Player Discussion Troy Terry

There's no handcuffing here by Murray. That's a false narrative. Verbeek already knew what he was going to do the moment he became GM. Verbeek never contacted Manson's agent. Verbeek wanted to give only a 4-year extension to 28-year old Lindholm. If anything, it made Verbeek's job easier to remake the team in his image by having several UFA's rather than force Verbeek to have long contracts that don't fit Verbeek's timeline.
When I say handcuffing, I mean it in the way that from the time he took over, Verbeek had limited options for the 3 pending free agents. Sure, he could have re-signed them (pending their acceptance of the amount the Ducks / Verbeek were willing to pay and for what term), but the limited time he had didn't give him a lot of flexibility in getting that done. His only other (good) option was to trade them if he wasn't going to re-sign them, and with them all being on expiring contracts, that also limits what teams are willing to trade for them, and which teams are even willing to acquire them. That is the handcuff...the inflexibility within those 2 options. If BM made some decisions significantly earlier on these players, that wouldn't have been an issue (though other issues would have taken their place).

At the same time, maybe it was the optimal situation for Verbeek, due to (as you said) making his job easier to remake the team the way he wants. But again, that's not the situation I was referring to.
 
When I say handcuffing, I mean it in the way that from the time he took over, Verbeek had limited options for the 3 pending free agents. Sure, he could have re-signed them (pending their acceptance of the amount the Ducks / Verbeek were willing to pay and for what term), but the limited time he had didn't give him a lot of flexibility in getting that done. His only other (good) option was to trade them if he wasn't going to re-sign them, and with them all being on expiring contracts, that also limits what teams are willing to trade for them, and which teams are even willing to acquire them. That is the handcuff...the inflexibility within those 2 options. If BM made some decisions significantly earlier on these players, that wouldn't have been an issue (though other issues would have taken their place).

At the same time, maybe it was the optimal situation for Verbeek, due to (as you said) making his job easier to remake the team the way he wants. But again, that's not the situation I was referring to.

Verbeek had options and time.

1. Verbeek did not talk to Manson's agent at all once he was GM.​
2. Verbeek was strict on offering Lindholm a short term deal.​

Verbeek knew what he wanted the moment he became GM. That's not handcuffing Verbeek when he already knew what he was going to do beforehand.

Murray protected Lindholm, Manson, Rakell, and Des in the Seattle expansion draft. Murray drafted Lindholm, Manson, and Rakell. Murray gave Manson an A and wouldn't trade him for the world. Murray traded for Des and signed him to a two-extension rather than trade him at the TDL for the 2019-20 season when we were losing. When the team started to perform well after the first 9 games, then that was probably what Murray wanted to see before handing out extensions. But Murray had issues that needed him to resign on Nov 10th. We were 7-4-3 (17 pts) at the time and on a 5-game winning streak, which ended up becoming an 8-game winning streak.

It seems easy to project that Murray would have kept the crew together and probably have added onto the NHL roster once he started to notice his defense failing to injury.

Everyone in the NHL world knew Murray resigned on Nov 10th. Between Nov 10th and early Feb, every GM candidate probably had several scenarios in their mind of what to do with the franchise. All those months of monitoring and waiting to be hired was more than enough time. Verbeek could have continued down the path of layering/insulation like Murray and Yzerman with the Bolts, but Verbeek didn't. Verbeek wanted to go younger as evidence by my first two points about Manson and Lindholm.

There's no handcuffing here for Verbeek when he had options. Handcuffing Verbeek would have been having all four already signed to extensions that probably Verbeek did not want b/c he wanted to go younger. Lindholm would have an an 8-year extension, Manson a 4-year extension, Rakell a 4-6 year extension, and Des with a 2-3 year extension under Murray. What you're talking about is receiving more from the four players traded, which is what you're highlighting. What you're missing is that Verbeek still wanted them traded away b/c you wanted more in the return. But if Verbeek did trade away all four under contract, then how would that look knowing Verbeek ripped apart the backbone under multi-year contracts? Verbeek could not have traded them away if they were all signed to multi-year contracts. Verbeek would have been "handcuffed" to do what he truly wants done.
 
Okay, I can concede based on definition, and I probably should have used different terminology. Handcuff means no other options, and yes he did have more than 1 option, and that wasn't what I was trying to say.

As you can tell, I was going off of being limited in his trade options (or flexibility in negotiating extensions, though he obviously didn't want to go that way), and thinking we might have gotten a better return if they'd been sent off earlier, whether earlier this year or in a previous year when they still had some term on their contracts. And to be clear, I DO think we could have gotten a better return if we traded them during the summer, and I would have been okay with trading them.

But while I can agree that Verbeek likely had some time both leading up to and after his hiring, it doesn't change the fact that due to lack of previous re-signing or trading while BM was still head that he was stuck with 3 expiring contracts.
 
Okay, I can concede based on definition, and I probably should have used different terminology. Handcuff means no other options, and yes he did have more than 1 option, and that wasn't what I was trying to say.

As you can tell, I was going off of being limited in his trade options (or flexibility in negotiating extensions, though he obviously didn't want to go that way), and thinking we might have gotten a better return if they'd been sent off earlier, whether earlier this year or in a previous year when they still had some term on their contracts. And to be clear, I DO think we could have gotten a better return if we traded them during the summer, and I would have been okay with trading them.

But while I can agree that Verbeek likely had some time both leading up to and after his hiring, it doesn't change the fact that due to lack of previous re-signing or trading while BM was still head that he was stuck with 3 expiring contracts.
Simply by taking over a rebuilding team in a season where the decision had to be made on these 4 players, he was handcuffed--by circumstances if you don't want to blame Murray. And it was Murray who entered this season with those four unsigned, so I don't think it's ridiculous to think that he'd have traded some or all of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: branmuffin17
Simply by taking over a rebuilding team in a season where the decision had to be made on these 4 players, he was handcuffed--by circumstances if you don't want to blame Murray. And it was Murray who entered this season with those four unsigned, so I don't think it's ridiculous to think that he'd have traded some or all of them.
Except that people were hoping he'd do SOMEthing on these and other people over the past couple of years, as he was threatening change to the core for a while...but nothing major ever happened, right?

And @Hockey Duckie , I agree with or at least see your different points on BM's likely strategy in layering, drafting etc. that you've mentioned in a variety of posts, but still think in the end it prevented Verbeek from going in certain directions, though the end flexibility he now has may be better for the franchise in the long (hopefully not TOO long) run.
 
As for "my Terry takes" I seem to recall the argument was usually me saying he couldn't just rely on fancy passes and he needed to start putting the puck into the net to be a useful player, versus other people saying he just needed to keep doing what he was doing and get linemates to finish the passes.

He didn't get better linemates, he did start putting the puck in the net, and now he's a useful player. I was 100% correct.
Now, not only did you not have laughably bad takes, you were actually right the entire time!

You’re a prime example that the human brain is built for rationalizing rather than being rational.
 
Now, not only did you not have laughably bad takes, you were actually right the entire time!

You’re a prime example that the human brain is built for rationalizing rather than being rational.

People are bad at reading and nuance. I always said that I thought Terry had an interesting ceiling but I thought he was unlikely to reach it. Is it wrong if you say something is possible but very unlikely but it happens anyway, are you wrong? I'll leave that question to the philosophers. But all people remember or read is 'brrr he said bad things about terry he hate Terry."

If you give me 50 more guys putting up Terry's results last year at Terry's age last year, I'll bet against them 50 more times and be comfortable with that bet every time.

I'm quite capable of admitting my bad takes. I had Comtois for a no-doubt good season. I liked Guhle's upside. I had Drysdale over Zegras and saw Z as more of a good second liner than a first liner.

But Terry? I said Terry needed to play significantly better than he was and he needed to change his game wildly to be create goals rather than just making a couple of dangle passes per game, and that he would not be a useful NHL forward until he did.

And he has played significantly better and he is creating more goals, exactly what he needed to do. He isn't the 15 goal, 50 assist guy people were trying to claim he would be with better teammates last year. He still has bad teammates but he's putting the puck in the net himself. Completely different player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smirnov2Chistov
It's funny, my initial impression is that's a pretty good comparison. But the main difference that sticks out to me is possibly the reason why Ritchie was suspended and Beagle wasn't:

Rozival skated away from the situation and his body language suggests he's completely unprepared for contact. He sort of shrugs and I'm not sure if that's directed at the ref as to say "what did I do?" or if that's a sort of taunt at Ritchie to goat him into taking a (yet another) bad penalty.

By contrast, Terry engages Beagle. So the optics are quite different. I'm just guessing that's probably why these two situations were treated so differently.

I want to make it clear that I'm in no way saying Terry threw a punch, deserved it, or anything like that. Just trying to rationalize as to why these two situations were treated differently. I may be completely wrong.

And for the record, I absolutely think Beagle should've been suspended. What he did is worse than what Ritchie did in my opinion.

I think that is a fair distinction between the situations, though if you look at it, when Ritchie approaches, Roszival raises his stick and hands as if to engage. But suspension is mostly beside the point. The larger issue is that KyleJRM has repeatedly suggested that Terry threw the first punch (which is questionable) and that somehow Beagle's reaction was to be expected or even typical, Not so much.

And if KyleJRM is correct, then in the video Zegs2comtois posted, Getz should have gone to town. But he didn't, because Beagle was not willing to drop his gloves.

Ritchie broke the guys Jaw.

Beagle broke Terry's face. I have no idea what distinction/point you're trying to make.
 
I think that is a fair distinction between the situations, though if you look at it, when Ritchie approaches, Roszival raises his stick and hands as if to engage. But suspension is mostly beside the point. The larger issue is that KyleJRM has repeatedly suggested that Terry threw the first punch (which is questionable) and that somehow Beagle's reaction was to be expected or even typical, Not so much.

And if KyleJRM is correct, then in the video Zegs2comtois posted, Getz should have gone to town. But he didn't, because Beagle was not willing to drop his gloves.



Beagle broke Terry's face. I have no idea what distinction/point you're trying to make.
From what I understand Terry had a bruised face obvious he broke skin but no bones were actually broken. I'm sorry if you cant see the difference of actually breaking someone's face.
 
I literally directly said repeatedly that what Beagle did was outside of expected hockey norms.

I don't understand how I can say that repeatedly and still be accused of "suggesting Beagle's reaction was typical or expected.". I really don't think it's too much to ask to read what I say and not what it "feels like" I am saying.

The rule has been simple in hockey as long as I can remember: you don't hit a guy with bare fist unless you've given him a chance to drop his gloves too. Beagle broke that rule.

Not to mention the excessively violent cross check after the whistle that started it all.
 
Dude heals like wolverine, lol.

460FF626-4761-4913-8F11-1D97EE6CA5AD.jpeg
 
It is unfortunate that there is no one on the Ducks that was a deterrent in preventing Beagle from taking liberties.

It is also unfortunate that Beagle may not be in the league long enough to even things up.

There was a time when payback was coming but not necessarily in the same game. This does make the offender have his head on a swivel because he knows it’s coming.

In the current scheme, even with a good hard hit, someone wants to mix it up right away. This wasn’t a clean hit situation, but better to pick your spots down the road and level the offender when he lets his guard down.

I’m hoping we bulk up and an opportunity arises for Beagle to get his next year.

John
 
36 goals 63 points after today's 2 goal 1 assist game. What a season he is having getting so close to 40 goals along with over 60 points :popcorn:
I said it earlier in the season he could end up with the breakout Wild Bill numbers from 2017.
Needs only 7 more goals to match Wild Bills career high for highest season goals scored by a Madden draft pick.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad