Speculation: 2021-22 Trade Thread VI : Who's your Dadonov?

[Sean Garrity]

well two benefits would be that EJ helps the Ducks get to the cap floor and would be a great leader and mentor for guys like Drysdale, Vaak, and Benoit.

I don't think we should be worried about the cap floor if we trade Gibby, and what makes EJ a better leader than Shattenkirk or Fowler?

 

[tomd]

I think we can find much better ways to get to the cap floor without trading Gibson for EJ, and what makes EJ a better leader than Shattenkirk or Fowler?

I think it is important to realize that the Ducks are probably going to have to take back salary in any deal for Gibson in order for the acquiring team to help fit him under their cap. It sounded like the deal as proposed included a 23 1st and Newhook along with EJ. That seemed like a pretty good basis for a deal to me but I'm sure others might disagree.

 

[Sean Garrity]

I think it is important to realize that the Ducks are probably going to have to take back salary in any deal for Gibson in order for the acquiring team to help fit him under their cap. It sounded like the deal as proposed included a 23 1st and Newhook along with EJ. That seemed like a pretty good basis for a deal to me but I'm sure others might disagree.

I've edited my OP but it doesn't effect this. I'm not disagreeing with anything here, however, what is Comtois worth then? IMO, I woulnd't trade Comtois for anything less than a 2nd. Thus, for Gibby alone I'd 100% do the 23rd 1st, Newhook and EJ. Once you add Comtois, AVs have to add more in my opinion. I'd personally just not include Comtois and swap him out for a lesser prospect or middle round pick.

 

[Paul4587]

I'd need to drop Comtois and add a lower level prospect or mid round pick. EJ absolutely has negative value to Anaheim. It's great for him and the Avs that he's having a good playoff run, but the Ducks won't be in the playoffs so what good does that do them?

He helps insulate younger players from minutes they aren’t ready for.

 

[gilfaizon]

I think it is important to realize that the Ducks are probably going to have to take back salary in any deal for Gibson in order for the acquiring team to help fit him under their cap. It sounded like the deal as proposed included a 23 1st and Newhook along with EJ. That seemed like a pretty good basis for a deal to me but I'm sure others might disagree.

I'd do that quite easily. I think the goal in a Gibson deal is to get a high end prospect, as we were unable to at the deadline. As Gibson has term, and if teams see him for the greater body of work, i think its possible. Newhook fits that bill IMO.

 

[dracom]

I think it is important to realize that the Ducks are probably going to have to take back salary in any deal for Gibson in order for the acquiring team to help fit him under their cap. It sounded like the deal as proposed included a 23 1st and Newhook along with EJ. That seemed like a pretty good basis for a deal to me but I'm sure others might disagree.

i would say it's not a great deal for our needs. EJ only has a year left so high chance he either leaves or retires so there would be no long term benefit from him. Newhook i'm not really sure helps; he's an undersized center which I don't know helps an already undersized roster. Granted now I'm only looking at his nhl.com page so I don't know much more than what that shows; if others have a different opinion on him i'm happy to hear it. Then the late 1st is what it is.

Not sure how happy I would be with that trade; especially if Comtois is included like in the OP.

 

[Duck Off]

well two benefits would be that EJ helps the Ducks get to the cap floor and would be a great leader and mentor for guys like Drysdale, Vaak, and Benoit.

He's also likely able to be flipped at the deadline for a small asset. That said, he's not someone we should target and if he's coming here, we need to be compensated for it.

IMO, Newhook or Byram are the primary pieces I'd target in a Gibson deal. If Newhook + 1st is on the table for Gibson, that's the deal I'm taking easily. If they want to send EJ back, I'm also good with that, but not with including Comtois going the other way. Not without another decent asset coming back as well. I think Comtois value is around a 2nd for what it's worth.

 

[DavidBL]

EJ would fill a hole for us next season but only for a year then we have to replace him again. Rather take a look at someone who would be more of a long term situation.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I'm getting less sure the Avs are even gonna move EJ this offseason. He's obviously not worth the cap hit but they can't really use his money on long-term commitments anyway, they could probably only use it to bring in other rentals. Given how respected he is, their lack of assets already and the lack of RDs out there I wonder if they just don't bother and go into next season with him and Byram as their second pair.

 

[Sean Garrity]

He helps insulate younger players from minutes they aren’t ready for.

Agree with this, I just don’t think it’s worth giving up Comtois for.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Semi-decent segment on Gibson on 32 Thoughts today. To summarize, he says Gibson wants to win but Elliotte figures it mostly boils down to whether they're on the way up, which he thinks Gibson can live with, or whether it's a 5 year rebuild and maybe he can't wait any longer. Marek also points out how between cap space and draft capital there's easily enough to start pushing towards contention.

 

[DavidBL]

Semi-decent segment on Gibson on 32 Thoughts today. To summarize, he says Gibson wants to win but Elliotte figures it mostly boils down to whether they're on the way up, which he thinks Gibson can live with, or whether it's a 5 year rebuild and maybe he can't wait any longer. Marek also points out how between cap space and draft capital there's easily enough to start pushing towards contention.

That's all I ask for.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

I agree it is very much a strategy. The poster was asking for an articulated strategy on how I would build the team, citing that PV has stated he would build through the draft. To me that means that he's looking for specific strategies or players I would implement. If that is what they considered articulated. To me "build through the draft" is even less articulated as there is generally even less clear cut strategy. We don't know where our picks are going to land from a year to year basis and have even less idea on who who be available. Generally in FA or trade you have a specific target in mind which can make planning a whole lot easier. That's all I meant. If that is not what the poster meant by articulated strategy then go ahead and disregard. I think the Ducks have, are, and will continue to build via the draft. I just don't think it will be the sole avenue nor do I think its limited by where the team is if the right deals are there.

You should stop projecting an extreme outcome as your counters:

1. "I just don't think it will be the sole avenue...​

2. ... nor do I think its limited by where the team is if the right deals are there."​

Let's address point 2. Earlier in the thread, someone asked if teams in rebuilds would make trades for significant talent. Using Murray and the Ducks' rebuild starting at the 2019 TDL as an example, we tried to acquire RHD Justin Faulk in a trade in the 2019 off-season and tried to trade for C Pierre-Luc Dubios using futures. The context there was the Ducks had established veterans on the team, not plugs.

This brings us to point 1. From 2018-19 TDL, Murray didn't add any significant talent. Although he did try to go after the very top-end talent in Faulk and PLD, Murray's other option was to not to use prospect or draft assets for middling talents. By essentially sitting on his hands, he was letting his youth get NHL burn and he lands better prospects because we had no NHL depth if injuries hit us. Result:

Ducks Draft picks​

2019: 9th overall = C Zegras​

2020: 6th overall = D Drysdale​

2021: 3rd overall = C McTavish​

Those three picks are going to be the pillars for the next Ducks hockey era. Murray went solely drafting when the option to acquire top talents didn't work out.

Verbeek doesn't need to use all his draft picks since Murray laid down the foundation, but Verbeek does have a specific rubric for his team of the future. One of Verbeek's rules is age factor and his youth core, imo, revolves around the ages of Zegras, Drysdale, and McTavish.

I have been advocating trying to trade for D Haydn Fluery or D Nicolas Hague as they would not be costly acquisitions and fit our youth core time line. Fluery could be had for a fifth rd or later pick or swap with Steel. Hague could be had in salary dump trade or offer sheet will cost the Ducks only a 2nd round b/c VGK can't afford to re-sign him with their current cap concerns.

Anyhow, why are you so adamant about NOT revealing your plan in detail that a poster asked of you? You pivot to project extremes of building through the draft to change the direction of the conversation? Just give the poster his answer instead of being afraid of criticism while criticizing everyone else.

...

To me "build through the draft" is even less articulated as there is generally even less clear cut strategy. We don't know where our picks are going to land from a year to year basis and have even less idea on who who be available.

You're projecting again on the organization's ability to have imagination and are constrained with trying to draft potential hockey players.

The Hockey News' 2022 Future Watch has a five year snapshot of farm team rankings.

Anaheim Ducks' 5-year farm team ranking (THN)

2018: 20th​

2019: 21st​

2020: 14th​

2021: 4th​

2022: 1st​

Anaheim's top-10 prospects:

1. C McTavish (2021, Rd 1)​

2. G Dostal (2018, Rd 3)​

3. LD/RD Zellweger (2021, Rd 2)​

4. RW Perreault (2020, Rd 1... 27th OA)​

5. RD Helleson (2019, Rd 2... acquired at 2021-22 TDL)​

6. LW Tracey (2019, Rd1... 29th OA)​

7. LD/RD LaCombe (2019, Rd 2)​

8. RW Pastujov (2021, Rd 3)​

9. LD Thrun (2019, Rd 4)​

10. RD Moore (2020, Rd 3)​

Not included in that list Zegras (2019, Rd 1... 9th OA) and Drysdale (2020, Rd 1... 6th OA). The other youth cores are Terry (2015, Rd 5) and Lundestrom (2018, Rd 1... 23rd OA).

How can a GM help himself build through the draft aside from great scouting? Adding more draft picks is a sound strategy b/c the draft is still a gamble. Murray added a second 1st round draft pick in 2019 and 2020, which both are part of the top-10 prospects above. Verbeek added a second 1st round pick and a second 2nd round draft pick for the 2022 draft. He also added two more second round picks in 2023.

Please note the many different rounds represented in the 2022 top-10 prospects on the #1 farm team for The Hockey News' Future Watch. Our best player on the NHL team today is a 5th round pick in Troy Terry.

Eventually, the goal is to have a team full of NHL talent, some talents developing in the AHL, and longer term prospects. When that happens, then Verbeek can start trading prospects and/or picks for top-end talents like Murray did to acquire Kesler.

Anyhow, here's a quote from Verbeek when he was hired by the Ducks:

"We studied successful teams, then we found our own way to do it," Verbeek said. "In Tampa, we were fortunate because we had [Steven] Stamkos and [Victor] Hedman, two major pieces we could build around. That was a big advantage. We wanted draft picks. We wanted to throw as many darts at the board as we could. Then we need to make sure players develop. Those go hand-in-hand if you're going to build a team that can win in the cap era."​

 

[WhatTheDuck]

I'm getting less sure the Avs are even gonna move EJ this offseason. He's obviously not worth the cap hit but they can't really use his money on long-term commitments anyway, they could probably only use it to bring in other rentals. Given how respected he is, their lack of assets already and the lack of RDs out there I wonder if they just don't bother and go into next season with him and Byram as their second pair.

Trade for the purpose of a buyout might still be on the table. While it would cost more in terms of assets, it would be win-win for the Avs in that it helps them bring back EJ and as much of the rest of the core as they can.

Acquiring team would end up paying a buyout of 2M x 2 years. EJ free to sign back in Colorado for his break even number of 2M, nothing lost or gained for him. Avs have an extra 4M to spend on keeping their forward group intact, without having to break up their D in order to do it.

As I write that I couldn't help but wonder if there's a rule against it.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Trade for the purpose of a buyout might still be on the table. While it would cost more in terms of assets, it would be win-win for the Avs in that it helps them bring back EJ and as much of the rest of the core as they can.

Acquiring team would end up paying a buyout of 2M x 2 years. EJ free to sign back in Colorado for his break even number of 2M, nothing lost or gained for him. Avs have an extra 4M to spend on keeping their forward group intact, without having to break up their D in order to do it.

As I write that I couldn't help but wonder if there's a rule against it.

I think there might be after the Avs helped the Caps do that with Orpik. But that's besides the point, I'm saying even the full $6 million isn't $6 million they can use to keep their core together long term, they probably need more than that just to sign MacKinnon and Byram, so maybe they feel there's no point in using assets just to free up that money for one year.

 

[rt]

Sorry for crashing. It’s the doldrums before the draft so I hope it’s okay to toss in a random conversation starter. Hopefully it’s not too annoying.

Gun to your head; you MUST trade one of the following for Jakob Chychrun:

Pick one:

A: Comtois+Zellweger+22nd
B: Comtois+Perreault+10th

^ I’m sure many of you would say neither. But I’m curious which package is least offensive.

And I’d you’re angry I’m here, blame 32 Thoughts. They resuscitated the Chychrun to Anaheim speculation on the last podcast.

 

[FiveHoleTickler]

Sorry for crashing. It’s the doldrums before the draft so I hope it’s okay to toss in a random conversation starter. Hopefully it’s not too annoying.

Gun to your head; you MUST trade one of the following for Jakob Chychrun:

Pick one:

A: Comtois+Zellweger+22nd
B: Comtois+Perreault+10th

^ I’m sure many of you would say neither. But I’m curious which package is least offensive.

And I’d you’re angry I’m here, blame 32 Thoughts. They resuscitated the Chychrun to Anaheim speculation on the last podcast.

Probably B. From a value perspective, the difference between Perreault & Zellweger is bigger than the difference between 22nd & 10th in my opinion.

Although it would make more sense for us to give up a dman if we're getting one.

I hope the gun isn't loaded.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Sorry for crashing. It’s the doldrums before the draft so I hope it’s okay to toss in a random conversation starter. Hopefully it’s not too annoying.

Gun to your head; you MUST trade one of the following for Jakob Chychrun:

Pick one:

A: Comtois+Zellweger+22nd
B: Comtois+Perreault+10th

^ I’m sure many of you would say neither. But I’m curious which package is least offensive.

And I’d you’re angry I’m here, blame 32 Thoughts. They resuscitated the Chychrun to Anaheim speculation on the last podcast.

By resuscitated, Marek just basically said "maybe they could try for Chychrun to replace Lindholm", just to keep the non-listeners from thinking there's a big actual rumor.

But I get what you're saying. For me, I think its the Perreault package but I dunno, that's a tough one. You're definitely right about it likely being neither, though.

 

[bsu]

Sorry for crashing. It’s the doldrums before the draft so I hope it’s okay to toss in a random conversation starter. Hopefully it’s not too annoying.

Gun to your head; you MUST trade one of the following for Jakob Chychrun:

Pick one:

A: Comtois+Zellweger+22nd
B: Comtois+Perreault+10th

^ I’m sure many of you would say neither. But I’m curious which package is least offensive.

And I’d you’re angry I’m here, blame 32 Thoughts. They resuscitated the Chychrun to Anaheim speculation on the last podcast.

I think that ship has sailed.

 

[rt]

By resuscitated, Marek just basically said "maybe they could try for Chychrun to replace Lindholm", just to keep the non-listeners from thinking there's a big actual rumor.

But I get what you're saying. For me, I think its the Perreault package but I dunno, that's a tough one. You're definitely right about it likely being neither, though.

Those two speculated about Chychrun to Anaheim an average of 1.5x/wk for at least 6wks. Haha. I just felt some dejavu when they did it again.

I think that ship has sailed.

The joker in you doesn’t want to trade a top ten pick for Chychrun and then give Forsberg 70 million dollars? C’mon… live a little … haha. J/k

 

[Duck Off]

Sorry for crashing. It’s the doldrums before the draft so I hope it’s okay to toss in a random conversation starter. Hopefully it’s not too annoying.

Gun to your head; you MUST trade one of the following for Jakob Chychrun:

Pick one:

A: Comtois+Zellweger+22nd
B: Comtois+Perreault+10th

^ I’m sure many of you would say neither. But I’m curious which package is least offensive.

And I’d you’re angry I’m here, blame 32 Thoughts. They resuscitated the Chychrun to Anaheim speculation on the last podcast.

No reason to apologize. It's a long off-season and we can only regurgitate the same convos over and over again until the draft so visiting (non troll posters like yourself) are always welcome.

Personally I do not see Verbeek doing either of those deals. However, if you're asking me which one I'd prefer, the answer is easily B for me. I'd push to replace Comtois with Milano though.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Those two speculated about Chychrun to Anaheim an average of 1.5x/wk for at least 6wks. Haha. I just felt some dejavu when they did it again.


The joker in you doesn’t want to trade a top ten pick for Chychrun and then give Forsberg 70 million dollars? C’mon… live a little … haha. J/k

It does make sense, it's a unique intersection of a surer thing of a major need along with the ability to afford to not only trade for him but pay him long term too, if that makes sense. Do I think they trade three assets like that? I'm not as sure, but it is fun to speculate.

 

[Gliff]

Sorry for crashing. It’s the doldrums before the draft so I hope it’s okay to toss in a random conversation starter. Hopefully it’s not too annoying.

Gun to your head; you MUST trade one of the following for Jakob Chychrun:

Pick one:

A: Comtois+Zellweger+22nd
B: Comtois+Perreault+10th

^ I’m sure many of you would say neither. But I’m curious which package is least offensive.

And I’d you’re angry I’m here, blame 32 Thoughts. They resuscitated the Chychrun to Anaheim speculation on the last podcast.

Neither, but I would say A. A probably has more value, but losing a top defensive prospect is less painful when it is for a guy like Chychrun.

Comtois+Perreault+22nd is where I would get onboard.

 

[tomd]

Semi-decent segment on Gibson on 32 Thoughts today. To summarize, he says Gibson wants to win but Elliotte figures it mostly boils down to whether they're on the way up, which he thinks Gibson can live with, or whether it's a 5 year rebuild and maybe he can't wait any longer. Marek also points out how between cap space and draft capital there's easily enough to start pushing towards contention.

The Gibson situation is really all in Verbeek's hands at this point. Only Verbeek knows his timeline for the team's rebuild. If it conflicts with Gibson's expectations of a quick rebuild (Doughty style) then obviously Verbeek has to move him this summer.

IMO, it's going to be a shame if we hold on to Gibson one year too long rather than moving him when his value is at its highest (which is now). Murray did the same thing with Manson and Rakell and most likely lost out on a pair of 1st rounders. If the Ducks have another bad year in 22-23 (which is almost guaranteed) then Gibson's value only falls further. Another .904 save percentage year could lower his value to the point where no team will offer anything meaningful and will expect significant retention if they do.

 

[FiveHoleTickler]

The Gibson situation is really all in Verbeek's hands at this point. Only Verbeek knows his timeline for the team's rebuild. If it conflicts with Gibson's expectations of a quick rebuild (Doughty style) then obviously Verbeek has to move him this summer.

IMO, it's going to be a shame if we hold on to Gibson one year too long rather than moving him when his value is at its highest (which is now). Murray did the same thing with Manson and Rakell and most likely lost out on a pair of 1st rounders. If the Ducks have another bad year in 22-23 (which is almost guaranteed) then Gibson's value only falls further. Another .904 save percentage year could lower his value to the point where no team will offer anything meaningful and will expect significant retention if they do.