g20topdogg
-
Posts
1,904 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Media Demo
Gallery
Posts posted by g20topdogg
-
-
8 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:
Bombay is 100% in on the Shane Wright sweepstakes, so any trade proposal that includes our 2022 1st will be rejected.
Personally, I think the NHL is squeezing Buffalo to make a deal now and that the price is coming way, way down. Anaheim could probably now do it for a 2022/23 protected 1st (Anaheim's choice) + Perreault + Milano + Lundestrom + Kesler, and Bob could probably even hold out a bit longer to bring that cost down a bit considering Buffalo's cap issues. This deal HAS to get done for Anaheim though. If nothing changes, Gibby is demanding a trade and Lindholm is for sure gone by next season and the defense is going to be a black hole that plagues this team for a LONG, LONG time. We have NOTHING in the pipeline to replace Lindholm any time soon, and if Gibby forces his way out the Ducks are going to ruin a 22-year-old Dostal by making him face 45 shots/game behind that awful Hampusless defense next season. On the flip side, Eichel is the type of elite talent who can make guys want to stay here, and he makes other guys want to come here (see Taylor Hall and Jeff Skinner signing in Buffalo). Heck, with that trade price, we're coming out of the Olympic break this season with Comtois-Eichel-Rakell, Henrique-Zegras-Terry, Jones-Getzlaf-Silfverberg, and a 4th line of Deslauriers/McTavish/Grant/Steel/Groulx. That's a good forward unit.
I could even see that if Eichel doesn't play this season at least it would give some guys like Gibby another season to wait and see until he comes back because he'd be an instant boost to our offense. He could be a really good reason for guys to want to stick around. I also don't get why some keep thinking we need to move on from Lindholm and Gibby. If Lindholm refuses to sign a good deal then sure trade him. But if we lose those guys, we might as well forget about the playoffs for the next 5 to 6 years.
If anyone doubts that Gibby is capable, look no furthur than our last preseason game. He basically stole that win for us.
-
2
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:
Volkov put on waivers. Thought he’d be relatively safe on a 4th line spot.
I just saw that as well. I thought he was ok for us last year when he came in. I'm surprised by this as well.
-
54 minutes ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:
Ben Hutton signed to a PTO lol.
I give up…again
As long as Larsson is gone I don't care who they bring in.....
-
14 minutes ago, HockeyIzCool said:
Whoever they can get on the cheap. Perhaps the current Gulls GM.
I'm pretty sure that Bob is stepping down at the end of the year. This is his last with no renewal pending. At least that's what I've heard. Who knows, with how pretty this organization has been I wouldn't be surprised if they decide that he'll be back...
-
1 hour ago, ike8228 said:
Define intelligent lol
Ducks trade for Eichel with 50% retained salary and cap hit for Grant and a 7th rd pick in 2050. Even then that's too much given how much value the Grantzlaf has!
-
1
-
-
Vancouver would need a D with Hamonic likely out. Manson anyone? Please Bob do the right thing. I know you want to resign him to an 8 year nmc contract but fight the urge Bob. Fight the urge...
-
5 hours ago, CharlieConway said:
How many teams have more NTC / NMC than the Ducks? not many.
Lets look at the actual good franchises when wanting to emulate the market.
Avalanche - Kadri, MacK, Johnson, Landeskog.
The only bad NTC here is Johnson (who is much better than Shattenkirk) and the rest are all top 6 talent / elite.
Lightning - Bogosian, Hedman, Kucherov, Stamkos, Vas, Palat, Killorn, Perry, Maroon, McDonagh,
Everyone here outside of Killorn (who is better than both Silf and Henrique) is either a top 6 f / top 4 d-man OR on a sweetheart contract.
Bruins, Knights, Caps, Pens are also pretty much similar to the above. (1, maybe 2 questionable NTC)
The Ducks NTC feature Henrique (5.8M), Silf (5.2), Getzlaf. Bottom 6 forwards at best and only one has actually accomplished anything of note with this team.
Shattenkirk is god awful and was worse than a handful of D-man who would've signed for cheap and wouldn't require a NTC.
The Ducks simply don't know how to use NTC / NMC and should probably follow the Devils and only use it to attract ELITE d-man, not scrubs who are carried by Victor Hedman during a playoff run.
Wasn't this discussed already and shown that as far as ntc and nmc is concerned we were about league average?
I'm scratching my head at the bolded. How exactly are they "bottom 6 forwards at best"? First of all, when we signed them they were at worst second liners, except Getzy who by the way deserves that added perk because he's earned it with this team. Like Teemu and others, Getzy has every right to have that in his contract. Second, I don't think MOST teams would have those players outside the top 6 besides Getzy (who again isn't the same player he once was but has earned the ntc).
Shatty doesn't deserve the ntc but Bob wanted him and that was the sweetener to get him here. Honestly, we probably shouldn't have picked him up in the first place.
So again, we're about league average when it comes to those clauses. I don't disagree that they're hurting the team, it's just that you make that kind of a statement I had to reply.
-
Bunch of Debbie Downers.....
-
1
-
1
-
-
Who's the guy sitting all by himself?
-
7 hours ago, BombaysTripleDeke said:
That makes more sense and at least we are in agreement that next season is going to be bad lol. 2022-2023 is when things might begin to turnaround but as far as competing for the playoffs but a lot of things need to go right and happen: Zegras and Drysdale are legit NHLers and contributors (most important), John Gibson still wants to play on this team and plays very well; we add another top-4 defensemen (possibly two if we both Manson and Lindholm are gone), bring in at least two top-6 scoring wingers to play along side Eichel/Zegras. If Zegras and Drysdale aren't very good by 2022 then the Ducks are still going to struggling even with Eichel, imo. I don't think we can bank on that right now and this upcoming season is purely a developmental one for Zegras/Drysdale. If I were a betting man, I think that 2023-2024 would be more realistic for the Ducks competing for a playoff spot.
Manson bringing back a second rounder at the deadline sounds about right and would be a masterclass showing of Murray's incompetence in asset management.
🤔hmmm.... so you've finally joined the Eichel bandwagon! Welcome aboard!!! Woot woot!!!!
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, dtsdlaw said:
I think his comps right now are Saad (5 x $4.5M), Toffoli (4 x $4.25M), and Granlund (4 x $5M). Silfverberg's 5 x $5.25M is probably the outer limit, but that contract looks like quite an overpay in hindsight and it would be surprising to see Rakell get that in UFA with the current flat cap. Keeping him in Anaheim at Toffoli's contract would be fantastic, but I would also absolutely re-sign him for either Saad's contract or Granlund's contract. Four years means he's done at 32, and five years is 33. Unless there's some unknown injury he's dealing with, I think that is an ideal bridge to the next generation of Ducks and still makes him tradeable if one of the youngsters (Perreault?) surprises us within the next 2-3 seasons and makes him expendable.
I would resign Rakell to a 4x5 and Lindholm to a 6x7 or 7x7 (somewhere around there). Going long term on Rakell isn't a good idea. I also agree with others that we trade him at the dead line if he's having a really good season. It's a contract year for him so he might put in the extra effort to get paid. Manson should be traded. We still need to pick up a center to play the first line (maybe even just for a year or two) who might be able to slot into a second line center moving forward. We absolutely cannot go into next season with no changes to the roster. And trading off a lot of vets also hurts the development of our prospects. I'd trade Manson and pick up Vats as a fill in for a 2x 2-2.5 (I think that would be fine). Get someone to play top line center and go into next season knowing it's going to be a developmental season for the young guys. Otherwise trading off a lot of better pieces of the team should mean we let Zegras and Drysdale go to the Ahl so that they don't get destroyed and hurt their confidence and game for the future.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, tommer-1 said:
So fresh...
Parapappapa I'm NOT lovin it! 🤣🤣
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Gorbachav55 said:
If he's waiting for Eichel, he might just keep waiting. Buffalo doesn't have to do anything. Eichel is still under contract and if they don't get an offer they like, they could show Jack that they're willing to play hardball by just hanging onto him.
But yes, one way or the other, tanking or trying to compete, having the same roster is asinine.
I don't think that's the case though. Sure, they have his contract rights and they could sit him until he's a free agent technically. But in reality they have to trade him before the season starts. Everyone and their grandma knows to have Eichel be a part of their team is crazy. It's going to be a circus come training camp. If henrique was waived it seemed like we needed to part ways with him and the situation was irreparable then the Eichel situation is 100x worse. He's openly critiqued the sabers organization and he's openly demanding a trade I don't see how they could hold onto him.
Who was it, Dubois? Who clearly was not trying on the ice when he was with the jackets. Assuming Eichel even plays, he's probably going to score on his own team lol.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Fisix said:
i think i only care a little because i'd want to purchase a jersey without an ad, and so now i'm less inclined to increase the size of my collection.
THG mentioned that the retail version wasn't supposed to have the ads though.
-
38 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:
Gross
It's not going to look like that. From what I heard it's going to be 3x3.5 inches. One ad? Idk but definitely not like those European jerseys.
-
4 hours ago, gotchabari said:
Rico, Silf, maybe Rakell. Not all 3 at once, but 2 of those three if they get an okay return. Definitely more flexibility on the Offense than Defense.
I'd also add Manson to the list to be moved. If Lindholm is asking for too much or it seems we won't be able to sign him then by all means trade him. But id hold onto him and probably Ricky. Our defense will be absolute trash, plus what will that accomplish? Look at Toronto, their defense is still not too great. Sure they have a lot of firepower but now they have a different issue. Both parts of the team are important and besides I seem to remember that he was probably had the most stamina in the combine before he was drafted. He's not going to decline like other more offensively talented defensemen will in their 30s. He's more of a Lindstrom type player in that he's very physically fit and could probably play into his late 30s at a high level for sure. But if the right offer comes along I'd trade him.
-
7 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:
242-196 = 46
A competent power play gets you half way there. Eichel easily gets you the other half.
I think he meant that if those guys were the top line then the rest of the team would have to score 150 goals. It's not a stretch to say that since that season our goals for have dropped further. Goals will be hard to come by either way.
-
7 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:
A 2022 1st is likely a feature of the trade for most of the teams still in on Eichel, and I betcha Adams thinks that the longer Buffalo holds up the trade the less Eichel will play in the 2021-22 season, which will in turn improve that 1st round draft pick. This makes sense if the Buffalo doctors have convinced him that the fusion surgery is the correct procedure for Eichel, since Dr. Prusmack mentioned on the 31 Thoughts podcast that if the disc replacement doesn't work then the corrective procedure is the fusion surgery. So by waiting until closer to the start of the season, he's guaranteeing that Eichel misses a minimum of 6-8 weeks of the season (if the replacement works) and a maximum of the entire season (if he needs the fusion as a fall back). Aside from it also being a bit vindictive towards the player, it's not a bad strategy for the team, since outside of the Rangers any team still in on Eichel probably isn't really trying to go deep in the 2022 playoffs and doesn't feel pressure to get the trade done before the season starts. Like the Ducks, they're almost all looking at 2023-2026 as their competitive years. The only team that probably feels pressure is the Rangers, who want to win now and also will have to make some decisions on their top-2 centers (Zibanejad and Strome) who are both UFAs at season's end, so this could be part of Adams' last effort to squeeze more out of New York before they pull out and leave it to teams like Anaheim, Columbus, Calgary, and Detroit to put up their best final offer right before the season starts.
But I'd argue that it also lowers his value because you're getting a player who's going to miss significant time playing. Players are paid to play not to sit on the sidelines. If I'm getting a player who's only going to play half a season for me then I'm going to pay you less especially if that said player could have played the full season and the reason he's not is the team's fault.
-
3 minutes ago, DucksFan_08 said:
This looks quite good actually. Two big questionmarks though, Eichel and Drouin. Will they be able to play next season if at all (Drouin).
Having said that, I´m a fan of taking a chance on Drouin. Given our capspace it´s a low risk high reward kind of move.
Which is why the pick has to be protected for next year. Buffalo needs to hurry this up because Eichel could be sitting out a while. Maybe this is their way of getting back at him or something. I just don't see how they're going to get better offers at this point.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:
Here's what I do to improve this team and to put butts back in the seats at Honda Center:
1. Eichel <---> 1st (2022, lottery protected) + Perreault + Lundestrom + 2nd (2023) + rights to LaCombe [+ Kesler for Buffalo's cap]
2. Henrique ($1M/season retained) <---> Drouin
3. Shattenkirk + Deslauriers + 4th (2022) <---> PK Subban + 3rd (2022)
4. Sign UFA Sami Vatanen 2 x $2M
Full lines could be:
Comtois-Eichel-Rakell
Drouin-Zegras-Terry
Jones-Getzlaf-Silfverberg
Steel-Grant-Volkov [extras: Milano, Groulx, McTavish]
Lindholm-Manson
Fowler-Subban
Vatanen-Drysdale [extras: Mahura, Larsson]
Gibby, Stolarz
That team is about $3.6M below the cap, and still allows for guys like Rakell and Manson to be moved at the deadline if it doesn't look like an extension makes sense for either guy.
Note on Subban: He has a $9M cap hit for one more season, but his salary is structured as $2M base + $6M signing bonus. The signing bonus has already been paid, so he'd only cost $2M in salary. And I know he's been a nightmare with the analytics the past two seasons, but he's been playing on an awful defense with useless partners and no goaltending on a team he clearly doesn't want to play for (and didn't want to be traded to). If there's one guy I think could benefit from a fresh start (other than Eichel, of course), it's Subban. And if he still sucks, he only costs $2M and is a UFA in 2022. But if he rebounds, I betcha he could be re-signed for a reasonable contract and could fill Manson's spot if we want to trade Manson at the deadline. He's also PK freaking Subban, and I would buy tickets just to see him play in Anaheim. Especially if the Ducks also added talent to the top-6.
1. I'm not sure this would be enough but it'd be awesome if that was it. But what made me want to comment on this is the Kesler contract. The way I see it is we don't need to trade his contract but buffalo needs it to reach the cap floor. We hold the advantage on this imo and is actually a benefit for both teams, more so buffalo. This makes me think any trade involving the teams would have to include the Kesler contract I think. It just makes too much sense. Buffalo is rebuilding and they get a contract that they don't have to pay and helps them money wise in being cap compliant. This would remove the idea of also having to take on contacts like Henrique to make the cap work.
2. I think we'd have to throw in a pick or retain more salary but the more I thought about it it makes sense for both teams. They get a guy who's actually playing and we might be able to restart his career. It's risky though.
Overall, I like the team and I think this roster is a big improvement. +1 on Vats, I've been saying we should pick him up. He helps our defense and he'd be relatively cheap. The only thing I don't like is Mahura is left without a spot, again. Seriously, are we ever going to play the guy? Get rid of Larsson, toss him into the Eichel trade lol.
-
11 hours ago, tommer-1 said:
I was more looking at that entire group and, imo, seeing 0 guys who are difference-makers. We are hoping that kids like Zegras and Drysdale and McTavish and maybe even Perreault will be that, and they may, but looking at those "older" guys, we thought the same thing. And non of them have been. They haven't drafted legit impact guys - and held onto them (Theo and Wild Bill) since 2005 - one guy - and 2003 - two guys. That's it.
Don't bring up Gibson's name, because he is not a difference-maker. He doesn't put this team on his back and drag them to greatness.
Those really high draft picks, Top 10 - Lindholm, Ritchie, Zegras, Drysdale, McTavish - will any of them be difference-makers? Right now we know about Lindholm and Ritchie. 0 for 2. We are hoping on the next three. What in the Ducks' history gives us that hope? Getzlaf, Perry, Kariya. That's about it.
He is quite possibly the only legitimate star on this team though. He's going to single handedly drag a last place team to the playoffs? He's probably the main reason we haven't ended up 31st the last three to four years. Our goals for keeps dropping like a brick. The defense has sucked worse every year since Yawney left. And to top it all off our pp got sucked into a black hole. And you're suggesting we skip all that and pretend that Gibson is garbage?
Easily 3/4 of the league would probably replace their starting goaltender with Gibson if they had the chance.
-
4
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:
my guess is could be a) they so strongly disagree that they are afraid that he wont heal properly at all and then no one wants him (but they at least get some cap relief....?) or b) teams wont be interested AT ALL till he's skating again which at this point wouldn't be till Sept/Oct so it greatly delays the trade. Not that it doesn't seem to be delayed anyway and might go till then...but im guessing that's their reasoning. There also might be a responsibility issue....like, if it happens under the Sabres watch, they are still responsible. And they don't want to be.
Then come off your high horse and get a deal done. They want the best of both worlds and they're probably going to find out it doesn't work that way. With every passing day the price should be lowered. Besides they don't want to assume the responsibility but others who pay top dollar should? Lol keep him. See how bad this will really get closer to training camp, they'll be begging to move him. He's not playing there ever again so whatever they seem to think that they hold all the cards is a serious bluff and everyone else is calling them out on it. I'd actually like to see that. Imagine the drama come first day of camp, no surgery and no trade.
-
5 hours ago, Fisix said:
am i right in that: if Eichel decides to go ahead with the neck surgery he wants, without permission from the Sabers or whoever owns his contract going forward, he'd be in breach, and the team holding the contract could just end it without paying him?
i think at this point, any team trying to work a deal would be talking with Eichel and his agent, and the agent and Eichel would be letting everyone know that he expects to be allowed to get the surgery he wants after he's traded. i can't imagine any team wanting to ship assets to get him and then risk their investment by refusing to allow him his want.
at the same time, an acquiring team would want a hedge, where my guess is that they'd want the Sabers to share about half the burden if Eichel's career ends. i'd say that's actually very fair, and it'd have to include some of the shipped assets coming back (money is likely the cheapest thing in this transaction).
so, what's the holdup?
are the Sabers refusing to assist in the hedge, or are they asking too much, or some combination? what i don't really get is why, at this point, the Sabers aren't giving Eichel permission to get the surgery? if there was still some 50-50 chance that a new team could prevail in getting Eichel to go the conservative healing route willingly, then pausing would make sense, but from all accounts that's not reality, and delaying the approval is just decreasing Eiche's value, second by second (it's leaking his career playing time away by forcing his recovery time further and further into overlap with next season).
are the prospective acquiring teams unwilling to do their part in the hedge? do they want the Sabers to bear all the risk? or are they just offering too little? it sounds like the Sabers believe there are teams (more than just 1) that have assets that would work in what they believe would be a fair trade, so it doesn't seem like it's for lack of teams with marketable assets.
i'm probably making this more complex than it actually is. the simplest answer is that the Sabers are asking for more than what teams are willing to pay under the circumstances of the player's heath; there's only so much an acquiring team can hedge for. i don't know how player contract insurance works, but if it needs to be renegotiated every time a player is traded, can you imagine what the premiums would be for the remaining portion of Eichel's contract? $$$$$
i reiterate that i think Eichel to the Ducks is a horrible idea, and offer no caveats because it's clear they're asking for more than we should be willing to give, and it's also clear they aren't going to back down. otherwise, the deal would be done already.
What I don't understand is if Eichel is set on the surgery regardless of which team he goes to, why don't the sabers let him do the surgery? Teams are probably hesitant to pull the trigger because of the unknowns. He's already said he doesn't want to play for the Sabres basically. Why not give him the chance to get the surgery and if he heals as good as he's projected then the sabers should be able to get more value. It feels like a dead end street in that the sabers want too much and he's very unhappy. Give him the surgery, see how he heals and then ask for the moon idk seems like a better plan to me.
-
34 minutes ago, nieder said:
Ristolainen got Buffalo the 14th overall pick, a second rounder, and a third pair defenseman (Hagg). If Risto got that then surely Manson could net a similar return. He scores more than Manson but he's god awful in his own end.
I know right. With the returns teams were getting I thought Manson was a goner for sure.
Seems we are stuck with Bob
in Former Ducks Forum
Posted
Well to be fair, the last two were shortened seasons. BUT to be far less fair I believe we're one of only like two or three teams....