Confirmed with Link: Ducks sign Nico Myatovic to ELC (3 years, $897k AAV; begins 2024-25)

[ScarTroy]

I understand context and you make some fair points but the bottom line is that for a team which realistically must build through the draft, the Ducks cannot afford to only count on success when drafting in the top 10. This is especially true for 2019 and later when it was obvious the team was in rebuild mode. It is possible...teams like Dallas and St. Louis are examples of what can be done.

You’re ignoring that we’ve drafted exceptionally well at Defense in that portion of the draft. We’ve done better than the teams you listed at that position. It would be nice if we could hit on a mix of forwards and defense, but every team wishes that.

 

[Gliff]

I understand context and you make some fair points but the bottom line is that for a team which realistically must build through the draft, the Ducks cannot afford to only count on success when drafting in the top 10. This is especially true for 2019 and later when it was obvious the team was in rebuild mode. It is possible...teams like Dallas and St. Louis are examples of what can be done.

Obviously this is true that the Ducks have to build through the draft, but waving away top 10 picks or drafting defensemen/ goalies just feel like you’re ignoring them to make a point.

There are teams like NY that have bombed top 10 picks. They drafted 4 forwards in a row at 1, 2, 7, and 9 and maybe got 1 top 6 forward out of it.

The reason the Red Wings are not in a better spot is because they missed on 2 top 10 picks.

The Ducks have nailed every top 10 picks and have gotten incredible value on defense and goalie. Even if Gaucher and Myatovic bust the Ducks are still by far one of the best drafting teams in the league.

 

[tomd]

You’re ignoring that we’ve drafted exceptionally well at Defense in that portion of the draft. We’ve done better than the teams you listed at that position. It would be nice if we could hit on a mix of forwards and defense, but every team wishes that.

Yes, so my message is that they continue to do what they are doing with defense and look to make changes to improve how the evaluate forwards.

Obviously this is true that the Ducks have to build through the draft, but waving away top 10 picks or drafting defensemen/ goalies just feel like you’re ignoring them to make a point.

There are teams like NY that have bombed top 10 picks. They drafted 4 forwards in a row at 1, 2, 7, and 9 and maybe got 1 top 6 forward out of it.

The reason the Red Wings are not in a better spot is because they missed on 2 top 10 picks.

The Ducks have nailed every top 10 picks and have gotten incredible value on defense and goalie. Even if Gaucher and Myatovic bust the Ducks are still by far one of the best drafting teams in the league.

So I guess I should be hoping that the Ducks continue to draft in the top 10? I can do that.

 

[Gliff]

Yes, so my message is that they continue to do what they are doing with defense and look to make changes to improve how the evaluate forwards.


So I guess I should be hoping that the Ducks continue to draft in the top 10? I can do that.

No you should have realistic expectations and know that even the best drafting teams are not going to hit on every pick. 2nd rounders only have like a 1/3 chance to play 100 games, let alone be a top 4/6 player.

 

[tomd]

No you should have realistic expectations and know that even the best drafting teams are not going to hit on every pick. 2nd rounders only have like a 1/3 chance to play 100 games, let alone be a top 4/6 player.

I can do that. I hope those realistic expectations also extend to those who think this team is playoff bound any time soon.

 

[duckpuck]

Multiple things can be true at once

• Ducks track record picking d men is really good.
• Ducks track record with late first round picks is really bad and seemingly flawed in philosophical approach
• Ducks track record picking forwards outside the top 10 is pretty bad
• It is unclear how Myatovic fits into this. He's 19.

Hard to imagine why anyone would be critical of this signing. The pick (i.e. decision who to pick) is a sunk cost. At this point, the only thing to do is sign and hopefully develop him.

 

[Gliff]

Multiple things can be true at once

• Ducks track record picking d men is really good.
• Ducks track record with late first round picks is really bad and seemingly flawed in philosophical approach
• Ducks track record picking forwards outside the top 10 is pretty bad
• It is unclear how Myatovic fits into this. He's 19.

Hard to imagine why anyone would be critical of this signing. The pick (i.e. decision who to pick) is a sunk cost. At this point, the only thing to do is sign and hopefully develop him.

Except it isn’t. It just isn’t among the best in the league.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

Youre missing a ton of context on this. For example in 2016 there was a grand total of 2 top 6 forwards drafted from 10-35, Tage Thompson, and Jordan Kyrou. In fact Steel has more points then every forward outside of those 2 between 10-35.

In 2017 our first pick was Comtois at #50. You have to go all the way to pick 121 for the next best forward, Batherson.

In 2018 they took Lundestrom at 23. Who is the best forward taken after him you may ask? That would be Yegor Sharangovich who was taken at pick 141 in the 5th round. Who is the second best between those 2? Ryan McLeod and his career 71 points.

In 2019 Tracey is a borderline bust. Not going to debate that. Pinto, Kaliyev, Hoglander, and Brink all would have been much better picks taken in the next like 11 picks.

In 2020 Perreault was a boom/bust pick that busted. Honestly this year may hurt the most. Guys taken between 28-45: Greig, Brisson, Bourque, Wallinder, Peterka, Bordeleau, Evangelista, Faber.

In 2021 we didnt select a forward after McTavish until the 3rd round.

Anything later is just pointless since they are still developing. So ya, the Tracey and Perreault picks hurt, but lets stop acting like the Ducks have missed gem after gem every year.

What's funny is people were complaining about missing out on Kaliyev in 2019 that we end up picking a player like Kaliyev in 2020 with Perreault. Both high end goal scorers who's motor sucked and didn't play defense. You can never win with people if the picks don't pan out despite actually changing drafting philosophies.

An aside, I have no say in the 2019 draft b/c I wanted D Thrun with LW Tracey's pick. We still ended up with Thrun, but in the 4th round. That turned out to be a great move at draft time. Yet Thrun didn't sign with us, but we at least got back a 3rd round pick. Hopefully, we can use that 3rd round pick with another of our other picks to move up in the draft.

 

[mightyquack]

And this then leads to whopping 9 goals in a draft +1 season in juniors? I know he had a tough season in terms of injuries but still.

Colangelo had 9 goals in his D+3 season and now everyone think he's the best thing since sliced bread.

Good young players can have struggles for whatever reason, Myatovic's D+1 season was massively interrupted.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

I understand context and you make some fair points but the bottom line is that for a team which realistically must build through the draft, the Ducks cannot afford to only count on success when drafting in the top 10. This is especially true for 2019 and later when it was obvious the team was in rebuild mode. It is possible...teams like Dallas and St. Louis are examples of what can be done.

2023-24
Teams	GP	W	L	OTL	Pts		GF	GF rank	GA	GA rank
Dallas	74	46	19	9	101		273	2nd	220	11th
St. Louis	73	39	30	4	82		213	25th	224	14th
Anaheim	73	24	45	4	52		179	30th	263	30th

========
St. Louis
========
Just looked at St. Louis' lineup, specifically their defense. They have only one player drafted between 2019 to the present out of the 10 blueliners that have logged time for the team today. Average age of Blues' blueliners is 29.2 years old.

Blues top-10 scorers that are age 21 or younger: 1 (LW Neighbors)

========
Dallas
========
The Stars' defense has only one player drafted between 2019 to the present, out of the 10 blueliners that have put on the uniform for the Stars. Average age of the Stars' blueliners is 29.5 years old.

Stars top-10 scorers that are age 21 or younger: 1 (C Johnston)

========
Anaheim
========

Anaheim has 12 blueliners that have suited up for the team this year. Five of those d-men were drafted from 2019 to the present. Two were drafted in the top-10 and three were drafted in the 2nd round. Average age of Ducks' blueliners is 24.9 years old.

Ducks top-10 scorers that are age 21 or younger: 3 (C McTavish, D Mintyuko, C Carlsson)

=============================
It's all about the D, 'bout the D, 'bout the D
=============================

Looking at the chart above comparing the three teams and info presented below it, it appears having a mature and talented defense is a significant determinant. Of course, if you have both a good defense and offense, then you'll skyrocket to the top like Dallas. A good defense and mediocre offense will have you on the playoff fringe like St. Louis. If you don't have either, then you're the Ducks.

================================
Last time the Ducks were on the playoff fringes
================================

The last time the Ducks were in playoff contention at the All-Star break was in 2021-22. Verbeek got rid of D Lindholm and D Manson. We were playing three rookies if one of Fowler, Lindholm, or Manson fell to injury in Drysdale, Benoit, and Mahura. We didn't have enough proper D-veterans to step up in that season, especially when our top-3 were hit with injuries starting at game 34 through game 60, at total of 27. Of those 27 games, all there were on the ice six times.

W & w/o FLM
Game set	GP	W	L	OTL	Pts	pts %
34 to 60	27​	10​	15​	2​	22​	0.407​
FLM = Fowler, Lindholm, Manson
w/FLM	6​	3​	3​	0​	6​	0.500​
missing at least one of FLM	21​	7​	12​	2​	16​	0.381​

Instead of rolling with three rookies on the D and trading for veteran RD, then it's possible the Ducks would have earned an additional 5 points minimum at .500 pts % play. At game 60, then the Ducks would have been tied for 3rd in the Pacific at 68 points with Vegas days before the TDL instead of 63 pts and 6th in the Pacific.

We know Murray resigned in early November. Verbeek came onto the scene in Feb, during All-star break or after game 48. Anaheim was 3rd in the Pacific when Verbeek took over. The only time we added a veteran D to the roster was on March 8th when we picked up Sustr off of waivers and he didn't play until March 10th, game 60. Manson had missed 12 consecutive games, including all-star break, until the Ducks got another vet D to fill in for him in game 60. Date wise, it was from Jan 31 (game 48) to March 10 (game 60).

Today's Anaheim D is far too young, inexperienced, and not developed enough to push the team into playoff contention.

Currently, the Ducks have enough offensive top-end talent going forward, but they're mostly under age 23 and younger in C Zegras (23 yrs old), McTavish (21), Carlsson (19), and Cutter (20). Terry is older at age 26 and Colangelo (22) could be find, provided he's signed. That looks like a formidable top-6 for the near future.

We're hoping to improve our bottom-6 with C Gaucher, LW Myatovic, and others with the mass amount of prospects we've accumulated already or going to get with this year's draft as well.

Defensively, Verbeek might want to be rolling in two rookies full-time into the NHL in Luneau and Zellweger on top of having Minty and LaCombe going into their second full season in the NHL. If those youths don't take significant defensive steps forward, we'll continue to rummage at the bottom of the heap. Most teams won't give away young, defensively strong top-4D because they're difficult to come by. Which means we're gonna have to draft and develop one or more, if possible.

 

[duckpuck]

What's funny is people were complaining about missing out on Kaliyev in 2019 that we end up picking a player like Kaliyev in 2020 with Perreault. Both high end goal scorers who's motor sucked and didn't play defense. You can never win with people if the picks don't pan out despite actually changing drafting philosophies.

An aside, I have no say in the 2019 draft b/c I wanted D Thrun with LW Tracey's pick. We still ended up with Thrun, but in the 4th round. That turned out to be a great move at draft time. Yet Thrun didn't sign with us, but we at least got back a 3rd round pick. Hopefully, we can use that 3rd round pick with another of our other picks to move up in the draft.

I think this misses the point because you are conflating drafting philosophy with results and ignoring the important role of post draft player development.

Draft philosophy late in the first round - I prefer Kaliyev type of players to Tracey. I'll take the upside. But beyond that, the player evaluation has been poor. Instead of Tracey, the ducks could have drafted Ryan Johnson, Shane Pinto, and Kaliyev.

I don't have clear insight to the specifics of player development. And presumably Covid had some impact. But the ducks drafting and development of D-men has been far superior.

 

[AngelDuck]

There’s a big problem with drafting Gaucher over Kulich and Snuggerud and it does appear to be a philosophical issue

 

[DuckDuckGetz]

There’s a big problem with drafting Gaucher over Kulich and Snuggerud and it does appear to be a philosophical issue

I don't think there's any way to make this claim until any of them make (or fail to make) the NHL.

If none of them have any real success at the pro level, it doesn't really matter.

 

[AngelDuck]

I don't think there's any way to make this claim until any of them make (or fail to make) the NHL.

If none of them have any real success at the pro level, it doesn't really matter.

Oh but it does because Gaucher has half the upside of them

 

[DuckDuckGetz]

Oh but it does because Gaucher has half the upside of them

Unrealized upside is meaningless

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

I wonder how he’ll fit in with our prospect pool.

Looking back at his draft thread - lots of people like myself either: never heard of him, or was expected to be taken at a later point. Maybe he’ll prove us wrong

 

[MMC]

Oh but it does because Gaucher has half the upside of them

That’s your opinion. It’s very possible (maybe even likely?) the scouting staff sees something in either of their games that has them doubting their upside at the NHL level. “Upside” isn’t black and white

 

[duckpuck]

Unrealized upside is meaningless

When drafting, all of the player's potential is "unrealized". Literally there is risk in every single pick, particularly as you get to the bottom of the first round and lower.

The philosophical question is do you want a high floor/lower ceiling type of guy vs a high ceiling/higher bust type of player. Not suggesting it can be known mathematically speaking, but that is the question.

The ducks do seem to be predisposed to getting high floor/lower ceiling type of players late in the first round. I think that's a mistake - those types of players are most likely bottom six forwards. Those are relatively easy to find. I'd take a shot to get a top 6 guy or at least a guy who possesses an elite skill that can be useful (kaliyev in a limited role).

And to reiterate, there seems to be a player development element here.

That’s your opinion. It’s very possible (maybe even likely?) the scouting staff sees something in either of their games that has them doubting their upside at the NHL level. “Upside” isn’t black and white

Would you rather have a 1% chance of winning $1,000,000 or 50% chance of winning $20,000? That is the question we're debating. For a hockey club drafting late in the first round, I'd submit that you go for option 1 because even though the mathematical expected gain is the same, the $1,000,000 hit is far more meaningful than $20,000. It seems like the ducks have played it safe too often (not always).

 

[Gliff]

Would you rather have a 1% chance of winning $1,000,000 or 50% chance of winning $20,000? That is the question we're debating. For a hockey club drafting late in the first round, I'd submit that you go for option 1 because even though the mathematical expected gain is the same, the $1,000,000 hit is far more meaningful than $20,000. It seems like the ducks have played it safe too often (not always).

This is actually a good way to put it. My only problem with it is the notion that taking the 20k is forsure a bad decision when it could 100% be the better decision. And that is the point, there is no right answer.

If you look at Tampa a lot of their success was because they had a stream of cheap role players to finish out their roster on top of their top players. Once that pipeline dried up they had to make trades like the Jeannot, Hagel, Goodrow, and Coleman trades which I think is a big reason for their window closing.

This is what they gave up for 3 bottom 6 wingers, and 1 top 6 winger.
Foote (their top prospect at the time)
2020 1st
2021 1st
2023 1st
2024 1st
2025 1st
2024 2nd
2023 3rd
2023 4th
2023 5th

Once you have the core (Carlsson, McTavish, Zegras, Terry, Gauthier) I think those 20k picks are very important.

 

[MMC]

Would you rather have a 1% chance of winning $1,000,000 or 50% chance of winning $20,000? That is the question we're debating. For a hockey club drafting late in the first round, I'd submit that you go for option 1 because even though the mathematical expected gain is the same, the $1,000,000 hit is far more meaningful than $20,000. It seems like the ducks have played it safe too often (not always).

Again, my entire premise is that we don't know the odds our front office placed on any of these players becoming an NHLer. For any player any particular team declines to draft, it could very well have been 0

 

[duckpuck]

Again, my entire premise is that we don't know the odds our front office placed on any of these players becoming an NHLer. For any player any particular team declines to draft, it could very well have been 0

We don't know the odds that were placed - but we do know the results. So when the results are bad (i.e., players drafted later did much better than the player the ducks selected), we can conclude (at least in part) that the Ducks evaluation of odds and skills was off. Or that the traits valued by the ducks are not weighted properly.

To repeat myself, player development plays a role. Maybe Tracey does better if drafted by a different team. But its clear that at least for the ducks, he was the wrong pick.

 

[MMC]

We don't know the odds that were placed - but we do know the results. So when the results are bad (i.e., players drafted later did much better than the player the ducks selected), we can conclude (at least in part) that the Ducks evaluation of odds and skills was off. Or that the traits valued by the ducks are not weighted properly.

To repeat myself, player development plays a role. Maybe Tracey does better if drafted by a different team. But its clear that at least for the ducks, he was the wrong pick.

Nope, we're talking about guys that haven't even debuted in the NHL yet

 

[duckpuck]

Nope, we're talking about guys that haven't even debuted in the NHL yet

Thank you for making my point.

Part of the result is that a guy like Tracey hasn't had more than a sniff in the NHL when most first round (and even many second round) players his draft year have including Kaliyev and Pinto. That is a result. Same can be said for Perrreault - lots of players from 2020 are in the NHL including Brock Faber who was drafted well after him.

Sam Steel and Max Jones also say hello. Guys drafted after them in 2016 include Tage Thomspson, Kyrou, and Debrincat.

Yes, the jury is still out on Gaucher and perhaps Colangelo. But there are in fact results we can see and they aren't pretty.

 

[MMC]

Thank you for making my point.

Part of the result is that a guy like Tracey hasn't had more than a sniff in the NHL when most first round (and even many second round) players his draft year have including Kaliyev and Pinto. That is a result. Same can be said for Perrreault - lots of players from 2020 are in the NHL including Brock Faber who was drafted well after him.

Sam Steel and Max Jones also say hello. Guys drafted after them in 2016 include Tage Thomspson, Kyrou, and Debrincat.

Yes, the jury is still out on Gaucher and perhaps Colangelo. But there are in fact results we can see and they aren't pretty.

Your "point" is something entirely different from what I was responding to. The original post I responded to that led to you responding to me was the incredibly played out and tiresome Gaucher vs Snuggerud/Kulich debate. Outside of Kulich's one game none of those guys have done squat, so there are no results to speak of.

 

[DuckDuckGetz]

When drafting, all of the player's potential is "unrealized". Literally there is risk in every single pick, particularly as you get to the bottom of the first round and lower.

The philosophical question is do you want a high floor/lower ceiling type of guy vs a high ceiling/higher bust type of player. Not suggesting it can be known mathematically speaking, but that is the question.

The ducks do seem to be predisposed to getting high floor/lower ceiling type of players late in the first round. I think that's a mistake - those types of players are most likely bottom six forwards. Those are relatively easy to find. I'd take a shot to get a top 6 guy or at least a guy who possesses an elite skill that can be useful (kaliyev in a limited role).

And to reiterate, there seems to be a player development element here.


Would you rather have a 1% chance of winning $1,000,000 or 50% chance of winning $20,000? That is the question we're debating. For a hockey club drafting late in the first round, I'd submit that you go for option 1 because even though the mathematical expected gain is the same, the $1,000,000 hit is far more meaningful than $20,000. It seems like the ducks have played it safe too often (not always).

This is my problem with your argument, though - almost every single late round first pick IS a bottom six player. There's some weird belief that other teams are drafting all-star forwards with the 20-50OA pick and we just keep missing with ours. The reality is that there have been like 15 players in that range the last 10 drafts that have become top-6 players.

We're not bad at it, everyone is - unless you're Dallas or St. Louis.

Also Kaliyev only has 2 more points than LaCombe (who was taken 6 spots after him) this year. I can't see how that would be useful for us.