I feel for the guy. Too early to say we won the trade? Cutter isn't lighting the world on fire but he certainly hasn't been bad.
Don't have a problem with Fabbro and wouldn't have been upset if they had put in a claim I just question why anyone would really feel like it was a missed opportunity when I don't think he's really a fit for our current roster for all the reasons I outlined. "He's a free asset" isn't a good enough of a reason for me, what the team would have to do to make a spot for him has to be factored in. It's a different conversation if this team is in a playoff spot and multiple D are going down with injuries and the team has the cap room to add some proven depth but elects to passThat's fair, wasn't sure if you had a problem with the player specifically or just with adding a lower quality asset in the broader sense.
I agree. This board consistently overrates our d-prospects.Sometimes you guys make it really hard to take this board seriously
No,not to early to say that we definitely won the trade and it isn’t close.I feel for the guy. Too early to say we won the trade? Cutter isn't lighting the world on fire but he certainly hasn't been bad.
This assumes that actually would have happened.I agree. This board consistently overrates our d-prospects.
Getting someone like Fabbro to play the tougher minutes and matchups as he has done in Nashville so that we can send some of the underperforming juniors down to the AHL or give them easier minutes would do wonders for their developement.
This assumes that actually would have happened.
Last year Verbeek signed Hägg and team media talked him up as a veteran defensive presence, only for Verbeek to send him to San Diego and let LaCombe get caved in on the top pairing night after night while Cronin was self-admittedly too hard on him. (For that matter, when it wasn't LaCombe it was every other rookie not named Mintyukov getting thrown into first pairing duties. IIRC there was a post somewhere else last season about Zellweger having the highest quality of competition rating of anyone on the team.)
People clowned on Hägg for asking why we bothered signing him, but considering LaCombe apparently had to do a whole offseason "having to learn to regain his confidence" journey or something, maybe he did have a point (just not in the way he thinks he did).
This year Verbeek re-signed Vaakanainen, who handled tough minutes pretty well last year (and not just with Gudas, he looked fine with Fowler in the second stint when Fowler was playing on the right). This year he spent the early part of the season sitting in the press box with whichever kid was out of the lineup because nobody was in San Diego, the dumbest possible way to handle that situation. Now that Luneau has gone down and Vaaks is playing, he's getting the fewest defensive minutes on the team and it's not even close. He played eleven minutes against CBJ. They were not the tough minutes.
If your intention is to shelter the kids from the tough minutes, you use those guys. And then, sure, maybe you pick up Fabbro. But that clearly isn't the development path Verbeek is pursuing here, lip service about overcooking prospects aside.
I'd already say Gauthier is a better player than Drysdale, and that's before taking into account that their developments are trending in opposite directionsI feel for the guy. Too early to say we won the trade? Cutter isn't lighting the world on fire but he certainly hasn't been bad.
Well unfortunately for Jamie drysdale being injured has been a theme, so you absolutely can put that at the forefront of comparison and a huge red flagIt’s kinda difficult to compare a d-man and a forward. Even more so when one has been hampered by injuries and the other is a forward with 15 games played.
I'd already say Gauthier is a better player than Drysdale, and that's before taking into account that their developments are trending in opposite directions
This is absolutely spot on. Now if only Stevens had the balls to ask Verbeek how this squares with the “over marinate” bullshit we were fed early on. But we all know that will never happen.This assumes that actually would have happened.
Last year Verbeek signed Hägg and team media talked him up as a veteran defensive presence, only for Verbeek to send him to San Diego and let LaCombe get caved in on the top pairing night after night while Cronin was self-admittedly too hard on him. (For that matter, when it wasn't LaCombe it was every other rookie not named Mintyukov getting thrown into first pairing duties. IIRC there was a post somewhere else last season about Zellweger having the highest quality of competition rating of anyone on the team.)
People clowned on Hägg for asking why we bothered signing him, but considering LaCombe apparently had to do a whole offseason "having to learn to regain his confidence" journey or something, maybe he did have a point (just not in the way he thinks he did).
This year Verbeek re-signed Vaakanainen, who handled tough minutes pretty well last year (and not just with Gudas, he looked fine with Fowler in the second stint when Fowler was playing on the right). This year he spent the early part of the season sitting in the press box with whichever kid was out of the lineup because nobody was in San Diego, the dumbest possible way to handle that situation. Now that Luneau has gone down and Vaaks is playing, he's getting the fewest defensive minutes on the team and it's not even close. He played eleven minutes against CBJ. They were not the tough minutes.
If your intention is to shelter the kids from the tough minutes, you use those guys. And then, sure, maybe you pick up Fabbro. But that clearly isn't the development path Verbeek is pursuing here, lip service about overcooking prospects aside.
Based on comments he’s made since then, my synthesis is that over marinating is just a preference, all things being equal, like having actual NHL depth. But we don't, so the kids get called up and just have to work through it at this level.This is absolutely spot on. Now if only Stevens had the balls to ask Verbeek how this squares with the “over marinate” bullshit we were fed early on. But we all know that will never happen.
I don't claim to have a clue as to what he's really thinking but it would seem as though intentionally continuing the tank is self defeating since your kids are continually not becoming what you need them to be. It's truly baffling to try and understand what's going on here.Based on comments he’s made since then, my synthesis is that over marinating is just a preference, all things being equal, like having actual NHL depth. But we don't, so the kids get called up and just have to work through it at this level.
Basically he’s willing to sacrifice his preferred method of development to keep the tank alive which seems kind of self-perpetuating to me. But what do I know, I’ve never worked with Steve Yzerman and I don’t even have a crew cut.
I bet you have a mullet insteadBased on comments he’s made since then, my synthesis is that over marinating is just a preference, all things being equal, like having actual NHL depth. But we don't, so the kids get called up and just have to work through it at this level.
Basically he’s willing to sacrifice his preferred method of development to keep the tank alive which seems kind of self-perpetuating to me. But what do I know, I’ve never worked with Steve Yzerman and I don’t even have a crew cut.
And my boss has a crew cut!I bet you have a mullet instead
I assume that they would trade for a goalie or pick one up as part of this deal, and that guy would get 35 - 40% of the starts. That goalie almost certainly won't be good, but he'd protect Dostal.If Gibby keeps playing like this would rather keep him so he can split the work load from Dostal. If they have a 1A and 1B they won’t get burnt out so quickly. If the offense can improve , maybe could have a decent season.
I mean support for Dostal is more important to me than a later Pick that may never see the NHL.
Not necessarily unfortunate for us.Anaheim Ducks' John Gibson set to return to TSN trade bait board, but interest levels unclear | TSN
Anaheim Ducks goaltender John Gibson has been a mainstay on the TSN Trade Bait board the past few seasons and it appears this year will be no different.www.tsn.ca
Mostly clickbait and speculation re: Gibby, but...
"LeBrun notes that the Colorado Avalanche and Carolina Hurricanes would appear to be obvious suitors, given their current goaltending situations. Unfortunately for the Ducks, he adds the Avalanche are not currently focused on upgrading the position and are keeping their options open to potentially add an impact player at the trade deadline."
Yeah that sounds more like unfortunate for Gibson. The idea of having a competent tandem sounds awesome for the ducksNot necessarily unfortunate for us.
I believe that Gibson will bounce back this year playing fewer games, so it honestly might benefit us and raise his trade value to have a full, strong season.