Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,231
- 13,287
And Klingberg m and Drysdale and physically we are set lol.
Confirmed with Link: Ducks acquire Dmitry Kulikov from the Wild for future considerations
- 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
And Klingberg m and Drysdale and physically we are set lol.
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,231
- 13,287
They’re nowhere close to the bottom. We have definitely got enough fire power up front to squeeze a lot of goals out of our lineup.
Verbeek is doing an excellent job, in my opinion. So weird to have a GM making intelligent moves.
He should but will he?
He averaged around 30 sec for us IIRC when we had an already depleted blueline
Refresh my memory - who the hell is colton white and where did he come from?
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,231
- 13,287
He's a random depth dman we signed in the offseason who played about 1/3 of a season for NJ last season. He plays a stay at home game. Definition of an NHL/AHL tweener. Kind of like Benoit and Mahura.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 24,190
- 19,152
Everything he’s done in his career as an executive suggests he knows what he’s doing and has the big picture in mind. We’re in good hands
All Mighty
Registered User
So far, everything is on paper... and to that degree, he seems to be doing a decent job planning for the future. However, lots to play out over the next season or two (at least) before he gets an "excellent" mark from me.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 24,190
- 19,152
We go by the information we have. And so far it is very good. It can change, sure
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Verbeek is just continuing what Murray has been doing and still afflicted with the same problem as Murray, which is a lack of talent depth.
I don't know if the roster is as good as the one that started last year. Last year's roster reached the top of the Pacific division. This year's roster should have more promise with its forward group due to the breakout of Terry and Zegras, the goalies depth proved great with Stolarz and Dostal, but lots of question marks with our blue line group/chemistry. The late addition of Kulikov does improve the blue line talent depth.
Still, both Klingberg and Kulikov are under one-year deals. If Verbeek is planning on TDL mass exodus version 2.0, then Verbeek is true to his word of collecting more talent through the draft. Verbeek will be riding the foundation Murray set until more talents filter through the system. I do hope Verbeek can sign both LaCombe and Thrun after their college seasons are done.
It's early, but I like the rebuild plan. I'm thinking we aren't looking for solid solutions until 2025 off-season to see how our young blue liners are developing along with the youth forward contingent.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 24,190
- 19,152
What Murray failed at was not selling earlier on Rakell, Lindholm, Manson. And not utilizing free agency to acquire players that can be dealt for extra assets later or kept to augment the team. Verbeek has done that beautifully so far(Vatrano, Klingberg, Strome, Kulikov). And he might not be done
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,231
- 13,287
Yeah asset management was a real issue with Murray.
I also didn’t like how every year we didn’t make the playoffs nobody was held accountable (with the only exception being an ageing veteran coming off a major knee injury). He would promise changes and that the core pieces weren’t delivering and then every year we would start the season with the exact same core in place.
Deuce22
Registered User
Verbeek traded 3 core vets at the deadline and began an actual rebuild. Are you saying Murray would have done the same? If he was going to trade Manson, Rakell, and Lindholm for young assets, shouldn't he have done it earlier when they carried more value? You have posted countless graphs, charts and paragraphs "proving" that the season went in the crapper when Verbeek traded those guys. Now he is just continuing what Murray was doing? Goalposts moved by goalpost moving accuser.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Wow. You do realize that Murray would have probably kept all three of Rakell, Lindholm, and Manson seeing how we were in a playoff spot last year, along with Des. The starting point under Murray would be advanced compared to Verbeek. Aside from that, Verbeek's running the same plan.
The rebuild started at the 2018-19 TDL. This info is what many are missing. Murray was able to acquire an extra 1st round pick in 2019 and 2020 as well as kept flipping players. He's avoided adding players because of the rebuild form. Hey, even I was upset we didn't go after two top-6 forwards last off-season, but it paid off as we saw the stardom of Terry and Zegras begin.
Right now, a lot of media are liking the future of the Ducks with Terry, Zegras, McTavish, Drysdale, and Zellweger alone! The latter four were acquired because we didn't add more talent. Zegras went 9th, Drysdale went 6th, and McTavish went 3rd overall.
When Verbeek reset the team at the TDL, I knew it was going to be another rebuild year. Klingberg and Kulikov aren't ideal fits like a Lindholm and Manson for the blueline. Stome and Vatrano replace Getz and Milano, but still missing out on Rakell's spot. We have our 12 forwards at the NHL level, but after that are prospects still developing. Of the 12 forwards, we still don't know what we have in Comtois, Jones, and McTavish.
Did Verbeek do more for the NHL club? Not really, he replaced some talents he lost. That's something I was expecting with the reset. Verbeek isn't trying to push too far ahead of his timeline and letting the youth develop. He's doing a good job of what he said he would do, which is to stock pile picks. We're in year 2-3 of the rebuild instead of jumping for it like the Kings did last off-season when it added two top-6 forwards and a veteran D to their existing roster.
Remember all the hype that we'd be in a several high-end talents like Fiala? We didn't. Klingberg wasn't on our radar until F Nino spurned us at the last moment and there was a dire need to reach the cap floor. I like Klingberg's offense, but we lost two top-4 shutdown Dmen. Remember how many said that Verbeek wouldn't use all his draft picks in the draft, but use one or two for a trade?
I'm very happy with the rebuild and know that Verbeek isn't impatient. This is the way to go with the path Verbeek chose. Klingberg, Kulikov, Grant, and Shatty are all TDL baits. So does that mean we're not avidly going after a playoff spot this year? We're simply padding for the future? It's essentially a similar game plan to Murray's - build through the draft and develop players.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Maybe you lack imagination. Maybe you think a rebuild should happen over one season. Please, if you're gonna refer to me, then use the actual words I used, not some made up shit you're accusing me of. I said Verbeek is basically doing what Murray has been doing, which is not adding more talent depth while letting the youths develop.
We still have the same problem as last year from a macro POV, which is lacking NHL talent depth. We shuffled the deck chairs around, but some of those chairs don't carry the same value, good and not-so-good.
It's essentially a repeat of last year all over again to start the season.
I don't think you know what "goal post moving" means.
.
.
=== More in-depth stuff so you can cite things correctly than make shit up ===
Has Murray traded players once thought of as core players before? Yes. Murray has traded players at the TDL if he didn't think there would be no future for them like Montour, Kase, and Ritchie. Monty and Kase helped bring in an extra 1st round pick in 2019 and 2020. 2018-19 TDL was when Murray decided it was rebuild time. 2018-19 finished 8th in league. 2019-20, finished 5th in the league. 2020-21, finished 2nd in the league. Last year, we were in playoff spot... but Murray resigned before the Ducks reached the top of the Pacific.
With Murray, I think we would have pulled what the Kings did last off-season. We keep the main core, but add top-6 and blue line talents to give us depth. We would be seriously gunning for the playoffs this season. If Murray was GM all season, then I think we would have traded for a #4/5 D-man when our blue line started to get rocked. Why? Because Murray's done things like that before. Verbeek sat on his hands knowing Manson would be out for quite some time. Manson missed 11 games straight out of 14 games when Verbeek was GM, but Verbeek was hired on Feb 3 and the next game played was Feb 11th. Manson missed Jan 31st game and knew he would be missed for a longer period of time.
Murray's timeline would have been advanced compared to Verbeek.
With Verbeek, we got set back a bit. I like what he did with the additions of two-way forwards in Strome and Vatrano, but we got misfits on the blue line with Klingberg and Kulikov. Everything else is about the future. We have big unknowns in Comtois, Jones, and McTavish. Again, all we did was shuffle the deck chairs around and banking on the development of the youths while lacking NHL talent depth.
It's odd. I like what Murray did. And I like what Verbeek is doing. I really like the fact that Verbeek isn't impatient since he did the reset b/c the timeline for prospect development works out better this way. I said that once I accepted the TDL reset, which was a few days or a week afterwards. Yet some of you got HD-DS (Hockey Duckie Derangement Syndrome). It's all about the future with Murray. It's the same theme with Verbeek.
This is a serious question - when people compliment Verbeek, why do you feel the need to interject a totally unrelated compliment for Murray? Even if what you claim is true (that Verbeek is simply continuing what Murray did), why bring that up? It is VERY odd and seemingly compulsive, since you do it so often. Why? It seriously calls into question whether you're related to the guy.
And for the record, I don't agree that Verbeek is simply continuing what Murray did. If Murray was committed to a rebuild, Manson, Rakell and likely Lindholm would have been traded a year earlier and Shattenkirk probably would never have been signed. But that is beside the point - Murray (and his bad drunken behavior that was abusive toward his own staff) is gone. We can and should have a discussion of Verbeek without bringing up Murray.
MMC
Global Moderator
Montour, Ritchie, and Kase were not core players when we traded them, nor were they ever
MMC
Global Moderator
This is just ridiculous. He had multiple offseasons over his tenure to give us major injections of talent from outside the organization like Verbeek did this year with Strome, Vatrano, Klingberg, and Kulikov and never did.
Deuce22
Registered User
First of all, I was responding to your statement that "Verbeek is just continuing what Murray was doing." A ridiculous statement which you debunked in a later post in which you said that Murray would have kept the vet core and pulled off what the Kings did. Verbeek trading the vets and Murray keeping them and doing a Kings are completely opposite paths. Secondly, it's not all about you. It's about your anger and defensiveness when challenged. Third, goal post moving means when caught in the wrong, trying to pivot and act like you never held that position. Which you do often. When I disagree with someone on here, I try to be respectful. Maybe you could try that.
FlyingV09
Registered User
Murray would have never dealt Manson, Rakell, AND Lindholm. That is a fact, and that alone should be proof enough that Verbeek's approach is much different. Murray was too attached to the players he saw develop.
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
This seems a bit too unequivocal. We know Verbeek made offers to both Rakell and Lindholm, so there's a pretty nearby universe where PV only deals Manson. At any rate we don't know if PV is as attached to his own projects as BM was (assuming that that's true) because he's brand new.
Is it an influx of talent given the talent he moved out? Would that be the definition of shuffling deck chairs. If we give that Strome is replacing Getzlaf then you can argue that we took
Linholm
Manson
Rakell
Milano
and replaced them with
Klingberg
Kulikov
Vatrano
Doesn't seem like we added all that much talent to the NHL roster which I assume we're discussing here. I'd say all 3 are actually downgrades especially given the NHL roster needs. Obviously you can't discount the prospects or pucks we got in return for those players and eventually they may pay off if they make meaningful NHL contributions or are part of meaningful trades. Imo. Verbeek has added some potential depth more than being responsible for an influx of talent. Depth is good so I'm not terribly upset but I think it would be hard to argue that the players he got are better than the ones he let go, especially when you consider team construction.
MMC
Global Moderator
I look at it as
Klingberg > Manson
Lindholm > Kulikov
Strome > Getzlaf
Vatrano > Milano
Rakell didn't get a direct replacement but McTavish will be here full time now, and probably starts with his spot on the top 6 wing.
