Confirmed with Link: [ANA/PIT] Daniel Sprong for Marcus Pettersson
- Thread starter MMC
- Start date
yeah he clearly knows nothing about hockey and has very little interest. That said, I do appreciate his willingness to ask the awkward or sensitive questions that others wouldn't. He did that a lot last year which was refreshing. I remember him asking Carlyle last year basically something along the lines of "what the f*** is the logic in playing Bieksa over some of these clearly better players?" You could tell it caught RC off guard. Nice considering every fan wanted that question asked for a few seasons now.
I seriously doubt that's going to be the case. I think it's just more writing on the wall that Silfverberg will be traded and that Murray isn't counting on Eaves contributing much, if any, more this season.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Maybe a change of scenery is needed. I recall we had a forward who had lots of potential, but couldn't get it to click into his head. yeah, he bounced around a couple of teams and ended up scoring 43 goals last year for Vegas. Yup... his talent was so good and his personality the opposite that he earned the nickname Wild Bill.
With the uncertainty of Eaves and Perry along with the slew of young prospects that still needed developing at the AHL level, Sprong could be that stop gap. Remember, we lost Comtois this year as we let him return to his junior team. Getting forward talent that can finish is often difficult to find. With Sprong, we increase our talent pool as well as increase the chances of finding some chemistry along the top-6. The only real chemistry I noticed this year was Comtois-Rico-xxx (I forgot who was on that line... was it Silfy?). We're rotating our top-9 to find something. Once we find set pairs, then it's easier to build off of that. Because we don't have those chemistry pairs, we're often off on our tic-tac-toe passing and the offense is hodge-podge.
As for Pettersson, I like him and he already surpassed my expectations has he came up last year over Larsson and Welinski. Larsson finally made the NHL jump and took a bit to look comfortable up here, but is here to stay now. The Ducks have their top-5 set in Magnus, Manson, Fowler, Monty, and Larsson. We're just trying to fill in the bottom pairing. Which is where Pettersson fit in very well (logging 18 min in his last game with us). The bottom pairing will have a choice between Dotchin, Welinski, Mahura, and Sustr/Schenn. Remember, once Fowler returns, Larsson probably goes to the bottom pairing and we're left with only one Defenseman to choose from.
huh... we've lost Theodore, Vatanen, and Pettersson, but our defense still feels stacked. Wow!
With the uncertainty of Eaves and Perry along with the slew of young prospects that still needed developing at the AHL level, Sprong could be that stop gap. Remember, we lost Comtois this year as we let him return to his junior team. Getting forward talent that can finish is often difficult to find. With Sprong, we increase our talent pool as well as increase the chances of finding some chemistry along the top-6. The only real chemistry I noticed this year was Comtois-Rico-xxx (I forgot who was on that line... was it Silfy?). We're rotating our top-9 to find something. Once we find set pairs, then it's easier to build off of that. Because we don't have those chemistry pairs, we're often off on our tic-tac-toe passing and the offense is hodge-podge.
As for Pettersson, I like him and he already surpassed my expectations has he came up last year over Larsson and Welinski. Larsson finally made the NHL jump and took a bit to look comfortable up here, but is here to stay now. The Ducks have their top-5 set in Magnus, Manson, Fowler, Monty, and Larsson. We're just trying to fill in the bottom pairing. Which is where Pettersson fit in very well (logging 18 min in his last game with us). The bottom pairing will have a choice between Dotchin, Welinski, Mahura, and Sustr/Schenn. Remember, once Fowler returns, Larsson probably goes to the bottom pairing and we're left with only one Defenseman to choose from.
huh... we've lost Theodore, Vatanen, and Pettersson, but our defense still feels stacked. Wow!
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,163
- 13,179
They were right about Whitney at least. 1/5 isn’t too bad haha.
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,163
- 13,179
I wouldn’t say stacked. Our third pairing is awfully weak at the moment and there isn’t much in the farm to come up. It’s a far cry from when we had Theodore and Montour as our first callups.
Frosted Tips
...
It has already been mentioned, but he's not going to replace Silfverberg when/if he's traded. Sure, he might replace him in the lineup, but he will not replace his play as the defensive specialist.
Yeah you're right, I'm ok with this gamble. It was probably better than any pick they could've had for Pettersson because there seems to be some serious upside in him, if the stars align for him.
He drew the shortest straw in the LA Times office when they were looking to add Ducks coverage to one of their existing sports writers.
Yeah you're right, I'm ok with this gamble. It was probably better than any pick they could've had for Pettersson because there seems to be some serious upside in him, if the stars align for him.
He drew the shortest straw in the LA Times office when they were looking to add Ducks coverage to one of their existing sports writers.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,195
- 16,821
The Ducks need some playmakers. Getting Perry back will be a good thing. We don't have many forwards who can rack up assists. Hopefully Steel and Terry can fill this void next year because right now Getzlaf is having to stir the drink of an entire offense
Sherwood is the defensive replacement for Silfverberg. I'm not saying that Sherwood = Silf, but that is the obvious outcome with the current roster (assuming Silf leaves at some point).
I think Sprong is a a good risk to take. Let's face it, Ryan Getzlaf makes his wings millions of dollars and no doubt Sprong would get lots of chances with Sprong if he plays there. I also think Henrique is a good fit.
Down the line, a line of Aberg, Steel and Sprong would be fun to see (at least in the offensive zone).
Bottom line, Sprong is a nice piece if the ducks want to eventually have three lines that can score.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Somebody just traded for Pettersson because their defense sucks. Pettersson is our 5/6th defensemen. Pitt is hoping he can become a 2nd pairing defenseman in their organization. I hope putting that into perspective gives you perspective. We had a superfluous amount of talent in defense and it is a far cry when Theo and Montour were first callups. But back then we did have veterans on the club (some good and some not so good). This year, it's mostly drafted Ducks as mainstays. I think we Duck fans are too spoiled to realize we're still stacked. With a fully healthy roster, Petterson is a 6th defenseman. Pitt is looking a 2nd pairing defenseman in Pettersson.
At the time we traded Theodore and Vats away, I thought our cupboard was thin. Larsson wasn't having a good season. Pettersson passed him up and Welinski. We didn't know much about Mahura. Flash forward, Larsson looks like a mainstay. Mahura is looking good. Welinski is Welinski. We just added Dotchin. Right now, sure, we need a new 5th defeneman as Dotchin is the 6th. We have two veterans in Sustr and Schenn or two younings in Mahura and Welinski. There are many clubs that don't have a competent 2nd line D-pairing.
Of course, the Ducks being good on defense means we sacrificed elsewhere. Our next gen forward corps is still a year or two away - which is why we traded for a boom/bust scoring forward.
terranraida
#RyanGetzlafIsASaint
I slogged through all the pages on the pens board post about this for anything on this trade and that was a mistaaaaaaaaaaaaake
branmuffin17
Registered User
@The Baffled King, lol wondered where the heck you'd come from but never checked...just figured out you're Boogernaut.
Definitely interested to see how he plays, but he sounds very one-dimensional. Not a bad move though, considering the variety of D we have that are currently in that 3rd pairing state.
Thing is, we continue to have a variety of what seem to be generally solid D. Sure, we lost Vatanen and Theodore, but at some point, we were going to be overloaded anyway. No way we could continue affording a D corps of Lindholm, Fowler, Manson, Vatanen, Theodore, and Montour (but god that would be nice). And sure, the glut of solid D means we could have afforded to trade away Fowler or whoever else (Fowler seems to consistently be the one people would prefer to trade), but no offense, I prefer Fowler's game to Petterson's, Larsson's, etc. I still think he's a solid player for us. Keep in mind, our D core is still super young.
So yeah, I'm also happy with this trade. Hope for some good offensive upside from Sprong, but even if it doesn't work out, it's not a bad gamble.
Definitely interested to see how he plays, but he sounds very one-dimensional. Not a bad move though, considering the variety of D we have that are currently in that 3rd pairing state.
Thing is, we continue to have a variety of what seem to be generally solid D. Sure, we lost Vatanen and Theodore, but at some point, we were going to be overloaded anyway. No way we could continue affording a D corps of Lindholm, Fowler, Manson, Vatanen, Theodore, and Montour (but god that would be nice). And sure, the glut of solid D means we could have afforded to trade away Fowler or whoever else (Fowler seems to consistently be the one people would prefer to trade), but no offense, I prefer Fowler's game to Petterson's, Larsson's, etc. I still think he's a solid player for us. Keep in mind, our D core is still super young.
So yeah, I'm also happy with this trade. Hope for some good offensive upside from Sprong, but even if it doesn't work out, it's not a bad gamble.
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
It's really not even that much of a gamble. I like Pettersson a lot but he wasn't a major piece to spend.
Getzmonster
Registered User
- Jul 24, 2014
- 5,502
- 1,488
Well, I just learned that we traded for a better version of Zucker. Yahtzee!
Is this bizarro world?
Because of course the Ducks had all those awesome stacked teams when Karpa and Trnka were logging 20+ minutes a night ...
branmuffin17
Registered User
I've also been reading the other boards (Edmonton's ATL was hilarious), especially on the trade...and yeah...crap is all over the place.
Most people on here weren't around for those years and only know from 2003 on, if that.
branmuffin17
Registered User
I remember those guys. I was watching in the late 1990s...but I wasn't nearly as into the details as I am now.
Anaheim4ever
Registered User
- Jun 15, 2017
- 8,882
- 5,459
When i was in high school i went to my 1st game back around 1999 or 2000 at the home opener.
Someone from my school got into a wrestling match with Wild Wing & lost.
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
Pavel Trnka. The defenseman so bad even Kariya wanted to kick his ass.
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
I have a lot of nostalgia for those crappy teams of yesteryear. They were not talented but they had great goaltending and a lot of heart, specifically in the Wilson (Hebert) and Bryan Murray (Giguere) eras. Contrast that with this team, a highly talented group of doorknob humpers.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
I actually enjoyed those teams even though we lost a lot. You saw the players put it all on the ice. Dan Bylsma was one of my favs! He was one half of the bash brothers we had back then. LoL
I still remember when he was traded as part of the Ozo trade about 15 years ago. It was one of the happiest moments for me as a Duck fan to that point. Ozo was a beast and I was fed up with Trinka. Cullen had also kinda irritated me that season too. God damn I'm old.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Pre-Game Talk: WCSF | Vancouver Canucks vs. Edmonton Oilers | Round 2 - FIGHT!- Latest: vadim sharifijanov
