Season Expectations

[BlibberBluff]

57 minutes ago, FanSince1993 said:

It's not necessarily true. Look at Ottawa, for example. 2 years ago this team was bad, a new GM signed some really good FA the last 2 summers, and now they have a potential to go really deep in the playoffs. 

That Ottawa team was atrocious and looked an absolute disaster of a team 5 years ago. If we want to use them as an example, they are entering the 6th year of their “rebuild” and looking competitive. They likely will be a bubble team this year and really start pushing contention next year.

 We are basically a year behind them. Entering our 5th year of mediocrity, could push to be a playoff bubble next year, and begin our real contention of a playoff team the year after that, 24/25

[Gorbachav55]

1 hour ago, FanSince1993 said:

It's not necessarily true. Look at Ottawa, for example. 2 years ago this team was bad, a new GM signed some really good FA the last 2 summers, and now they have a potential to go really deep in the playoffs. 

Ottawa is a great example, although I think "really deep" is stretching it quite a bit.  You're correct that this year Ottawa has the potential to go to the playoffs.  Once there, they (like any team) have the chance to get lucky and win a round or two, but that would be fairly surprising.  They're still behind most of the favorites in the East. 

Similarly, in two years, I expect the Ducks to have the potential to go to the playoffs.  And there's an outside chance they could even get close next season, depending on how aggressive Verbeek is in the offseason in trades and free agency.  But the timelines will be similar.

Ottawa last made the playoffs in 2017.  They have the potential to go to the playoffs in 2023.

The Ducks last made the playoffs in 2018.  They have the potential to go to the playoffs in 2024, but realistically 2025.  The reason the Ducks might be delayed a year behind Ottawa is because our former GM waited too long to begin what should have been an obvious rebuild.

So if you're using Ottawa as an example, that's a point in favor of the notion that Verbeek still has a year or two before we should expect to be competitive.  If the 24-25 Ducks aren't in the same position as the 22-23 Senators, then we should start lighting the torches and sharpening the pitchforks.

[BombaysTripleDeke]

1 hour ago, FanSince1993 said:

It's not necessarily true. Look at Ottawa, for example. 2 years ago this team was bad, a new GM signed some really good FA the last 2 summers, and now they have a potential to go really deep in the playoffs. 

Ottawa has been bad since the end of 2017 and have drafted players like Tkachuk, Stutzle, Norris (through the Karlsson trade), Batherson, Pinto, Sanderson with a legit top defender in chabot from 2015. It’s not as though they were bad for two years and are now on the come up. They loaded up at the draft and just recently added DeBrincat, Giroux and Joseph to help them become a team that can compete for the playoffs. 

The Ducks don’t have that kind of group and aren’t in the same position. Starting next summer, they will be closer to it though.

note: I responded to this before seeing Gorbachav’s comment which better illustrates the point.

Edited October 25, 2022 by BombaysTripleDeke

[Gorbachav55]

Just looking at draft picks, if Zegras is our Brady Tkachuk and McTavish/Zellweger are our Stutzle/Sanderson, then we're still a year behind Ottawa.  But we need:

• Chabot: I don't think there's an analog within the system - Drysdale doesn't seem to be it, but we'll see
• Batherson: Terry might be a good analog here - late drafted guy who breaks out in his mid-20s 
• Josh Norris: the Senators got a great haul from the Karlsson trade - the Ducks didn't trade an asset like that until Lindholm last year, and Lindholm's not Karlsson's caliber so they didn't pick up a player like Norris; they have to hope that Gaucher becomes a guy like Norris, which realistically won't happen for three years

The Ducks are a bit behind, so Verbeek has his work cut out for him.  But I think 24-25 is realistic for the Ducks to expect to make the playoffs, unless things go too far off the rails.

[dtsdlaw]

43 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:

Ottawa is a great example, although I think "really deep" is stretching it quite a bit.  You're correct that this year Ottawa has the potential to go to the playoffs.  Once there, they (like any team) have the chance to get lucky and win a round or two, but that would be fairly surprising.  They're still behind most of the favorites in the East. 

Similarly, in two years, I expect the Ducks to have the potential to go to the playoffs.  And there's an outside chance they could even get close next season, depending on how aggressive Verbeek is in the offseason in trades and free agency.  But the timelines will be similar.

Ottawa last made the playoffs in 2017.  They have the potential to go to the playoffs in 2023.

The Ducks last made the playoffs in 2018.  They have the potential to go to the playoffs in 2024, but realistically 2025.  The reason the Ducks might be delayed a year behind Ottawa is because our former GM waited too long to begin what should have been an obvious rebuild.

So if you're using Ottawa as an example, that's a point in favor of the notion that Verbeek still has a year or two before we should expect to be competitive.  If the 24-25 Ducks aren't in the same position as the 22-23 Senators, then we should start lighting the torches and sharpening the pitchforks.

Ottawa also had a hiccup in their own rebuild thanks to the Duchene trade. They gave up the #4 overall pick in 2019 (Bowen Byrum) for Duchene and ended up getting back only the #19 pick in 2019 (Lassi Thompson) when they sent Duchene to Columbus. Not all rebuilds are linear. Ottawa's rebuild also took advantage of having a lot of their top players on expiring contracts (Erik Karlsson, Mark Stone, Brassard, etc.). The timing just wasn't the same for the Ducks until this past TDL. A comparable rebuild for the Ducks would have involved trading the likes of Fowler and Henrique in the final year of their last contracts instead of re-signing them, but I don't know of any Ducks fans that would have had the stomach for that at that time (outside of the extreme Fowler haters).      

[Gorbachav55]

9 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:

Ottawa also had a hiccup in their own rebuild thanks to the Duchene trade. They gave up the #4 overall pick in 2019 (Bowen Byrum) for Duchene and ended up getting back only the #19 pick in 2019 (Lassi Thompson) when they sent Duchene to Columbus. Not all rebuilds are linear. Ottawa's rebuild also took advantage of having a lot of their top players on expiring contracts (Erik Karlsson, Mark Stone, Brassard, etc.). The timing just wasn't the same for the Ducks until this past TDL. A comparable rebuild for the Ducks would have involved trading the likes of Fowler and Henrique in the final year of their last contracts instead of re-signing them, but I don't know of any Ducks fans that would have had the stomach for that at that time (outside of the extreme Fowler haters).      

Certainly not Fowler, but I could see Henrique getting traded (I don't recall what my feelings were at the time, but I recall plenty of Duck fans who weren't happy about the extension he signed).  Silfverberg definitely should have been traded.  I think the pandemic (and resulting flat cap) screwed things up, but at least Manson (and possibly Lindholm) should have been traded a year or two before they were.  But yeah, no two rebuilds, no two pathways to competitiveness are going to look alike.

Either way, I think the point stands: there was no way Verbeek was getting this team to competitiveness this season.  I'd like to see them not play like complete and utter butt this year, but we knew it was most likely to be another below average season.  Next year, I hope to see them take a real step upwards in the standings, and that's going to mean beginning to make some of the moves Ottawa and Detroit made this past offseason.

[Jasoaks]

1 hour ago, dtsdlaw said:

Ottawa also had a hiccup in their own rebuild thanks to the Duchene trade. They gave up the #4 overall pick in 2019 (Bowen Byrum) for Duchene and ended up getting back only the #19 pick in 2019 (Lassi Thompson) when they sent Duchene to Columbus. Not all rebuilds are linear. Ottawa's rebuild also took advantage of having a lot of their top players on expiring contracts (Erik Karlsson, Mark Stone, Brassard, etc.). The timing just wasn't the same for the Ducks until this past TDL. A comparable rebuild for the Ducks would have involved trading the likes of Fowler and Henrique in the final year of their last contracts instead of re-signing them, but I don't know of any Ducks fans that would have had the stomach for that at that time (outside of the extreme Fowler haters).      

it's incredible to me to see the Sens get absolutely screwed in the Duchene trade by losing out on Byram but making it up in the Karlsson trade by getting Stutzle lol 

I feel like the closest equivalent to "Karlsson" or "Duchene" for us now would be Gibson. No way he fetches the exact same return, but right now I don't see anyone else on this team that would fetch us more (beyond the obvious players we aren't trading like Z, McT, TT, OZ, Minty etc...) And that would be a big deal.

Klingberg I guess would be next. But with the way he's playing, I would be stoked to get a 1st lol

A Fowler trade back in 2018 I would have been able to stomach depending on the return. Heck, I remember seeing rumors back in 2014 of a Fowler/Weber trade in the works which I would have been completely fine with!

Edited October 25, 2022 by Jasoaks

[tommer-1]

The other important thing to remember is that you can't simply draft your way to success.  Or just trade to get there, or just sign UFAs to get there.

 

It has to be all three elements combined in some complete shift.  Usually take a few years.

So, they are going to have to make some decisions on some draft positions, some draft picks, and some young players.

They WILL NOT get better just drafting and trading away players who are over the hill (Henrique, Silf, Klingberg, Fowler, The Shatt) or are not proving out (Comtois, Jones, Lundestrom).  Some of those guys need to move on to create roster spots for others, but they will not net some great return, at least not at this rate.

 

They are most likely going to have to move a high draft pick or two and a good young player or two (Drysdale, Mintyukov, Zellweger, Gaucher, possibly even McTavish or Zegras or Terry, though they really can't afford to move kid C's unless they get one back), as well as continue to try to draft well and sign a UFA or two to build a contender.

Edited October 25, 2022 by tommer-1

[tommer-1]

Btw, I think signing Strome and Vatrano and Klingberg and Kulikov were good moves to bridge the gap with some "glue" guys, either for one year or three or five. Their next foray into the UFA battlefield needs to be impactful.

[MooseDuck]

10 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:

Btw, I think signing Strome and Vatrano and Klingberg and Kulikov were good moves to bridge the gap with some "glue" guys, either for one year or three or five. Their next foray into the UFA battlefield needs to be impactful.

It should.....there is rumor I hear our Ducks may want to sign Klingberg to extension But nothing is new.

DuckPride 4ever

MooseDuck

[g20topdogg]

52 minutes ago, tommer-1 said:

Btw, I think signing Strome and Vatrano and Klingberg and Kulikov were good moves to bridge the gap with some "glue" guys, either for one year or three or five. Their next foray into the UFA battlefield needs to be impactful.

I agree. The moves made were good. Maybe we could have done more to use our cap space but perhaps there weren't any deals that we could make. Though others were able to. But for this year I think it was decent. Though it seems the loss of some of our ufas ended up being more than we thought. Plus the retirement of Getzy and you have a team seemingly worse than last year. I still think we need to move on from Eakins though as soon as possible. 

[tommer-1]

4 minutes ago, g20topdogg said:

I agree. The moves made were good. Maybe we could have done more to use our cap space but perhaps there weren't any deals that we could make. Though others were able to. But for this year I think it was decent. Though it seems the loss of some of our ufas ended up being more than we thought. Plus the retirement of Getzy and you have a team seemingly worse than last year. I still think we need to move on from Eakins though as soon as possible. 

A new HC is imperative to get the culture turned around.

Next year's UFA class is VERY shallow, with about 12 guys league-wide fitting in with the Duck's needs and time frame. And that's counting guys who will not be leaving their current teams and would not come for a rebuild - Pastrnak and Larkin.  I guess they could throw stupid money at them, because they have the cap space.  But I don't see those guys leaving their current teams.

Bo Horvat

Pavel Zacha

Tie Domi

Matt Dumba

Jonathan Drouin

Damon Severson

Jason Zucker

Carson Soucy

Ryan O'Reilly

Vladimir Tarasenko

 

That's it. Like I said, VERY shallow.  Quality, young UFA's are getting tougher to come by, because teams are locking up their good young players past those 27-28 year marks. buying up UFA years. What the Ducks will most likely do with Zegras, Terry, Drysdale (maybe), McTavish.

[dtsdlaw]

5 hours ago, Gorbachav55 said:

Certainly not Fowler, but I could see Henrique getting traded (I don't recall what my feelings were at the time, but I recall plenty of Duck fans who weren't happy about the extension he signed).  Silfverberg definitely should have been traded.  I think the pandemic (and resulting flat cap) screwed things up, but at least Manson (and possibly Lindholm) should have been traded a year or two before they were.  But yeah, no two rebuilds, no two pathways to competitiveness are going to look alike.

Either way, I think the point stands: there was no way Verbeek was getting this team to competitiveness this season.  I'd like to see them not play like complete and utter butt this year, but we knew it was most likely to be another below average season.  Next year, I hope to see them take a real step upwards in the standings, and that's going to mean beginning to make some of the moves Ottawa and Detroit made this past offseason.

Manson had a really tough run of injuries during the two seasons before he was traded and he also had that pesky 12-team NTC that hindered a move during the pandemic. So circumstances have to be factored in there.  I know the organization loved him and there's a good chance he wasn't going anywhere even if all things were groovy, but we'll never truly know what the market was for him during the seasons when he was injured. And Lindholm never should have been moved, aging curves be damned. His extension was affordable and our defense completely sucks without him. Drysdale's development is also in danger of taking a huge step back now that he's gone. And where is Lindholm's replacement in our system? Nowhere to be found. It's a glaring hole that you highlighted above when you mentioned that the Ducks have no analog to Thomas Chabot. 

[g20topdogg]

3 hours ago, tommer-1 said:

A new HC is imperative to get the culture turned around.

Next year's UFA class is VERY shallow, with about 12 guys league-wide fitting in with the Duck's needs and time frame. And that's counting guys who will not be leaving their current teams and would not come for a rebuild - Pastrnak and Larkin.  I guess they could throw stupid money at them, because they have the cap space.  But I don't see those guys leaving their current teams.

Bo Horvat

Pavel Zacha

Tie Domi

Matt Dumba

Jonathan Drouin

Damon Severson

Jason Zucker

Carson Soucy

Ryan O'Reilly

Vladimir Tarasenko

 

That's it. Like I said, VERY shallow.  Quality, young UFA's are getting tougher to come by, because teams are locking up their good young players past those 27-28 year marks. buying up UFA years. What the Ducks will most likely do with Zegras, Terry, Drysdale (maybe), McTavish.

I would sign O'Reilly. He's one of the last of those old school hard nose players like Getzy. But you're right, that isn't very appealing. 

[g20topdogg]

20 hours ago, Belarus said:

Leadership, lack of leadership, no leadership. former leadership...

Sparked a question in my head - Who do you think was/is the best Ducks leader of all time?

I still think Scotty was the best pure leader we ever had with Getzy close. It made me remember about another guy we had, Saku Koivu. One of my favorite Ducks of all time. He was definitely a leader and someone we considered along with Getzy at the time. At the time there were a lot of questions with Getzy being able to captain this team but in the end he ended up being one of the team's best captains. I still miss him on this team. We'd be in much better shape with him around... I'm not saying we'd get more wins but he'd definitely help calm things down. 

[Gorbachav55]

4 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:

Manson had a really tough run of injuries during the two seasons before he was traded and he also had that pesky 12-team NTC that hindered a move during the pandemic. So circumstances have to be factored in there.  I know the organization loved him and there's a good chance he wasn't going anywhere even if all things were groovy, but we'll never truly know what the market was for him during the seasons when he was injured. And Lindholm never should have been moved, aging curves be damned. His extension was affordable and our defense completely sucks without him. Drysdale's development is also in danger of taking a huge step back now that he's gone. And where is Lindholm's replacement in our system? Nowhere to be found. It's a glaring hole that you highlighted above when you mentioned that the Ducks have no analog to Thomas Chabot. 

Well, Lindholm is no analog to Chabot now. And he will become even less of one as his contract ages. I think he could have been a decent 2nd pairing piece going forward, but the Ducks' need for a top pairing d-man would still exist.

I think Drysdale's development is in danger because of Eakins. 

[perry_mvp]

5 hours ago, tommer-1 said:

A new HC is imperative to get the culture turned around.

Next year's UFA class is VERY shallow, with about 12 guys league-wide fitting in with the Duck's needs and time frame. And that's counting guys who will not be leaving their current teams and would not come for a rebuild - Pastrnak and Larkin.  I guess they could throw stupid money at them, because they have the cap space.  But I don't see those guys leaving their current teams.

Bo Horvat

Pavel Zacha

Tie Domi

Matt Dumba

Jonathan Drouin

Damon Severson

Jason Zucker

Carson Soucy

Ryan O'Reilly

Vladimir Tarasenko

 

That's it. Like I said, VERY shallow.  Quality, young UFA's are getting tougher to come by, because teams are locking up their good young players past those 27-28 year marks. buying up UFA years. What the Ducks will most likely do with Zegras, Terry, Drysdale (maybe), McTavish.

I think Pastarnak is going to be looking for a big pay day. The problem is see with him is future longevity. He's already played 516 regular season NHL games so far and this is his 9th NHL season. That's a lot of wear and tear if you include 70 post season games. I still think the guy to go for if available would be DeBrincat. He and Zegras could be tearing it up for the next 8 years.

[bufbarnaby]

Must be fun to playing for the Kraken , trouncing the high-flying Sabres , Sprong dekes goalie out of his jock , scores goal.😁

[bufbarnaby]

8 hours ago, tommer-1 said:

A new HC is imperative to get the culture turned around.

Next year's UFA class is VERY shallow, with about 12 guys league-wide fitting in with the Duck's needs and time frame. And that's counting guys who will not be leaving their current teams and would not come for a rebuild - Pastrnak and Larkin.  I guess they could throw stupid money at them, because they have the cap space.  But I don't see those guys leaving their current teams.

Bo Horvat

Pavel Zacha

Tie Domi

Matt Dumba

Jonathan Drouin

Damon Severson

Jason Zucker

Carson Soucy

Ryan O'Reilly

Vladimir Tarasenko

 

That's it. Like I said, VERY shallow.  Quality, young UFA's are getting tougher to come by, because teams are locking up their good young players past those 27-28 year marks. buying up UFA years. What the Ducks will most likely do with Zegras, Terry, Drysdale (maybe), McTavish.

Tie Domi is the father , I saw him play in 1993 , 29 YEARS AGO for Toronto vs Mighty Ducks. At the Arrowhead pond. Surprised he is still playing. Must be oldest player in NHL history.😆

[bufbarnaby]

8 hours ago, tommer-1 said:

A new HC is imperative to get the culture turned around.

Next year's UFA class is VERY shallow, with about 12 guys league-wide fitting in with the Duck's needs and time frame. And that's counting guys who will not be leaving their current teams and would not come for a rebuild - Pastrnak and Larkin.  I guess they could throw stupid money at them, because they have the cap space.  But I don't see those guys leaving their current teams.

Bo Horvat

Pavel Zacha

Tie Domi

Matt Dumba

Jonathan Drouin

Damon Severson

Jason Zucker

Carson Soucy

Ryan O'Reilly

Vladimir Tarasenko

 

That's it. Like I said, VERY shallow.  Quality, young UFA's are getting tougher to come by, because teams are locking up their good young players past those 27-28 year marks. buying up UFA years. What the Ducks will most likely do with Zegras, Terry, Drysdale (maybe), McTavish.

Pasta and esp. Larkin are the only 2 I would want. 🙄

[Jasoaks]

12 hours ago, Gorbachav55 said:

I think Drysdale's development is in danger because of Eakins.

i feel this so much. more than anything else.

Also, Mahura...sounds like he's doing pretty well in Florida. Another D struggling in Anaheim, surging on another team.

[Aksun]

45 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:

i feel this so much. more than anything else.

Also, Mahura...sounds like he's doing pretty well in Florida. Another D struggling in Anaheim, surging on another team.

I'm pretty much sick of defesemen being mediocre here then going on to be great for other teams. Theodore, Petterson, Mahura, Manson, Lindholm looks like a rock in Boston...this is disgusting. If it doesn't change soon - that's it, relocate the entire franchise to Quebec.

[dtsdlaw]

12 hours ago, Gorbachav55 said:

Well, Lindholm is no analog to Chabot now. And he will become even less of one as his contract ages. I think he could have been a decent 2nd pairing piece going forward, but the Ducks' need for a top pairing d-man would still exist.

I think Drysdale's development is in danger because of Eakins. 

So Lindholm was a top-pair defenseman for the Ducks under Boudreau, Carlyle, and Eakins from ages 22-27, and he's now the #1 D-man for the current top team in the NHL (Boston at .857pts%) while playing >24 mins/game in all situations, but he would have been a "decent 2nd pairing piece" for our gawd-awful defense, which is legitimately one of the worst D-units in the entire NHL.

He may not be an exact equivalent to Chabot (didn't say he was, I just noted that its now a gaping hole in the organization with Lindholm gone and no one coming up soon to fill that role), but it's hard to take these comments seriously. At age 28 (i.e. his prime), Lindholm would have been a legitimate top-pair guy for the Ducks for the next 3-4 seasons, and then a decent second pair D-man for the next 2-3+ seasons after that, and then who cares where he would have slotted in for years 7-8 because the cap will be at 90M+ by then and he'll have a lower cap % than Erik Johnson did for the Avalanche this past season as a washed up 6/7 D-man.

So yeah, the Ducks have a gaping hole in the organization where Lindholm used to be. You've highlighted that with the Chabot comparison, and I agreed with the Lindholm reference. Not that Lindholm = Chabot, but at least Lindholm could have filled a top-pairing role for the next several seasons and helped to bring along Drysdale. We're seeing now how truly awful the blueline is without him. The decision to move Lindholm will be excellent in the short term for our 2023 draft position, and I really hope the picks we got for him turn into something. But unless we pull off a trade for a Chychrun type, I also think there's a strong chance it's going to be a while until GMPV can fill the hole that Lindholm left, and that's potentially going to be a real problem with this rebuild. From my perspective, the progress of our forward group is looking like it's going to out-pace the development of our defense by a significant margin, which is basically what has caused the rebuilds of Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver, and others to result in less success than you'd expect considering the superstars they have in their top-6. GMPV needs to find his Hedman or Seider (or Chabot, if you please) soon if he wants our rebuild to be successful. 

[Jasoaks]

18 minutes ago, dtsdlaw said:

the progress of our forward group is looking like it's going to out-pace the development of our defense by a significant margin, which is basically what has caused the rebuilds of Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver, and others to result in less success than you'd expect considering the superstars they have in their top-6.

I fear this too...

How about the Rangers? I mean looking at their D -- take out Fox and Schneider (I'll bring them up in a min) it's not really that crazy good looking of a corp. Trouba I guess you could look at as a top guy.

Add in Fox (and Schneider to an extent) and that D looks really good. Do you think we have a Fox in our prospects in OZ? We clearly don't have a Schneider as is  your whole point lol but he hasn't been too impactful yet, from what I can tell.

I feel we could still go the rebuild route of the rangers here...but I dunno. What do you think of how they rebuilt?

(and I know they had a #1 and #2 OA recently, but both of those players aren't performing YET at that level you'd expect of that draft ranking)

[Gorbachav55]

1 hour ago, dtsdlaw said:

So Lindholm was a top-pair defenseman for the Ducks under Boudreau, Carlyle, and Eakins from ages 22-27, and he's now the #1 D-man for the current top team in the NHL (Boston at .857pts%) while playing >24 mins/game in all situations, but he would have been a "decent 2nd pairing piece" for our gawd-awful defense, which is legitimately one of the worst D-units in the entire NHL.

He may not be an exact equivalent to Chabot (didn't say he was, I just noted that its now a gaping hole in the organization with Lindholm gone and no one coming up soon to fill that role), but it's hard to take these comments seriously. At age 28 (i.e. his prime), Lindholm would have been a legitimate top-pair guy for the Ducks for the next 3-4 seasons, and then a decent second pair D-man for the next 2-3+ seasons after that, and then who cares where he would have slotted in for years 7-8 because the cap will be at 90M+ by then and he'll have a lower cap % than Erik Johnson did for the Avalanche this past season as a washed up 6/7 D-man.

So yeah, the Ducks have a gaping hole in the organization where Lindholm used to be. You've highlighted that with the Chabot comparison, and I agreed with the Lindholm reference. Not that Lindholm = Chabot, but at least Lindholm could have filled a top-pairing role for the next several seasons and helped to bring along Drysdale. We're seeing now how truly awful the blueline is without him. The decision to move Lindholm will be excellent in the short term for our 2023 draft position, and I really hope the picks we got for him turn into something. But unless we pull off a trade for a Chychrun type, I also think there's a strong chance it's going to be a while until GMPV can fill the hole that Lindholm left, and that's potentially going to be a real problem with this rebuild. From my perspective, the progress of our forward group is looking like it's going to out-pace the development of our defense by a significant margin, which is basically what has caused the rebuilds of Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver, and others to result in less success than you'd expect considering the superstars they have in their top-6. GMPV needs to find his Hedman or Seider (or Chabot, if you please) soon if he wants our rebuild to be successful. 

I don't think Lindholm is going to age as well as you think he will or that cap problems will all be a thing of the past in five years.  By the time the team is making the playoffs, he'll be a 2nd pairing guy.  

As I've consistently maintained, I was comfortable either way.  Had we retained him, it would have solved a temporary problem (that's not REALLY a problem when the team isn't trying to compete) but potentially created a long-term one.  By not retaining him, Verbeek will have to work harder and get more creative to solve that problem in the next couple of years.  But I do think it's a problem that can be solved.  Guys who can do what Lindholm can do aren't nearly as rare as true #1 guys.

[dtsdlaw]

31 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:

I fear this too...

How about the Rangers? I mean looking at their D -- take out Fox and Schneider (I'll bring them up in a min) it's not really that crazy good looking of a corp. Trouba I guess you could look at as a top guy.

Add in Fox (and Schneider to an extent) and that D looks really good. Do you think we have a Fox in our prospects in OZ? We clearly don't have a Schneider as is  your whole point lol but he hasn't been too impactful yet, from what I can tell.

I feel we could still go the rebuild route of the rangers here...but I dunno. What do you think of how they rebuilt?

(and I know they had a #1 and #2 OA recently, but both of those players aren't performing YET at that level you'd expect of that draft ranking)

The Rangers have rebuilt a totally different way than what the Ducks are doing. Zibanejad, Trouba, Fox, and Lindgren were all acquired via trade (with most of those being absolute robberies by the Rangers). Panarin, Trochek, and most of their bottom-6 were all UFA signings. Unlike the Ducks, that's a lot of high end talent that has been brought in from outside the organization. And so far they've hit on hardly any of their own draft picks, except the one guy who matters - Igor Shesterkin. The Rangers have a pretty average defense and they'd probably be a middle of the road team if they didn't have one of the top-2 goaltenders on the planet (the other one being in Tampa). It'd be great if GMPV could find one of the best goaltenders in the world in the draft. He could rebuild however he wants if the Ducks had one of those. 

[dtsdlaw]

4 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:

I don't think Lindholm is going to age as well as you think he will or that cap problems will all be a thing of the past in five years.  By the time the team is making the playoffs, he'll be a 2nd pairing guy.  

As I've consistently maintained, I was comfortable either way.  Had we retained him, it would have solved a temporary problem (that's not REALLY a problem when the team isn't trying to compete) but potentially created a long-term one.  By not retaining him, Verbeek will have to work harder and get more creative to solve that problem in the next couple of years.  But I do think it's a problem that can be solved.  Guys who can do what Lindholm can do aren't nearly as rare as true #1 guys.

Agreed, he's not a true #1. Lindholm's a true #2. He and McAvoy are going to be one of the best D-pairings in the NHL for the next 3-4+ seasons, and I maintain he could have been an ideal true #2 for Drysdale for the next few seasons. He also would have been a great partner for Helleson or Noah Warren on a lower pair later on.

I do think he's more rare than you think though. Maybe not as rare as a true #1, but so far we haven't been able to find another guy like him in the draft since 2012. Boston couldn't find a guy like him in the draft either, so they ended up trading for him and giving him an 8-year contract instead.

[bufbarnaby]

tommer-1 listed Tie Domi as a possible player to get ROFL Saw him play Ducks in 1993. Isn't he kind of old ???

[g20topdogg]

23 minutes ago, Gorbachav55 said:

I don't think Lindholm is going to age as well as you think he will or that cap problems will all be a thing of the past in five years.  By the time the team is making the playoffs, he'll be a 2nd pairing guy.  

As I've consistently maintained, I was comfortable either way.  Had we retained him, it would have solved a temporary problem (that's not REALLY a problem when the team isn't trying to compete) but potentially created a long-term one.  By not retaining him, Verbeek will have to work harder and get more creative to solve that problem in the next couple of years.  But I do think it's a problem that can be solved.  Guys who can do what Lindholm can do aren't nearly as rare as true #1 guys.

Actually I think he will age fine. He does have an injury history though. However, let's not forget that he was one of the most conditioned athletes at the combine compared to his peers. If I recall correctly, they really liked his endurance. He's a guy you could play a lot and I think as he ages his overall game will compensate for the age curve because he's such a good athlete. Obviously injuries becomes a big problem and you can definitely say that's a process of aging.

[Gorbachav55]

20 minutes ago, g20topdogg said:

Actually I think he will age fine. He does have an injury history though. However, let's not forget that he was one of the most conditioned athletes at the combine compared to his peers. If I recall correctly, they really liked his endurance. He's a guy you could play a lot and I think as he ages his overall game will compensate for the age curve because he's such a good athlete. Obviously injuries becomes a big problem and you can definitely say that's a process of aging.

Injuries are a part of it, but players get worse as they age, and generally, the peak is from 24-27.  Some players age more gracefully and some less.  The numbers show that players fall fairly steeply after age 30. 

Lindholm has a good shot to age better than most, given his fitness level and that the style of his game (not predicated on speed or stickhandling) might lend itself to a better aging curve.  But Boston is paying for his decline, whatever that looks like, and, fair or not, it certainly seemed as if that decline had already begun over the last few years (it turns out it might have been the Eakins effect).  If the Ducks had retained him, chances are they've got a decent to good d-man, but it's more likely that he's closer to decent than good by the time they're in the playoffs, and then they're going to need to find a top pairing d-man anyway.  The presence of Fowler also makes that tough, as they've already got a decent-to-good LHD to play top-4 minutes.  If Lindholm could play the right side, I would have been a lot more enthusiastic about keeping him around.

Again, I think you could have flipped a coin on this one.  I wouldn't have been upset to sign Lindholm to the contract he got, and I'm not upset we traded him for some nice assets.