No. You don’t trade 19 year old potential top pairing #6 overall picks.
The Ducks can easily make a great package for Chychrun without him.
Speculation: 2021-22 Trade Thread VI : Who's your Dadonov?
- Thread starter All Mighty
- Start date
- Status
No. You don’t trade 19 year old potential top pairing #6 overall picks.
The Ducks can easily make a great package for Chychrun without him.
Just not sure what that package would be without giving up more than you'd be getting. And I'm just not sure how Chychrun moves the needle in the next 2 years. The Ducks will be very bad with or without him. I'd rather keep the very expensive assets you'd have to give up to get him.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,541
- 39,379
I kinda have the same feeling as @bsu chychrun kinda lost his appeal when we moved lindholm manson
Also i feel like Chychruns 41 point season in 56 games is looking closer to an outlier(like mansons 37 point year) than what he actually is.
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
I wouldn't think so, I'm starting to wonder if even Zellweger would also be off limits. This ones such a tough cost to peg.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,541
- 39,379
I was fine trading Zell if our window was close(meaning we kept manson rakell lindholm and added to that core), now that weve moved on i think we can be patient and look for players that will be here for 5+ years and wait on prospects with highish upside.
The cost for chychrun at least sounds like theyd want a premium prospect Zell/Mctavish + our 1st + a roster player (comtois?).... thats way to expensive for a guy that hasnt exactly shown a ton of consistency... hes a good player no doubt... but is he a dmen thatll push 60 points? or a guy that will chill around 35-45 points?
bsu
"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
- Sep 27, 2017
- 28,539
- 29,293
At this point we are so bad you might as well just keep all the picks and take them unless someone is unloading a really damn good young player for some unknown reason.... We are not going to make the playoffs for the next 2 seasons with what we have plus a couple FA's or trades.
I just think trading Lindholm was so f***ing stupid. Might as well just start over what's the point of trading players in their 25-27 year age group, they will be old or a FA by the time we are able to compete again.... Man Verbeek was really stupid not to sign Hampus to 8x6.25 or even cheaper if what the reports are true he would have signed for less here if we gave him term. Even at the end of it that 6 million dollar salary will be pennies on the dollar. I know how hard he works in the offseason for him ever to be useless. That was completely idoitic no move he makes will make up for it. We could have had Lindholm and still added whatever we are going to add. Just stupid, we won't draft, develop and play a shutdown defensemen like Hampus for a decade or more.
I just think trading Lindholm was so f***ing stupid. Might as well just start over what's the point of trading players in their 25-27 year age group, they will be old or a FA by the time we are able to compete again.... Man Verbeek was really stupid not to sign Hampus to 8x6.25 or even cheaper if what the reports are true he would have signed for less here if we gave him term. Even at the end of it that 6 million dollar salary will be pennies on the dollar. I know how hard he works in the offseason for him ever to be useless. That was completely idoitic no move he makes will make up for it. We could have had Lindholm and still added whatever we are going to add. Just stupid, we won't draft, develop and play a shutdown defensemen like Hampus for a decade or more.
DavidBL
Registered User
I e gotten to the point where I do t think Chychrun makes sense. Not because of the cost but the fit. We have offensive D in Fowler Shattenkirk and Drysdale. We need pkers. Unless 1 or more is also being moved. Better to target guys who are more defense first and probably less high profile on D leaving more assets for Forwar upgrades
6'4 shutdown defensemen with his puck skills don't come around often.
I don’t understand this logic. Chychrun and Lindholm are pretty comparable players and he fits our age group better. (That said I agree we should have signed him to that deal). Rakell and Manson are replaceable through free agency. The key is the price for Chychrun. If you can get him, I say go for it. I don’t agree that the rebuild has completely started over due to trading 3 ufas. The key is replacing the Lindholm hole, which I agree seemed unnecessary to create.
bsu
"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
- Sep 27, 2017
- 28,539
- 29,293
Chychrun doesn't replace Lindholm. He is another Fowler/Drysdale type. If we had those 3 and Zellweger we would be hemmed and bullied in the defensive zone like we are now. We need defensive defensemen and we let one of the best ones in the entire NHL go over a steal of a deal 8x6... Even in the last 2 seasons the cap will be up 6 million will be no big deal... and that's if he falls off a cliff, sorry don't see that happening he's way too smart and hard working of a player. You could see when we traded him and Drysdale interview, dude look like he was gonna cry.
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
I don't get this logic. None of those three are needle movers and in this scenario there would still be so much work to do. You'd be spending considerable assets to add to the position you have the most invested in, leaving a lot less to add in other, more needed areas. It's similarly why the Kings were never hot in the Eichel sweepstakes.
Makes way more sense now where you'd pay a premium to exchange Lindholm for a guy much closer to Zegras in age and who should be better over the next five years, if he isn't already.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,541
- 39,379
He isnt... and very unlikely he will be. Specially when you consider the cost of him, can also leave after 3 years as hell be a UFA.
Also 24 and injury prone
Ducks don’t need an elite or Top #1 D, they need the best compliment pairings for Drysdale and Fowler for those two to be able to play their game, and then eventually for Zellweger. I would not trade Zellweger for Chychrun, who may even have a higher upside than him.
This will get some heat, I honestly don’t think Lindholm was the most ideal D partner for Drysdale.
Drysdale has #1 potential, get him the most ideal pairing where he can reach that potential. If the Ducks bottom pairing ends up being Vaak - Helleson, with players above them being better and in a higher tier, the Ducks will be in very good shape on D. If those two can reach their potential, it won’t sting at all when they need to fill in a Top 4 role due to injury, which has been the biggest issue the last 3 or so years.
This will get some heat, I honestly don’t think Lindholm was the most ideal D partner for Drysdale.
Drysdale has #1 potential, get him the most ideal pairing where he can reach that potential. If the Ducks bottom pairing ends up being Vaak - Helleson, with players above them being better and in a higher tier, the Ducks will be in very good shape on D. If those two can reach their potential, it won’t sting at all when they need to fill in a Top 4 role due to injury, which has been the biggest issue the last 3 or so years.
Last edited:
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
He's arguably/probably better right now and if he isn't over the next five years it's probably a massive disappointment. The hope with him is to be a #1 guy, if he isn't one already.He isnt... and very unlikely he will be. Specially when you consider the cost of him, can also leave after 3 years as hell be a UFA.
Also 24 and injury prone
Now, you're absolutely right, he has been injury prone, it's a major issue. The hope there is that he's past the knee issues and it's manageable going forward. There's three years to figure out how much of an issue it is. #1 defensemen are hard to find and even harder if they're under 25, there's gonna be some risks, that's the way I see it.
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
I don't think so either. IMO he needs someone much more physical and someone who plays a much safer game. Long-term I'm not sure who that could be but short term shouldn't be the hardest to find.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,541
- 39,379
Well clearly it wasnt working so i agree Lindholm/drysdale wasnt ideal pairing... not sure who makes sense for Drysdale.
Yeah Doesn’t need to be a superstar, a Good #3/#4, but yeah like you said, someone physical, big, who can clear the crease, and force turnovers on the wall. If Manson was a LHD would make you wonder if he was re-signed. But I think his age and injury history was what made Verbeek move on from him.
McDonald19
Registered User
Maybe, but he called up little Lettieri instead of Hunter Drew? Personally I’d react with an immediate call up that helped the current team’s toughness.
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
Right now I don't even know if you need that. I'd really like to see him with Benoit on a sheltered third pairing the rest of this year and maybe even next year too. Long term is harder to project but those types really aren't that rare. 10 years ago when this debate surrounded Fowler it was much harder because of handedness.
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
Well Lettieri was already here and they seem to be saving callups but this is a good point. They didn't make any response moves right after and even scratched one of the few guys who could maybe do something about it like Benoit. Then again, there's basically just the one option in San Diego and if they don't think he's anywhere near NHL caliber then it could just be that.
Yeah he continues to be thrown to the wolves. Maybe roll for the remainder of the season....
Fowler - Sustr
Vaak - Shattenkirk
Benoit - Drysdale
bsu
"I have no idea what I am doing" -Pat VerBleak
- Sep 27, 2017
- 28,539
- 29,293
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
Don't see why not. They could also experiment with one of Fowler or Vaak on the right side to see if it works at all, might be necessary for next year. Also could give Axel Andersson a look somewhere.
Tbh I’d be pretty surprised if Anaheim didn’t just go up to the podium and make a ton of draft picks this year and next.
I doubt Verbeek is able to pull the proverbial rabbit out of his hat and somehow turn the small batch of assets he got from Lindholm,Rakell, and Manson into meaningful players to get us back to even. Let alone improve the team from the first few months of this year.
And Trying to pull the rabbit out of the hat by going for players like Chychurun would likely just be compounding his mistakes.
I doubt Verbeek is able to pull the proverbial rabbit out of his hat and somehow turn the small batch of assets he got from Lindholm,Rakell, and Manson into meaningful players to get us back to even. Let alone improve the team from the first few months of this year.
And Trying to pull the rabbit out of the hat by going for players like Chychurun would likely just be compounding his mistakes.
- Status
