Anaheim Ducks: What Can Dallas Eakins Learn From the Past?
The Lindholm and Manson Pairing
Pundits slammed Randy Carlyle when he moved Josh Manson away from Hampus Lindholm and persevered with the move long after it was apparent that both payers struggled apart. In part because of their strong play together, and weaker play apart, most fans expect them to be paired together to start the season under Eakins stewardship. However, this being the absolutely right thing to do should still be questioned.
On one side of the coin, it is undeniable that these two players have a symbiotic relationship and that they both play far better together than when apart. By default, when two of the 5 players your team is going to ice at a given time are playing well, that flow-on effect is felt for the duration of their time on ice. This was written about in more detail by Alex Novet who suggests that hockey is a “strong link game” or more perhaps more aptly stated, that the team with the best players on the ice will usually win. That is to say, for the ~25 minutes these two players are on the ice, the Ducks are a better team.
The other side of the coin is what then of the remaining ~35 minutes? Taking Novet’s conclusion to the next step, it makes some sense to distribute talent throughout the line-up, so that high-end talent is on the ice more often. That is to say, if Lindholm and Manson were separated, and if Lindholm was on the ice for ~25 minutes, and Manson was on for a separate ~25 minute period of time, the Ducks would have high-end talent on the ice for ~50 minutes of a 60-minute game. This hypothesis has further support from Dawson Sprigings, who suggests that balancing elite talent throughout the line-up has a better return on investment than consolidating it in one place.
The Anaheim Ducks, under Bruce Boudreau, could afford to play Lindholm and Manson together. They, at the time, had a wealth of defensive depth. The envy of the league, in fact, and all of it was young and talented. Certainly talented enough to make up for some of the weaker veteran players that were signed to fill in the experience gap at the time.
This season’s version, however, boasts far less depth than in previous seasons. Cam Fowler is still a Duck, however, behind him, there are more questions than answers. With Brandon Montour no longer with the organization, the most experienced NHL veteran is Michael Del Zotto. Korbin Holzer is the veteran defenseman behind him. Both of these players are perhaps best suited to 3rd pairing roles.
Jani Hakanpaa was signed as a player out of Finland, and while optimism may be high, the expectation should be low for the 25-year-olds first season in the NHL. Brendan Guhle, Jakob Larsson, Josh Mahura await their turn to play, and while their talent levels may be noteworthy, they’re still very much unproven.
Thus spreading the Ducks talent about the line-up, in this case separating Lindholm and Manson, makes some sense. At the very least the concept of spreading talent should be given serious consideration.
Considering the Options
However, it doesn’t mean it needs to be forever, nor even for the entirety of games. The basis for the spread of talent is so that the Ducks have high-end players on the ice at all times. The more high-end players they have, the easier this becomes and the sooner the Lindholm-Manson pairing can be reestablished. Currently, there are two options for this:
- That the Ducks acquire a highly talented top 4 defenseman. While unlikely, there were rumors that Bob Murray had put in a bid for Kevin Shattenkirk’s services, prior to him signing in Tampa Bay.
- The other option is that one of the current team members can step up to become a bona fide top 4 player. Presently there is hope for Guhle and Mahura to take that role, given their strong play in, albeit short samples in the recent past.
Additionally, there are obvious game situations in which it would necessitate a Lindholm-Manson pairing for team success. Game-close situations come to mind. Should the Ducks be holding onto a lead with minimal time remaining, and the game is there to be won, then reuniting your best shut down pairing would be a good move.
It would take a shrewd coach to pick the right time to do so, without subjecting players to excessive fatigue or put that pairing out too early, have them need a change, and have a weaker pairing on the ice in a key moment. It would most certainly take a shrewd coach to identify when this may be necessary and manage the bench accordingly. All that to say that Eakins should consider immersing himself in the data that is available, and at least consider the options.