing to trade you a young (25-27) scoring F (multiple 20+ goal seasons - think Nick Schmaltz or Brock Boeser or Nikolaj Ehlers) for a package that must include either Mintyukov or Zellweger. Who ya sending?
It’s not even close; Mintyukov has entered another stratosphere compared to Zellweger.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:
Personally, I think the "load management" plan was just a cover in case GMPV felt that he needed to sit due to performance and/or inability to hang at the NHL level. Now that's he's proven he can, Verbeek's cover has been blown.
I could believe this if it wasn’t already reported that he’s missed a few practices for his development plan (that we know of - Lee doesn’t follow the team on the road).
-
4 point night for Bedard in Tampa - 2 ES goals, 1 ES primary assist, and 1 primary assist on the PP. Mintyukov’s Calder lead just took a hit lol.
-
1
-
-
Sharks are historically bad to start the season. If this holds up let’s hope they fail at the draft lottery too. Celebrini is off to a very hot start in college (11 points in 6 games including 8 goals) and he won’t turn 18 until next summer. It’s early, but that’s significantly more impressive than what Fantilli did last year. Bonus if they finish 3rd in the lottery. That would be such a huge gut punch for them.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:
I think you can make this argument with respect to the whole draft, but at #10 isn't the strategy to just go best player available based on scouting? And IIRC, there were a lot of really compelling forwards being discussed at #10 in 2022, and the guy taken right behind Mintyukov was Connor Geekie (listed at 6'3", 196lbs in his draft year), who certainly fits Verbeek's criteria too. Given Madden's track record with D-men and Mintyukov's draft profile, I tend to believe that Mintyukov was likely Madden's target, regardless of Verbeek's criteria.
The criteria affects the scouting. There’s no way of knowing anything definitively about how/why things went down without talking to Madden himself. I don’t take issue with giving Madden/scouts a lot of credit for the draft. Personally, I think in every single draft those guys have a huge impact, and a lot of people often give too much credit to the GM for picks made. I just think the 99% number is too high.
-
27 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:
I think Verbeek said as much - that he wasn't incredibly involved in that first draft. Which means we can give Madden credit for Mintyukov and hope that we don't have to deduct points for the Gaucher pick.
There was an article on the Ducks site with quotes from Madden (it was probably a full interview with him) that before the 1st draft the scouting staff were working with Verbeek to rank/pick players based on the criteria that Verbeek was looking for. It talked about how they were needing to make adjustments from Murray to Verbeek. So while Verbeek wasn’t doing as much of his own scouting for that draft, I do think it’s unfair to give 99% credit to Madden and the scouting staff because just making even small changes to the criteria could change who the Ducks picked at any given position.
Of course, I think the opposite is true too. I don’t think we should be giving 99% credit to Verbeek for the 2023 draft either. From what I’ve read about the way drafts work in hockey and other sports it’s a much more collaborative thing than assigning credit to any one individual. At least until the later rounds. I’ve definitely read about late round picks sometimes being chosen because one person on the staff was super passionate about the player. In that situation I think a large percentage of credit can be assigned to that person.
-
1
-
1
-
New 2023 - 2024 Season
in Anaheim Ducks
Posted
The market this year will dictate what his worth is. Comparing him to what a comparable player went for 9 years ago also doesn’t make any sense for the same reason. There’s a lot that needs to play out leading up to the deadline and the day itself before we can start talking about failures. Hopefully there’s a number of desperate teams, the prices are high, and when it comes time to deal Henrique there’s a scarcity available. If not, his worth becomes whatever other teams are willing to pay for him. Bottom line, it’s more involved than simply thinking this early in the game that no 1st = failure.