LeBrun: - John Carlson not returning to Anaheim | Page 4 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

LeBrun: John Carlson not returning to Anaheim

  • If you are having issues logging in, we have found opening the log in page in a new tab/window rather than using the pop out should resolve these issues. We are working to get this resolved and thank you for patience.
  • Congrats to our latest Sportsbook winners - GOLD MEDAL kihei, SILVER MEDAL fish7 and BRONZE MEDAL Sammy Kat - new tournament begins today 6/15
Not sure that the Ducks even would have made the playoffs without Carlson's production post deadline. That run was invaluable experience for our young core and for that reason I'm fine (but not thrilled) with the trade.

There seems to be a lot of indication that the Ducks were pushing for Parayko and then likely pivoted to Carlson late in the deadline process when that didn't work out. I wanted Parayko and don't disagree that it would have been a been a better fit.

They had a 6 point gap on the 9th place team, so I doubt Carlson was the reason the team made the playoffs.

I think you can make the argument that he helped them secure the 3rd wildcard spot, which allowed them to face the Oilers instead of the Avs, but it's doubtful Carlson made such an individual difference that he swung 3 of the 16 games he played for the Ducks down the stretch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flywithme
Rationalizing the Carlson trade as a good thing is like rationalizing a botched vasectomy as a good thing. The facts say otherwise.
It depends on what you mean by botched, right?

As long as no swimmers are coming out, I'm happy. What is botched, is it swelling? Maybe I meet a girl who likes huge balls! That could still be a win.

Life is 10% what happens to you, and 90% how you and your huge balls respond to it!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: flywithme
How wasnt it good?

We made the playoffs, we won a round and we played competitive games in round 2.
The Ducks were in 1st place the day the trade was made. They finished in 3rd.
The Ducks had a better record percentage-wise without Carlson than with him by a fair bit.

Those are the FACTS.

OTOH, you can't point to Carlson as being a legitimate factor in any of the points you mentioned. All could just as easily been achieved without him. We'll never know.

Bottom line....the FACTS are not on your side. Neither is critical thinking.
 
The Ducks were in 1st place the day the trade was made. They finished in 3rd.
The Ducks had a better record percentage-wise without Carlson than with him by a fair bit.

OTOH they went in the tank when Mintyukov and Gudas were out, and Gauthier got his vertebrae cracked. So it's not really a fair comparison.

You're basically arguing that he was a negative impact player. But we cannot know for sure if they'd have been worse without him if those same injuries happen.

OTOH, you can't point to Carlson as being a legitimate factor in any of the points you mentioned. All could just as easily been achieved without him. We'll never know.

Didn't he get a hat trick in one of their few wins down the stretch against a direct competitor? That's a 4 point swing right there.

Bottom line....the FACTS are not on your side. Neither is critical thinking.

We're all spinning hypotheticals. No need to be pissy about it.
 
OTOH they went in the tank when Mintyukov and Gudas were out, and Gauthier got his vertebrae cracked. So it's not really a fair comparison.

You're basically arguing that he was a negative impact player. But we cannot know for sure if they'd have been worse without him if those same injuries happen.



Didn't he get a hat trick in one of their few wins down the stretch against a direct competitor? That's a 4 point swing right there.



We're all spinning hypotheticals. No need to be pissy about it.
Just stating facts that the fanboys don’t like to hear. The facts say he didn’t improve the team. Anything beyond those facts is supposition that could be argued either way with no resolution.
 
Just stating facts that the fanboys don’t like to hear. The facts say he didn’t improve the team. Anything beyond those facts is supposition that could be argued either way with no resolution.
Lol "fanboys"

Thats the nice thing about sports(hockey), facts dont always tell the whole story.

You asked what my expectations were when we made the trade, i said 2nd round and playing competitive.... we got there.

I dont think Carlson is the right move long term, so im glad were not bringing him back.... but i was more than okay spending a 1st on insurance for the team to get some playoff experience.

I enjoyed the end of the season and playoffs and happy with the growth of the team , my guess is you sat there hoping theyd lose so you could celebrate the trade not being a success in your eyes... sad way to be a fan tbh.
 
Just stating facts that the fanboys don’t like to hear. The facts say he didn’t improve the team.

If you mean his addition didn't cancel out Gauthier, Mintyukov, and Gudas being out ... then sure.

Anything beyond those facts is supposition that could be argued either way with no resolution.

Indeed, you could fairly argue that maybe the Ducks make it without him. OTOH, we do not know that, because we have no point of comparison of how the Ducks would have done without him given the same injuries. So yes, there's a lot of supposition and opinion. Again, no need to be nasty about an opinion.

I do think it's unlikely their PP clicks at around 50% in round 1 without him though. Again, no proof, but that's my opinion.
 
Lol "fanboys"

Thats the nice thing about sports(hockey), facts dont always tell the whole story.

You asked what my expectations were when we made the trade, i said 2nd round and playing competitive.... we got there.

I dont think Carlson is the right move long term, so im glad were not bringing him back.... but i was more than okay spending a 1st on insurance for the team to get some playoff experience.

I enjoyed the end of the season and playoffs and happy with the growth of the team , my guess is you sat there hoping theyd lose so you could celebrate the trade not being a success in your eyes... sad way to be a fan tbh.
So because they met YOUR expectations it’s a good trade. Got it.
 
The “facts” say that Anaheim got halfway through the second round of the playoffs. One would suggest that the added experience was a great benefit to the young core.

I’m curious what facts you’re referring to that say it was a poor decision.
Rationalizing the Carlson trade as a good thing is like rationalizing a botched vasectomy as a good thing. The facts say otherwise.
 
The “facts” say that Anaheim got halfway through the second round of the playoffs. One would suggest that the added experience was a great benefit to the young core.

I’m curious what facts you’re referring to that say it was a poor decision.
What the “facts” don’t say is whether Carlson was the reason they got there. He sure was a big reason why they didn’t get past the 2nd round.

I’ve already stated my facts and they are indisputable.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Ad

Ad