Rickard Rakell

[DaDucks*]

The problem is that, I think, it's easy to focus on those good stretches Rakell had and overlook some of the less impressive ones. Unfortunately, what we got from him in the playoffs, when it mattered the most, was the less impressive Rakell. He's a young kid, and he's going to have ups and downs.

I think DaDucks has a bit of an agenda in his defense of Rakell, though. He was the one who seemed confident young guys like Holland and Rakell would surpass the play of Koivu, from last season. Not all of us were convinced, pointing out that experienced , and for good reason it seems.

Ultimately, I think Rakell was as expected. At least, as I expected. He showed some promise, but not with any kind of consistency. I think some were quick to suggest he had arrived this season. It was an encouraging season from him, but that's as far as I'd take it. My issue isn't with Rakell, specifically. He can't really help the fact he's a young kid who has a lot to learn, but there was no contingency. If he struggled, which he did, the Ducks had no one who could step in and take the responsibility. All that could be done is cut into his ice time, shelter him, and hope he still manages to do something... which he didn't.

My agenda more or less, was spreading awareness that we need more scoring from the bottom 6 lines in the playoffs and throughout the season. My criticism of Koivu stemmed from the 3rd lines disappearance from the score sheet in the playoffs. Yes, I stressed that any of our young centers would be an upgrade and step in the right direction from Koivu, and still stand by that. To avoid looking hypocritical, I haven't combated any criticisms of Rakell until yesterday. There might be an agenda, but I think its from the Koivu crowd. The guy had 2 goals in 26 playoff games lol.....Pure "shutdown" lines that cant score are a thing of the past, and are certainly not part of BB's game plan. I'm happy the board has come around and demanded more scoring from the bottom 6, even though if it is 3 years late

2011-2012 Ducks 6 1 6 7 -2 6 0 0 0 7 14.3
2012-2013 Ducks 7 1 2 3 -4 6 1 0 0 6 16.7
2013-2014 Ducks 13 0 1 1 -3 8 0 0 0 5 0.

 

[nbducksfan19]

I don't mind Rakell as our #3/4C, my beef is that we no longer have competition for that spot. Rakell has it on lockdown for better or worse. Maybe Wagner adds some of that next season, he's not as offensive, but it's something.

did the Kerdiles experiment at center fail? I did not keep up with that story line.

 

[Getzmonster]

did the Kerdiles experiment at center fail? I did not keep up with that story line.

Others here know better than I do, but from what I've gathered it's still a work in progress, and Kerdiles still needs some AHL time as the reports on his development last season were still pretty up and down. Not sure how well he bounced back from his concussion, I suppose we'll see how he looks at camp.

 

[Sojourn]

My agenda more or less, was spreading awareness that we need more scoring from the bottom 6 lines in the playoffs and throughout the season. My criticism of Koivu stemmed from the 3rd lines disappearance from the score sheet in the playoffs. Yes, I stressed that any of our young centers would be an upgrade and step in the right direction from Koivu, and still stand by that. To avoid looking hypocritical, I haven't combated any criticisms of Rakell until yesterday. There might be an agenda, but I think its from the Koivu crowd. The guy had 2 goals in 26 playoff games lol.....Pure "shutdown" lines that cant score are a thing of the past, and are certainly not part of BB's game plan. I'm happy the board has come around and demanded more scoring from the bottom 6, even though if it is 3 years late

2011-2012 Ducks 6 1 6 7 -2 6 0 0 0 7 14.3
2012-2013 Ducks 7 1 2 3 -4 6 1 0 0 6 16.7
2013-2014 Ducks 13 0 1 1 -3 8 0 0 0 5 0.

To begin with, it was never the "Koivu" crowd, DaDucks. It was the crowd of people who didn't feel comfortable expecting a bunch of kids to perform like veterans, and who felt that replacing Koivu wasn't quite as easy as you were making it out to be.

If you'd like, I could point out the actual threads in question, and how you mockingly declared that the trio of Rakell, DSP, and Karlsson would be better than Winnik, Koivu, and Silfverberg.

But really, the point is simple: For all the criticism you had of Koivu's offensive numbers, he could at least be trusted to play solid hockey. The same was not true of Rakell in these playoffs. In all the ways you tried to call out Koivu, for his play in the playoffs, Rakell was much worse.

Edit: If pure shutdown lines are a thing of the past, where do lines that aren't effective offensively or defensively stand? What type of line would you classify that?

 

[DaDucks*]

To begin with, it was never the "Koivu" crowd, DaDucks. It was the crowd of people who didn't feel comfortable expecting a bunch of kids to perform like veterans, and who felt that replacing Koivu wasn't quite as easy as you were making it out to be.

If you'd like, I could point out the actual threads in question, and how you mockingly declared that the trio of Rakell, DSP, and Karlsson would be better than Winnik, Koivu, and Silfverberg.

But really, the point is simple: For all the criticism you had of Koivu's offensive numbers, he could at least be trusted to play solid hockey. The same was not true of Rakell in these playoffs.

He wasn't solid at all. He had a major role, and failed miserably in the playoffs. I was expecting at least for mp22 to be around this year to hedge against us trying out a young center. Anything to inject more scoring into the lineup, and yes Winnik and Koivu were certainly a problem. Both didn't get a whiff of an extension. So yes, it wasn't just a Koivu thing, it was a bottom 6 thing, and primarily 3rd line thing.

For the record
I was expecting Silf to get 15-20 goals this year.

 

[Sojourn]

He wasn't solid at all. He had a major role, and failed miserably in the playoffs. I was expecting at least for mp22 to be around this year to hedge against us trying out a young center. Anything to inject more scoring into the lineup, and yes Winnik and Koivu were certainly a problem. Both didn't get a whiff of an extension.

For the record
I was expecting Silf to get 15-20 goals this year.

So your upgrade was a player who took on a much lesser role, and was even worse.

Edit: I like our young talent as much as anyone, but isn't this exactly what some people have been saying all along? Relying on unproven players is just not smart. If you don't re-sign Koivu, you need to replace him. We failed to do that.

 

[DaDucks*]

So your upgrade was a player who took on a much lesser role, and was even worse.

Edit: I like our young talent as much as anyone, but isn't this exactly what some people have been saying all along? Relying on unproven players is just not smart. If you don't re-sign Koivu, you need to replace him. We failed to do that.

no, you upgrade him.

 

[Sojourn]

no, you upgrade him.

Should I just repeat the post again?

 

[DaDucks*]

Should I just repeat the post again?

you have been insinuating that Saku had played adequately throughout his playoff tenure, which isn't true. So yes, if you replace something that isn't working, you get an upgrade. Rakell proved he was that upgrade up until the playoffs.

 

[nbducksfan19]

To begin with, it was never the "Koivu" crowd, DaDucks. It was the crowd of people who didn't feel comfortable expecting a bunch of kids to perform like veterans, and who felt that replacing Koivu wasn't quite as easy as you were making it out to be.

If you'd like, I could point out the actual threads in question, and how you mockingly declared that the trio of Rakell, DSP, and Karlsson would be better than Winnik, Koivu, and Silfverberg.

But really, the point is simple: For all the criticism you had of Koivu's offensive numbers, he could at least be trusted to play solid hockey. The same was not true of Rakell in these playoffs. In all the ways you tried to call out Koivu, for his play in the playoffs, Rakell was much worse.

Edit: If pure shutdown lines are a thing of the past, where do lines that aren't effective offensively or defensively stand? What type of line would you classify that?

I agree with much of what you said....but Koivu had 1 assist and was a -3 in last years playoffs where Rakkel had 1 goal and a -1...This seems consistent with the eye test of the two players, so i would call it a wash in terms of ineffectiveness and it was looking quite possible mid season that Rakkel would be an upgrade.

 

[Sojourn]

you have been insinuating that Saku had played adequately throughout his playoff tenure, which isn't true. So yes, if you replace something that isn't working, you get an upgrade. Rakell proved he was that upgrade up until the playoffs.

...really?

And considering your biggest argument for Koivu was not, in fact, his regular season stats, but his playoff stats, how does that work?

 

[Ducks DVM]

you have been insinuating that Saku had played adequately throughout his playoff tenure, which isn't true. So yes, if you replace something that isn't working, you get an upgrade. Rakell proved he was that upgrade up until the playoffs.

Rakell wasn't the replacement for Koivu. He was the replacement for MP22.

When you look at ice time and usage

Kesler replaced Koivu.
Thompson replaced Bonino.
Rakell replaced MP22.

 

[Sojourn]

Rakell wasn't he replacement for Koivu. He was the replacement for MP22.

When you look at ice time and usage

Kesler replaced Koivu.
Thompson replaced Bonino.
Rakell replaced MP22.

I think it gets a little muddled in a direct comparison, especially when you look at how they are used. Bonino and Perreault kind of overlapped at times, while Koivu was clearly the shutdown guy. But I also think you need to compare the team overall. That blue line just wasn't as good as the current one, particularly after we replaced Lovejoy with Despres, and Fowler got going again. It also lacked a secondary defensive forward, like we had in Thompson.

Ultimately, I think our top six was much better, but our bottom six was easily worse.

 

[Ducks DVM]

I think it gets a little muddled in a direct comparison, especially when you look at how they are used. Bonino and Perreault kind of overlapped at times, while Koivu was clearly the shutdown guy. But I also think you need to compare the team overall. That blue line just wasn't as good as the current one. It also lacked a secondary defensive forward, like we had in Thompson.

Ultimately, I think our top six was much better, but our bottom six was easily worse.

Agreed. But Koivu was the guy getting all the ES minutes, and getting the shutdown responsibilities. You can argue which of Bonino and MP22 were the 3vs 4, but Koivu was the 2C. Kesler was traded for Bonino, he didn't replace him, and Rakell didn't replace Koivu. Ignoring the responsibilities of Koivu in a shutdown role vs Rakell in a sheltered role when comparing their production is disingenuous.

 

[Sojourn]

Agreed. But Koivu was the guy getting all the ES minutes, and getting the shutdown responsibilities. You can argue which of Bonino and MP22 were the 3vs 4, but Koivu was the 2C. Kesler was traded for Bonino, he didn't replace him, and Rakell didn't replace Koivu. Ignoring the responsibilities of Koivu in a shutdown role vs Rakell in a sheltered role when comparing their production is disingenuous.

Doesn't really help the argument for Rakell, though. Which, I realize you aren't trying to make. It just makes it that much worse.

We all knew Koivu wasn't a good solution for a #2 center. We'd known it for a while. That's why getting Kesler was such an important addition. Unfortunately, to do that we had to move Bonino. Then we lose Koivu and Perreault. So, we gained a #2, but we downgrade at 3 and 4.

Thompson, I dig his game, but he isn't my choice for a #3. I think he's a good #4, more than a legit #3. Which means, when we really needed it, I don't think we had a legitimate #3 center. I do think Rakell showed he could be that guy, at times, but not consistently. He had good stretches, and some very, uh, ungood ones, and I think for a center who was seeing the easiest ice time, that wasn't good enough. Especially when it really mattered. And we aren't talking one game, or even one series.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Well would you mind informing me what your expectations were? Did you expect him to be a 50%+ guy in the dot?

No, I didn't. I had hoped he could perform more of a Perreault role from last year and provide a spark in sheltered duty. I liked that he made an effort to be more physical.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Thompson, I dig his game, but he isn't my choice for a #3. I think he's a good #4, more than a legit #3. Which means, when we really needed it, I don't think we had a legitimate #3 center. I do think Rakell showed he could be that guy, at times, but not consistently. He had good stretches, and some very, uh, ungood ones, and I think for a center who was seeing the easiest ice time, that wasn't good enough. Especially when it really mattered. And we aren't talking one game, or even one series.

Thompson was in over his head at 3C, again since our 3C went kaboom, but I was really impressed with him. I don't expect that over an 82 game season but he made me a fan with the way he stepped up.

 

[snarktacular]

you have been insinuating that Saku had played adequately throughout his playoff tenure, which isn't true. So yes, if you replace something that isn't working, you get an upgrade. Rakell proved he was that upgrade up until the playoffs.

Also Koivu 12:48 ES TOI and 1:34 SH TOI, Rakell 11:15 ES TOI and 0:00 SH TOI.

 

[DaDucks*]

Also Koivu 12:48 ES TOI and 1:34 SH TOI, Rakell 11:15 ES TOI and 0:00 SH TOI.

What are you saying? Rakell didn't impress through the 2nd half of the season?

 

[DaDucks*]

So your upgrade was a player who took on a much lesser role, and was even worse.

Edit: I like our young talent as much as anyone, but isn't this exactly what some people have been saying all along? Relying on unproven players is just not smart. If you don't re-sign Koivu, you need to replace him. We failed to do that.

Im not denying Rakell failed in the playoffs...

 

[Sojourn]

Thompson was in over his head at 3C, again since our 3C went kaboom, but I was really impressed with him. I don't expect that over an 82 game season but he made me a fan with the way he stepped up.

I agree. I was really happy with his play.

On the other hand, I also think that play from him emphasized just how ineffective Rakell was. That should have been an ideal environment for Rakell to step in and exploit favorable match ups with weaker competition. For as frustrated as I was with our top guys, they still showed up and really, they had a good post season. When I think of the guys I'd expect to be our best, those are the guys who were pretty consistently our best. Beauchemin being the one exception, as he seemed to struggle a bit throughout. Silfverberg and Fowler even exceeded expectations, based on regular season play. Kesler stepped it up, as well, but I think that was an assumption. I still expected something from that Rakell line though, and I really didn't feel like we got nearly enough. Not even in an optimistic "I hope they can step up" kind of way, but just in general. That line just wasn't very good, even in very favorable circumstances.

It's easy to get frustrated at guys like Getzlaf and Perry for not being good when we needed them the most, but it's less excusable, in my opinion, to not be good at all through 3 rounds of hockey.

 

[Sojourn]

What are you saying? Rakell didn't impress through the 2nd half of the season?

He's saying that you slammed Koivu for not being good enough in the playoffs, while glossing over Rakell being even worse, and pointing to his regular season play. That's either incredibly convenient, or straight up hypocritical. You aren't applying your argument equally here.

Correct me if I'm wrong, snark.

 

[DaDucks*]

Agreed. But Koivu was the guy getting all the ES minutes, and getting the shutdown responsibilities. You can argue which of Bonino and MP22 were the 3vs 4, but Koivu was the 2C. Kesler was traded for Bonino, he didn't replace him, and Rakell didn't replace Koivu. Ignoring the responsibilities of Koivu in a shutdown role vs Rakell in a sheltered role when comparing their production is disingenuous.

We didn't have shutdown line all season, so I don't understand why we would implement one in the playoffs. Our greatest strength last year was rolling four lines, BB made his frustrations public when that dried out.

Didn't Koivu play 3rd line center in the playoffs the last two years?

 

[DaDucks*]

He's saying that you slam Koivu for not being good enough in the playoffs, while glossing over Rakell being even worse, and pointing to his regular season play.

Ya, they both sucked...I'm not debating that. I have a problem with the amount of criticism he is receiving, (which is more than anyone on the team) yet I was one of few complaining about Koivu the last two years, who for some reason received a pass.

 

[Sojourn]

Ya, they both sucked...I'm not debating that. I have a problem with the amount of criticism he is receiving, (which is more than anyone on the team) yet I was one of few complaining about Koivu the last two years who for some reason received a pass.

Koivu never got a pass. He received plenty of criticism. Just because it wasn't enough for you doesn't mean it wasn't there. There was also a general acceptance that he had a tough responsibility. Believe it or not, that matters.

Rakell, on the other hand, had minimal responsibilities, favorable match ups, and he did **** all. Name me an Anaheim player who was worse than Rakell over the 3 rounds of playoff hockey. That may have something to do with the criticism he has received.