g20topdogg
-
Posts
1,939 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Media Demo
Gallery
Posts posted by g20topdogg
-
-
17 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:
No, a guy who has spent a good amount of time behind an NHL bench, as well as a guy who has some HC experience under his belt.
I don't think it will be a college coach, or a pure AHL coach, or an international coach. Could be wrong, but I don't think so.
Brunette, Dineen, Sacco, somebody like that. I'm sure there are probably 10 other guys who fit that bill.
Eakins? I mean it's all speculation but even nhl had coaches who have experience fail. It's about the right fit and a good plan. If both of those things happen then we'll have a chance, otherwise any coach coming in has the ability to fall.
-
6 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:
Is there a resource that breaks down shots for/against by period? I don't find it useful to just use the average of 13 shots, because the Ducks were frequently being out-shot this past season by a 2-to-1 margin in the first period, and then playing teams much closer in shot totals once they were trailing by a significant number of goals. I just did the math on the first 8 games of the season (SEA, NYI, NYR, BOS, DET, TB, VGK, TOR) and the breakdown for the total shots for/against by period over those games is:
1st period - 126 shots against, 61 shots for
2nd period - 91 shots against, 77 shots for
3rd period - 82 shots against, 77 shots for
I don't know if that's a representative sample for the whole season, but it sure feels like it is based on the games I watched (or couldn't bear to watch, as the case may be). If it is representative of the whole season though, it sure lends itself to the conclusion that our goalies were indeed wearing down as the games went on due to the volume of rubber they were seeing early in games.
Thanks for the stats! But my issue with using the first games of the season is scoring is generally up in the beginning and begins to level out as the season progresses. Besides everyone is coming back from summer and goalies in particular take a bit longer to get settled in. But with that said I think if we were to look at game samples in the middle of the season we'd probably still see ourselves outshot badly after the first and second. We generally don't get very good shots on goal totals throughout the game. And trying to remember I'd say we usually got outshot 2:1 at the third. If we take say 12 shots in the first were looking at close to 20 against. So if we gave up an average of 40 it makes sense that the beginning of the game were getting hemmed in very badly and then the opposing team let's off because they're ahead in goals scored. Unless of course the opposing team goes to 50+ shots and doesn't let up at all. I just don't think Gibson or Stolarz were the problem this year. Any team that gives up that many shots just isn't very good offensively or defensively. Shots on goal isn't on the goaltenders but indicative of the team in front of them. Besides how many times have we mentioned that the play of Gibson is going to prevent us from getting the best odds of Bedard? A lot. That should tell you that it's not on the goalies but the team in front of them playing like garbage. Though Gibson isn't Scott free either, he still needs to step up and play better too because there are areas that he can improve on and close up those gaps. Better rebound control is one of them.
-
2
-
-
I'd like to post this in defense of Gibby. I'm taking into account games played to get an idea of the amount of work load Gibson is facing:
John Gibson-
431 GP
13266 SA
.912 SV%
2.83 GAA
Cam Talbot-
432 GP
12607 SA
.914 SV%
2.65 GAA
In one game LESS Gibson has faced 659 MORE shots over the course of his career and the difference between him and Talbot in terms of SV% and GAA is pretty small.
Andrei Vasilevskiy
425 GP
12914 SA
.919 SV%
2.52 GAA
Gibson has played 6 more games than Vasy and faced 352 more shots which comes out to almost 59 shots per game. Vasy faced quite a bit of shots per game in his career as well. But the reason I'm comparing him to Gibson is shots are only part of the picture. Besides facing serious amounts of shots he also plays behind one of the worst teams in front of him. Not only have the shot totals gone up as a result of losing players/ rebuilding but the quality of those players has also gone down. Not to mention playing in one of the NHLs worst systems under a head coach who isn't very good. All those things add up to his poor performance. Now I don't expect him to rebound to Vezina levels right but I think we should see improvement in his play next year with a better defense and better systems. But he's also not getting any younger either so time is also working against him. He's also stolen points for us this year and others mention his ability to keep us in the game. The fact we weren't getting destroyed 7-1 every game is a testament to the caliber goaltender he really is. Dostal isn't ready to go full time either so we go with Gibby until he's ready. But I do believe we'll see a bounce back from the whole team and Gibson just from a better coach.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Gorbachav55 said:
Yeah, that goal was absurd.
Zegras has the top (spoiler alert) non-goalie goal of the season!
Yeah that's why I posted it. But honestly I'm not sure I'd put it that high.
To me it feels kind of like zegras is getting promoted hard by the league. Which is very good for us and he's the kind of player and personality that is easy to promote. He's obviously a very skilled player and he's probably got some highlight reel stuff that is in the all time greatest moments in NHL history. He's sort of become the face of the league I think.
-
1
-
-
Anyone see this yet?
-
2
-
-
I wanted to wait until emotions cool off before putting a final note on the season. Although I'm happy for the top 3 pick we've all been talking about I can't help but feel extremely disappointed in where we ended up. This season has definitely been a roller coaster season of emotions. And actively rooting for the team to lose really saddens me, especially the last game against the kings. I wasn't happy with Eakins and when he got fired although it's what I've wanted for the past couple seasons it just doesn't feel very good that the team had such a poor performance that Eakins was let go either. Besides entertainment there's also the humanly aspect of the game and I think the players feel disappointed in themselves that Eakins was let go, maybe not everyone but I don't think it's a good feeling knowing that someone was let go because of you (to a certain extent).
I'm still optimistic about getting Bedard in the draft but if it doesn't happen then I'm ready to accept that outcome as well. This team has issues and a lot of them and I don't think we'll be able to get to the playoffs next year either. I'm still more excited for who will be our next coach then who the next draft pick is.
Overall, it's been a very disappointing season and it's left a really bad taste. I'm happy it's over, the torture of this year has been brutal. It's easily the worst season I've experienced following the ducks and it hurts going from a perennial playoff team to the very bottom. A slow slow decline to the very bottom with the torture getting worse and worse every year. I'm hoping we'll all get to experience some possible playoff excitement next year. We won't make it but I just want us to still be able to play for something after December. All this to say, losing sucks!
-
1
-
1
-
-
"On a good day"
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, HockeyIzCool said:
Ducks coach Dallas Eakins hoping to return to finish the job
Coach's future is uncertain with the Ducks in second-to-last place in the NHL before the season ends Thursday
IRVINE — In the end, Ducks coach Dallas Eakins simply wants to finish the job that has been started in Anaheim.
Eakins will coach his 291st game with the organization against the visiting Kings on Thursday in the regular-season finale for both teams.
With the final chapter of this season about to close for the Ducks (23-46-12), there are questions looming about the future of players and coaches on expiring contracts, including Eakins himself. Just when they will be answered is a decision for general manager Pat Verbeek, who is wrapping up his first full season with the Ducks.
“It’s as simple as that for me,” the fourth-year Ducks coach said. “I’ve got my fingers crossed, I hope there’s a process to it. We’ll see where it goes. That’s just pro sports.”
Equally unclear is Verbeek’s timeline. He’s under no obligation to instantly make his call.
“That’s Pat’s decision,” Eakins said. “Respect the hell out of him. I think he’ll make the decision that he thinks is right for our organization at this time. I’m certainly going to respect that one way or the other because I only want the best for here.”
Eakins was talking about a tumultuous 2022-23 season for the Ducks, which has them in contention for last place overall heading into the finale. In an interview in the dressing room at Great Park Ice after the Ducks’ final practice of the season Wednesday, Eakins touched on the future.
“For me, personally, I have zero interest in going to somewhere where it’s rainbows and butterflies. That kind of ‘walk in and win right away’ mentality,” Eakins said. “There’s a part of me that enjoys going through the mud part of it, because the payoff down the road will be an incredible experience, to watch these young men develop and watch a team develop and do something far different that it has been this year.”
After three losing seasons under Eakins, the Ducks are sitting in second-to-last place in the NHL, one point ahead of the Columbus Blue Jackets. They started the season slowly – failing to win in regulation until Game 20 – and are finishing in roughly the same manner, having not won in their last 12 games.
There is a potential pot of gold at the end of the rainbow this year, in the person of Regina Pats center Connor Bedard, the consensus No. 1 draft pick who is widely considered to be a franchise-changing talent. By virtue of their poor season, the Ducks are one of a handful of teams to have a legitimate chance at getting Bedard.
“I’ve said it before. I’m inspired by the ownership,” Eakins said. “I understand Pat’s plan and the patience and the work ethic that it’s going to take to get it there. When my coaching days are over here – and I hope they are not – I want to be a Duck forever.”
If coaching isn’t in his immediate future, Eakins would welcome a chance to stay in the organization in a different capacity,
“I want to go do something else here,” he said. “I just think this is an incredible organization that is well led. When you find a place that is inspiring to work, I don’t think you should be trying to go look somewhere else to do whatever you’re going to do.”
For me, personally, I have zero interest in going to somewhere where it’s rainbows and butterflies. That kind of ‘walk in and win right away’ mentality,” Eakins said
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
What? I know the situation wasn't that great that he walked into but we've gone from bad to worse. Please PV let's move on, for the sake of everyone involved.
-
Just now, g20topdogg said:
😒we never get to have nice things! But I'm still hopeful the league owes us a Bedard after the Crosby debacle. But picking 4th is still very very good especially in this draft.
-
30 minutes ago, Fisix said:
so... there's a 55% chance that a team higher than us gets 1stOA. in the second round, there's a ~70% chance a team higher than us gets 2nd OA.
put those together, it's roughly 40% chance we pick 4th... which is pretty likely.
😮💨 we never get to have nice things! But I'm still hopeful the league owes us a Bedard after the Crosby debacle. But picking 4th is still very very good especially in this draft.
-
10 minutes ago, DucksFan_08 said:
We´re all Islanders tonight. If they win they qualify and pittsburgh´s last game in columbus is meaningless to them.
And of course we´re all kings on thursday. It´s not fun but whatever it takes.
If Pittsburgh is deflated after missing the playoffs that definitely gives better chances for a Jackets win or perhaps at least a point.
-
13 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:
The Ducks can officially pick no later than 5th. 4th is in their grasp.
If we lose the final game we're guaranteed top 4. Although I think it's likely we get a top 3 pick because having two teams win the lottery below us isn't likely to happen.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Spencer_12 said:
Chicago fans have all the luck right now. Wild were missing SIX key players in their game so it was a very winnable game. They hit a post that would have given them a 2 goal lead. Later, they score a goal that would have given them a 2 goal lead, but it gets waved off because the Wild were deemed to have possessed the puck on a delayed call. They then give up a SH goal and fold late.
I wish we had their luck the last two games. It might not even matter. With the way the Ducks have played their last 4 games I just don’t see them going winless. LA might even pull a Wild on Thursday and rest a bunch of good players.
Don't think so. I looked at the schedule and LA only has one remaining game and it's against the ducks. Seattle is right on their heels. They need to win out to secure that spot for sure unless Seattle falters. But they need to get at least a point from the ducks game otherwise their likely playing Vegas or maybe even the avs.
-
Just now, perry_mvp said:
It's confusing for me. Henrique says basically that they are tired of losing but then he praises Eakins. You could have put a ham sandwich up in the GM's loft and the team would have still lost. If Eakins system was that good and the players thought that highly of him, wouldn't they have played a tad better?
I think what's happening is they like his personality and he's good around the players. Maybe even has decent ideas as far as the game is played. Obviously without being in the room it's difficult to see how Eakins interacts with the players. But I don't see how the players can't also not see the negatives around his coaching habits and his systems that don't work. Maybe he's just too nice that they don't want to hurt his feelings, lol who knows. I think we're all confused as to how Eakins got this far anyway! 🤣
-
4 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:
Thanks. The whole quote is pretty interesting from Rico, especially this part.... "We know where we're at and this has to be the worst year of whatever, what we're building. It has to progress, and if it doesn't, guys aren't going to want to be here.... Why would you want to go through this year after year?"
He's basically stating the obvious - that the team is teetering on the edge of being the West's version of the 2013-2021 Buffalo Sabres. It has to change next season.
I read that as sort of warning shots fired that things have to change asap. I don't think Henrique is being deceiving either, he's letting it known what the locker room feels. This has to be some sort of kick in the pants towards PV. We can't be at the bottom next year because guys are tired of losing. Henrique is in the final year of his contract so I don't think he's going to care much about how he's mixing his words because he knows he's pretty much gone anyway so if he's tired it's not too big of a deal BUT if others such as the young guys are also tired that becomes a much bigger problem. So maybe he's more implying that that's something that's happening and things need to move up soon.
And here's the thing right, PV stated we were going to be a .500 team (whether you believe that or not) and maybe he's sold the players that things were going to turn around. Everything falls apart this year and we're once again at the bottom so guys are airing their frustrations. Henrique also mentioned changes and as much as guys like Eakins I think it's a subtle nod towards moving on from him and changing the coaching. And maybe that's also his way of saying the PV isn't doing as good a job. Who knows, but the fact that he's said that is really an eyebrow raiser.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:
I don't think anyone is saying tanking will stop. I think what he's saying, and I agree, is that these sorts of things will mitigate the negative effects of tanking. It means that, as a fan, I can root for my team to win all season. We don't have to have these ridiculous conversations about whether players or coaches should try to lose on purpose.
Teams in a down cycle will still sell off players, but maybe not quite so blatantly. And even if they do, fans will never have to see them score a goal and be mad.
I see. I can definitely get behind rooting for the team because it sucks wanting the team to lose so we get better odds.
Let's say something like that is implemented. Wouldn't that also make gms want to fire bad coaches faster? I mean if it was about wins we wouldn't be stuck with Eakins for the whole year. Now THAT I 1000% support!!!
-
57 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:
He does...kind of. He actually prefers the Gold Plan, but doesn't think the league will go for it:
I don't know that I agree that it's impossible the league would consider the Gold Plan, but it would take a commissioner a lot more willing to think outside the box than our current one. Instead, his thought is that a modified unweighted lottery would be better than the current system. You give the bottom X teams the same odds, where X is some number that seems fair. He uses five in his example (so Chicago, Columbus, Anaheim, San Jose, and Montreal would all have the same odds at winning the lottery), but he implies that the number could be whatever the league thinks is fair.
More than his solutions, I agree with him (and he has some quotes from players as well) that tanking makes things really awkward for players and fans. I can't tell you how much it frustrates and bothers me that there are people on this board making snide comments or directly contentious comments toward fans who are openly rooting for the team to do well. We're Ducks fans! We SHOULD be rooting for our team to do well! And yet logic says we should root for them to lose in this lost season. That sucks. I don't think it's good for the league.
I think that with most of these ideas there is still some amount of tanking that would be going on. Say we do the bottom 5 odds thing. Teams on the cusp will still tank. 1) to stay in the bottom 5 and 2) to get into the bottom 5. The gold plan still would have some tanking it just wouldn't be at the bottom but higher in the standings. If a team sees they won't make the playoffs they then "tank" to get into that lottery system faster and then try to win games from there. Maybe for this reason the league doesn't see much incentive to change the current system because each of those systems still has its drawbacks. The only system where tanking wouldn't be an issue is giving all the teams outside the playoffs equal odds and I don't think that kind of a system would be approved because it would likely keep the bottom teams rebuilding for far longer. Or give the bottom team like an extra 1% chance over 2nd to last and keep going down only 1% from there. That gives a slight advantage to the bottom teams but not enough to tank for. Why would you tank for a 1% better chance (or something to that effect that gives an advantage but not a big advantage) to draft the bpa? You wouldn't have much of an advantage and your team sucks and you lose fans and revenue so you wouldn't do it for that little extra. Something like that would be the most likely scenario to prevent tanking and still give some kind of a system that favors the bottom teams (though a lot less).
-
9 minutes ago, HockeyIzCool said:
Queens are going to see to it that we win on Thursday, so we lose the best chance of landing Bedard.
I was just looking at the standings. Seattle is on their heels. If they lose that spot to Seattle they will face the Avs. If they keep that spot they play the oilers. I think I'd rather try my chances with the oilers than the defending cup Champs. Although they have had a lot of injuries but if guys get healthy in time and they're playing really well I'd rather play the oilers and try to contain their top line. Oilers aren't as deep as the Avs either. Either way though they're looking at a tough match up.
-
5 minutes ago, perry_mvp said:
Plenty of Russians are staying to make a fortune. I don't see why Michkov wouldn't. I wouldn't be worried at all if Anaheim drafted him. The only downside is his KHL contract. That said, I would still prefer Fantilli or Carlsson because the size and Anaheim's lack of it in the top 6.
I think if it comes down to it and of the four Michkov remains we take him. I don't care if he's not going to come over right away, you pick the best player available. Besides, I think he'd actually line up with our timeline better because he'd be on an elc when we'd compete in the playoffs. He'd also be an instant boost to the team when he does decide to come over. Besides, if we draft anyone else they won't be nhl ready either.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, saskduckfan said:
I guess that all depends. If you bring in a new coach and continue to run a defense that contains Harrington, Beaulieu, White, and Benoit, then yes, you can expect the team to be just as bad. All of those players are liabilities. If the 12 forwards still contains 11 players that are no better then bottom 6 players, then the offense will be just as bad too. Goaltending is the only place that is not an issue, but looks bad this year because of who is playing in front of them and the lack of a defensive system. A new coach could bring better results, but the team needs better players too. Guys like Megna, Leason, Carrick, Jones, and the previous 4 defensemen are nothing but warm bodies to fill a line up. If Verbeek continues this offseason with his questionable moves then there is something to worry about.
I still would have rather not waived Mahura then pick up Leason or use any of the 4 defensemen that made the team ahead of him.
Oh I fully expect most if not all of those guys gone. That's why I mentioned ufa/ trade as areas where we can upgrade. Again, not anything fancy but finding good solid players. By the way, when I'm referring to trades we still have picks that we can trade out. Players aren't the only means of acquiring other players let's not forget and we still have a good amount of picks to work with. Also I think we bring up some of the kids.
I'm not trying to look at the team through rose covered glasses. But you gotta admit with a better coach the current team isn't this bad. If we make good smart moves that only moves us in the right direction further up the standings. But yeah I'm pretty optimistic depending on what happens this off season and hopefully we have a much better season next year.
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:
I don't think so. Let's use the Buffalo (14) and Vancouver (7) example. If Buffalo wins the #1 overall lottery, they move up to the #4 draft slot. Then Vancouver wins the #2 overall lottery. If your latter scenario is right, what happens then? If Buffalo can't move down (i.e. they are locked into the #4 draft slot), there are only two options - one is that Vancouver can move up no higher than 5th overall, which is obviously not correct.
The other option is that Vancouver does move up to #2 and pushes all the teams down, except for Buffalo, meaning that the team in third place (Columbus) has to move past Buffalo to the fifth spot in the draft. I guess this latter option is possible, but it seems unlikely to me.
My interpretation (that the second lottery moves EVERYONE down, regardless of whether they won the first lottery or not) does seem a bit unfair as well. It essentially punishes one of those 12-16 teams for winning first instead of second.
That was my issue with it as well. Because the #1 is greater than the #2 pick so it should be placed higher. But Jasoaks basically confirmed this to be true.
So then the #12 pick wins 1st and moves up to #2. Then #11 wins the 2nd pick and moves up to #2 dropping the other team to 3rd. Basically that scenario gives the team winning the second overall pick the better of the two picks. This would probably never happen though because the odds are pretty low but that's still interesting.
Thanks for the clarification by the way!
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, saskduckfan said:
I love the comment "wait to see how Verbeek turns this around with trades and free agent signings this year". It's like people expect him to completely turn this team around via trades and UFA. Sorry to burst the bubble but this team will be fighting to stay out of last next year again. The UFA group is horrible this year and I doubt any of the "decent" players sign with a rebuilding group. Kane, O'Riley, Taresenko, JVR, those are the "top 4" forwards. None are worth signing in my opinion. Then you got guys like Klingberg, Lucic, Bertuzzi, maybe Bertuzzi. Graves, Sverson, Soucy are the top defensemen, and will likely sign elsewhere.
Then there is the trade market. Ducks only have a handful of players that would bring anything valuable back and those guys are not getting traded. Zegras, Drysdale, Fowler, McTavish, Terry, Henrique, Gibson. Only one that will likely move is Henrique and closer to the trade deadline when the Ducks are out of it yet again. The others are not being traded. Verbeek has told Gibson he is going nowhere unless he wants a trade. Guys like Comtois, Leason, Megna, Lundestrom, Jones, etc are not going to fetch anything that will turn the team around, just similar players.
I personally would like to see the Ducks not go dumpster diving next year and let the young guys play. Everyone says that the Ducks have one of the strongest prospect groups, so lets see them play. It would be nice to add a Graves on defense, but with guys like Zellweger, Lacombe, Minty, and others coming, then lets just fill our holes with the talent that we are looking forward to seeing. Or we bring in UFA's that are aging out of the rebuild group and watch the young guys walk or demand a trade like Thrun. The forwards is a different take, but I'm sure a Perreault can be just as effective as Leason or Megna are.
I don't expect the team to do a 180. Neither is the ufa/ trade market going to be our savior. I think we pick up meaningful players, we don't (and probably won't) find anyone great this year. But I think the right players with new systems could work. I think given the right circumstances we fall short of the playoffs next year. I think the team isn't as bad as you make it out to be but the current teams coaching brings out the worst in everyone. But we also can't not bring in anyone either because of we're trying to get better we need to improve the team here and there. I'm not saying we finish in the top of the league because that's just not realistic but saying they will be this bad again isn't right either.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, HockeyIzCool said:
Verbeek only got hired by the Ducks in February 2022. So he's been here about 14 months. I think it's a bit premature to place blame on him for the dumpster fire that is the Ducks. He chose McTavish in last year's draft, and so far that's turned out to be a good pick. It takes time to steer the Titanic away from the iceberg. I'm willing to give him some time. So long as Eakins is gone before the Cup Finals.
He better be! Otherwise Verbeek is numbering his days here pretty fast.
-
2 hours ago, saskduckfan said:
My expectations were low, very low. Klingberg was a signing that was made just to trade away. Kulikov was a trade made because it came with an extra pick. Neither guy really fit our lack of system. Team didnt know how to play defense and neither does Klingberg so he was going to be a liability unless he got the offense going. Kulikov was decent and would have been better for a 3rd pairing guy like he is on Pittsburgh, not the second guy on the top pair. Again, part of filling the roster out with guys playing above where they belong. Strome and Vatrano never had me excited. Both contracts made me cringe. Strome was the wrong one and is not worth $5mil for 5 years. Overpaid by $2mil per season. And Vatrano, those college UFAs are never that good. Yes he had 20 goals last year but playing with a team with more offensive talent. Again both guys belong on the third ljne but we were asking them to fill top 6 roles, spots that are well above where they should be. Had the guys been playing proper roles in the lineup then maybe there was more to get excited about, but seriously we were replacing Ryan Getzlaf with Ryan Strome and Rickard Rakell with Frank Vatrano. Which two of those 4 would you rather have on your team? Not the two we got. Yes one retired but there was a lot of leadership lost there and never replaced. And the other was a former 30 goal scorer replaced by a guy that will never hit 30. Coaching wont change that either unfortunately.
My take was based on how good this team was after last years trade deadline and they were awful, giving up 40 plus shots and getting blown out, much like this year. Then seeing the guys they brought in, I did not expect anything to change in terms of results.
I think the biggest issue was not the guys that they brought in but in retaining Eakins. I'm sure if there was a better coach we'd feel a lot better about those signings. That's the one area I'm looking forward to improving the most. I know we didn't replace the guys leaving with the same quality and I think it was voiced here many times ( especially about Lindholm). But hopefully we can turn the page on this season, hope for a really good pick and better coaching next year giving the guys a boost as well. Hopefully some good signings in ufa/or trade as well. I'm not too happy with some of the moves Verbeek has made but I'm willing to see what he can do to turn this team around.
2023 Playoffs!!
in NHL Talk
Posted
No no that can't be right! GM Blake (best GM in the nhl) solved all the Kings goaltending issues...hmmm... so I'm sure there is some kind of mistake here. Please check again because Korpi is unstoppable and we're supposed to be picking him up in the offseason and dumping that has been Gibson. In fact just trade Gibson for a Walmart coupon that's 10 cents off when you spend $100.