Murray & Boudreau Offer Insights and Warnings at State of Franchise Address
While I'll have a full breakdown (with video!) of the Skills Showdown tomorrow, I wanted to highlight the other critical piece of today's event at Honda Center. Before the actual fun began, General Manager Bob Murray and coach Bruce Boudreau spent about 30 minutes answering questions and giving an overall State of the Franchise. Murray and Boudreau covered a range of topics and made several interesting statements ranging from the state of the farm system and their goals in the draft to a not-so-subtle message that some of the team's best players need to start delivering more effort.
I did my best to take notes about everything Murray and Boudreau touched on, but I'm only one man with a legal pad. I feel that the following notes accurately summarize the high points, but please do not take any of these as direct quotations.
- When Murray and Boudreau were being introduced, the crowd went nuts for BB and there were several people yelling "Bruuuuuuuce." Carlyle never got that kind of reception at these events. The fans love Bruce.
- When asked what the Ducks did differently in January, Murray said that the Ducks finally started to play a team game and that they started to play hard. He said the Ducks wanted to play easy in the beginning of the season and that you can't expect to win in the NHL playing like that. But now that they're sacrificing for each other and playing as a team, they're finding success.
- On the same topic, Boudreau said that team defense has improved dramatically over the two months he's been head coach. He said that you can't create defense from offense, but if you play strong defense, you can create strong offense, which has been the recipe to the team's recent success. He specifically mentioned that prohibiting shots has been a goal and he was particularly proud of the special teams play in January.
- Bruce described the first month as coach of the Ducks as a transition period where he really had to get to know the players since he didn't know much about them before becoming joining the team. He believes that everyone is now on the same page and that they've really tightened up the play in the neutral zone. He said that he thinks the team just needs a few tweaks and that he believes they're very close to being a strong contender. He also said that a reason the team's play has improved so much is the chemistry that the defensive pairings have been able to develop.
- Murray reiterated the same comments he's made before regarding the Francois Beauchemin extension, especially highlighting that Frankie finds ways to contribute and continues to work hard, even if he doesn't have his "A" game on a given night. He also said that it was important to have someone with Frankie's work ethic to serve as an example for the younger players on the team.
- Murray was asked about the perceived difference between Eastern and Western teams and he said he dismisses a lot of it because most people don't stay up to watch the teams out West play. He specifically mentioned that he likes the way the Bruins play and that he believes they play the right kind of hockey. He said that the Ducks used to play like that and that he wants to get them back to that style of play. He wants a big, strong hockey team.
- Bruce said that the media bias is staggering. He never really paid much attention to it before, but now that he's coached a team on both coasts, it's unbelievable how strong the bias is. When Jonas Hiller was snubbed for a star of the week by the NHL a few weeks ago, Bruce said he texted several of his media contacts on the East Coast and said "What the hell?" There are great players in the West that the rest of the hockey media has no idea about.
- Murray was asked about some of the kids in the system, starting with Emerson Etem. He said that Etem will definitely have a shot to make the team next year and that the organization knows he can score. They need Etem to improve his play away from the puck to stick in the NHL (this is eerily familiar to the comments he made about Kyle Palmieri last year at this event).
- On the topic of Justin Schultz, Murray was very effusive and praised his intelligence and play. He said that the team hopes to see Schultz before next camp (which seems to confirm whispers that the Ducks will give up a cup of coffee this season) and that he believes Schultz will not go back to Wisconsin for his senior year, although nothing is set in stone. Murray also mentioned that Sami Vatanen continues to impress int he Swedish Elite League and that he feels the team has some very good defensive prospects on the way.
- In terms of guys at Syracuse, Murray said that they need Kyle Palmieri to stay with top-6 forwards to see what he can do. Whenever he's called up, he gets third line time, which is just sort of the way it is. They need to see if he can be the guy as a top-6 forward. Murray also mentioned that Peter Holland has made good progress this season.
- When asked about their goals for the draft, Murray said that hockey is a lot like baseball. You always try to go up the middle to improve, meaning you build from a strong goaltender, strong defense, and strong centermen. He said the coming draft is heavy on centermen and defensemen, and I'd be personally be stunned if the Ducks don't go after a stud center.
- In terms of the upcoming trade deadline, Murray said he hopes the team makes the decision tough for him by playing strong and getting themselves back in the chase. He said that while Bruce has to focus on this year, his job is to focus on this year and next year, so if he does make a trade, he won't be going after draft picks. If he trades, he wants young players that are pros, but may not have cracked their clubs' lineups yet for various reasons.
- Bruce was asked about penalties and he said he feels the team has really cleaned up their act on that front. When he took over, the team was averaging about five penalties a game and now they're down to two and a half. The team has done a good job of eliminating the lazy or needless penalties.
- Murray and Boudreau were asked what they thought it would take to make the playoffs in the West and while Murray declined, BB said he thinks it will take between 92 and 95 points. He said that the team has broken down the remaining schedule into four segments, with the upcoming 8-game road trip being an extremely important set of games. He flatly stated that they have to beat the teams in front of them and that they'll have the opportunity to do that on Monday against Calgary. He also got a raucous cheer from the crowd when he said that he wants to break Detroit's home winning streak when the face the Red Wings on the upcoming road trip.
- In terms of the struggles in the last three games, Bruce said that last night's game against Columbus was a great example. The team played hard for 50 minutes, but the periods of time when they went brain-dead killed them. He said that the team has done a good job of controlling games, but they need to take advantage of the opportunities when they do have control. He specifically mentioned the inability to score more PP goals last night and said that it's important to jump all over teams when given the chance.
- Murray and Boudreau were both asked about concussions and the job Brendan Shanahan has done, and they both had positive things to say about Shanny. Murray noted that Shanahan has a tough job, but they have got to make sure that the players respect each other when they're on the ice.
- Murray said that keeping the ice safe for the players is the biggest deterrent to a Winter Classic in California. He also said that the Ducks have aggressively lobbied for an All-Star Game over the past few years and that he expects Ducks CEO Mike Schulman to keep up the pressure.
- Murray and Boudreau both praised the overall state of youth hockey in California and mentioned that the the professional players and organizations have really done a lot of work to grow the game in the state.
- Bruce was asked about his 24/7 experience and he said he loved it until he watched it. He said he didn't realize he swore that much and that his mother let him have it after the first episode aired. Regarding the infamous diatribe where he dropped the bomb over 10 times in the span of just over a minute. Bruce said he actually had asked the cameras to leave prior to letting that loose, but they never left.
- Murray said that the overall strength of the system is strong. He mentioned that the team is currently suffering due to bad drafts in '05 [Ed. Note: Bobby Ryan drafted that year], '06, and '07, but said that they've overhauled their drafting since then and have had three strong drafts in a row. The results of those drafts are good players that can both help the team on the ice, or as attractive pieces via trade. He really emphasized the fact that the strength of the system should allow the Ducks make good trades if they see fit.
- Murray's last comment was rather ominous in my opinion. He mentioned that the guys who work hard and play the hard way will stay. He said that there are players who want to play the easy way and that this team needs more players like Corey Perry that are willing to take punishment and pay the price of going to the dirty areas. He said the Ducks need more from some of their players, which seemed like a pretty obvious message to both Bobby Ryan and Ryan Getzlaf. At this point, it wouldn't surprise me if the team traded either one. Although Murray never mentioned either by name, it was pretty obvious from his tone who he was referring to.
- Boudreau seemed to reiterate Murray's sentiments, saying that you need character guys to succeed. It doesn't matter if you miss a shot or give up a goal, what matters is how hard you work and how committed you are to the team. You have to want to win.
So some pretty interesting stuff in there, with the last comments obviously being the most important in my opinion. Whether or not this are just more empty threats remains to be seen.
47 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
At the event too
I think I actually saw you scribbling away during the presentation.
“If he trades, he wants young players that are pros, but may not have cracked their clubs’ lineups yet for various reasons.”
Wanted to add that he was specifically mentioning how some teams unload veterans for draft picks and that was not what he wanted to do, instead trying to acquire the quoted above. This to me sounds a lot like Murray is looking into a deal for Schultz in Washington. Don’t know if anyone else got that from those comments.
Hah! Where were you sitting?
There were a couple people around me that were like, “What the hell is this guy doing?” They covered A LOT of ground in those 30 minutes. I had like five pages of notes.
But yeah, I agree that they’re targetting young, under-utilized guys from other systems. Sort of like the Cogs pick up. Benny Lightning actually floated this same idea in the recap from last night’s game.
I don’t know near enough about other systems to even begin to identify potential candidates that meet this criteria. But I think we’re looking for players that would be the equivalent of Kyle Palmieri in our system.
by PhantomPretender on Feb 4, 2012 9:36 PM PST up reply actions
I was sitting in 209 I believe. So I was across the rink and down a level from you. I agree with the Cogs comparison. I think he might go after one of NYR defensive prospects, just because they have so many good Defensive Dmen. Other teams that could potentially be trade partners would include Nashville, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, Pitt, Philly, and Vancouver. All of those teams might be willing to move younger guys for proven ones like Blake and Hagman.
Sounds like blake and hagman are the prototypical player that they want. hard working and hard to play against. “It doesn’t matter if you miss a shot or give up a goal, what matters is how hard you work and how committed you are to the team. You have to want to win.” Ok theyre older, but we’ve never been a team to shy away from veterans. makes for interesting reading, and possibly an interesting next few weeks!
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 1:39 AM PST up reply actions
Blake and Hagman definitely are the “hard working” type that they talked about. But they also talked about how everyone on the team wants to win and works hard. I’d say Blake and Hagman, because even though they work hard I feel that they disappear for long stretches of games and (blake especially) just aren’t physically intimidating when they go on the back check to make a difference.
Sounds to me they want to become tough to play against. Theres a world of difference in being physically intimdating and hard to play. It’d be nice if they went hand in hand, but they dont always have to. Anyway, doesnt really matter just seemed like theyd be the type of player to stick around as opposed to some others
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 2:52 PM PST up reply actions
One-dimensional?
Although Kyle Palmieri is statistically the best forward in the AHL right now, it seems to me that in his few Ducks games he was a one dimensional player… does anyone have input? Is this guy for real or will he choke once he gets up here?
Personally
I’d rather trade him while he’s putting up gaudy AHL stats. I think guys like Etem and DSP will be more valuable to this team and we don’t need Palmieri taking up one of their slots.
by PhantomPretender on Feb 4, 2012 9:53 PM PST up reply actions
Id agree
I think he is the one TOP trade chip that I would be completely fine seeing moved. I think he has great hockey sense and a good shot, but his lack of athleticism and size have been apparent during his NHL stints. It seems to me that he will likely be a phenomenal AHL player and at best a good NHL player. I’m much higher on guys like Etem, DSP, Holland, and Bonino at this point.
Im not so sure. I’ve always been really high on Palmieri. I admit i havent seen much of him this year, but ive always liked his hustle and ability to upgrade his toolkit to the league he’s played in. I admit i see him more as a very good 3rd liner as opposed to a top 6 player (in the way that jordan stall is an excellent 3rd line centre-maybe not to the same degree, but along those lines). In any case i believe he can be one of those guys that people hate to play against, and that in itself is invaluable.
Im not opposed to moving him for the right deal (but i would move anybody for the right deal), however i wouldnt be upset if he was given a long look in the big club. I thik he can be a very effective player here, if given a real chance.
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
Selling high on Palmieri is a good idea. He can be a good piece in a package for a better overall player. It’s not that he’s bad; it’s just that I don’t know if he’ll fit here in the long run. No offense, but a solid third line player that’s difficult to play against is the type of a guy a GM should always be able to find. That just doesn’t strike me as the right reason to keep him. That’s a first round selection, and if he’s even close to a 20 goal scorer, he’s going to want to get paid like a first round pick. I think we are better off using him as a key prospect in a trade to a team that can make better use of his talents.
Sure, if he goes towards a package that nets us Suter then yes. but i wouldnt be upset if he stayed. Like i said i see him as a very good third liner in the same way that staal plays third line. He could play top 6 minutes and be effective, or he could be outstanding in a 3rd line role. The same as i see DSP as a 3rd liner only. If RPG stays, etem and holland are playing 2nd line, then i can see DSP and Palmieri highlighting a super power 3rd line.
As for pay, your more likely to get a hometown discount on a guy you draft than a guy you pick up. So its possible that, thats his niche and he plays and gets paid like it.
Anyway i like the guy, im not upset either way if he goes or stays. Question was, could he be a good player up here, and my answer was, yes i think he can be a very good player.
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 1:43 PM PST up reply actions
If he’s used in a package to get us Jordan Staal, that’s still a win. On any other team, except maybe Detroit, Staal is a second line center. I don’t think you can compare a third line winger with second line potential to a third line center with definite second line ability who will probably win a Selke before it’s all said and done. Palmieri is not in the same league as Jordan Staal.
I think you’re only likely to get hometown discounts from guys who have something to give up in exchange. Guys who don’t want to move their families, or like a certain area. Turris certainly didn’t want to give Phoenix a home team discount. He charged them for being inept. Could a similar thing happen with Palmieri, maybe. What I do know is that the second contract is a key time to make money for guys. When Edmonton threw all that money at Penner, he had to take it. Something similar could happen with Kyle.
I don’t think it’s a question of whether or not he’ll be a good player. I think it’s a question of how valuable he is to us. I’m pretty sure guys like Etem and Devo will pass him on the depth chart. At that point, you have to ask yourself if you can get more by selling high. Rakell and Friberg are in the system as well. Can Palmieri be put together to get a better overall player. I think he’s much more valuable as a trade piece than he is as a player.
Well yes staal is a gun. Hes proven. But palmieri is a first round pick putting up piles of points in the A. He may very well become an excellent scorer on a top 2 lines. I just think he should be on a third. Wasnt saying he was/will be as good as staal. jsut that i can see him in that role for us, being that etem will come in and assuming rpg is intact. but yes i would take staal in a heartbeat.
Could happen. Murray should know that ahead of time. And if Palmieri gets the same return that Phoenix got for Turris, then sweet. Wasnt saying its set in stone, only more likely to get the discount.
And yes, he could be a good trading chip im not denying that. Only that i wouldnt be upset if he was still here next year. Also i would be looking at moving Friberg while his value is relatively high after the WJC.
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 2:50 PM PST up reply actions
Palmieri has more value than Friberg, because he’s doing it in the AHL. That’s why he’s a great trade chip for us right now.
I try not to count on Murray to know anything. I do sometimes have to, like knowing that he’ll get a significantly smaller return on the big 3 if he unloads at the deadline instead of waiting for the draft. But overall, I try to assume he’ll do the wrong thing so that I can be pleasantly surprised.
I think I would be disappointed if he was still around, because it would mean we didn’t take advantage of a good asset. I don’t know. I think his value isn’t going to get much higher unless he puts up some numbers in the NHL this year. Of course, I just don’t see that happening. Not because he can’t, I think he just won’t get the opportunity.
Its all about the right package. As you know im open to trading absolutely everyone for the right price. I think both players are currently in vogue and could be added as a package to get something good. Problem is, is that i value Palmieri differently to you. I think hes a player that you should find an excuse to trade (not you personally), as i think he’ll be an extremely effective weapon for this team down the track. Which is why of course he is a good trading chip.
Say what you will about his trading, but his negotiations have seemed to have gone at a passing grade. I trust him enough in that regards to at least have discussed a monetary figure.
Sometimes the best move is to do nothing. If we (the franchise) believe that he can be a point a game player and add some of those intangiable qualities that help teams win then maybe hes worth keeping.
If we do end up moving blake/hagman etc. then that will open up a roster spot, at least for a chunk of time to acclimatise. How long has it taken Bonino to adapt? Palmieri at least deserves the chance to play himself out of this teams plans. Unless of course hes part of a move that brings a J. Staal, Suter etc to this club
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 5:59 PM PST up reply actions
When I talk about moving Palmieri, I mean for the type of player you have mentioned. I don’t think you move him to move him, but I think he can complete a good deal for us. He’s the type of piece that finalizes deals for the type of player you’ve been mentioning. I think he’ll get that audition at the end of the season, but the Ducks need to get another impact player on the blue line and I think Palmieri is the type of player who can get you that piece. That is if Murray can make a good deal.
Unless we have the first overall pick, we are not drafting a center. We are drafting Matt Dumba. We must draft Matt Dumba.
by Daniel AC on Feb 4, 2012 10:56 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Dumba is not an offensive defenseman. He has great offensive tools, but that’s not how he plays the game, at least not according to everything I’ve read. He’s a bruising elite type of defenseman who’s only major flaw seems to be occasionally chasing the big hit. The comparisons to Phaneuf are enticing. I don’t know, he’s a little undersized right now at only 6 feet, but people seem to think he could be a definitive #1 type of defender.
by Daniel AC on Feb 5, 2012 9:29 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
That’s how he described himself in this interview. I think, from what I’ve read, he just strikes me as a complete defenseman. He can do everything you need him to, and he’s eager to be successful. Maybe it’s an intangibles thing, but the kid just strikes me as one of those players you have to draft.
I looked at the ESPN insider prospects report and it looks like your take on him seems accurate. They describe him as an offensive defensemen that is being trained to play d first. Can and does throw big hits and lots of offensive upside. Biggest knock on him is his size at 5’11 and 180ish lbs.
by DavidBL on Feb 5, 2012 12:59 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
With the way the NHL is going these days, with its speed over size.. I dont really see being sub 6’ a flaw, but thats my opinion. A guy thats 5’11 is just as effective as a guy thats 6’5 if he knows how to play the position.
by Hockey Phreak on Feb 6, 2012 2:44 PM PST up reply actions
Interesting Note
The comment of the the poor draft made me curious as to those years, more specifically, the year Ryan was drafted. That year both Kopitar and Marc Staal were drafted. There are some other decent players that went in the first round, but none of them that I would want instead of Ryan. The poor draft started in round 2 where we picked Mikkelson. James Neal, Vlassic and Stastny were all taken after in the same round… The most interesting were Kris Letang at 62 Keith Yandle at 105 and Niklas Hjalmarsson at 108. There were 8 defensmen taken in the first round that year. None of them are really considered as good as Letang or Yandle. Jack Johnson and Staal are notable out of the 8
I looked at a few other “top” defensmen for their draft positions, We have Chara at 56th in 1996, Weber at 49th in 2003. Green was taken at 29th and Keith was taken 54th. I guess my feeling is that maybe it is safer to try and draft D later in the draft. Obviously there are still good D that go in the first round, but most of the best D in the league seem to come later in the draft. Maybe it is because defensmen picked earlier in the draft are usually drafted that high because of their offensive abilities, which don’t necessarily translate to the NHL (like Mikkelson), overshadows their defensive abilities, or weaknesses. Defensmen drafted later in the draft are more likely more rounded giving a better foundation to build offensive and defensive skills. Not to mention they are probably left in the AHL to develop more because they aren’t expected to step right into the lineup being late round picks.
My picks for the draft are either Frosberg or Grigorenko. Both Big centers. Yakupov is ranked number 1 right now and is a smaller RW.
That seems like a small sample size.
Also, we are all using The Secret to draft Matt Dumba.
by Daniel AC on Feb 5, 2012 9:32 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
I could be wrong
But I didn’t get the sense that Murray was referring to Bobby with that comment. You typically measure your draft by the strength of your top four or five picks, not just your top pick.
I do find it interesting that he’d so openly blast Burke’s picks, though. I wasn’t really expecting that.
by PhantomPretender on Feb 5, 2012 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
He’s gotta do something to convince people he’s better than Burke. It’s not like he can point to a Stanley Cup on his GM resume.
In his defense, I think the only picks from those years that has played significant NHL time other than Bobby Ryan is Maxime Macenauer who has played 30 less than 30 games, and Matt Beleskey. That doesn’t seem like very good drafting to me either. Tangradi was also in there but we traded him. As for sample sizes I picked guys that who are constantly talked about as some of the greatest defensmen in the league that I hear about, I’m not very worldly so I probably missed a few, but some of the first round D picks that do stand out also seem to have their issues. For example Eric Johnson, or Zach Bogosian, Alex Pietrangelo, Luke Schenn, Tyler Myers even Drew Doughty has had their issues. Some of these guys have been in the league for a few years too and had the time to develop consistency and with the exception of Doughty none are considered in the realm of the guys I mentioned earlier. Green was the highers pick of the group and probably the least deserving to be there.
Can’t believe I forgot Suter! he has been a elite level defensmen taken in the first round. I concede that.
I think the problem with Defensemen is there skill level, seems like alot of the 1st round picks reach there skill level faster then others, the later rounds, 2nd, 3rd, seem to develop slower, but have a higher skill level, its just masked by how slow they progress. If that makes sence. Kinda Like goalies also, you see alot of late round goalies make the NHL and have better careers over some of the high draft picks.
by Hockey Phreak on Feb 5, 2012 11:07 AM PST up reply actions
My point is more that I think it is safer to draft a forward in the first round than a d-man because d-men take longer to develop. I’m pretty sure Eminger and Boyton were first Rounders too. I think you are more likely to get an impact player with a forward than a d-man. Maybe it depends on the draft year.
by DavidBL on Feb 5, 2012 11:59 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Ill agree with you to a point. I just think that early progression by dmen is an overall bad thing. They progress to there talent so fast, that they get picked high, and then there isnt much room for them to progress cause there already close to there peak. Where as a later round guy that shows skill, but steadily progresses through his CHL/NDP careeer has a higher overall skill ceiling. Im sure my babble or the way I explain it dosnt make sence, im good for that. lol
by Hockey Phreak on Feb 6, 2012 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
vatanen
Murray also mentioned that Sami Vatanen continues to impress int he Swedish Elite League and that he ……………………vatanen plays in the FINNISH ELITE LEAGUE….lol and hes kinda awesome
To be fair
I may have f’ed that up. I woudln’t pin that on Murray. I wrote Swedish Elite League in my notes, but it was most likely an error on my end.
by PhantomPretender on Feb 5, 2012 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
Honestly, it wouldn’t surprise me to find out that Murray said it wrong. In either case, it could easily be an honest mistake.
His scoring numbers seem to be up from last year, but his +/- is way down. I wish there were advanced statistics somewhere for the Finnish Elite League, because a drop like that needs a better explanation.
Maybe more PP time? Increased points but doesn’t get the +/- increase. Might actually indicate a decrease in effective 5v5 scoring.
by DavidBL on Feb 5, 2012 12:15 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
might just be playing against better opposition. Top line minutes perhaps. Thus getting scored on more. Might be his defensive game hasnt caught up with his offensive game.
Or could be statisticians error…
Too many possibilities
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 12:37 PM PST up reply actions
It strikes me as odd, that Murray inherited a team that wasn’t too different from the Bruins, completely retooled it because it wasn’t fast enough, and there wasn’t enough scoring depth, then realized that he had gotten too small and wants to add size again…sigh
I sort of thought this too
I know that some of the core draft guys that have come up through the system haven’t necessarily been of the Bruins mold, but it’s not like he’s gone out and got those kinds of players. I guess you could argue that Winchester and Sutton were attempts at the style of play, but Cogliano, his big get this season, was definitely not that kind of player.
by PhantomPretender on Feb 5, 2012 11:20 AM PST up reply actions
I know people think I harp on it, but I just think it further demonstrates what a poor planner he is. He wanted one thing, went too far to the other end and now he has to get going in the other direction again. All that starting, stopping, and moving in different directions makes it hard to keep things going in a consistent manner.
I would agree with that. Harping or no. Seems like he can’t make up his mind. He adds speed by getting smaller. There are guys who are bigger with speed or speed with tanacity. Mike Brown and Chris Kunitz come to mind. Both players he traded away.
by DavidBL on Feb 5, 2012 12:11 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I have to admit, i dont know why brown was moved. A favour to the old boss??
by BennyLightning on Feb 5, 2012 12:47 PM PST up reply actions
I loved me some Mike Brown
Dude played hard, had speed to burn, and could bring the pain when he needed to.
by PhantomPretender on Feb 5, 2012 1:10 PM PST up reply actions

by 
















