Around the League 2020-21

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kalv

Slava Ukraini
Mar 29, 2009
23,469
10,972
Latvia
So it seems like next seaon Ducks will be playing in the same division with Arizona Coyotes, Colorado Avalanche, Dallas Stars, Los Angeles Kings, Minnesota Wild, San Jose Sharks and Vegas Golden Knights. All the regular season games will be played between those teams. It will probably be the weakest division. LA and Ducks are rebuilding, Arizona is a mediocre mess, Minnesota is meh, San Jose could rebound but we'll see. Colorado, Dallas and Vegas are clearly the best out of the bunch. I'll assume that there won't be a play-in rounds so 4 best teams go into playoffs, which means that those five inferior team will be fighting for that one spot. I don't see how Ducks could be that team as they haven't improved (yet) in the offseason remarkably. It would require a lot of improvement from prospects and young players.
Just having everyone healthy and some of the young guys improving should be a good ''add''. Outside of Getzlaf there shouldn't be anyone declining.
I think we should definitely be among those who fight for that one spot.
 
Aug 11, 2011
28,139
21,592
Am Yisrael Chai
So it seems like next seaon Ducks will be playing in the same division with Arizona Coyotes, Colorado Avalanche, Dallas Stars, Los Angeles Kings, Minnesota Wild, San Jose Sharks and Vegas Golden Knights. All the regular season games will be played between those teams. It will probably be the weakest division. LA and Ducks are rebuilding, Arizona is a mediocre mess, Minnesota is meh, San Jose could rebound but we'll see. Colorado, Dallas and Vegas are clearly the best out of the bunch. I'll assume that there won't be a play-in rounds so 4 best teams go into playoffs, which means that those five inferior team will be fighting for that one spot. I don't see how Ducks could be that team as they haven't improved (yet) in the offseason remarkably. It would require a lot of improvement from prospects and young players.
Are they planning a normal length season?
 

Leonardo87

New York Rangers, Anaheim Ducks, and TMNT fan.
Sponsor
Dec 8, 2013
38,060
54,525
New York
General consensus seems to be that 48 is the bare minimum they will go ahead with. I think they’ll aim at 60, hopefully it can be achieved.

60 is not too bad. Would hate if it’s only a half season. It seems they will have to start the season with empty arenas, but some states like Florida have no restrictions, so will be interesting if they follow a similar plan like the NFL. But at this point, just want hockey back to watch on TV. There is only so much Netflix you can watch, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul4587

JabbaJabba

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
7,540
2,765
Finland
Just having everyone healthy and some of the young guys improving should be a good ''add''. Outside of Getzlaf there shouldn't be anyone declining.
I think we should definitely be among those who fight for that one spot.

Wishful thinking right there buddy :D

Ducks have a chance because they'll play against these other weak teams in their division. They don't have to beat the top teams to make it, just need to collect more points than the other teams. I do think that San Jose is due to a rebound year and Arizona has overall a better team than Anaheim. Minnesota is weird at the moment, they have no center depth but have good defence. I don't know what to make of them. Los Angeles is basically in the same situation as Anaheim, if their youngsters excel, they'll do better.

Anaheim needs to improve their special teams, I believe they were last in both PP and PK last season. The team was the worst in scoring goals and having a better PP would help with that problem. I don't think they have fired any of the assistant coaches who run the special teams. Those things must improve for Ducks to be in the race for a playoff spot for real. Otherwise I don't see it happening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kalv

Kalv

Slava Ukraini
Mar 29, 2009
23,469
10,972
Latvia
Wishful thinking right there buddy :D

Ducks have a chance because they'll play against these other weak teams in their division. They don't have to beat the top teams to make it, just need to collect more points than the other teams. I do think that San Jose is due to a rebound year and Arizona has overall a better team than Anaheim. Minnesota is weird at the moment, they have no center depth but have good defence. I don't know what to make of them. Los Angeles is basically in the same situation as Anaheim, if their youngsters excel, they'll do better.

Anaheim needs to improve their special teams, I believe they were last in both PP and PK last season. The team was the worst in scoring goals and having a better PP would help with that problem. I don't think they have fired any of the assistant coaches who run the special teams. Those things must improve for Ducks to be in the race for a playoff spot for real. Otherwise I don't see it happening.
Yeah I know :laugh: But I can hope.

I am still a big believer in our D and G therefore I think we can compete with these teams. Even though like you said, it probably tells as much about those teams than it tells about us :laugh:. We will see McKinnon and Heiskanen torch us on nightly basis and get overwhelmed with Vegas depth, but I think that #4 spot is open and we should be right up there to compete for it. We still have some veteran players that want to compete so I think we would be situated well to grab that spot and have an honor to lose to Blues or Bolts in the first round :laugh:
I fully share the concern regarding our assistant coaches though. Not much reason of optimism looking forward to our special teams other than hope that declining Shattenkirk will magically turn things around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JabbaJabba

JabbaJabba

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
7,540
2,765
Finland
Yeah I know :laugh: But I can hope.

I am still a big believer in our D and G therefore I think we can compete with these teams. Even though like you said, it probably tells as much about those teams than it tells about us :laugh:. We will see McKinnon and Heiskanen torch us on nightly basis and get overwhelmed with Vegas depth, but I think that #4 spot is open and we should be right up there to compete for it. We still have some veteran players that want to compete so I think we would be situated well to grab that spot and have an honor to lose to Blues or Bolts in the first round :laugh:
I fully share the concern regarding our assistant coaches though. Not much reason of optimism looking forward to our special teams other than hope that declining Shattenkirk will magically turn things around.

Obviously anything can happen during the season. Favorites fall and underdogs rise every year Just at the moment it seems like Vegas, Colorado and Dallas are surefire playoff teams, but you never know what happens when the games start.

The #4 spot is open for competition and if Ducks manage to improve some of their weaknesses from last season, they do have a chance. I am a bit negative maybe as the roster hasn't improved really, Gudbranson out, Shattenkirk in so far. Then we are hoping that the youngsters take steps in their development. We shall see what happens with them. I just don't want to expect too much out of them scoringwise because the core around them isn't that spectacular. In addition, the assistant coaches stayed, which doesn't look for the special teams. If either defending or goalscoring improves, things look better, but if nothing seems to have changed, then I don't see Anaheim making it anyhow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kalv

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,162
13,178
At this point is anyone else really worried we aren’t going to get a season? I can’t see the players and owners having an easy time making compromises and it sounds like there are up to 10 owners that want to pull the plug on the year altogether.
 

Static

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2006
47,187
32,951
SoCal
At this point is anyone else really worried we aren’t going to get a season? I can’t see the players and owners having an easy time making compromises and it sounds like there are up to 10 owners that want to pull the plug on the year altogether.
Yes, but it seems the league is taking a similar trajectory as the MLB did, which is the owners stalling until a shortened season is the only possibility. 48 games is the best bet.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
Indoor sports viewing isn’t happening for a few more months at least, and the NHL owners need ticket revenue. They can’t do a TV revenue season like the NFL.
 

Leonardo87

New York Rangers, Anaheim Ducks, and TMNT fan.
Sponsor
Dec 8, 2013
38,060
54,525
New York
At this point is anyone else really worried we aren’t going to get a season? I can’t see the players and owners having an easy time making compromises and it sounds like there are up to 10 owners that want to pull the plug on the year altogether.

There is too much money to be left on the table for them to not have a season, something will happen, they can get like a 60 game season in if it runs from Say Feb 1st to like end of May or beginning of June. Gives them like 6-7 weeks to get the playoffs done, which they want to do before the Olympics start on July 23rd. Gonna see condensed schedules and more back to back games. Regular season and playoffs alike, imo.
 
Last edited:

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
There is too much money to be left on the table for them to not have a season, something will happen, they can get like a 60 game season in if it runs from Say Feb 1st to like end of May or beginning of June. Gives them like 6-7 weeks to get the playoffs done, which they want to do before the Olympics start on July 23rd. Gonna see condensed schedules and more back to back games. Regular season and playoffs alike, imo.

Is there that much money on the table with empty arenas and no ticket revenue? I don’t think NBC money is that good.
 

Leonardo87

New York Rangers, Anaheim Ducks, and TMNT fan.
Sponsor
Dec 8, 2013
38,060
54,525
New York

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
Seems like they are going to lose a lot of money playing a 50-60 game season in empty arenas, but they also don’t want to lose relevancy by not having a season.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
It seems they will have to start the season with empty arenas, but some states like Florida have no restrictions, so will be interesting if they follow a similar plan like the NFL.

I think indoor sports have to be treated differently than outdoor sports for spectators during Covid.
 

AngelDuck

Rak 'em up
Jun 16, 2012
23,078
16,561
It’s going to be a disaster, similar to what the NFL has experienced. Cancelling games left and right and playing makeup games and back to backs.

The only thing they have going for them is that they are closer to the vaccine.
It’ll be nice to watch hockey but I’m not particularly stoked about the season in general.
To be honest it would hurt more if we were actually supposed to be a cup contender
 

JabbaJabba

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
7,540
2,765
Finland
Seems like they are going to lose a lot of money playing a 50-60 game season in empty arenas, but they also don’t want to lose relevancy by not having a season.

The question is, do they want to lose a lot of money by having a 50-60 game season to empty arenas or lose even more money if they don't play at all.

I think indoor sports have to be treated differently than outdoor sports for spectators during Covid.

At least in Finland they haven't traced any covid infections to hockey games. Only half of the seats have been available and the stands have been divided into sections, which have their own entrances and people are not allowed to go other sections. So even if there was an infected person in the game, they wouldn't be able to infect that many people. And of course people wear masks.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
The question is, do they want to lose a lot of money by having a 50-60 game season to empty arenas or lose even more money if they don't play at all.

Wouldn’t the owners lose less money by not having a season? Then they don’t have to pay the player salaries?
 

JabbaJabba

Registered User
Dec 22, 2010
7,540
2,765
Finland
Wouldn’t the owners lose less money by not having a season? Then they don’t have to pay the player salaries?

If there's no season the popularity could dip for some time and getting it back up would take time and money. Television deal is also up after the following season and the price of it would sink if they don't have a season (who wants to buy rights for a league that didn't have a season when other major sports did?). I suspect that there would be a lot of indirect losses and costs if they don't have a season.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
22,957
3,824
California
If there's no season the popularity could dip for some time and getting it back up would take time and money. Television deal is also up after the following season and the price of it would sink if they don't have a season (who wants to buy rights for a league that didn't have a season when other major sports did?). I suspect that there would be a lot of indirect losses and costs if they don't have a season.

I think you are right, but there is an ownership split. Some of the owners have that long term view, and some have the short term view where they would rather not lose millions of dollars having an empty arena season.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->