Speculation: ‘20-21 Trade/Free Agency Thread Part II

[dracom]

I'm not boasting his draft status, I was mentioning it to show that there still might be some untapped potential given his draft position.

Sam Bennett, Jake Virtanen, Nick Ritchie; all drafted in the top 10 and have bottomed out to be bottom 6 "grit" players. there is no untapped upside to these players at this point. they've all been in the league long enough to reach that potential and they haven't.

And even if there was, if we couldn't get it out of Ritchie or our own current prospects; then there's very very little chance we can take on a save a reclamation project. Let's worry about developing our own prospects first before taking on other teams projects.

 

[Trojans86]

Sam Bennett, Jake Virtanen, Nick Ritchie; all drafted in the top 10 and have bottomed out to be bottom 6 "grit" players. there is no untapped upside to these players at this point. they've all been in the league long enough to reach that potential and they haven't.

And even if there was, if we couldn't get it out of Ritchie or our own current prospects; then there's very very little chance we can take on a save a reclamation project. Let's worry about developing our own prospects first before taking on other teams projects.

I actually know someone close to Virt and from what I hear the pressure of playing in his hometown and not living up to expectations has been very hard on him as he said himself. I'd be interested in seeing him on the Ducks for cheap.

 

[Kalv]

I like Bennett, he can be really gritty. Would take a flyer on Virtanen as well

 

[Mr Rogers]

Just watching Bennett, I don’t see a player who unequivocally appears like he’d break out on a different team. If such potential exists, he’d need to be playing with a highly skilled winger who can create offense and set him up. We don’t have that player and he’d just be another 3rd liner here.

 

[duckpuck]

You do know you don't often get more than one top-3 pick in a draft. You're selling established NHL'ers so you can repeat the decade of mediocrity of the Oil? Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.

It's as if you didn't read the list of talent from 2015 forward and are instead choosing to be willfully ignorant. If we falter again this year, then we'll get another top-10 selection. That would give the Ducks three top-10 selections, but you think that's not enough and want to remove three NHL'ers from our team to await for prospects drafted in the next draft forward? That could take three to four years until they might become established. Again, this is the Oil template of a decade of mediocrity.

Steel was drafted in 2016. It's been five years since Steel's draft year and we're still hoping that Steel can pan out. Steel with other youths was disastrous this seasons thus far as they kept being hemmed in. Steel surrounded by NHL talent and Steel doesn't look so helpless. In this microcosm of an example, it's evident that having a team full of youngster could only lead to faltering. That's what the 2019-20 season was all about, the youth movement: C Steel, LW Comtois, LW Jones, RW Terry, C Lundestrom, D Larsson, and D Guhle. Not a single one of them took step forward last year. That's a second example of a microcosm of playing mostly youths and failing.

Again, you purposely didn't acknowledge the list of prospects we have (or had in case of Nattinen) since 2015 and are still waiting on. I can only lead a horse to water.

bracer posted that top 3 picks have the highest percentage of success. You responded with an incomprehensible list of the ducks NOT TOP 3 PICKS. He didn't acknowledge your list of prospects because it was totally irrelevant to his post. He's saying top 3 and your responding with top 10 or lower.

Did you ever consider that many of the ducks prospects didn't take a step forward last year because . . . they're not that good? And one reason they're not that good is that they all were picked in the late first round (or after). None are top 3.

Beyond that, the ducks did not play mostly youth last year. Comtois and Lundestrom barely played. Guhle and Jones played a bit more. Larsson Terry and Steel played a lot - hardly a team composed mostly of "youths."

Finally, your fixation on the Oilers failures ignores all the other teams that accumulated picks and did well. Yes, the oilers were poorly managed and didn't develop their talent. Buffalo is another example of that. But other teams like Chicago, Toronto, Winnipeg, and Tampa Bay turned their high picks into great teams.

I'll repeat myself - how many Stanley cup teams have no top 3 picks on their roster? So far, we haven't found any in the last 20 years. How many top 3 picks do the ducks have on their roster or in the minors? ZERO.

 

[duckpuck]

I like Bennett, he can be really gritty. Would take a flyer on Virtanen as well

Just a question of price. If the price is low, the risk is low.

 

[sasha barkov]

bracer posted that top 3 picks have the highest percentage of success. You responded with an incomprehensible list of the ducks NOT TOP 3 PICKS. He didn't acknowledge your list of prospects because it was totally irrelevant to his post. He's saying top 3 and your responding with top 10 or lower.

Did you ever consider that many of the ducks prospects didn't take a step forward last year because . . . they're not that good? And one reason they're not that good is that they all were picked in the late first round (or after). None are top 3.

Beyond that, the ducks did not play mostly youth last year. Comtois and Lundestrom barely played. Guhle and Jones played a bit more. Larsson Terry and Steel played a lot - hardly a team composed mostly of "youths."

Finally, your fixation on the Oilers failures ignores all the other teams that accumulated picks and did well. Yes, the oilers were poorly managed and didn't develop their talent. Buffalo is another example of that. But other teams like Chicago, Toronto, Winnipeg, and Tampa Bay turned their high picks into great teams.

I'll repeat myself - how many Stanley cup teams have no top 3 picks on their roster? So far, we haven't found any in the last 20 years. How many top 3 picks do the ducks have on their roster or in the minors? ZERO.

Ducks in 07 had no top 3 picks except for Pronger , but we didn’t draft him. Bobby Ryan was in the A so he doesn’t count . Also St. Louis won a cup in 2019 with no top 3 picks other than a veteran Jay Bouwmeester , even then he wasn’t drafted by STL. So technically, you don’t need to have top 3 picks to go to the finals.

 

[TopShelfWaterBottle]

My biggest gripe is how awful our player development is for forwards. I’m too lazy to list the players who’ve blossomed somewhere else after we dumped them for pennies.

if Bob ends up getting the shaft there needs to be a reverberating waves in this organization. The only one I’m truly confident is is Madden

 

[duckpuck]

Ducks in 07 had no top 3 picks except for Pronger , but we didn’t draft him. Bobby Ryan was in the A so he doesn’t count . Also St. Louis won a cup in 2019 with no top 3 picks other than a veteran Jay Bouwmeester , even then he wasn’t drafted by STL. So technically, you don’t need to have top 3 picks to go to the finals.

I posted elsewhere that I draw the line at top 5, but statistically top 3 is the line. So its fair for you to say top 3.

Pronger was (2). Cup team also had S. Niedermayer (3), R. Niedermayer (5). Also obviously Selanne (10) was on that team - a generational talent they acquired in a trade and then as a UFA. They had a lot of great talent that filled in (Getz, Perry, McDonald, Beauch). Beyond that, the league has really changed since then, with an emphasis on highly skilled players and less physicality. Skill is drafted at the top of the draft.

St. Louis had Pietrangelo (4), Schenn (5) in addition to Bouwmeester. The reality of that team is they had a ton of mid to late first round picks who were better than expected - Tarasenko, Schwarts, Steen, Peron, and a stud O'Reilly who they got on the cheap. I think they're the closest example of a counterpoint - but the truth is they are an outlier. They deserve full credit for drafting well, but statistically speaking that is not a likely route to a cup. I didn't say it was impossible, but it is really hard. Particularly when you don't have at least 1 or 2 really good players like Pietrangelo.

And for the record, I'm not distinguishing between top picks that are drafted or traded for. To trade for elite talent, you need assets to go the other way (like high picks). More high picks = more assets.

 

[Leonardo87]

Mod edit

Every Tony D discussion on this forum seems to go to hell eventually. It’s really not worth the time anymore, been through it on the Rangers forum and tired of it.

 

[Hey234]

I thought defense was going to be a strength this season but the weakness on the right side is evident with the exception of Hakanpaa. BM really wanted Shattenkirk and I can't see him trading him. I wonder if there is a team we can swap Manson for someone more offensive and drop Shattenkirk to the bottom pairing.

Lindholm - Trade
Fowler - Hakanpaa
Larsson - Shattenkirk

 

[Opak]

I thought defense was going to be a strength this season but the weakness on the right side is evident with the exception of Hakanpaa. BM really wanted Shattenkirk and I can't see him trading him. I wonder if there is a team we can swap Manson for someone more offensive and drop Shattenkirk to the bottom pairing.

Lindholm - Trade
Fowler - Hakanpaa
Larsson - Shattenkirk

Tough to make a dman trade right now due to the expansion draft.

IMO in an ideal world we protect Fowler/Lindholm/Larsson, trade Manson for picks and leave Shattenkirk up for grabs for Seattle. Hank is an upcoming UFA, so he should only be re-signed after the ED.

21-22 defense:

Lindholm - Trade/Drysdale (2021 1st rounder?)
Fowler - Hank
Larsson - Curran (Shattenkirk, if not selected by Seattle)

 

[SmokeyDuck]

I doubt a 2021 dman would be playing tbh.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

I doubt a 2021 dman would be playing tbh.

Eh there is a couple I could see making nhl roster

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

IMO in an ideal world we protect Fowler/Lindholm/Larsson

why would you want to keep Larsson?

 

[Gliff]

why would you want to keep Larsson?

Manson traded hopefully.
Hawk is a UFA.
If Shatty sucks and they want to expose him.

I doubt it happens, but it’s possible.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

why would you want to keep Larsson?

Over the other options larsson almost seems like a no brainer

 

[bsu]

Mahira would be just as effective as anyone on our 3rd pairing same with curran and Benoit. Our team is full of meh.

 

[Gliff]

Mahira would be just as effective as anyone on our 3rd pairing same with curran and Benoit. Our team is full of meh.

I would have put Hawk in that group also but he has taken his opportunity and run with it.

Mahura always gets so much love from scouts whenever they talk about Ducks prospects. He is the guy I see projected to go to Seattle most often.

 

[TopShelfWaterBottle]

I would have put Hawk in that group also but he has taken his opportunity and run with it.

Mahura always gets so much love from scouts whenever they talk about Ducks prospects. He is the guy I see projected to go to Seattle most often.

If mahura doesn’t get nhl time this season he’s going to leave for another organization once seasons over

 

[Deuce22]

If mahura doesn’t get nhl time this season he’s going to leave for another organization once seasons over

Nothing against Hutton, he's OK, but don't Ducks need to find out if Mahura can play in the NHL at some point?

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

I would have put Hawk in that group also but he has taken his opportunity and run with it.

Mahura always gets so much love from scouts whenever they talk about Ducks prospects. He is the guy I see projected to go to Seattle most often.

I think mahura will be solid... not sure why he hasn’t really gotten more of a look yet.... hopefully they give him a look before moving him

 

[WhatTheDuck]

If mahura doesn’t get nhl time this season he’s going to leave for another organization once seasons over

He doesn't have that option

 

[Ducks DVM]

Mod edit

Every Tony D discussion on this forum seems to go to hell eventually. It’s really not worth the time anymore, been through it on the Rangers forum and tired of it.

This. People are incapable of not flaming and not straying into politics. Take it to the main boards or the political boards as you wish.

 

[bracer028]

I posted elsewhere that I draw the line at top 5, but statistically top 3 is the line. So its fair for you to say top 3.

Pronger was (2). Cup team also had S. Niedermayer (3), R. Niedermayer (5). Also obviously Selanne (10) was on that team - a generational talent they acquired in a trade and then as a UFA. They had a lot of great talent that filled in (Getz, Perry, McDonald, Beauch). Beyond that, the league has really changed since then, with an emphasis on highly skilled players and less physicality. Skill is drafted at the top of the draft.

St. Louis had Pietrangelo (4), Schenn (5) in addition to Bouwmeester. The reality of that team is they had a ton of mid to late first round picks who were better than expected - Tarasenko, Schwarts, Steen, Peron, and a stud O'Reilly who they got on the cheap. I think they're the closest example of a counterpoint - but the truth is they are an outlier. They deserve full credit for drafting well, but statistically speaking that is not a likely route to a cup. I didn't say it was impossible, but it is really hard. Particularly when you don't have at least 1 or 2 really good players like Pietrangelo.

And for the record, I'm not distinguishing between top picks that are drafted or traded for. To trade for elite talent, you need assets to go the other way (like high picks). More high picks = more assets.

The game has evolved where you need speed, puck control, and skating ability. Gone are the days of the hard hitters.

If you need someone with those skills, they are in the top 5 minimum