Speculation: 2024-25 - Free Agency/Trade Thread

[Ducks DVM]

I don’t need to address any of that because I don’t want the youth playing above where they should be and I believe you can do that with or without Fowler here.

I’d like to point out that Vaakanainen had a good season and should be playing too. He’s the forgotten man on these boards and by the team right now but he shouldn’t be.

My defense after a Fowler trade would be:

LaCombe-Gudas
Mintyukov-Dumolin
Vaakanainen-Luneau


it’s really not that different than it is right now.
Zellweger starts in the AHL and gets called up after the 1st injury.
Again, I don’t understand this massive freak out about kids being shoe horned into roles if Fowler is gone.

I also think it’s important to note that Fowler is no where near the same player he was from 2013-2020. People conveniently leave that part out.

Vaakanainen was good with Gudas (so was every other youngster). Vaakanainen was considerably less good away from Gudas.

Gudas’ play fell off dramatically as his numbers crested 19 minutes - he clearly didn’t have the stamina, nor the physicality to his game at 20 minutes that he does at 18.

Replacing Fowler with Vaakanainen is absolutely a step backwards, at least right now.

Side note (not saying this is you) - the people saying he’s a decent mid-pairing defenseman and wanting to replace him with a bottom pairing guy, I do not get. Nor do I get how the typical 2nds you’d expect for a mid pairing guy is going to make the team better before the current crop is well into their 7-8 year contracts. It’s not addition by subtraction until you have players who give actually proven they are ready to be given the responsibility, and are somehow immune to the sophomore slump.

 

[Ducks DVM]

Guys, we can't let Fowler tear us apart like this lol. Some of us love him, some of us hate him. He will be gone by the deadline and then we can continue with our life and pick a new person to be split on lol.

My money is still on Cronin and Gibson.

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

Can Fowler is unappreciated. If you are objective with what he has to deal as far as partners and team I don’t think he is the problem.

His last good partner was Manson and I thought they were amazing together. I have hopes for luneau and him. They just need to be sheltered to start the season. Not 3rd pairing minutes but more pair 2b.

Let gudas and lacombe take the tough. Minutes and minty dump the offensive ones. Can and lineup should take the easy ones.

We should really thinking long term solutions for gudas and dumo. Zelwegger will eventually replace Fowler but who replaces them? We need a rhd badly.

I’m not seeing a crazy amount of Fowler hate besides maybe one or two posters

I just keep seeing people saying “the Fowler hate is over the top” when most of the “hate” is just basic discussion about if he fits or not on the team moving forward

He almost seems to have more stans/nutsswingers than haters at this point to me

You guys saying similar things with the same pfp broke my brain for a minute

My money is still on Cronin and Gibson.

The off-season has been all Cam talk but I think Terry was the most divisive player last year. I'm sure he will slot nicely into the whipping boy schedule.

 

[AngelDuck]

In this scenario, the benefit of moving Fowler is to get vaak into the lineup? Why is that enough for you to make the team worse? Vaak is a nice story, but the guy is a #6/7. Any way you slice it, Fowler out and vaak in makes the team worse. Why do we want that?

Second, it is unavoidable to move our bullet sponge and not have kids taking strays. That is unavoidable. You have to be ok with lacombe, luneau, and mintyukov taking on substantially tougher minutes between them, hope they are ready for it, and hope it doesn't negatively effect their development. Are those risks worth the positive (??????) of removing fowler from the team?

Third, fowler's statistical output has been brought up ad nauseum to combat the Fowler sucks crowd, and those arguments have been met with "well the stats lie" or "we don't care about his production". So, when you say he hasn't been as good as when the team was good, yeah no shit. But, the data supports the pro-fowler crowd far more than the other side.

This isn't meant as a dump on you, but the Fowler debate becomes a drive-by cascade of bad takes once an actual discussion begins, because the argument of dumping him for no real upgrade or reason doesn't make any sense.

And again, vaak is going to get into the lineup. Probably a lot! We use 9-10 dmen every year. Someone is going to get hurt, many someones, and he is going to play. Zellweger is going to play. Some very bad AHL dman is going to play. Why we want to worsen our depth is lost on me.

I don’t think there is any tangible evidence that the kids playing higher roles will negatively effect there development. There’s a lot of people on here who want to keep the training wheels on guys but I’m not sold that’s to their benefit either. You don’t throw them out there for 25 minutes a night but some of them should be getting reps in the top 4.

It’s funny how this board is the exact opposite of the kings board. They’re PISSED their young players don’t get to play in the top 6/top4. And most of you are pissed when they do. The reality, to me, is that it doesn’t matter either way as much as anyone thinks it does developmentally. There are even people on this board who thought Carlsson should have been in Sweden or the AHL last season. I mean for f***s sake.

The stats don’t support that Cam Fowler is cut out to play the minutes he’s played the last 2 seasons. I’d be more on board with keeping him if the coaching staff could look at him objectively for who he is at this point as a player and not treat him like he’s Chris Pronger or Drew Doughty.

The reason we want to “worsen” our depth is because we need to get a long hard look at our younger guys to determine which ones are keepers and which are trade bait.

You ask a zillion other questions in your post that I’m not interested in arguing or responding to. My point is that it doesn’t matter if Fowler is here or not. Keep him, fine. Trade him, fine.

The good prospects/young players are going to develop fine with or without his presence

 

[duckpuck]

Imo fowler doesn’t get enough hate, people have been willing to give him passes, only recently have people started actually even noticing/criticizing him.

But often times it’s not even hate it’s criticizing or looking at the big picture, and the Fowler stans ain’t ready for the conversation yet, they want him to get his 1000 games or something.

Also I don’t recall many people saying fowler is terrible/not nhl talent or even top 4 talent…. A lot of the issues is with fit, future players showing up.


He’s prob a solid #3, good #4 on a contender but that isn’t exactly what we need and stylistically he isn’t the ideal fit. I doubt he’s moved until deadline, because it’s tough to find the right team for him where we can get value back, at that point there may be more legit options.


I don’t think they have any pieces lol… their prospect pool + draft picks is pretty bare.

Detroit would be my ideal target as partners

You, other people, and I have been criticizing Fowler for years. This is just not true. And while criticism does not equal "hate", your acknowledging he's a solid 3/4 and then wanting to trade him sooner rather than later for the proverbial bag of pucks seems irrational.

If the team wants to see how the kids handle a bigger role, then play Fowler less. I would not disagree whatsoever that that needs to occur this season, it's the natural order of things.

But there's a difference between weaning and cold turkey, and you can't takesy-backseys if you find out the kids aren't quite ready.

This is exactly right. As the season progresses, give the kids more responsibility and harder matchups. Sprinkle in Zell and Vaak. And once they've shown they are ready for increased roles (hopefully by the deadline), you trade Fowler and/or Dumoulin. There's no reason to trade Fowler now unless they are overwhelmed by an offer.

 

[Static]

I don’t think there is any tangible evidence that the kids playing higher roles will negatively effect there development. There’s a lot of people on here who want to keep the training wheels on guys but I’m not sold that’s to their benefit either. You don’t throw them out there for 25 minutes a night but some of them should be getting reps in the top 4.

It’s funny how this board is the exact opposite of the kings board. They’re PISSED their young players don’t get to play in the top 6/top4. And most of you are pissed when they do. The reality, to me, is that it doesn’t matter either way as much as anyone thinks it does developmentally. There are even people on this board who thought Carlsson should have been in Sweden or the AHL last season. I mean for f***s sake.

The stats don’t support that Cam Fowler is cut out to play the minutes he’s played the last 2 seasons. I’d be more on board with keeping him if the coaching staff could look at him objectively for who he is at this point as a player and not treat him like he’s Chris Pronger or Drew Doughty.

The reason we want to “worsen” our depth is because we need to get a long hard look at our younger guys to determine which ones are keepers and which are trade bait.

You ask a zillion other questions in your post that I’m not interested in arguing or responding to. My point is that it doesn’t matter if Fowler is here or not.

The good prospects/young players are going to develop fine with or without his presence

The evidence of players developing without veteran presences is not in your favor. Historically, currently, whatever. Kids who are given roles they are not ready for typically suffer developmentally. I don't know why anyone would want to take that chance when you can accomplish the same thing with Fowler on the roster as a Fail-Safe.



Why does Fail-Safe demand capitalization

 

[AngelDuck]

The evidence of players developing without veteran presences is not in your favor. Historically, currently, whatever. Kids who are given roles they are not ready for typically suffer developmentally. I don't know why anyone would want to take that chance when you can accomplish the same thing with Fowler on the roster as a Fail-Safe.

Why does Fail-Safe demand capitalization

Uh, but there is plenty of veteran presence on the roster without Fowler.

They just named a veteran captain. Dumolin/Killorn have both won 2 Stanley cups. Strome/Vatrano/Fabbri have been around the block.

We’re not icing the San Diego gulls if Fowler isn’t here

There’s zero evidence that the roles these guys would be playing without Fowler would be detrimental to their development - provided that the coaching staff distributes minutes correctly

 

[Sean Garrity]

Uh, but there is plenty of veteran presence on the roster without Fowler.

They just named a veteran captain. Dumolin/Killorn have both won 2 Stanley cups. Strome/Vatrano/Fabbri have been around the block.

We’re not icing the San Diego gulls if Fowler isn’t here

There’s zero evidence that the roles these guys would be playing without Fowler would be detrimental to their development - provided that the coaching staff distributes minutes correctly

But there aren’t any that can fill Fowler’s role before the kids are ready. Half more of a season or maybe one more and then he’ll be gone and we can all pick on Tim because that’s easy.

 

[Static]

Lol literally no one has said “the stats lie”
Shoulda thrown in “trust me bro” in your post.

Fowler's shot is a complete non factor. He doesn't shoot it hard and he's not accurate. He also holds on the puck way too long., causing the powerplay to tick down He may appear to have some decent stats but I don't think you can say that most D-man in his position wouldn't do the same if not better. Sometimes stats just don't tell the whole story and I think thats probably the case here.

Took five seconds.

Uh, but there is plenty of veteran presence on the roster without Fowler.

They just named a veteran captain. Dumolin/Killorn have both won 2 Stanley cups. Strome/Vatrano/Fabbri have been around the block.

We’re not icing the San Diego gulls if Fowler isn’t here

There’s zero evidence that the roles these guys would be playing without Fowler would be detrimental to their development - provided that the coaching staff distributes minutes correctly

There is zero evidence in this specific case because it hasn't happened.

Historically, there is a TON of evidence that kids playing above their heads before they are ready hurts their development.

Fowler does not have to be traded to test out if one of the young dmen is ready for tougher minutes.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

You, other people, and I have been criticizing Fowler for years. This is just not true. And while criticism does not equal "hate", your acknowledging he's a solid 3/4 and then wanting to trade him sooner rather than later for the proverbial bag of pucks seems irrational.




This is exactly right. As the season progresses, give the kids more responsibility and harder matchups. Sprinkle in Zell and Vaak. And once they've shown they are ready for increased roles (hopefully by the deadline), you trade Fowler and/or Dumoulin. There's no reason to trade Fowler now unless they are overwhelmed by an offer.

How so, I don’t feel the team needs another puck moving 3/4 guy on the left side. If he was more of an anchor defensively, or more physical I wouldn’t mind…. But he’s average at best in terms of defense, and he’s 1 of the softest players in the league.

I also have said I don’t mind waiting till deadline to up his value a bit… in terms of more teams pursuing him potentially. But I won’t cry if he’s traded this week(maybe cry a little but they’d be tears of happiness)

 

[Deuce22]

Fowler’s skill set is redundant with what we already have. Puck moving LHD. He isn’t good in his own zone. Mintyukov, LaCombe, and Zellweger can do what he is doing at this point. Ducks D won’t be any worse if Cam is traded. Fowler getting caved in isn’t protecting anyone. Heck, LaCombe looked like a different player once they got him away from Fowler.

 

[CrazyDuck4u]

I want Cam gone the most.. But I gotta be honest. They tried to make him into something he is not.. a # 1.

 

[2faded]

Historically, there is a TON of evidence that kids playing above their heads before they are ready hurts their development.

I would say Fowler is an example of that.

My opinion is that Fowler is a #3/4 (at this point, not always) that's being asked to be a #1 and isn't doing a good job at it. Do I want him on the team still? Not really. But, it's not going to hurt anyone to have him on the team a bit longer and it's not like we're competing this season anyways.

Zell sitting in the press box might hurt his development. But, that's not Fowler's fault.

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

Sure.. move Fowler and then have the young core defenseman play out of their heads like last season

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

You don’t throw them out there for 25 minutes a night but some of them should be getting reps in the top 4.

They did! So we’re all good.

 

[All Mighty]

Not a ton of info here, but a couple mentions by Friedman:

 

[ZegrassyKnoll]

Wonder if we take a swing at Liljegren?

 

[Rybread86]

nevermind, said it too much before

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

nevermind, said it too much before

Dome?

 

[dracom]

Liljegren is not good and wouldn't push anyone on the right side out. not sure he has much of a NHL career...

 

[dracom]

Not a ton of info here, but a couple mentions by Friedman:

St. Louis looking at Fowler is interesting...not sure where he would fit there. i assume after getting Broberg they probably aren't interested anymore

 

[cheesymc]

St. Louis looking at Fowler is interesting...not sure where he would fit there. i assume after getting Broberg they probably aren't interested anymore

Broberg might end up being a steal. He’s started off well and will be logging big minutes with his size and skating abilities.

I’m hoping Nashville gets early injuries and pursue Fowler.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

The evidence of players developing without veteran presences is not in your favor. Historically, currently, whatever. Kids who are given roles they are not ready for typically suffer developmentally. I don't know why anyone would want to take that chance when you can accomplish the same thing with Fowler on the roster as a Fail-Safe.



Why does Fail-Safe demand capitalization

I don’t think many people are advocating lining up all rookies… actually the opposite.

Most want a better fit vet presence.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

St. Louis looking at Fowler is interesting...not sure where he would fit there. i assume after getting Broberg they probably aren't interested anymore

Don’t really see a fit for the blues.

Liljegren is not good and wouldn't push anyone on the right side out. not sure he has much of a NHL career...

I actually think Toronto could have interest in fowler…. But idk what they have on top of liljegren to persuade us

 

[Hockey Duckie]

I don’t think there is any tangible evidence that the kids playing higher roles will negatively effect there development. There’s a lot of people on here who want to keep the training wheels on guys but I’m not sold that’s to their benefit either. You don’t throw them out there for 25 minutes a night but some of them should be getting reps in the top 4.

It’s funny how this board is the exact opposite of the kings board. They’re PISSED their young players don’t get to play in the top 6/top4. And most of you are pissed when they do. The reality, to me, is that it doesn’t matter either way as much as anyone thinks it does developmentally. There are even people on this board who thought Carlsson should have been in Sweden or the AHL last season. I mean for f***s sake.

Our prospects didn't play top-6F nor top-4D last season? Huh. Someone wasn't watching the Ducks closely last season.

==== Carlsson as 1C ====

Carlsson played 1C minutes all last year as an 18-year old rookie. His load mgmt was piss poor due to inconsistent rest times and he still would up getting injured on three separate occasions, including one concussion result that lasted seven games, or half a month, missed. Leo played a total of 55 NHL games last year. Guess that load mgmt was a failed gimmick.

The SHL has a 56-game schedule on their regular season in the same time span of an NHL season that plays 82 games. Why trust Carlsson's SHL team that developed him for two seasons and became the #3 overall in the 2023 draft? Orebro stated he would be playing 1C with them last year and they were a playoff team. Odds are his offensive production would have fared much better and probably developed better physically.

==== Defensive youths in the top-4 ====

Our defensive youths of Minty, Zell, and LaCombe last year as rookies displayed below in charts as evidence.

Mintyukov	2023-24
Game Set	Games	G	A	Pts	PPG		+/-	Hits	Blocks	Pair
1 to 63	63​	4​	24​	28​	0.44​		-20​	85​	65​	.
1 to 20	20​	1​	10​	11​	0.55​		-1​	30​	24​	Lybush 3rd pair
21 to 40	20​	1​	7​	8​	0.40​		-10​	26​	19​	Lyubush, 2nd P, injury
41 to 47	7​	1​	3​	4​	0.57​		-2​	10​	2​	Lyubush, 3rd pair/2nd pair
48 to 55	8​	0​	2​	2​	0.25​		-5​	6​	13​	Gudas, top pair
56 to 62	7​	1​	2​	3​	0.43​		0​	11​	7​	LaCombe, 2nd pair
63	1​	0​	0​	0​	0.00​		-2​	2​	0​	Lindstrom, 2nd pair and injured for the rest of the season

When Minty was thrusted into a top-4 position the first time, he faltered defensively. As a top pair with Gudas, he faltered even more offensively and defensively. Surprisingly, his game steadied when paired with LaCombe (LaCombe playing RD).

Zell	2023-24
Game Set	Games	G	A	Pts	PPG		+/-	Hits	Blocks	Comments
Total	26	2	7	9	0.35​		-6	14	38	total
1st call up	4	0	1	1	0.25​		2	4	5	3rd pair
2nd call up	22	2	6	8	0.36​		-8	10	33	1st pair

Zell's +/- rating should actually be worse b/c a few times LaCombe would help win the puck in the D-zone, push it up fast, then head to the bench promptly, and Zell would step onto the ice as the team scores.

LaCombe	2023-24
Game Set	Games	G	A	Pts	PPG		+/-	Hits	Blocks	Playing
1 to 69	71	2	15	17	0.24		-24	50	129	.
1 to 6	6	0	1	1	0.17		1	3	10	Pair 2 with Gudas, Pair 1 in 2nd half of game 6
7 to 20	14	0	2	2	0.14		-17	15	18	Pair 1
21 to 40	20	0	4	4	0.20		-7	14	41	Pair 1 to 3
41 to 60	20	1	5	6	0.30		-2	13	43	Pair 1 to 3
61 to 71	11	1	3	4	0.36		1	5	17	Pair 1 to 2

LaCombe looked alright to start the season as the team's 2nd pairing with Gudas until Drysdale got injured, Luneau just wasn't ready, and Vaak got replaced in 1 1/2 games. Despite LaCombe's absurd -17 rating in 14-and-a-half games as a top pairing, the Ducks went 8-7-0. The first five games, the Ducks went 1-4-0 with Drysdale, Luneau, and Vaak. That one win in the first five games was with Fowler-Drysdale top pair, where Fowler had 1g, 1a, and +2 rating in 23:30 TOI while Drysdale had 1a, +1 rating, and 22:06 TOI.

It took a bit for LaCombe to recover as he was rotated up and down the pairings. Eventually, he turned his game around in his final 31 games. Although LaCombe played 71 games, he was never injured during the season. A big thanks to developing physically for four years in the NCAA.

None of our defensive youths fared well as a top-pairing D, but LaCombe somewhat improved later into the season.