WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
The Flames PBP guy took note of Lacombe last night, said he's an impressive young Dman who seems to fly under the radar, or something to that effect.
Speculation: 2023-24 Roster Thread
- Thread starter Leonardo87
- Start date
- Status
The Flames PBP guy took note of Lacombe last night, said he's an impressive young Dman who seems to fly under the radar, or something to that effect.
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
Hard to say that any first year player has taken a step because there's nothing to compare it to. I think, on this team, Vaaks and Leason are really the only young-ish guys who could be said to legitimately look better this year as compared to last year. Given both of those guys are 25, it's not great evidence for this being a good developmental environment.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,760
- 39,701
I think all of the young dmen have looked fine.
Most young dmen struggle their 1st season, while be putting in much better situations to succeed.
We put them in a system that doesn’t seem great, with a roster that lacks support.
But overall I think they have performed well given the situation. Mintyukov has shown flashes of being a top pair upside. Zellweger looks like he can be a legit 2nd pair guy.
I know lacombe gets criticized a lot, but he’s been the player put in the worst situation to succeed this season. Vaaks has been solid throughout the year, maybe our most consistent dmen.
Throw 6.5x 6 at Roy and run
Mintyukov Roy
Fowler luneau
Zellweger gudas
- or trade fowler and put lacombe and luneau as 3rd pair
Most young dmen struggle their 1st season, while be putting in much better situations to succeed.
We put them in a system that doesn’t seem great, with a roster that lacks support.
But overall I think they have performed well given the situation. Mintyukov has shown flashes of being a top pair upside. Zellweger looks like he can be a legit 2nd pair guy.
I know lacombe gets criticized a lot, but he’s been the player put in the worst situation to succeed this season. Vaaks has been solid throughout the year, maybe our most consistent dmen.
Throw 6.5x 6 at Roy and run
Mintyukov Roy
Fowler luneau
Zellweger gudas
- or trade fowler and put lacombe and luneau as 3rd pair
I think Roy would be a good add as well but 6 years? The guy is 29 right now. I'm not sure Roy at 6.5 when he's 34 & 35 is what the Ducks need. I would go 3-4 years max.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,760
- 39,701
I doubt he signs for 3-4 years…. I’d imagine 5 min. And I imagine he’ll want 7 x5…. Maybe he’ll go 5-6 for extra years /shrug
We signed gudas af 32-35, essentially same time frame… this lines up 29-35.
By the end of the contract, he won’t be needing to do nearly as much…. I’m fine with 5-6 years
Maybe we get lucky and he wants to stay in socal and willing take less years or money to stay. Not exactly a lot of dmen that can do what he can available for us to choose from…. And we don’t exactly have any coming
What do the forums think about bringing back the following players?
1.) Leason
2.) Lindstrom
3.) Vaaks
I honestly wouldn't mind if all three were brought back. I think, in particular, Lindstrom has been extremely effective. I think also both Leason and Vaaks have improved this season.
1.) Leason
2.) Lindstrom
3.) Vaaks
I honestly wouldn't mind if all three were brought back. I think, in particular, Lindstrom has been extremely effective. I think also both Leason and Vaaks have improved this season.
GreatBear
Registered User
I would bring them all back. Vaaks has been fine, and Lindstrom has been a pleasant surprise, with the added benefit that he is right handed. I keep going back and forth on Leason, but he brings something to the table and he is cheap. I just wish that he would consistently bring his "A" game.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,760
- 39,701
Leason = 100%
Lindstrom = 75% depends on what other moves happen, luneaus health etc…. If we get a Roy/pesce type I still think he’s a good option as a 7.
-Vaaks is a tough 1, maybe 50%
Fowler Mintyukov zellweger lacombe…. Hinds prob in line for a cup of coffee at some point in the season. Then you also potentially have lagesson(another RFA) who brings a different game that might be more appealing as a depth guy.
I’d throw Lundy and Jones on this too
Jones = 20%, too injury prone, doesn’t do enough when he’s in the line up, can be replaced
Lundy =75% was hoping he could be a 3rd line center long term , but starting to seem like that won’t pan out…. Could come back as a 4th c or bottom 6 winger, but may be someone that needs a change of scenery
Jones I could take it or leave it...wouldn't mind a 1 year "show me" deal and also wouldn't mind if the Ducks moved on.
Lundy I would bring back for one more season. He's a good defensive forward with a bit of offensive flare. Would like to see what he can do with a season free from injury.
Lags I like what I've seen from him, but as you identified, we have a bit of a logjam here. He'd be a nice guy to have as a call-up option/7th d-man.
Sean Garrity
Quack Quack Quack!
I thought Leason had a real good season, but for some reason seemingly would find himself in the doghouse. Lindstrom and Vaaks I'm meh about, Lacombe's flexibility might mean we only keep 2 out of those 3.
True, with LaCombe, Lags, Lindstrom, and Vaaks (in addition to our young D-men like Luneau, Hinds, Zelly etc), there def is a logjam. Likely someone doesn't make the cut.
I didn't include LaCombe as re-sign since I think it's clear the Ducks need to re-sign him (especially with his RFA status as you said).
I also didn't realize Lindstrom was a plus 9 and Vaaks is a -2...on this team that's really good lol.
1. Leason: On a team with more top-6 two-way forwards, I would bring him back as a 4th line winger. He's got speed, he's improved on the forecheck, and he has occasional finishing ability. But he doesn't bring any real physicality, and, more importantly for me, he's not a good defensive guy. I know that ideally you have the puck all the time, but that's not reality, and this team needs a few forwards with good defensive abilities. They don't have many in the top-6, so they need some in the bottom-6, and Leason isn't that guy.
The short answer: I don't think the team can afford to have both Leason and Jones on the roster next season. I'm more of a Jones guy because Jones has some grit to him, although I recognize that he can't stay healthy, so maybe I need to re-think that. If Jones stays, Leason goes. If Leason stays, Jones goes.
2. Lindstrom: He's been fine as a stopgap while Gudas is out, but he's certainly not any better than Gudas, and Gudas should be our 3rd pairing RD next year. As we saw this season, Gudas' effectiveness drops dramatically once you start getting his minutes up past the 19 or 20 mark. He's perfect as an 18-minute, 3rd pairing d-man and PKer. So if that's Gudas, where does Lindstrom slot in? I don't think we want him on the 1st or 2nd pairing. So we would only keep him around as a 7th d-man, which brings us to:
3. Vaakanainen: I actually like his game the best of these three. He's got very little offensive ability to speak of, but he's been remarkably solid in the defensive zone. I like him a lot as a 3rd pairing LD or a 7th d-man. But whether to keep him depends on what you think about Lindstrom and LaCombe.
I think our locks for defense next season are: Fowler, Gudas, Mintyukov, Zellweger. If the Ducks don't sign anyone, that leaves room to keep all of LaCombe, Vaakanainen, and Lindstrom, since I would guess the Ducks want to slow-play it with Luneau a bit, and there will always be injuries.
However, I would love the Ducks to sign a guy like Pesce or Roy to take some tough RD minutes. If they do that, it means one of those three (LaCombe, Vaaks, Lindstrom) have to go. Handedness is a factor, but not enough of one for me. I send Lindstrom packing because I think LaCombe is slightly better now and still has upside.
Just a few stats to back up my choice of Vaakanainen over Lindstrom: both have been in the top half of Ducks' defensemen in defensive statistics (Shot Attempts per 60 minutes, Shots/60, Scoring Chances/60, Expected Goals Against/60, etc.).
Vaakanainen is better than Lindstrom in all of these categories. Not by a ton, usually, but he is better. In xGA/60, for example, Vaaks is at 2.33 and Lindstrom is at 2.64. For context, Gudas is the best on the team at 2.27 and Lyubushkin was the worst at 3.05 (Drysdale and Luneau were worse, but in much smaller sample sizes). The other thing I notice is that Lindstrom starts in the D-zone 6.81 times per 60 versus 8.41 for Vaakanainen, so Vaaks seems to be trusted more in the defensive zone.
Lindstrom has been fine, but I think I'd rather keep LaCombe and Vaakainen over him if the Ducks bring in outside help.
Vaakanainen is better than Lindstrom in all of these categories. Not by a ton, usually, but he is better. In xGA/60, for example, Vaaks is at 2.33 and Lindstrom is at 2.64. For context, Gudas is the best on the team at 2.27 and Lyubushkin was the worst at 3.05 (Drysdale and Luneau were worse, but in much smaller sample sizes). The other thing I notice is that Lindstrom starts in the D-zone 6.81 times per 60 versus 8.41 for Vaakanainen, so Vaaks seems to be trusted more in the defensive zone.
Lindstrom has been fine, but I think I'd rather keep LaCombe and Vaakainen over him if the Ducks bring in outside help.
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
2 thoughts.
Vaakanainen plays on the left, and is bad on the right. Lindstrom plays on the right.
Vaakanainen has spent most of the season stapled to Gudas, Lindstrom hasn’t had anywhere near that good of a partner. Defensive metrics very much involve the pairing rather than just the player.
robbieboy3686
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 3,331
- 2,243
Lindstrom plays a surprisingly physical game. And it seems natural to him. Where as, leason tried to play physical and it doesn’t suit him at all.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,760
- 39,701
I think if the question is who do you keep between lindstrom and Vaaks…. I’d prob say lindstrom
I’ll keep Vaaks over fowler tho ^.^
robbieboy3686
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 3,331
- 2,243
I would be shocked if Jones was resigned. Shocked. He gets injured to much and that’s a big no for our gm
Vaaks over fowler for sure
robbieboy3686
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 3,331
- 2,243
Lacombe is the perfect dman to get traded as part of a package for a top 6 rh wing. He has more value than vaaks or Lindstrom while not being ahead of minty, zell or fowler in our system on the left side. Not to mention luneau and whoever we pick on D with our first pick this year ( assuming we don’t get celebrini)
That's fair, but again, there's nowhere for Lindstrom to play on the right. Gudas is our RD3. If Gudas or Lindstrom are our RD2, we're in trouble. So then it comes down to whether we want a righty or lefty as the 7th d-man.
From the eye test, Vaakanainen seems to play a better positional game than Lindstrom. Lindstrom seems to have better skills in the offensive zone, but he's not good enough to complete many plays. I'd rather just have Vaaks back there playing good defense.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,760
- 39,701
I don’t think any of the 3 have a ton of value to get that RH winger…. But I guess if any team wants any of the 3 as part of a trade I’d comfortably move Vaaks/lidstrom before I’d move lacombe
robbieboy3686
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 3,331
- 2,243
Lacombe is the youngest of the 3 by a couple years right? Hence more value, more pedigree and it was his first true year in the nhl. Have to give to get, lacombe + oilers 1st for a necas type, along those lines is what I’m thinking. I would love to cash in on sending lacombe out of town. He looks solid at times. but that’s also against 2-3 absolutely without fail egregious turnovers each game that lead to grade A scoring chances. With a bone headed penalty every other game too. The egregious turnovers was also something I remember vattenen being plagued by. These old school Murray verbeek guys don’t like that, we already have minty zell and luneau for offense from the back end. Lacombes spot should be more about being dependable and steady, more than “ he shows offense talent” imho
Last edited:
Agreed on Leason and Lindstrom 100%. If it's Vaaks or Lagesson, I'd rather have Lagesson in a landslide.
Keep Lundy as 4c, drop Jones.
Deuce22
Registered User
Keep all 3. Leason has produced despite playing with horrible linemates. He has some offensive upside. Vaaks is serviceable, trade Fowler. Lindstrom is a perfect 6-7 guy-break glass in case of injury.
- Status
