Replace the assistant coaches, buy low on Marino, sell high on Vatrano for McGroarty, pick up a couple complementary pieces and call it a solid off-season.
Speculation: 2023-24 Free Agency/Trade Thread II
- Thread starter MMC
- Start date
- Status
I doubt it, unless vatrano were to sign an extension. I doubt that as well.From Pagnotta:
“After putting up 37 goals and 60 points this past season, Frank Vatrano’s value has never been higher. Verbeek and the Ducks are also taking calls on him, as he enters the final year of his contract.”
I wonder if Winnipeg would have any interest in Vatrano, in a McGroaty deal.
Zegras a trade target, but move may wait — The Fourth Period
Trevor Zegras is open to a move, but unless a team pays a premium, the Ducks will hold on to him, reports TFP's David Pagnotta.www.thefourthperiod.com
Marino was fantastic two seasons ago, and it looks like he was good last season, but was bitten by the PDO bug. I would happily take Marino in trade. Roy is the guy I'd want in free agency if Pesce is off the table.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
That’s honestly kind of fine by me, I’m afraid of any deal that goes beyond three years for pretty much any defenseman. If there’s a bargain, sure, but I’d rather sign none than sign someone who’s an anchor when the team is actually good.
All Mighty
Registered User
I could see them having interest in any of Fowler, LaCombe, and Vaakanainen.
KelVarnsen
Registered User
Of course the Ducks will miss out on the Top FA's. They almost always do which is not a terrible thing as most mistakes are made in the FA market. Like Strome.
Would rather keep Vatrano till Gauthier is ready to take on a top 6 role full time.
Unless we are getting a hockey trade with Vatrano or a prospect who is close to the NHL, have no interest to create another hole in the line up, for uncertain futures.
If Verbeek wants to package Vatrano in a deal to land a legit Top 4 D, or a young F, then I’m all for that.
Unless we are getting a hockey trade with Vatrano or a prospect who is close to the NHL, have no interest to create another hole in the line up, for uncertain futures.
If Verbeek wants to package Vatrano in a deal to land a legit Top 4 D, or a young F, then I’m all for that.
yeah i'm not sure why they would trade vatrano, that just makes another hole. unless extension talks are going nowhere (i know he can't sign until July 1st, but they likely have an idea) i can't see them entertaining dealing him.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,780
- 38,295
I don't understand Fowler? The Ducks need more top 4 defenseman, not less. If Fowler plays normal minutes, he will look and play much better. It's really hard to play his minutes as one of or even the only proven top 4 defenseman on the team.
Who takes his minutes that can actually reliably play in the top 4? Mintyukov, unproven. LaCombe, unproven. Zellweger, unproven. Gudas, not anymore. Luneau, unproven. Vaakanainen, unproven/mightnotevenbehere. You trade Fowler and.... you're left with the exact same problem as right now. The idea is to add too Fowler and the Ducks might have enough support to allow the young players to grow into bigger roles.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,780
- 38,295
I think were using the word reliable pretty loosely here.
Ill take your obvious bait tho... and say you spread it out pretty evenly across the board.
I think you might be judging Fowler's impact pretty loosely here. There is so much context missing from your statement. Replacing Fowler with Marino or another top 4 defenseman of this quality does not equal a better team. Fowler's impact on the ice is a positive, not a negative.
Imagine any of the players I listed currently on this team taking his minutes last year. They would have collapsed. He's not the best defenseman, but he's a reliable top 4 defenseman without a doubt.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,780
- 38,295
Which means were not losing much if we swap him out for marino.
I mean fowler basically collapsed playing those mins too, whats your point.
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
i feel like I have a very different view of our young defensemen than many. I don’t think any of them have proven they belong anywhere above the 4D slot for a minimum of another year.
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
The pretty easy answer is to, as you said, spread out the minutes, and then see if Fowler can excel at the mid-pairing minutes he should be getting.
I'm a pretty big Fowler supporter and don't disagree that with fewer minutes, he would provide better play. On the other hand, though, how do the young guys get to be proven without playing? The Ducks aren't contending for the Cup next year - it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to just let the kids play.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,780
- 38,295
Sure but is he even a fit for much longer…. His strongest assets are basically the same as our talented young guys…. Not to mention it’s much easier to find a lhd than it is to find a rhd, if we still feel we need a stop gap.
Most people here think we need to get tougher…. I’d say fowlers spot is one you can sacrifice to do that
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
Take him from 24-25 minutes to 18 and see? He had the 16th most TOI/G in the entire league. That’s ridiculous.
This is another developmental year. I’d rather have someone with some offensive/puck moving abilities training the offensive/puck moving rookies. Getting a stopgap physical guy is more for wins.
Dr Johnny Fever
Eggplant and Teal
At the risk of stating the obvious, Fowler should be taken off PP1 next year. We should give Minty, Z2, and maybe (later in the year depending on health) Luneau, the chance to earn the position. Next year is still more of a development year than squeezing out a few extra meaningless standings points (not to say we even would). Fowler could have fewer minutes to hopefully strengthen his D play and we can develop the future PPQB(s) of the next 10 years.
Who knows, maybe we even end up with an improved PP and actually win a few more games vs trotting Fowler out on PP again?
Who knows, maybe we even end up with an improved PP and actually win a few more games vs trotting Fowler out on PP again?
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
If one was hoping for a Gibson trade then even with an apparently bad return(I’m curious to see just how bad) then this is great news. Gibby was probably not gonna want to go there and Ullmark’s off the market. If Saros gets extended or Nashville at least holds off to try then he’s probably the top guy available.
Hamilton Bulldogs
Registered User
- Jan 11, 2022
- 4,046
- 5,798
The boards behind the opposing teams net no longer being blackened by Fowlers terrible accuracy would appreciate this.
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
The younger guys do need the reps and maybe things improve under Clune in that regard but it’s odd to blame Fowler for powerplay stuff. His unit was the good one.
- Status
