GDT: Game #29 of the season Capitals visit Ducks 10:00 PM ET on 12 - 6 - 19

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hockey Duckie

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
17,117
12,055
southern cal
Mod edit
We don't have anyone on our back end that you get excited for when they touch the puck... I remember watching Montour and every time he got the puck in his own end or at the point, id get excited because of the potential of something big happening.... at the end of the day Montour has a dynamic offensive skill set... and that's what our blue line lacks right now.

Odd. Isn't that what many other NHL teams are seeking? What is Buffalo's record with Monty on it again? Is it a winning record? No. It's 4-8-3. Apparently, Monty doesn't push the needle enough to help a team win more games.

This is similar to how people gauge Fowler. Last year, when we went without Fowler for a spell due to injury, I thought our team defense would falter. It didn't. This year, when both Lindholm and Manson fell to injury and Fowler was pushed back up to top-pairing duties, our defense "ducked" out. Fowler's offense is great if he isn't playing top-pairing and is sheltered.

Although our team is missing a dynamic offensive skill set, that's not what our blue line lacks the most. It lacks health. Once Lindholm returned, our team defense improved. With Manson set to return, it can get even better. I suppose it's a difference in philosophies here: do you want to win a shootouts (trading goals) or defensive games?

SubjectGamesGFGAGoal Diff GF/GGA/GDiff
Total297787-10 2.663.00-0.34
With Lindholm215052-2 2.382.48-0.10
W/o Lindholm82735-8 3.384.38-1.00
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Then add in Manson's presences/absences:

Ducks Top Pairing Comparison
SubjectGamesGFGAGoal Diff GF/GGA/GDiff
Total297787-10 2.663.00-0.34
With Lindholm and Manson1125241 2.272.180.09
W/o Both on the Ice185263-11 2.893.50-0.61
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

As you can see, Lindholm's defensive presence is far more valuable than looking for "only offense". There's almost a 2 goal differential without Lindholm. Also, we're involved with more goal trading without Lindholm. By adding Manson back into the fold, then it's very possible we can get into a positive goal differential, which would lead to more wins.

If we didn't trade Monty, then we wouldn't have been forced to trade for Gudz. Oddly enough, Gudz is a better partner for Fowler than Monty.

What's crazy about this is we lost Monty last year. Monty played six games under Bob and the team went 3-3. In the final 20 games without Monty, the team went 11-8-1. I was shocked when we traded Monty, but I was fine with the trade when reflecting upon it after the season. This year, Monty's been injured to start the season and Buffalo's record with him on it is 4-8-3. I guess we're still winning that trade b/c Monty hasn't raised the level of play for Buffalo that leads to more wins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckRogers10

bracer028

Registered User
Apr 18, 2018
961
305
Isn"t Zegras a for sure superstar? At least he was prior to the draft and impossible to get.

I don't care how loaded it is. Superstars don't grow in trees. A lot can happen. Wrong choice, injury, not progressing.
Alphas arent born everyday. Theres only one or two in like a 5 year span
 

Boo Boo

Registered User
Jan 31, 2013
2,081
2,175
Odd. Isn't that what many other NHL teams are seeking? What is Buffalo's record with Monty on it again? Is it a winning record? No. It's 4-8-3. Apparently, Monty doesn't push the needle enough to help a team win more games.

This is similar to how people gauge Fowler. Last year, when we went without Fowler for a spell due to injury, I thought our team defense would falter. It didn't. This year, when both Lindholm and Manson fell to injury and Fowler was pushed back up to top-pairing duties, our defense "ducked" out. Fowler's offense is great if he isn't playing top-pairing and is sheltered.

Although our team is missing a dynamic offensive skill set, that's not what our blue line lacks the most. It lacks health. Once Lindholm returned, our team defense improved. With Manson set to return, it can get even better. I suppose it's a difference in philosophies here: do you want to win a shootouts (trading goals) or defensive games?

SubjectGamesGFGAGoal DiffGF/GGA/GDiff
Total297787-102.663.00-0.34
With Lindholm215052-22.382.48-0.10
W/o Lindholm82735-83.384.38-1.00
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Then add in Manson's presences/absences:

Ducks Top Pairing Comparison
SubjectGamesGFGAGoal DiffGF/GGA/GDiff
Total297787-102.663.00-0.34
With Lindholm and Manson11252412.272.180.09
W/o Both on the Ice185263-112.893.50-0.61
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
As you can see, Lindholm's defensive presence is far more valuable than looking for "only offense". There's almost a 2 goal differential without Lindholm. Also, we're involved with more goal trading without Lindholm. By adding Manson back into the fold, then it's very possible we can get into a positive goal differential, which would lead to more wins.

If we didn't trade Monty, then we wouldn't have been forced to trade for Gudz. Oddly enough, Gudz is a better partner for Fowler than Monty.

What's crazy about this is we lost Monty last year. Monty played six games under Bob and the team went 3-3. In the final 20 games without Monty, the team went 11-8-1. I was shocked when we traded Monty, but I was fine with the trade when reflecting upon it after the season. This year, Monty's been injured to start the season and Buffalo's record with him on it is 4-8-3. I guess we're still winning that trade b/c Monty hasn't raised the level of play for Buffalo that leads to more wins.


Buffalo's record is not indicative of how good montour is or is not. I am fine with the trade too but you cant keep on using this argument it just doesnt work
 

Hockey Duckie

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
17,117
12,055
southern cal
Tracey better be a first liner or really good 2nd liner

I know Tracey is Ducks property to keep or use beyond this season, who's on an ELC slide. Monty will be a RFA after this season that's already making $3.387 mil a year and will be wanting more. Between the two, Tracey gives the Ducks more flexibility in time, money, and personnel. Right now, Tracey's scoring rate is great at 1.58 points per game (27 points in 17 games). The Ducks can shop that high potential in the near future or be content to see him develop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckRogers10

AngelDuck

Rak 'em up
Jun 16, 2012
23,078
16,563
The only way the Ducks get the "next Getzlaf" in this draft is if they suck enough to land Quinton Byfield. So basically they have to finish in the bottom 5 and get some luck with the ping pong balls.

Other than that, you are looking at a good prospect that you hope becomes a star or close to it if everything breaks right in development

Right now I think the absolute worst they could finish is 5th from the bottom. There's no chance this team loses more games than NJD, DET, OTT, LAK. Most likely they finish 6-12 from the bottom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ducks DVM

Hockey Duckie

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
17,117
12,055
southern cal
Buffalo's record is not indicative of how good montour is or is not. I am fine with the trade too but you cant keep on using this argument it just doesnt work

So you're saying Monty's significance means nothing to their record? Isn't that the reason why many on here are still pining for Monty, because of his significant presence on the ice? Shouldn't his offense help the Sabres lead to more wins? If not, then why are we continually bringing him up?

Monty brings offense. Yes. That's difficult to deny at all. He has 8 points in 15 games. His CF% is 47.8 and Fenwick is 47.0%. Do you know what's odd about those less than appealing stat for an offensive defenseman is his OZ% starts, which is 59.1%. Despite getting sheltered starts in about 60% of the game, he doesn't control play. How does that benefit our team with the way it's constructed? It doesn't. That's why I posted Lindholm and Manson's splits. We don't have to score more to win. We have to play better defense because our forward offensive productions are meh. The Lindholm splits alone reveals by playing better defense the goal differential drops.

Ducks' Team record: 12-13-4
With Lindholm: 10-9-2
Without Lindholm: 2-4-2

Sabres' Team record: 13-11-5
With Monty: 4-8-3
Without Monty: 9-3-2

Lindolm: 21 games, 12 points (or 0.57 ppg)
Monty: 15 games, 8 points (0.53 ppg)

Lindholm makes a significant difference to our line up. Monty would not. (But this is fluid. Monty could still improve his defense. Last year, we won without Monty under Bob. This year, many were wanting Monty back despite not realizing he wasn't available to start the season because he was injured. We'd still be in the same dire disposition of mass injured defensemen. Now, with him back into the lineup, I don't see his significance being imposed to help the team win more games after his first 15 games. Monty gives you offense at the expense of his defense. Could it change? Sure. But that isn't the case today. If Monty can't help his current team out, then how does that help the Ducks, who's winning formula is defensive-centric?)
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
39,067
33,540
So you're saying Monty's significance means nothing to their record? Isn't that the reason why many on here are still pining for Monty, because of his significant presence on the ice? Shouldn't his offense help the Sabres lead to more wins? If not, then why are we continually bringing him up?

Monty brings offense. Yes. That's difficult to deny at all. He has 8 points in 15 games. His CF% is 47.8 and Fenwick is 47.0%. Do you know what's odd about those less than appealing stat for an offensive defenseman is his OZ% starts, which is 59.1%. Despite getting sheltered starts in about 60% of the game, he doesn't control play. How does that benefit our team with the way it's constructed? It doesn't. That's why I posted Lindholm and Manson's splits. We don't have to score more to win. We have to play better defense because our forward offensive productions are meh. The Lindholm splits alone reveals by playing better defense the goal differential drops.

Ducks' Team record: 12-13-4
With Lindholm: 10-9-2
Without Lindholm: 2-4-2

Sabres' Team record: 13-11-5
With Monty: 4-8-3
Without Monty: 9-3-2

Lindolm: 21 games, 12 points (or 0.57 ppg)
Monty: 15 games, 8 points (0.53 ppg)

Lindholm makes a significant difference to our line up. Monty would not. (But this is fluid. Monty could still improve his defense. Last year, we won without Monty under Bob. This year, many were wanting Monty back despite not realizing he wasn't available to start the season because he was injured. We'd still be in the same dire disposition of mass injured defensemen. Now, with him back into the lineup, I don't see his significance being imposed to help the team win more games after his first 15 games. Monty gives you offense at the expense of his defense. Could it change? Sure. But that isn't the case today. If Monty can't help his current team out, then how does that help the Ducks, who's winning formula is defensive-centric?)
I don't think anyone is saying Montour is going to be more impactful than Lindholm.... Lindholm is elite shut down dmen. Montour brings something the team lacks and that's offense from the blue line.... I don't think buffalos record has any real impact on montours on ice play. Buffalo just isn't a great team.

Not to mention sometimes change of scenery help a player and sometimes hurt a player.

Look at a guy like Gudbranson who was basically laughed at when we picked him up... his #'s look much better in Anaheim. Should we pass on risto too because his advanced stats don't look great?
 

bsu

"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
Sep 27, 2017
28,539
29,290
Montour would be our 3rd best defensemen by a mile. Then take into account we need RD and offensive defensemen plus him playing in eakins activate D system would be fun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Getz2noone

KyleJRM

Registered User
Jun 6, 2007
5,523
2,695
North Dakota
Isn"t Zegras a for sure superstar? At least he was prior to the draft and impossible to get.

I don't care how loaded it is. Superstars don't grow in trees. A lot can happen. Wrong choice, injury, not progressing.

I mean, this is all semantics, “superstar” doesn’t have an official definition or anything. But when I think of a “superstar,” I think of a guy who would be the best player on most teams and not all teams have one. You don’t get those in the back half of the top 10 unless you’re lucky.
 

DuckRogers10

Registered User
Feb 3, 2016
771
436
Cypress, CA
I actually liked Terry and Steel’s game tonight, Getz showed why he wears the “C”. Was good that Henrique broke his goalless drought had a very good game. Guhle is not good, the turnover are bad, hopefully he sits when Manson gets back. But still feel they need outside help to improve this D.

In my little fantasy world, they won this game. F the Refs, Caps, and the NHL. Heck they gave Getzlaf 1st star of the game and they lost. Hmmmm..
You liked watching Terry and Steel lose the puck all night?
 

Ducks DVM

sowcufucakky
Jun 6, 2010
51,610
28,579
Long Beach, CA
I don't think anyone is saying Montour is going to be more impactful than Lindholm.... Lindholm is elite shut down dmen. Montour brings something the team lacks and that's offense from the blue line.... I don't think buffalos record has any real impact on montours on ice play. Buffalo just isn't a great team.

Not to mention sometimes change of scenery help a player and sometimes hurt a player.

Look at a guy like Gudbranson who was basically laughed at when we picked him up... his #'s look much better in Anaheim. Should we pass on risto too because his advanced stats don't look great?
Since Montour came back from injury (15 games), he's 4th in points (Eichel 22, Olofsson 14, Reinhardt 10, Montour 8), tied for 6th in +/-(+4), has only been a - player in 4 games, and is tied for 6th most in goal with...2 (Eichel with 11, 2 guys with 5, 2 guys with 4).

Montour is not the reason that they’re not winning. With the number of “barely”losses that the Ducks have had, that offensive edge (and more importantly, lack of horrific defensive gaffes that Guhle provides) may well have led to several Ducks wins.
 

Deuce22

Registered User
Jun 17, 2013
5,511
7,469
SoCal & Idaho
Since Montour came back from injury (15 games), he's 4th in points (Eichel 22, Olofsson 14, Reinhardt 10, Montour 8), tied for 6th in +/-(+4), has only been a - player in 4 games, and is tied for 6th most in goal with...2 (Eichel with 11, 2 guys with 5, 2 guys with 4).

Montour is not the reason that they’re not winning. With the number of “barely”losses that the Ducks have had, that offensive edge (and more importantly, lack of horrific defensive gaffes that Guhle provides) may well have led to several Ducks wins.
C'mon, DVM, don't you know that the best way to evaluate defensemen is by their won-loss record?
 

Leonardo87

New York Rangers, Anaheim Ducks, and TMNT fan.
Sponsor
Dec 8, 2013
38,060
54,527
New York
You liked watching Terry and Steel lose the puck all night?

I was paying attention more to the goals they were involved with, sadly one was called back, for being a hair off-sides.

As per losing the puck, gonna happen with young forwards, I am more concerned with guys like Guhle turning over the puck in front of their own net. That cost them the game. Ducks had momentum after Henrique tied it, easily could have gotten at least a point last night.
 

Deuce22

Registered User
Jun 17, 2013
5,511
7,469
SoCal & Idaho
I was paying attention more to the goals they were involved with, sadly one was called back, for being a hair off-sides.

As per losing the puck, gonna happen with young forwards, I am more concerned with guys like Guhle turning over the puck in front of their own net. That cost them the game. Ducks had momentum after Henrique tied it, easily could have gotten at least a point last night.
Not absolving Guhle, it was a horrible play, but comparing the responsibility of forwards to defensemen is bogus. If you're OK with young forwards turning it over often, you have to give young D some latitude as well.
 
Last edited:

Leonardo87

New York Rangers, Anaheim Ducks, and TMNT fan.
Sponsor
Dec 8, 2013
38,060
54,527
New York
Not absolving Guhle, it was a horrible play, but comparing the responsibility of forwards to defensemen is bogus. If you're OK with young forwards turning it over often, you have to give young D the same latitude.

No of course not. Forwards should be just as responsible with the puck even if they are in the offensive zone. I just didn’t notice any blatant turnovers by Terry last night. I mean the game moves fast and you usually notice the bad turnovers more, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deuce22

Ducks DVM

sowcufucakky
Jun 6, 2010
51,610
28,579
Long Beach, CA
Not absolving Guhle, it was a horrible play, but comparing the responsibility of forwards to defensemen is bogus. If you're OK with young forwards turning it over often, you have to give young D some latitude as well.
I am understanding (to varying degrees) with a turnover that was a mistake, misplay, accident, or trying to do too much. I’m not so much ok with a turnover from being lazy, which is what the Guhle turnover appeared to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->