The Official 2022-2023 Anaheim Ducks Thread

[Brandon]

I've been in and out of games, but man do they give up a shit ton of shots. I think the Devils had 40 last night, Rangers had 43, and the Islanders had 38. Just not going to get it done.

[deepdrive]

53 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I've been in and out of games, but man do they give up a shit ton of shots. I think the Devils had 40 last night, Rangers had 43, and the Islanders had 38. Just not going to get it done.

Yeah, and their not just knocking them to the net. There's way too many shots that have a decent chance of scoring.

[Brandon]

34 minutes ago, deepdrive said:

Yeah, and their not just knocking them to the net. There's way too many shots that have a decent chance of scoring.

I'll have to watch more. I can't tell if we just have poor forechecking or our defense is in more of a zone defense without much pressure. But that's a lot of scoring chances.

[gotbeer]

1 hour ago, Brandon said:

I'll have to watch more. I can't tell if we just have poor forechecking or our defense is in more of a zone defense without much pressure. But that's a lot of scoring chances.

We play this weird zone defense that sucks in todays modern hockey.  It pretty much gives all the room to the guys at the blue line.  Leaves the boards open.  But supposedly closes the "box" in front of the net, to prevent passes.  To me, it's akin to prevent defense in football.  And we know how well that works.  It's a really poor system that I don't see many good teams using.

[Brandon]

13 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

We play this weird zone defense that sucks in todays modern hockey.  It pretty much gives all the room to the guys at the blue line.  Leaves the boards open.  But supposedly closes the "box" in front of the net, to prevent passes.  To me, it's akin to prevent defense in football.  And we know how well that works.  It's a really poor system that I don't see many good teams using.

That makes sense for all the shots we give. That many shots tells me we are giving up open passing lanes, mainly in the slot. Just have the forwards go to the boards or the corner and find the d-men or center driving down to the slot to get shots off or score. It's almost like PK defense playing zone. I never liked it. 

[gotbeer]

Gibswim swimming again.

[gotbeer]

And Gibswim gets bailed out by an offsides replay.

[gotbeer]

Lol.  Gibswim.  WTF was that.  Trying to poke check a puck and gives it away to Hall.  

[gotbeer]

Man, that one timer of Vatrano is something of beauty.  McTavish showing some chops knowing his teammates and putting that puck on the left side of Vatrano instead of leading him where he wouldn't get the shot off.

[gotbeer]

Lol.  Lindholm.  Doing a Duck at the end of the game.

[gotbeer]

Dang.  Such a wasted game.  Oh well, a point.  Not sure why Terry or Z didn't try some razzle dazzle in the shootout.  

[deepdrive]

The most uninspired shootout I've ever seen. But, the game was good. 

I'm perfectly fine with the Ducks not getting points. They just need to get better at playing in the NHL. If we're not going to make the playoffs, might as well get a good draft pick. We could use another high quality player. The guys we have are god. But none of them look like they are heading towards being one of the ten best in the league.

Without a superstar, you need a lot of balanced quality throughout your lineup - and a high end goalie (at least for the playoff run).

[gotbeer]

Now that I had a night to think about it.  Takeaways from last nights game. 

First, the D got away from playing that zone coverage and played a much more aggressive man to man style.  Didn't really give Boston that much room to maneuver.  I don't know if this was a result of Boston being a much slower team, or the Ducks changing things up though.

Second, we went back to quick 10 foot passes to get out of the zone.  This only works if the player you are passing it to is moving and not a pylon, and last night, they were moving.  Made getting out of the zone that much more easier.  Again, not sure if this was because of a slower team, or in past games, because people were leaving too quick, resulting in players having to make longer passes.  But they definitely looked better than the last 4 games in exiting the zone.  Still have work to do, but it wasn't a complete clusterfuck.

Finally, you could see the goalie difference.  Our goalie again, flopping around.  Their goalie composed on his feet making unbelievable saves.  Especially that cross ice feed from Z to Terry.  That should have been a goal.  

[deepdrive]

Well, that wasn't very inspiring. It looked like out spirits left town before the plane.

Hopefully they'll play better at home.

[gotbeer]

Missed todays game.  Looks like another Gibswim special.  Just looked at the highlights.  Yup, Gibswim special.  

[deepdrive]

11 hours ago, gotbeer said:

Missed todays game.  Looks like another Gibswim special.  Just looked at the highlights.  Yup, Gibswim special.  

Yesterday I thought maybe you gave up on them and took a step back for awhile.

Well, they're home now (sort of). We'll see how that goes.

 

[gotbeer]

2 hours ago, deepdrive said:

Yesterday I thought maybe you gave up on them and took a step back for awhile.

Well, they're home now (sort of). We'll see how that goes.

 

I won't give up on them.  They still have potential.  But at this rate, I can't see how Eakins survives.  Better to get the replacement in sooner than later.  (Please be Gronberg)

[deepdrive]

4 hours ago, gotbeer said:

I won't give up on them.  They still have potential.  But at this rate, I can't see how Eakins survives.  Better to get the replacement in sooner than later.  (Please be Gronberg)

You know, I don't think he was ever going to survive. He's cheap and if the players are progressing in their development, why burn out the coach you're going to want at some future time?

[gotbeer]

1 minute ago, deepdrive said:

You know, I don't think he was ever going to survive. He's cheap and if the players are progressing in their development, why burn out the coach you're going to want at some future time?

But on the flip side.  Are you stunting the development of the players?  Terry and Z look to be fine.  Drysdale is the one I'm worried about.  You could also say Comtois might fall in that category also.

[deepdrive]

1 hour ago, gotbeer said:

But on the flip side.  Are you stunting the development of the players?  Terry and Z look to be fine.  Drysdale is the one I'm worried about.  You could also say Comtois might fall in that category also.

I think Drysdale's problem is his size. A defensive player under 6'2" is going to struggle in the NHL until he matures and puts on some mass. I think Comtois's problem is attitude and being poorly developed in our system.

[gotbeer]

9 minutes ago, deepdrive said:

I think Drysdale's problem is his size. A defensive player under 6'2" is going to struggle in the NHL until he matures and puts on some mass. I think Comtois's problem is attitude and being poorly developed in our system.

But then you have guys like Makar.  23 YO, 5'11", 187 lbs.  Quinn Hughes.  23, 5'10", 175 lbs.  Which is interesting with Drysdale.  Because he's supposed to have elite skating.  But when I watch Makar, that's what I consider elite skating.  

[deepdrive]

33 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

But then you have guys like Makar.  23 YO, 5'11", 187 lbs.  Quinn Hughes.  23, 5'10", 175 lbs.  Which is interesting with Drysdale.  Because he's supposed to have elite skating.  But when I watch Makar, that's what I consider elite skating.  

You know, I never knew Maker was that small. I don't know. 

Maybe he's just not going to be what the Ducks thought he would. Let's see what he looks like at 24.

[gotbeer]

1 hour ago, deepdrive said:

You know, I never knew Maker was that small. I don't know. 

Maybe he's just not going to be what the Ducks thought he would. Let's see what he looks like at 24.

JMO, but the way Drysdale has been playing.  I just think he's going to have a Fowler career path.  Good defenseman, not great defenseman.  And definitely not a superstar defenseman.  

[deepdrive]

2 hours ago, gotbeer said:

JMO, but the way Drysdale has been playing.  I just think he's going to have a Fowler career path.  Good defenseman, not great defenseman.  And definitely not a superstar defenseman.  

That's funny, because I thought about making that reference/comparison in my post. I think it's too early to say. Maybe he is going to develop slower. The Ducks may be pushing him to focus on his defense now. 

I still think it's important to give all these situations a couple years to play out. Everything to me says Verbeek is going in a lot different direction than the Ducks past. I think he has a legit chance to change some of what we're seeing now.

One more thing about Drysdale. I think if he does turn out to be a version of Fowler, he will probably be better offensively and just as good defensively. Fowlers best attribute has been his puck moving ability up the ice. Drysdale should be good here too.

Then there's the issue of Zellweger. Do you think Verbeek has plans to keep two short offense minded defenders in his top two pairings?  I have my doubts. I think one will be gone within 3 years.

[deepdrive]

When I think of Fowler, I think 'that's the kind of guy you would like to have on your second pairing if you had one of the top NHL teams'. I saw an article recently in the Athletic that kept using 'fine' to describe him. Seems about right.

I'd like him better at about 5M. But right mow payroll doesn't matter too much to the Ducks. So, like with Silvferberg, we just trudge on.

Did you notice Silvferberg is wearing an 'A'. I guess they're trying to get him to take a more active roll in the team.