Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
Sounds a lot like Gibson. “No, we are not paying money to give you away so that you can be happier elsewhere”
Speculation: 2024-25 - Free Agency/Trade Thread
- Thread starter All Mighty
- Start date
I do hope that the Ducks are one of the 3 teams Waddell is "engaged" with. And if so, I hope PV take a good, hard look and does so with an open mind. Since we have permission to talk to the player and his agent, the org can get a good feel for how he will fit in Anaheim. If they get a positive feel from that, I hope PV will do all he can to make the deal happen. Our young players need to start winning NOW, and Laine is about the only available option to jumpstart our young offense.
Rasp
Registered User
- Apr 9, 2019
- 1,312
- 1,893
DavidBL
Registered User
I know those teams were mentioned in the past but were they confirmed for DWs most recent comments?
70sSanO
Registered User
We could have it all wrong about Laine and a low pressure situation.
Somewhere in all of this between our board and Columbus, I thought I read something about he’s tired of losing. But it might just be someone’s speculation.
If Laine is tired of losing, and not too much pressure, that changes a lot of things.
Playing for Anaheim vs Columbus for 2 years is kind of a wash. Wanting out does make sense if Laine sees it as throwing away a couple of prime years on a lottery team.
John
Somewhere in all of this between our board and Columbus, I thought I read something about he’s tired of losing. But it might just be someone’s speculation.
If Laine is tired of losing, and not too much pressure, that changes a lot of things.
Playing for Anaheim vs Columbus for 2 years is kind of a wash. Wanting out does make sense if Laine sees it as throwing away a couple of prime years on a lottery team.
John
Last edited:
Assuming Waddell will not accept table scraps for Laine, what would “the deal” look like in your opinion?
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,431
- 17,391
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,728
- 38,075
Fowler
For
laine + 2nd
Addition by subtraction on defense, and potential boost in offense
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,431
- 17,391
I’m not a huge Fowler guy but I wouldn’t do that. Laine just isn’t worth the headache unless you’re dumping Gibson
The loss on defense is not worth the gain in offense. The Ducks have no one who can handle the extra minutes losing Fowler. They do have players with the potential to score as much as Laine. I do think they should trade for Laine, but without a replacement, Fowler makes no sense.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,728
- 38,075
Replacing fowler isn’t as hard as everyone pretends
Arthuros
Registered Snoozer
I would wonder about a deal around maybe 2 2nds and one of LaCombe or Moore.
I wouldn't trade anyone in the top 6 or the top 4.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,728
- 38,075
I mean if gibson is an option obviously he should be the guy going but I don’t think gibson gets conversation started…. He’s terrible
70sSanO
Registered User
I don’t have a problem with Laine for the right price.
But if the Ducks are on his no trade list, and he doesn’t waive it, there is no deal. And do we want a player, that has a history of wanting out, waive the clause and come here.
Knowing what teams are on the list would put things in perspective.
John
But if the Ducks are on his no trade list, and he doesn’t waive it, there is no deal. And do we want a player, that has a history of wanting out, waive the clause and come here.
Knowing what teams are on the list would put things in perspective.
John
robbieboy3686
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2016
- 2,999
- 2,035
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,431
- 17,391
Ok then I have zero interest in Laine.
The ducks need gritty defensive (two way)forwards to surround these high end young offensive talents(Carlsson, Gauthier, McTavish, Zegras, Terry, eventually Sennecke)
I’m not exactly sure how you can look at the composition of our roster right now and say “Laine is a great fit at forward”.
We already have Vatrano/Fabbri/Strome who leave a lot to be desired defensively
Examples of player types we need: Trevor Moore, Elias Lindholm, etc
I’m not sure who’s out there right now but Laine is certainly not moving the needle in that area:
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
It’s nowhere as easy as you pretend.
The type of addition by subtraction that’s needed is about 5-7 minutes off the time he’s on the ice every game, not all 25.
70sSanO
Registered User
Laine potentially brings goals. Pretty much a pure scorer.
If Vatrano gets close to 30, and Laine’s scoring frees up Terry, and reverses last year’s anemic hero offense, he is well worth it.
I’m less concerned about two-way right now and more concerned about filling up the net.
He’s just a 2 year stop gap to give us wins until our kids develop and hopefully we can bring in other assets.
But I’m not convinced he sees Anaheim as enough of a change of scenery.
John
If Vatrano gets close to 30, and Laine’s scoring frees up Terry, and reverses last year’s anemic hero offense, he is well worth it.
I’m less concerned about two-way right now and more concerned about filling up the net.
He’s just a 2 year stop gap to give us wins until our kids develop and hopefully we can bring in other assets.
But I’m not convinced he sees Anaheim as enough of a change of scenery.
John
anezthes
Registered User
- Mar 20, 2014
- 4,646
- 2,848
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,728
- 38,075
We will just have to agree to disagree
Because I don’t see how anyone has watched cam Fowler the last 3 seasons and came out thinking “ya we’re screwed without him “
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
The same way that I look at other players getting misused and failing, with everyone behind them on the depth charts struggling to do well where they are already at. Fowler is getting used as a top 10 defenseman in the league rather than the 3-4 he is. Our top line guys, aren’t. Our 2nd line guys, aren’t. Etc.
Slot players where they belong and their play improves. It’s not like we have any kind of defensive depth in the system that has proven that they belong above being a sheltered 4 next to Gudas, or any depth in the AHL that has proven they belong in the NHL at all.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 41,728
- 38,075
If we slot players where they belong fowler isn’t needed
Mortal Wombat
Registered User
- Dec 7, 2014
- 2,284
- 1,137
Spot on. Laine would be yet another scoring forward who is a defensive liability. We need players who are defensively responsible, meaning players who can get the puck back from the opposing team.
The best way to increase scoring is to spend less time getting hemmed in the defensive zone. Laine is not going to help with that.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,431
- 17,391
We NEED two-way players IN ORDER TO "fill up the net". Right now our young players are going to be chasing the puck the whole season because we have no one who can dig a puck off a wall or back check.
We need strong possession players to unlock our young offensive players. That's not Patrik Laine
70sSanO
Registered User
That’s sounds good except there are no two-way players out there that will fill up the net. At least none that we can get.
There are always two-way players that will be middling scorers.
John
Added: We have no offense anyone fears. We are so easy to shutdown.
