Speculation: 2023-24 Roster Thread
- Thread starter Leonardo87
- Start date
- Status
True, but i'm also considering how he's been using Minty and Lacombe. Zegras is out at the end of games, etc (still wasn't happening with Eakins last year). there is some degree of a shift in attitude going on imo
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
A glance at Zegras's and JD's game logs shows that isn't true, as they both played in back to backs a few times. And Z was immediately the team leader in PP time. I didn't look at the others'. It may be that it happened here or there but like a lot of things about Eakins it's probably just more negative lore dreamed up in a fit of frustration.
Well it was definitely at least one back-to-back he sat him in. I had to do some digging and it was the March 12/13 b2b. For Jamie it was the March 28/29. Eakins even talks about how he did it to Regenda too because he was a rookie, even though he had scored 2 points the night before.This is false for both Zegras and Drysdale.
Jamie Drysdale Stats And News
Get all the latest stats, news, videos, and more on Jamie Drysdale.www.nhl.com
Trevor Zegras Stats And News
Get all the latest stats, news, videos, and more on Trevor Zegras.www.nhl.com
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Actually, Z and Drysdale (Mac too) were out late in games to start the season and we blew some games. The moment we shortened the bench and relied on our vets, we started on our 8-game winning streak. This is why Lindholm had a +0 rating and Drysdale a -26 rating, despite being defensive pairs.
I know the CTP guys complained about Z and Drysdale riding the pine at the end of close games b/c the CTP guys put players ahead of team wins b/c of "muh fauncy stahts". Maybe you got suckered into that type of thinking too.
- Sep 21, 2018
- 3,864
- 6,112
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
Absolutely he did that, and it’s a pretty routine thing to do to rookies when they’re struggling. It wasn’t remotely a regular thing though.
Yeah the past had made me think it was a regular thing. But it does seem like he was reluctant to play rookies on their first B2Bs, so I think my original point that he wouldn't have played Mintyukov in both games let alone put him on the PK/PP in game 2 still stands.
But it is a moot point regardless.
All Mighty
Registered User
The fact that it happened only once for each player, and both of them wound up 1 game short of a contract milestone makes me think it very well could’ve been a Murray decision rather than an Eakins decision.
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
Drysdale last night came off the ice at 16:45. Mintyukov had no shifts between 13:54 and 19:27 (when it was 6-3). LaCombe had 12 shifts in the 3rd, but LaCombe is significantly older and more experienced.
Drysdale as a rookie averaged 19:34, which is ahead of where Mintyukov (18:04) is, and just behind LaCombe (20:01).
Also, it’s been 2 games. The TOI and advanced stats are meaningless at this point. Drawing conclusions is premature, although I will 100% get behind thinking the kids look legit.
I could see it... Definitely tracks with the "rookies can't pick their number" philosophy, even though IIRC Murray probably inherited that thinking
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
You just admitted you were wrong, but then continued to believe you were correct and your point still stands. How do you reconcile those thoughts?
Pretty easily.
My argument was that Eakins wouldn't have played Mintyukov in a B2B because he never played rookies in B2B. I was wrong about him never playing rookies in B2B, although it appears that he didn't play rookies in their first B2Bs.
Considering this was Minty's first B2B, my argument (Eakins wouldn't have played him) still feels correct to me despite my initial premise (Eakins never played rookies in B2Bs) not being completely correct.
Let me know if you need me to type up a longer response about a hypothetical argument on a hockey forum!
CrazyDuck4u
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2006
- 6,982
- 4,030
Smirnov2Chistov
Fire Greg Cronin!
That's been the consensus around here for a while.
All these defensive prospects will naturally push a player like Fowler out.
Vaaks on the other hand is a tough say. The injuries he's had really messed with his development
branmuffin17
Registered User
Vaaks has always been closer to expendable. I think you (but you're not alone) are undervaluing what Fowler brings to the table, at least at this point. Vet presence with lots of experience, positive offensive metrics, controls puck well in his zone with regular clean exits. Been durable lately, with great endurance. Generally reliable if nothing else.
Regarding age, outside of Gudas, and I guess Lyubushkin if you want to count him, the experience of Cam playing in the NHL a long time (and doing generally quite well) is still worth something. I don't want to be labeled as one that values experience just for experience, and depending on the situation, I'm fine if they play a much younger roster, but I still think Cam is a player that the team values, and that we should value as well. A lot of people seem to be so quick to want to get rid of him...a guy that's added 42 and 48 points the last 2 seasons, and who has basically never had a top 2 D partner but has been asked to play as a top line player. Sure, he's got one of the highest contracts on the team, but that's not hurting the Ducks through the duration of his contract unless they decide to bite the bullet on signing a high cost free agent or two, or doing some kind of bigger trade for a big name / higher value D. But it still should make sense.
Right now, I don't know of anyone that is ready to take Cam's spot on the roster. No way on Vaaks. As excited as I am for Zell, he's not ready yet IMO. Same goes for Hinds. And I'm sorry, but replacing him with anyone else in the system (Hagg? White??) makes no sense.
So if we could figure out a trade for another, defensively/physically stronger D that's not too old, doesn't cost too much more, and doesn't cost us a pick or prospect we really don't want to get rid of right now, then sure. But not now, and probably not in the next year or two. Let the prospects develop.
Last edited:
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
Those are VERY different scenarios. You get that, right?
Not sure how the best* and worst Dman on the team have anything in common.
Vaks is already expendable. Fowler COULD be down the road but Minty alone isnt pushing him out.
Gudas Shouldnt be in a top 4 role, but he will be for now. Drysdale has to still earn it a bit but its likely he is a top 4. LaCombe's been great but hes got a ways before hes a top 4.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,703
- 18,067
Can’t forget that Zellweger looks absolutely dynamic in SD right now too. The ducks are going to have to find ice for him too at some point in the next year
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
You're going off of feeling as opposed to you being factually incorrect.
You're also excluding the roster makeup factor. On the left side, we have Fowler, LaCombe, Minty, and Vaaks. Vaaks hasn't looked good in preseason. Which means we're left with playing the rookies on a B2B because there isn't another talent to replace them. Even if Vaaks were rotated in, then at least one rookie would have played B2B.
But hey, keep on hating on Eakins for some unknown reason.
Reveille1984
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2014
- 955
- 586
Zellweger is fine in the AHL honestly. I also like the size on D that we currently have, Minty and LaCombe are both bigger dudes with at least somewhat of a physical edge to their games.
These things tend to sort themselves out anyways as the season goes on. Injuries happen, guys get banged up. I'm sure Olen will at least get a cup of coffee sometime this year.
These things tend to sort themselves out anyways as the season goes on. Injuries happen, guys get banged up. I'm sure Olen will at least get a cup of coffee sometime this year.
There is plenty of evidence that Eakins was a very bad coach. We don't need to manufacture any to help the case.
robbieboy3686
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 3,288
- 2,215
- Status
