Speculation: Anaheim and Expansion - Why the Ducks are in great shape

Status
Not open for further replies.

nbducksfan19

Registered User
Jun 4, 2008
3,021
1,387
I just wanted to make clear. Has Murray come out and publicly said that the ducks aren't gonna lose something major this expansion draft. Like to the media, or is this speculation by ducks fans part that he would be smart enough to make a deal. If he's said s publicly, than there is nothing to worry and this thread will be funny, but for ducks fan being right all along. But if he hasn't and duck fans thought he would he smart enough to do than they could end up losing a major player or set of picks/prospects.

He came out publicly at the season ticket holder event.
 

hamzarocks

Registered User
Jul 22, 2012
20,122
13,064
Pickering, Ontario
Yes he has.


Then nothing to worry about lol. Fans of other teams are gonna be upset/disappointed that another team isn't losing good assets. As a leaf fan I would have loved to get Manson or vantanen from Vegas but if they are protected I'm gonna go around and try and create a false narrative on ducks being in trouble. Do you think that the ducks would have done something like Theodore, 2017 1st for the knights to choose kerdile and leave both Manson and vantanen along. Or is that too much?
 

silverfish

got perma'd
Jun 24, 2008
34,644
4,353
under the bridge

We can revisit that after we see what happens maybe? Nice of you, though.

But you're missing the part where they never get the 26 year old Dman. It's either make a trade with the Ducks to get those assets, or force them to "jump through hoops" and leave you with nothing. Neither scenario gives Vegas an actual chance to select Manson or Vatanen if we agree that Anaheim would have indeed jumped through said hoops if they were forced to.

Okay, then I'd force the division rival to jump through hoops, and wait to see if they could, or could not.

I'd force the division rival to potentially put buyout cap money on the books for Bieksa. I'd force the division rival to potentially trade an injured (albeit back in October/November) Vatanen for less than $1 to $1.

And then, if the division rival could not accomplish all of these things they needed to, I'd select a great d-man in Manson, or a good d-man in Vatanen.

That's just me.
Again. Wednesday. Not far away. Happy to wait and see. Happy to be wrong.
 

ScarTroy

Registered User
Sponsor
May 24, 2012
2,849
2,291
Corona, CA
Then nothing to worry about lol. Fans of other teams are gonna be upset/disappointed that another team isn't losing good assets. As a leaf fan I would have loved to get Manson or vantanen from Vegas but if they are protected I'm gonna go around and try and create a false narrative on ducks being in trouble. Do you think that the ducks would have done something like Theodore, 2017 1st for the knights to choose kerdile and leave both Manson and vantanen along. Or is that too much?

We don't have 2017 1st. But that is still too much. At that point the return in a vatanen trade would have to equate to vats, theo, and a 1st or we'd look really bad, and I have more faith in Murray to have that happen.
 

Exit Dose

Registered User
Jul 2, 2011
29,203
3,336
Georgia
Then nothing to worry about lol. Fans of other teams are gonna be upset/disappointed that another team isn't losing good assets. As a leaf fan I would have loved to get Manson or vantanen from Vegas but if they are protected I'm gonna go around and try and create a false narrative on ducks being in trouble. Do you think that the ducks would have done something like Theodore, 2017 1st for the knights to choose kerdile and leave both Manson and vantanen along. Or is that too much?

It's possible, but considering how high the team is on Theo, I have a hard time seeing his loss as being 'nothing major'. We don't have a 2017 first, so it would have to be the 1st in 2018 or Jones. Seeing as Vatanen will be dealt, I imagine that trading a 1st in 2018 could be dealt on the expectation that they'd be getting a 1st back in that deal to cover the loss.
 

dracom

Registered User
Dec 22, 2015
13,088
8,732
Vancouver, WA
Than nothing to worry about lol. Fans of other teams are gonna be upset/disappointed that another team isn't losing good assets. As a leaf fan I would have loved to get Manson or vantanen from Vegas but if they are protected I'm gonna go around and try and create a false narrative on ducks being in trouble. Do you think that the ducks would have done something like Theodore, 2017 1st for the knights to choose kerdile and leave both Manson and vantanen along. Or is that too much?

Thank god, finally a fan of another team that gets it. There is hope!

As for the price, seeing as we don't have a 1st this season, no. But I can see them giving them Theo for their trouble. And remember, it's not about giving them assets to not select Manson and Vats. It's a deal that just allows us to hold on to Vats longer so we can have a larger market for him, while also not having to ask Bieksa to waive or buy him out to protect Manson. Vegas gets an addition asset they never would have had (since they never would have had a chance to select Manson or Vats anyways) and we can get a larger return for Vats after the expansion draft. Both teams get what they want out of this deal.
 

nbducksfan19

Registered User
Jun 4, 2008
3,021
1,387
That's great you think you know what is going to happen with your team

I'm less inclined to believe you



Thanks for pointing this out, I have been forgetting to you my brain lately. Don't know what I would have done if you didn't point it out

You're welcome. I thought maybe you just weren't using your brain in this instance, but glad to know I may have helped your life in general.
 

Flamesjustwin

Registered User
Oct 8, 2010
2,529
438
London ON
Then nothing to worry about lol. Fans of other teams are gonna be upset/disappointed that another team isn't losing good assets. As a leaf fan I would have loved to get Manson or vantanen from Vegas but if they are protected I'm gonna go around and try and create a false narrative on ducks being in trouble. Do you think that the ducks would have done something like Theodore, 2017 1st for the knights to choose kerdile and leave both Manson and vantanen along. Or is that too much?

Anaheim doesn't have a 2017 1st. Change it to a 2018 1st and you got it about right value wise.
 

TheGroceryStick

Registered User
Jan 19, 2009
13,681
3,309
Ontario Canada
So you think the Ducks would rather do that than trade Vatanen and buyout Bieksa? Seems insane to me.

I'm confused.
I don't know what to say on this one.

buying out bieksa was the smart move.


Why would Vegas want any less though ; doing a solid for a team and gaining reputation is one thing - missing the boat on a building block Dman...would be asinine.

It confuses me more than anything, tbh



It seems like Vegas will (and should) give teams opportunity to pay to keep someone. So pay for Manson, like he isn't your player.....
 

CantLoseWithMatthews

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
49,555
59,148
Again, for the umpteenth time, we do have a clue.

The ONLY reason Bieksa did not waive, and the ONLY reason Vatanen is still a Duck is because there is a deal in place to protect the Anaheim ducks.

Please try to understand this.

half the world is being ignorant and saying "Anaheim is screwed. They have to pay the full price of both Vatanen and Manson" Which is insanely incorrect.

It just isn't correct.

For me, "no chance in hell" doesn't mean "it's really only depending on if we have a deal in place or not" but I'm not an insider like the ducks fans on here. I also interpret "Manson will not be made available for any reason" differently from you guys I guess. I take that to mean no reason, but it must mean no reason unless there's a deal in place
 

hamzarocks

Registered User
Jul 22, 2012
20,122
13,064
Pickering, Ontario
It's possible, but considering how high the team is on Theo, I have a hard time seeing his loss as being 'nothing major'. We don't have a 2017 first, so it would have to be the 1st in 2018 or Jones. Seeing as Vatanen will be dealt, I imagine that trading a 1st in 2018 could be dealt on the expectation that they'd be getting a 1st back in that deal to cover the loss.

Oh ok thanks. Will be interesting to see what the deal actually is and what Murray defines as nothing major.
 

exporta

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
3,219
246
Ritchie + Theodore + 2nd + 4th to not select both Dmen

While Anahiem and Minnesota can potentially make a deal to keep their team in tact, the other 29 teams can now make offers to LVK. Essentially, the Ducks and Wild are now bidding with other teams to keep a guy.

If say team A is interested in Manson or Vatanen / Dumba; they are now able to offer LVK something to take said player and then trade with them. They will have to outbid other teams to keep their players. Manson/Vatanen and Dumba are now trade chips that can be used by LVK.
 
Jul 29, 2003
31,639
5,336
Saskatoon
Visit site
We can revisit that after we see what happens maybe? Nice of you, though.



Okay, then I'd force the division rival to jump through hoops, and wait to see if they could, or could not.

I'd force the division rival to potentially put buyout cap money on the books for Bieksa. I'd force the division rival to potentially trade an injured (albeit back in October/November) Vatanen for less than $1 to $1.

And then, if the division rival could not accomplish all of these things they needed to, I'd select a great d-man in Manson, or a good d-man in Vatanen.

That's just me.
Again. Wednesday. Not far away. Happy to wait and see. Happy to be wrong.

Probably why you're not a GM lol. You're building a team and you'd make your own organization worse just to somewhat hurt a team you aren't competing with right now?
 

nbducksfan19

Registered User
Jun 4, 2008
3,021
1,387
Then nothing to worry about lol. Fans of other teams are gonna be upset/disappointed that another team isn't losing good assets. As a leaf fan I would have loved to get Manson or vantanen from Vegas but if they are protected I'm gonna go around and try and create a false narrative on ducks being in trouble. Do you think that the ducks would have done something like Theodore, 2017 1st for the knights to choose kerdile and leave both Manson and vantanen along. Or is that too much?

I want to hug you. We don't have a 1st in 2017 and I think that is a bit too much to trade just to have the ability to move vats after ED as opposed to before it. But I really have no idea how much more vats is worth in a trade post ED vs pre ED.
 
Jul 29, 2003
31,639
5,336
Saskatoon
Visit site
While Anahiem and Minnesota can potentially make a deal to keep their team in tact, the other 29 teams can now make offers to LVK. Essentially, the Ducks and Wild are now bidding with other teams to keep a guy.

If say team A is interested in Manson or Vatanen / Dumba; they are now able to offer LVK something to take said player and then trade with them. They will have to outbid other teams to keep their players. Manson/Vatanen and Dumba are now trade chips that can be used by LVK.

Except Anaheim already made their deal, possibly weeks ago.
 

WhatTheDuck

9 - 20 - 8
May 17, 2007
22,980
15,338
Worst Case, Ontario
I'm confused.
I don't know what to say on this one.

buying out bieksa was the smart move.


Why would Vegas want any less though ; doing a solid for a team and gaining reputation is one thing - missing the boat on a building block Dman...would be asinine.

It confuses me more than anything, tbh

Vegas wasn't going to get Manson or Vatanen no matter what IMO.

If the Ducks buyout Bieksa (or get him to waive) and trade Vatanen - Manson is protected and Vegas has very little to choose from.

Instead it seems as though Anaheim has paid Vegas in order to not be forced into making said moves above.

Again I believe we are talking about the price to not force Anaheim into leaving them with nothing - which is a far cry from the larger premium it would take to get Vegas to leave those players alone, had the Ducks not had those avenues at their dispense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->