Rasp
Registered User
- Apr 9, 2019
- 1,399
- 2,065
This is a serious issue that needs to be fixed.
Speculation: 2024-25 Coaching/Management/Ownership
- Thread starter MMC
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
2faded
Registered User
True but as good as he has been recently, he has only been playing like a top pairing D for a short amount of time. Not enough time to earn a top pairing contract and the agent should know that too. An 8 year deal at a reasonable price may make sense for LaCombe to accept.
Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
Terry Yake
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2013
- 29,261
- 18,082
that, high taxes, smallest market, somewhat isolated
will guys in their 20s making $$$ want to live and play in LA, NYC, FL, vegas, or winnipeg?
As long as possible. Especially with the cap rising, pay players who clearly deserve the contract. Prices always go up for good players, and LaCombe just keeps getting better. Another incredible defenseman pick by Madden.
Masch78
Registered User
- Oct 5, 2017
- 2,554
- 1,717
Tbh this was a high risk, high reward pick because he was transformed to a D shortly before the draft. I wish we would do this more often instead of going with the low risk picks.
FlyingV09
Registered User
For me, it’s too short of a sample size to hand LaCombe a hefty contract. I look at how Edmonton handled Nurse. They handed him a huge contract after a career year when they could have waited and signed him for much cheaper. Now they have that anchor contract on their blueline for the next however many years.
I’m all for locking up core pieces but I need to see more for longer with LaCombe. Let’s see if he can sustain his level of play for more than 30 games.
I’m all for locking up core pieces but I need to see more for longer with LaCombe. Let’s see if he can sustain his level of play for more than 30 games.
That comment “They have a lot of decent skill that they should be a good team , but they are not”
Really hits the nail on the head.
Really hits the nail on the head.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
LaCombe has played top pairing D last year and this year. We can see the vast improvement between the two seasons. He actually shown improvement as a top-4D as the season went and closed out last year as our best all around youth d-man as proof his ascension was not a fluke.
LaCombe is in the first year of a two-year contract. He's making under a million AAV. I believe he's eligible for an extension in the summer. For the org's perspective, try to sign him this summer to a long contract at a decent price. For LaCombe's camp, his agent will probably pass on a decent AVV on a long contract and gamble on being even a better player in year 2 of his current contract. Then that will boost his price even more along with the second bump in the cap going into 2026-27.
The question for the Ducks is, "How much ceiling is left for LaCombe and the probability he'll get there next year?" That's gonna be a pretty penny.
Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
That succinctly sums up all the consternation expressed on this board.
ZegrassyKnoll
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2016
- 1,132
- 1,968
Last game the commentators were mentioning how our power play is so static and they want to see some interchanging of players.
It's wild how it feels like everybody outside of the org can see the problems so clearly.
They are wasting talent of Z, Leo, Mac, Terry, Cutter …. The list goes on.
Ducks are 2nd to dead last on the PP with a 12.2% . Just sad
Bedard is a train wreck at ES, Yes Leo is better than him at ES. He is a PP merchant with 21 points on there. 21 F’ing Points??? Ducks as a team have 17 PP goals on the season!! It’s F’ing ridiculous how much production the Ducks are missing because of a horrible PP.
I agree with this, but I’m worried Pats gonna look at the record and think they’ve improved.
It might be just me but I feel like there are other areas where the players and staff feel they’ve improved but don’t really show up in the stats: playing with more structure, responsibility etc. It’s pretty intangible but I think it’s a legitimate factor. It’s why I think it’s far from certain Cronin goes anywhere this offseason. I mean we’re just complete outsiders, but that room looks pretty damn happy after wins.
It’s goaltending dude that is keeping them in games and I’m happy Gibby and Dostal have been so good. A lot of teams wish for solid goaltending. But it’s going to catch up to them when they can’t score goals.
ZegrassyKnoll
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2016
- 1,132
- 1,968
I do get the vibe that they are trying to improve specific things right now and not necessarily the performance as a whole, like you said. I just wish we knew what those things were haha.
The commentators mentioned that Cronin was caught off guard by how little practice time you get in the NHL, so that might be a factor as well.
I was never a big crowd/party person in my 20s, but for most players I get it not wanting to be there. To have the #1 answer be so obvious was super hilarious to me.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
LaCombe transitioned to D two years before his draft. As an OFD, LaCombe has showed the knack for scoring over a two-year period. The risk was drafting an OFD out of high school instead of the CHL, USNTDP, or Europe. Central Scouting's Final NA ranking for 2019 had LaCombe as the second highest high school product at 36th, with the first being ranked 35th in John Farinacci.
For perspective, here are other notables in the 2019 Final NA rankings:
21. LW Tracey
36. LD LaCombe
38. LD Alex Vlasic
39. LD Thrun
What made LaCombe less of a gamble was going to the NCAA route to learn how to play defense after high school.
I noticed that under Murray's latter defensive draft picks from Rd 1 - 3, the commonality was being a fast and smooth skater: 2019 Rd 2, LD LaCombe; 2020 Rd 1 RD Drysdale; 2020 Rd 3, RD Moore, and 2021 Rd 2, LD Zellweger. Height wasn't factor because Drysdale and Zell are sub-6'.
Big Offensive Risks and the NCAA
Murray's last three drafts showed he was swinging for the fences outside the top-10 picks. Murray didn't exclude NCAA bound players at the top of the draft. He drafted five prospects NCAA bound in the first three rounds of the 2019-21 draft. 4th rounder Thrun helped land a 2024 3rd round pick, which turned out to be RW Massé.
2019
Rd 1, 9. C Zegras (NCAA bound)
Rd 1. 29. LW Tracey (WHL)
Rd 2. 39. LD LaCombe (NCAA bound)
Rd 4. 101. LD Thrun (NCAA bound)
2020
Rd 1, 6. RD Drysdale (OHL)
Rd 1. 27. RW Perreault (OHL)
Rd 2, 36. RW Colangelo (NCAA bound)
Rd 3, 67. RD Moore (USHL and NCAA bound)
2021
Rd 1, 3. C McTavish (OHL)
Rd 2. 34. LD Zell (WHL)
Rd 3, 66. RW Pastujov (NCAA bound, but switched to OHL after the draft)
Rd 3, 76. LD Hinds (QMJHL)
Under Verbeek, the NCAA has been hands off in the top of the draft. Excluding a big part of draft pool isn't great for org for two reasons: 1) missing out on talent and 2) longer control of prospect rights. If you draft a CHL prospect, then the org has their rights for only two seasons to be signed. In our AHL today, there is a large contingent of prospects and more to come next season. The NCAA prospects can take four or five years max to develop, but you also have to worry about them going the UFA route at the end of that term. Still, if prospects are respectful, then they'll tell the org they are going the UFA route so the org can recoup some asset(s). That's what Thrun did with the Ducks.
2022
Rd 5, 154. RW Callow (NCAA bound, Harvard)
2023
none
2024
Rd 6, 182. RW Burnevik (NCAA bound, St. Cloud State)
Verbeek's Defensive-minded high-level picks
For two drafts (2022-23), Verbeek invested in shutdown forwards with some offense in the late 1st or early 2nd round. That feels very counterintuitive since you can probably find shutdown only forwards later in the draft because offensive forwards are difficult to find. I think Verbeek drafted Gaucher and Myatovic as culture changing selections. Players drafted after Gaucher: RW Snuggerud (6'2/187lbs, NCAA bound) and C Jiri Kulich (6'0/172 lbs, CZE). Snuggerud was NCAA bound and that's a no-no for Verbeek. Kulich wasn't tall enough, also a no-no for Verbeek.
Last draft, 2024, Verbeek finally went away with two factors: a) defensive-minded forwards at the bottom of the 1st or early 2nd round and b) a height limit to be drafted. Verbeek drafted 5'11 Lucas Pettersson from Sweden. He might be a longer burn prospect as an April birthdate and needing to put on more mass to his frame. And another factor about Pettersson is that we control his rights for the next four seasons, with a must-sign-by date of June 1, 2028. There is no need to rush Pettersson or put him on a "load mgmt" program. Just draft and stash. There is also a possibility that Pettersson can play in the CHL next season to adapt to NA ice and style of play, but still hold the must-sign-by date of June 1, 2028.
Seeing Gaucher and Myatovic struggle offensively at the AHL level as shutdown d-men doesn't bode well for them at the NHL level. We make fun of Lundy not having any offense at the NHL level, but it's possible it could be worse with these shutdown d-men.
Pettersson is currently on a 2nd tier Sweden men's team that is a bottom-2 team in the league. He is their best scorer and doing it in half the games played for the team!
KelVarnsen
Registered User
I disagree they are playing with more structure than in the past. Team still gets lost in the d zone after a couple of cycles allowing high danger chances. Difference is this year, the goalies are making huge saves. Also, the team seems super disjointed on breakouts most of the time because everyone is all over the place after being turned around on defense. If the other team even pressures the Ducks in the slightest when the Ducks do recover a puck in their d-zone, the team crumbles and loses the puck way more than they should. I chalk this up to a lack of structure because when the pressure is increased, the team doesn't seem to know where to go or where their teammates are supposed to be.
I guess it is easy to look like you have "structure" while on the PP when 5 players stay in their own 4-foot box and don't move.
Goaltending is the reason Ducks aren't even lower than they are IMO. Not better structure.
there could be just a belief amongst the team that they are though or that they have the recipe now and it’s a “matter of executing which will happen.”
Did anyone catch Cronin being asked last week I think about what the difference has been of late and why they’ve had more confidence/connectivity. His response was that players have finally “bought in.” We gotta consider this stuff as playing a big role, i think it’s hugely possible Pat is seeing something entirely different.
Last edited:
I do think they're playing with more structure in the defensive zone. They're still not great at it, but they're better than last year. Their breakouts are also markedly better than in past years, although still not good. I just think the structure they're being asked to play is suboptimal. It especially hinders their ability to break a forecheck. A man-to-man means that when the puck turns over, no one is open. In a zone, theoretically there are players in open space who can now receive a pass and effect a breakout. In a man-to-man, there need to be individuals who can make plays to break free of forecheckers and the Ducks young guys aren't there yet. They're being asked to play conservatively.
From the eye test, it seems to me that most of their regression is on giving up rush chances at alarming rates. Their goalies are bailing them out on those, no doubt.
