g20topdogg
-
Posts
1,939 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Media Demo
Gallery
Posts posted by g20topdogg
-
-
1 hour ago, Fisix said:
fixed it for you.
Lol that's fair.
🤦♂️ those grammatical errors though. Sorry to put everyone through that.
-
1 hour ago, tommer-1 said:
I think the Ducks currently really should only be saving three D spots, maximum, for vets. They already have Drysdale, so that would really leave two spots, max, for any "kid". If you also slot a Vaakanainen or Benoit into the 6/7 spot, then that only leaves room for one "kid". I think they can do just fine with two vets (Fowler, Severson), Drysdale, , two kids, and two #6/#7 guys.
Fowler, Drysdale - 2 spots
Two vets from the outside/resigned (Kulikov, The Shatt, Soucy, Severson) - 2 spots
One or two #6/#7 guys - Benoit, Vaakainainen
One or Two "kids" - Helleson, Zellweger, Mintyukov, Hinds
If they wanted to have a "vet heavy" blueline in the next 3-4 years, then trading Lindholm doesn't make much sense.
Can we please stop adding Shattenkirk as potential guy to return? Kulikov fine. But please get someone outside else in here and let him to ufa. It's depressing to think PV is even considering bringing him back.
-
1 hour ago, tommer-1 said:
Two new changes go into effect this year and the main alteration is a big one. Teams will now be restricted from moving up more than 10 spots in the pre-draft order. This means that unlike in the preceding years, not all teams participating in the lottery are eligible to win one of the top two picks. The main purpose for this change was to ensure the team that finishes last in the standings in the regular season won’t be slated to pick any worse than third overall.
Also going forward, no team can win the top pick in the draft lottery more than twice in a five-year span. Whichever team wins the No. 1 pick on Tuesday will only be eligible to do so one more time between 2023 and 2026. The Oilers, Buffalo Sabres and New Jersey Devils each won the draft lottery multiple times over the past decade.
It's a sportsnet article that doesn't go much into the details of the rules. Saying they can't win more than twice doesn't account for all the variables. None of the other articles when searching for lottery rules goes into more detail than just they can't win. I can't find the actual nhl rules and the article that comes up from nhl.com doesn't go into detail either. It still hasn't changed my mind of the whole trading for someone's pick idea. I think it's valid... until proven otherwise. 😅
-
47 minutes ago, FanSince1993 said:
Anybody on this forum, please explain me why our coaching stuff playing Gibson game after game. He looks disinterested, demoralized and simply not good. His agent stays quiet because he understands the lack of his trade value. However, the coaching stuff makes him starting goalie one game after another, even though you don't have to be a sport phycologist to see his low motivation level. The season is lost anyways, why don't give more starts to Dostal/Stolarz duo, I bet they won't be worse than 4.5GAA, .85% save he posted in the last 10 games.
P.S. Two Gibson die heart fans on this forum, who I won't mention by name, don't forget to place "Haha" symbol under my comment.
Haha. Got that out of the way.
Anyway, I agree with you. They should have given Stolarz the start.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Ducky Steve said:
It's time for the Ducks to move on from Dallas Eakins. When Pat Verbeek finally names his first head coach, let's all hope that it's Sergei Fedorov. I believe he would be a perfect fit.
Lol Fedorov didn't exactly have a good time here on his last go around. Doubtful he would consider us. Now if we win Bedard we don't have to look very far, coaches should be lining up at the door!
-
11 hours ago, tommer-1 said:
Not sure. But the wording to me indicates that the "penalty" for winning the lottery twice in any five-year period is that you do not get to win the lottery in those other three years. Period. Not you get to win it under certain circumstances. You are excluded.
So, basically once you win twice in a five-year period your first rounders in those other three years are conditional, with the condition being that you will not be picking #1 OA.
Is there a link on where you're seeing this?
-
2 hours ago, Aksun said:
Yes I've missed that despite it being mentioned multiple times on this page and the previous ones, but the years I cited were as an example only.
I should have given a better example. The 2022 winner MTL will not be able to win again until summer of '27.
So you were able to find this somewhere? I'm sure closer to the draft this stuff will be explained more.
-
4 hours ago, tommer-1 said:
The rule is not saying "No team can pick #1 OA more than twice in any 5-year period, but just with their pick if they're crappy, not if they traded for a crappy team's #1 OA pick one year"
It's just saying you can't win the lottery more than twice in any 5-year period.
I get what you're saying but I still think that if you already won it twice and you have another teams 1st (which wins the lottery) it's not team A that won the pick, it's team B's. And it just so happens that they had traded that pick away to team A. Team A is not at fault that Team B could have had the 1OA but lucked out by trading it away without any protections. I don't see why team A would be penalized by this system as it's not their pick to begin with.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, tommer-1 said:
No. A team cannot WIN the top pick more than twice in a 5-year period, starting in 2022. So ANY team can win the #1 pick this draft. If MON wins, then they can't get a #1 for the next three drafts. They are the only team currently in that position, because the rule was instated this last draft.
As for what team's pick it is, it doesn't matter. No team can win the top pick more than twice in a 5-year period. Doesn't have anything to do with how you acquired the actual draft pick. Has to do with winning the 1st OA/winning the lottery.
I don't think that's true. If I won it say year 1 and I wanted to trade for the 1st overall the following year I'm not allowed to follow through on this trade? We're talking about winning it with another team's draft pick not their own. I would think the rules pertaining to acquiring a 1st overall with someone else's pick would still be allowed. There's nothing preventing a team from trading for the 1st overall for the next 5 years even.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:
this is what i feel is likely true.
come on cats...get out of the lottery!!!
In still holding out hope for Bedard. I think we could finally do it this year!
-
2 hours ago, Fisix said:
we've have to look at the rules again, but i don't think using another team's pick (via trade) counts against your "winning the lottery" aggregate.
we'll have to look up the procedure for any team submitting balls in the lottery after winning the #1 the prior year. i can't remember if their balls are removed for the #1 pick, or if they're chucked into the trash if picked first, or shoved back into the whirlyjig until some other team gets the #1?
I would think that they would still get the#1 pick. It's not their pick but another team who got 1st overall but decided to trade it. Unfortunately for that team they didn't know it was going to be 1st but that's how that trade would work. You can't nullify a trade for the 1st overall because another team already had it before.
-
3 hours ago, Gorbachav55 said:
I don't think that's true - our best prospects are either already with the team (McTavish) or are in the CHL or college (Zellweger, Mintyukov, Gaucher, etc.).
However, it is true that there are some prospects in San Diego we're hoping could help the team - namely Dostal, Helleson, Tracey, and Perreault. Having not seen any of the Gulls' games, I have no idea whether their struggles are a result of injury, lack of development, lack of work ethic, coaching, something else, or a combination of all of those. As for the prospects we care about, other than numbers (which aren't great for Perreault and Tracey, but are somewhat beside the point for Helleson), I can't really opine on how the important guys are doing. I know that the rest of the team isn't all that relevant to the Ducks' future - they're mostly plugs.
So while you could be right that the coaching hire is the issue in San Diego, I think it's hard to say at this point. It's been three months and they've got a poor roster. But I don't think their poor play is necessarily a huge problem, because it's only four guys we really care about down there.
What about Bo Groux? He had a 15 game stint last season I believe. Shouldn't he also still count as a prospect worth watching still. Or do you think he's nothing more than 4th line?
-
6 hours ago, perry_mvp said:
With the posts on here, the rumor seems to be the Shatt coming back. If that happens why not just bring Kulikov back as well if he wants to. That could be your 1 or 2 vets.
I'd rather we brought Kulikov back. He's the better overall player at this point, he's not going to command a bunch of money and (as someone mentioned) he could be a good mentor to Mintyukov. Plus Kulikov has more years left than Shatty so he won't drop off in play as fast. Even if it's for one year.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, tommer-1 said:
Just FYI:
Top 5 picks in the last 21 drafts (2002-2022)
ANA - 2
ARZ - 5
CHI - 4
CLB - 6
FLA - 6
MON - 4
NSH - 1
OTT - 3
PHI - 4
SJS - 0
STL - 2
VAN - 2
That's crazy. Including the other list SJ is the only team to not pick in the top 5 for the last 21 years! That's kind of amazing actually considering they had a pretty good team and had some decent playoff success.
-
51 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:
I was a but disappointed with the Gaucher pick as well, so I'm not defending it. But we'll see. Hopefully he turns into a solid two-way forward.
I mean it's only his D+1 season so he's still got a long way to go before he even becomes a player to hopefully get some games in. Likely we'll know if he has a chance in his D+3 or 4 season.
-
He could still become a decent player I guess since he's still very young. But so far a lot of our later first round draft picks either don't make it or are 3rd/4th liners which isn't good when you're considering the value of the pick and what we're getting in return.
-
3 hours ago, perry_mvp said:
I know he's listed at 6'3" and over 200lbs but in preseason he just looked small. I was just so surprised to the point if it's a hockey 6'3" or normally 6'3"...lol. My problem with drafting someone with the hopes of them being a 4th line center is that you can find that type in free agency. With a 1st round pick it's not exactly good asset management.
Snuggerud probably would have been the better of the choices at that point with the kind of team Verbeek envisions. He wasn't picking BPA, he was picking for what he thought the organization lacked. I'm not hoping for Gaucher to fail, I hope he does develop but he looks like a long term project with little promise.
100%
Why would you draft a fourth liner with a 1st rd pick? Even second round is a stretch. I don't think PV hopes he will become a 4th liner when he makes the pick, that would just be dumb. But if he ends up there at least the pick wasn't totally wasted on someone who will never enter the NHL.
-
I'm not sure why Gibson was being played so much to begin with. If he had some kind of nagging injuries before he went out of the lineup why not just give him time off to heal properly? The broadcasters even mentioned that he seemed was better and refreshed when he came back. This season is over, why not give him more time off to heal up for next year? Wouldn't playing the long game be better for him and the club? I don't understand these weird moves. I'm not saying to end his season but let him be 100% for next year by not overworking and having him play through injuries.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Gorbachav55 said:
Lafraniere has been disappointing offensively, but he would immediately be the best defender the Ducks have. And that includes defensemen.
I got to thinking. What about trade Lafreniere for Klingberg (half retained) + 2nd? Rangers are in win now mode and we can afford to develop Laf for another season or two. If Klingberg doesn't work out in NY before the deadline they can probably trade him for another 2nd or retain another 50% and probably get a 1st. Idk if that would work? Maybe trade Lundestrom or Jones as well to make it work?
-
1
-
-
So Steel is at 6 goals for the season. He's never scored more than 6. Does this mean he's got his limit and won't get another the rest of the year? 🤭
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Jasoaks said:
Ya know, I was coming on here to defend Kakko...wouldn't call him a bust yet...the kid is 21.....but....
then looked at his stats and woof....193 games in and only 73 pts...in comparison to another 21 year-old, someone like Z, who has 100 in 135 games...and Z has played on SIGNIFICANTLY worse teams...
Also looks like NYR are close to being done with Lafreniere...I mean, I'd take him but not with giving up our first in 2023 or any of our most promising prospects AT ALL or any of our future, under 24 stars. The only one I'd CONSIDER would be Terry. Terry's development fits nicely with NYR's window. But that's as far as I'd go to consider.
No way I'd even consider Terry. He's by far the better player. You know I looked up Comtois numbers and he's got 72 pts in 171 games. He only needs one point to total Laf. I know he's still young but he's also played on a much better team and his numbers are worse than Comtois on a much worse team and less games. I'm not saying Comtois is worth Lafreniere but I just had to defend our boy Terry here lol.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Jasoaks said:
1. He'd look great I think.
2. I don't think he wants out -- he said exactly that over the summer.
3. As with most, I put Giguere first, Gibby second....but for 3rd....I think I'm going Freddie. Well, I'd put Hiller without vertigo 3rd actually 😕 Bryz can be up around there too and Hebert of course! We've had so many great goalies!
And Dostal looks like he's next in line to be great!
-
42 minutes ago, perry_mvp said:
It was a good trade. EXGMBM got a prospect ( former 2nd round pick, Guhle) and 1st round pick (2019) from a former second round pick (Montour). Can't complain about that return. It's fair to complain that Guhle's development didn't pan out for whatever reason and that EXGMBM used his magic beans to pick Brayden Tracey. On the flip side, Buffalo only got a 3rd round pick when Montour was traded to Florida. The only one who won this trade outright was Montour.
This should never be mentioned again lol
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, gotchabari said:
It kind of was. Montour for a first was good, then added a serviceable guy as gravy on top of it that probably wasn't necessary to square up the trade.
By serviceable you mean mainly played in the ahl? He only played a handful of games at the NHL level.
NHL Entry Draft Targets
in Rumors, Wishes and Speculations
Posted
Thank you for that! That Montreal article clarifies the situation as they mention the Florida pick (if it wins) would indeed count against the 5 year. So I was wrong and the way the language is written and those examples actually kind of hinder some teams. Like if a team is 13th in lottery position and wins to move up 10 spots to 3rd OA, that will also count against the 5 year because they won the lottery. I'm not sure that it's really a hindrance though because out of sheer luck you happened to get 3rd OA still so you can't really complain. That article also mentioned that if you're last and win, you don't move and so because you don't move it doesn't count against the 5 year. Basically you can still get multiple lottery wins then if you don't move?