Confirmed with Link: [ANA/PHI] Cutter Gauthier for Jamie Drysdale and 2025 2nd round pick

Aug 11, 2011
28,968
24,024
Am Yisrael Chai
Regarding him floating, as much as I would love everyone on the team to have incredible work ethic, it doesn't really shock me that a guy who is playing his last NCAA games isn't giving it 100% every shift.

Not that many people are giving their all after they've put their two weeks notice in.
I wouldn't say it's not 100% effort so much as he takes some hopeful opportunities to fly the zone when he might do better to pick up his man. Not a big deal when you're playing Merrimack and like others have mentioned, his reputation in the D zone is pretty good. Maybe my impression will change once the games are more meaningful for him.
 

MMC

Global Moderator
May 11, 2014
51,193
43,211
Orange County, CA
You can shill all you want, but that asset mgmt wasn't great, especially for a GM resetting the rebuild.

Last time I checked, Verbeek was the GM in the 2022 draft. He did reset the rebuild in the 2021-22 TDL. It wasn't as if needing top-6 scoring wasn't a topic in the 2022 draft. Now, in the middle of the 2023-24 season, he realizes he needs top-6 scoring in his system.
Not shilling for anyone. Both this trade and the Gaucher pick could easily turn out to be misses. I just think it’s silly to act like subsequent transactions have any bearing on whether a pick in the 20s is a good one or not. Once you get to that point in the draft all a player really has to do to satisfy me is become an NHL player, expecting any more than that doesn’t make much sense. I also don’t at all think that selection and this trade have anything to do with each other anyways, PV liked Gauthier and saw an opportunity to acquire him and jumped on it. He clearly believes in his ceiling, which is far enough above the guys you constantly reference to where it doesn’t matter. No GM who is serious about winning is going to pass on acquiring a (potential) top line player they like because they have someone with top 6 potential in the system
 

Kalv

Slava Ukraini
Mar 29, 2009
24,133
12,066
Latvia
Wrong thread so I'll just say hey, happy to get Gauthier but also, it sets us back abbit in our rebuild, technically
 

mightyquack

eggplant and jade or bust
Apr 28, 2010
26,702
5,843


It appears that Torts has never seen EK shoot the puck.

I assume that he means the way he reads the play offensively. Although after the -3 maybe he meant both ways.

This will go down well for Drysdale when Philly fans realise that he doesn't really have anything in common with EK and get upset he's not a generational offensive defenceman.
 

Hockey Duckie

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
18,827
13,957
southern cal
Not shilling for anyone. Both this trade and the Gaucher pick could easily turn out to be misses. I just think it’s silly to act like subsequent transactions have any bearing on whether a pick in the 20s is a good one or not. Once you get to that point in the draft all a player really has to do to satisfy me is become an NHL player, expecting any more than that doesn’t make much sense. I also don’t at all think that selection and this trade have anything to do with each other anyways, PV liked Gauthier and saw an opportunity to acquire him and jumped on it. He clearly believes in his ceiling, which is far enough above the guys you constantly reference to where it doesn’t matter. No GM who is serious about winning is going to pass on acquiring a (potential) top line player they like because they have someone with top 6 potential in the system

Now you're adding icing on the shilling.

Your lack of knowledge of who's in the 20s is your lack of knowledge, that you're trying to pass off as the common standard with,
Once you get to that point in the draft all a player really has to do to satisfy me is become an NHL player, expecting any more than that doesn’t make much sense.

You're not in this conversation since you don't know shit about prospects in the 20s and don't care about shit if they make it, right? Don't know why you're upset when you don't care.

=================
Your wrote:
I also don’t at all think that selection and this trade have anything to do with each other anyways,

You are admitting the GM doesn't do any long term planning.

That's like saying Verbeek trading away d-men Lindholm and Manson has nothing to do with drafting three d-men in the top-53 picks in the ensuing NHL draft. Conflate that 2022 draft and then not drafting a d-man with six picks in the first 85 selections (1 - first round, 3 - second round, and 2 -third round picks) in the 2023 draft. Yeah... no way a GM ever has long term planning. It's all randomized events that a GM has no control over at all!

=================

Comparing the talent of Cutter to Snuggerud (or Kulich) is the diversion b/c it doesn't address the asset mgmt.

Asset Mgmt
  • Cutter Trade:
    • Lose top pairing RD Drysdale
    • Lose NHL RD Depth
    • Lose 2025 second round pick
  • Drafting Snuggerud at 22nd overall:
    • Lose potential 3C Gaucher

That's a lot of value lost.

====================
Comparing Cutter (5th overall) vs Snuggerud (23rd overall, one pick after the Ducks)

Cutter
YearSeasonLeagueGamesGAPtsppg
2021-22D+0USHL
22​
19​
9​
28​
1.27​
USNTDP
54​
34​
31​
65​
1.20​
WJC-18
6​
3​
6​
9​
1.50​
2022-23D+1NCAA
32​
16​
21​
37​
1.16​
WJC-20
7​
4​
6​
10​
1.43​
WC
10​
7​
2​
9​
0.90​
2023-24D+2NCAA
21​
17​
13​
30​
1.43​
WJC-20
7​
2​
10​
12​
1.71​


Snuggerud
YearSeasonLeagueGamesGAPtsppg
2021-22D+0USHL
26​
6​
20​
26​
1.00​
USNTDP
59​
24​
39​
63​
1.07​
WJC-18
6​
3​
4​
7​
1.17​
2022-23D+1NCAA
40​
21​
29​
50​
1.25​
WJC-20
7​
5​
8​
13​
1.86​
2023-24D+2NCAA
24​
18​
7​
25​
1.04​
WJC-20
6​
5​
3​
8​
1.33​

At the time of the draft, Snuggerud's skating was in question. It did improve from his D-1 to D+0 season. Cutter's skating was far better than Snuggerud's at the time of the draft.

Verbeek only cited needing a top-6 scorer, he didn't say a need for a top-line scorer. Using what Verbeek said, hey, Snuggerud fits that bill.

=============

Again, I'm ecstatic to have Cutter here. We can't change the past. He's a Ducks and I'll support him.

What I can criticize is the asset mgmt. It wasn't as if I did not question the selection of Gaucher over Snuggerud (or Kulich) at the time of the draft; I did question it. Still, I support Gaucher then and now. Verbeek admitted he doesn't have a top-6 scorer in his system, which is why the Cutter trade happened. Verbeek admitted that shit, not me. I'm pointing out why we didn't have one b/c logic exists.

But you can keep on shilling, rationalizing, and redefining what you think things should be. I'll stick to doing my research, pointing things out, and be in the minority of things while being proven correct on most things without shilling, rationalizing, or redefining things to revolved around yourself.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: MMC

MMC

Global Moderator
May 11, 2014
51,193
43,211
Orange County, CA
Now you're adding icing on the shilling.

Your lack of knowledge of who's in the 20s is your lack of knowledge, that you're trying to pass off as the common standard with,


You're not in this conversation since you don't know shit about prospects in the 20s and don't care about shit if they make it, right? Don't know why you're upset when you don't care.

=================
Your wrote:


You are admitting the GM doesn't do any long term planning.

That's like saying Verbeek trading away d-men Lindholm and Manson has nothing to do with drafting three d-men in the top-53 picks in the ensuing NHL draft. Conflate that 2022 draft and then not drafting a d-man with six picks in the first 85 selections (1 - first round, 3 - second round, and 2 -third round picks) in the 2023 draft. Yeah... no way a GM ever has long term planning. It's all randomized events that a GM has no control over at all!

=================

Comparing the talent of Cutter to Snuggerud (or Kulich) is the diversion b/c it doesn't address the asset mgmt.

Asset Mgmt
  • Cutter Trade:
    • Lose top pairing RD Drysdale
    • Lose NHL RD Depth
    • Lose 2025 second round pick
  • Drafting Snuggerud at 22nd overall:
    • Lose potential 3C Gaucher

That's a lot of value lost.

====================
Comparing Cutter (5th overall) vs Snuggerud (23rd overall, one pick after the Ducks)

Cutter
YearSeasonLeagueGamesGAPtsppg
2021-22D+0USHL
22​
19​
9​
28​
1.27​
USNTDP
54​
34​
31​
65​
1.20​
WJC-18
6​
3​
6​
9​
1.50​
2022-23D+1NCAA
32​
16​
21​
37​
1.16​
WJC-20
7​
4​
6​
10​
1.43​
WC
10​
7​
2​
9​
0.90​
2023-24D+2NCAA
21​
17​
13​
30​
1.43​
WJC-20
7​
2​
10​
12​
1.71​


Snuggerud
YearSeasonLeagueGamesGAPtsppg
2021-22D+0USHL
26​
6​
20​
26​
1.00​
USNTDP
59​
24​
39​
63​
1.07​
WJC-18
6​
3​
4​
7​
1.17​
2022-23D+1NCAA
40​
21​
29​
50​
1.25​
WJC-20
7​
5​
8​
13​
1.86​
2023-24D+2NCAA
24​
18​
7​
25​
1.04​
WJC-20
6​
5​
3​
8​
1.33​

At the time of the draft, Snuggerud's skating was in question. It did improve from his D-1 to D+0 season. Cutter's skating was far better than Snuggerud's at the time of the draft.

Verbeek only cited needing a top-6 scorer, he didn't say a need for a top-line scorer. Using what Verbeek said, hey, Snuggerud fits that bill.

=============

Again, I'm ecstatic to have Cutter here. We can't change the past. He's a Ducks and I'll support him.

What I can criticize is the asset mgmt. It wasn't as if I did not question the selection of Gaucher over Snuggerud (or Kulich) at the time of the draft; I did question it. Still, I support Gaucher then and now. Verbeek admitted he doesn't have a top-6 scorer in his system, which is why the Cutter trade happened. Verbeek admitted that shit, not me. I'm pointing out why we didn't have one b/c logic exists.

But you can keep on shilling, rationalizing, and redefining what you think things should be. I'll stick to doing my research, pointing things out, and be in the minority of things while being proven correct on most things without shilling, rationalizing, or redefining things to revolved around yourself.
Lmao. Sure, we’ll go with all of that. I don’t know shit about the prospects available in the 20s of each draft, nor do I care if they make it or not. Verbeek has no long term plan for this team and your understanding of opportunity cost is spot on. If only we had taken Snuggerud we wouldn’t have been forced into making this trade.
 

Deuce22

Registered User
Jun 17, 2013
5,892
8,291
SoCal & Idaho
Now you're adding icing on the shilling.

Your lack of knowledge of who's in the 20s is your lack of knowledge, that you're trying to pass off as the common standard with,


You're not in this conversation since you don't know shit about prospects in the 20s and don't care about shit if they make it, right? Don't know why you're upset when you don't care.

=================
Your wrote:


You are admitting the GM doesn't do any long term planning.

That's like saying Verbeek trading away d-men Lindholm and Manson has nothing to do with drafting three d-men in the top-53 picks in the ensuing NHL draft. Conflate that 2022 draft and then not drafting a d-man with six picks in the first 85 selections (1 - first round, 3 - second round, and 2 -third round picks) in the 2023 draft. Yeah... no way a GM ever has long term planning. It's all randomized events that a GM has no control over at all!

=================

Comparing the talent of Cutter to Snuggerud (or Kulich) is the diversion b/c it doesn't address the asset mgmt.

Asset Mgmt
  • Cutter Trade:
    • Lose top pairing RD Drysdale
    • Lose NHL RD Depth
    • Lose 2025 second round pick
  • Drafting Snuggerud at 22nd overall:
    • Lose potential 3C Gaucher

That's a lot of value lost.

====================
Comparing Cutter (5th overall) vs Snuggerud (23rd overall, one pick after the Ducks)

Cutter
YearSeasonLeagueGamesGAPtsppg
2021-22D+0USHL
22​
19​
9​
28​
1.27​
USNTDP
54​
34​
31​
65​
1.20​
WJC-18
6​
3​
6​
9​
1.50​
2022-23D+1NCAA
32​
16​
21​
37​
1.16​
WJC-20
7​
4​
6​
10​
1.43​
WC
10​
7​
2​
9​
0.90​
2023-24D+2NCAA
21​
17​
13​
30​
1.43​
WJC-20
7​
2​
10​
12​
1.71​


Snuggerud
YearSeasonLeagueGamesGAPtsppg
2021-22D+0USHL
26​
6​
20​
26​
1.00​
USNTDP
59​
24​
39​
63​
1.07​
WJC-18
6​
3​
4​
7​
1.17​
2022-23D+1NCAA
40​
21​
29​
50​
1.25​
WJC-20
7​
5​
8​
13​
1.86​
2023-24D+2NCAA
24​
18​
7​
25​
1.04​
WJC-20
6​
5​
3​
8​
1.33​

At the time of the draft, Snuggerud's skating was in question. It did improve from his D-1 to D+0 season. Cutter's skating was far better than Snuggerud's at the time of the draft.

Verbeek only cited needing a top-6 scorer, he didn't say a need for a top-line scorer. Using what Verbeek said, hey, Snuggerud fits that bill.

=============

Again, I'm ecstatic to have Cutter here. We can't change the past. He's a Ducks and I'll support him.

What I can criticize is the asset mgmt. It wasn't as if I did not question the selection of Gaucher over Snuggerud (or Kulich) at the time of the draft; I did question it. Still, I support Gaucher then and now. Verbeek admitted he doesn't have a top-6 scorer in his system, which is why the Cutter trade happened. Verbeek admitted that shit, not me. I'm pointing out why we didn't have one b/c logic exists.

But you can keep on shilling, rationalizing, and redefining what you think things should be. I'll stick to doing my research, pointing things out, and be in the minority of things while being proven correct on most things without shilling, rationalizing, or redefining things to revolved around yourself.
Assuming that if Snuggerud was drafted, the Drysdale/Gauthier trade wouldn’t have happened is pure speculation. Verbeek saying we needed a top 6 scorer means nothing. Snuggerud making Gauthier unnecessary is more guesswork.
 

FiveTacos

Registered User
Oct 2, 2017
1,007
1,788
The Twilight Zone
The idea that any GM would not be interested in a prospect like Gauthier because of having a prospect like Snuggerud is insane. Even if we had Snuggerud AND Gauthier I'd still be looking for more, because neither is proven. Last I checked you need more than just one winger who can shoot.

This team is in the running for the top pick. We're not in position to be overlooking talent of any kind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kalv

FiveTacos

Registered User
Oct 2, 2017
1,007
1,788
The Twilight Zone
The more i see the name Snuggerud, the more im convinced its not a real name.

But imagine the endorsement opportunities!

default-large.jpg
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad