Speculation: 2025 Trade/Free Agency Thread

[91Fedorov]

Yup. It easy to say "trade them all" but harder to find replacements. No help from SD any time soon either.

I agree. I'm hoping some of the free agent signings PV goes after are upgrades to our bottom 6. We really could benefit from 2 or 3 good guys there.

 

[tomd]

I agree. I'm hoping some of the free agent signings PV goes after are upgrades to our bottom 6. We really could benefit from 2 or 3 good guys there.

I'm not even sure the bottom 6 is all that bad relative to the rest of the team. They aren't elite but they aren't costing the team games IMO. Lundestrom gets too much grief...he's solid for what his role is. Same with Leason. Both lack consistency but you can say that about the entire team.

 

[91Fedorov]

I'm not even sure the bottom 6 is all that bad relative to the rest of the team. They aren't elite but they aren't costing the team games IMO. Lundestrom gets too much grief...he's solid for what his role is. Same with Leason. Both lack consistency but you can say that about the entire team.

I see your point, I kind of disagree on Leason though. I think Leason, Harkins and Johnston wouldn't cut it as bottom sixers on a good team.

 

[tomd]

I see your point, I kind of disagree on Leason though. I think Leason, Harkins and Johnston wouldn't cut it as bottom sixers on a good team.

True...but the Ducks aren't a good team (although at least now they are competitive every game). Johnston I agree on for sure. Harkins has been a pleasant surprise given what my expectations were. Leason is very inconsistent but if he can ever bring his "A" game to the rink all the time he would be a good player.

 

[MMC]

harder to find replacements.

Idk about that

 

[WhatTheDuck]

I'm not even sure the bottom 6 is all that bad relative to the rest of the team. They aren't elite but they aren't costing the team games IMO. Lundestrom gets too much grief...he's solid for what his role is. Same with Leason. Both lack consistency but you can say that about the entire team.

Those guys are fine, they are far from our biggest problem. But they also just don't bring much to the table really, they are filler. I've always kind of liked Lundy, if he could become a good faceoff guy it would go a long way to making himself less expendable. But he's running out of rope to show he has upside besides OK fourth liner. Just not enough standout qualities. Consistency really can't be an issue with a grinder, those guys have to be going all the time.

 

[Hey234]

Those guys are fine, they are far from our biggest problem. But they also just don't bring much to the table really, they are filler. I've always kind of liked Lundy, if he could become a good faceoff guy it would go a long way to making himself less expendable. But he's running out of rope to show he has upside besides OK fourth liner. Just not enough standout qualities. Consistency really can't be an issue with a grinder, those guys have to be going all the time.

I disagree with the assessment. Those 4th liners will play 10-15 minutes. That's 16-25% of the whole game. That is not insignificant and shouldn't be just filler. If the Ducks want to take a step forward, the whole team has to contribute. Guys like Johnston, Harkins, Leason, and Lundestrom have not positively contributed to the overall success of the team. There are players who can do that.

You are correct; they are not the biggest problem. However, they are a problem, and Verbeek should be trying to address all the problems and not just one. If these players were replaced with PK specialists, for example, it could be a real net positive for the team.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

I disagree with the assessment. Those 4th liners will play 10-15 minutes. That's 16-25% of the whole game. That is not insignificant and shouldn't be just filler. If the Ducks want to take a step forward, the whole team has to contribute. Guys like Johnston, Harkins, Leason, and Lundestrom have not positively contributed to the overall success of the team. There are players who can do that.

You are correct; they are not the biggest problem. However, they are a problem, and Verbeek should be trying to address all the problems and not just one. If these players were replaced with PK specialists, for example, it could be a real net positive for the team.

I think you misread my post if you thought I was making a case for why they should stick around

 

[Hey234]

I think you misread my post if you thought I was making a case for why they should stick around

That's fair. I read it as don't make changes because it's inconsequential. Should have read the post you were responding to first. Context helps

 

[Daz28]

Leason and Fabbri should be gone. Sadly, Lundestrom too if he wants more than his QO.

I'd like to have Lundy's replacement lined up ahead of time, though. If the plan is Harkins, or similar, then no thanks.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

I'd like to have Lundy's replacement lined up ahead of time, though. If the plan is Harkins, or similar, then no thanks.

I think Gaucher is probably going to get a look as 4c next year, not sure what other options really exist….

I would love pageau tho

 

[MMC]

Will in all likelihood be a quiet deadline for the Ducks

 

[JAHV]

The only one I really want traded is Fabbri. I want to see either Colangelo or Pastujov get some time. And Fabbri has been disappointing.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

I think we're putting too much emphasis on our fourth liners than our top-9 offensive guys, tbh. Lundy and Leason are starting off in the Dzone nearly 70% of the time. We should expect their CF% to be slanted under 50% as well as not produce high-end offense when you are playing defense from the start 70% of the time. Their primary role isn't to score a lot of points, but to hold serve to give our top-9 respite or penalty killing.

Would I like improvement from our 4th line? Sure, who wouldn't. I'd rather focus on improving our top-9, who are supposed to be carrying the team. Our top-9 guys are giving up more points than they are scoring while being gifted with favorable offensive starts compared to Lundy and Leason.

Leave it to the Swedes for being disciplined forwards.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

I think we're putting too much emphasis on our fourth liners than our top-9 offensive guys, tbh. Lundy and Leason are starting off in the Dzone nearly 70% of the time. We should expect their CF% to be slanted under 50% as well as not produce high-end offense when you are playing defense from the start 70% of the time. Their primary role isn't to score a lot of points, but to hold serve to give our top-9 respite or penalty killing.

Would I like improvement from our 4th line? Sure, who wouldn't. I'd rather focus on improving our top-9, who are supposed to be carrying the team. Our top-9 guys are giving up more points than they are scoring while being gifted with favorable offensive starts compared to Lundy and Leason.

Leave it to the Swedes for being disciplined forwards.


View attachment 983673

The offense needs to be better, all lines …. I just want a 4th line with an identity.

Martin cizikas clutterbuck line… that line legit changed momentum every time they came out. I’d like to build a 4th line like that…. I don’t expect need them to tilt the game offensively …. But forechecking/physicality and a bit of edge to the 4th line would be nice, score some greasy goals, just out work the other teams players.


Our 4th line doesn’t really do much, I don’t think they really fit together great… and I don’t think there is an overall concept of what the line is supposed to do/be.

 

[FiveTacos]

The only one I really want traded is Fabbri. I want to see either Colangelo or Pastujov get some time. And Fabbri has been disappointing.

Disappointing suggests that there were real expectations. I never expected much out of him beyond a 1 year spackling.

Yes upgrading the 4th line should be do-able at low cost. I could see keeping one of the current guys though, don't really care which one.

 

[JAHV]

Disappointing suggests that there were real expectations. I never expected much out of him beyond a 1 year spackling.

Yes upgrading the 4th line should be do-able at low cost. I could see keeping one of the current guys though, don't really care which one.

Overall, yeah, Fabbri has been whatever. Mostly I'm disappointed that the way he plays (which I actually like - fast, hard on the forecheck, decent shooter) hasn't resulted in more production. He's also an awful defender, which has hurt the Ducks on a number of occasions.

So if you take preseason expectations and look at what he's done, he's fine. I just don't think he's a player the Ducks want in the lineup any more.

 

[tomd]

Expectations for Fabbri should have been pretty modest considering Detroit actually paid the Ducks to take him.

 

[91Fedorov]

The only one I really want traded is Fabbri. I want to see either Colangelo or Pastujov get some time. And Fabbri has been disappointing.

I agree on Fabri, but I want Dumo traded as well. Minty and Zell need more playing time.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Well roughly a week until trade deadline, still hoping for
3rd for Dumo
4th for Fabbri
I do think teams will get desperate enough to come closer to PV's ask for Gibson and something might get done.

Also expect us to try and find a cap dump 5/6/7 guy signed through next year, to help shelter our young dmen when needed, and flip at next deadline.

Id like to see us find a top 9 forward... but idk that many available make sense... wed need them to be signed past this ofseason.

 

[LuGBuG]

I’d rather re-up Fabbri for much cheaper and play him in a 4th line role with youngsters coming in and filling the top 9.

 

[McDonald19]

I’d rather re-up Fabbri for much cheaper and play him in a 4th line role with youngsters coming in and filling the top 9.

Does he want to commit to being a 4th liner on a bad team at 29 years old? I think he’d like to talk to 32 teams and cash in on his one good free agency opportunity. Bad timing with another injury, I hope the Ducks can still grab a mid round pick for him next week.

 

[Firequacker]

The offense needs to be better, all lines …. I just want a 4th line with an identity.

Martin cizikas clutterbuck line… that line legit changed momentum every time they came out. I’d like to build a 4th line like that…. I don’t expect need them to tilt the game offensively …. But forechecking/physicality and a bit of edge to the 4th line would be nice, score some greasy goals, just out work the other teams players.


Our 4th line doesn’t really do much, I don’t think they really fit together great… and I don’t think there is an overall concept of what the line is supposed to do/be.

I've been thinking about this a bit. (Likely too much, but whatever, someone has to think too much about the fourth line.) We're not that far removed from the Harkins-Lundestrom-Leason "hybrid third line" being almost exactly what you'd want out of a fourth line. They had positive possession differentials, positive goal differential, created some good momentum including arguably swinging the Nashville game in its entirety. That line wasn't together long enough to know if it could be consistent, but McGinn-Lundestrom-Leason had a lot of good games too (differentials didn't favor them, but differentials didn't really favor anyone on the team when they were together and they did generate stuff) and it wasn't just McGinn carrying them.

But then Ross had his one meaningful fight of the season and now it's not a "hybrid third line" anymore, which is an issue because if I'm not mistaken just about every good game Leason has had this season had him on something that could be identified as more of a checking line. (And I can't offhand recall a bad game he's had in that capacity, the bad games come when they ask him to be a top sixer or a pure energy guy.) He and Lundy together seem to have chemistry and a favored identity—which is two thirds of a decent traditional third line on a team that doesn't usually run one of those. They even managed to be an effective shutdown line with Fabbri on their left that one time, and I'm sure I remember Gauthier-Lundestrom-Leason even having some proper matchup duty (successfully) despite what Cronin has said recently about Cutter not being wired for that.
Cronin even said last season that Leason was a guy you can anchor a third line around. (FWIW, I'd rather have three scoring lines and a checking fourth line, but I think it's pretty clear what "third liner" actually meant in that context. At least until he said it about McTavish.)

Between a checking or energy line style, Johnston and Leason each seem to be specialized for one and it's not the same one. (And they do both have significantly better stats away from each other than together—which is not just Leason having his stats skewed by his time on the Carlsson line, because those numbers were also bad. His total without-Ross numbers are better than his Carlsson line numbers, so the good numbers are coming from somewhere else.) Not to say they can never play well together... hell, Johnston-Lundestrom-Leason got used successfully as a checking line against Dallas when we had Good Ross, it was awesome. But they're not a natural fit with each other. And the fourth line didn't become Public Enemy #1 around here until they got put back together, I don't think it's a coincidence.
That's compounded by the fact that Good Ross shows up like twice every three months. Unsure if Good Leason has a similarly sporadic schedule by nature, or if he'd be able to consistently show up if we consistently gave him a checking line role, but if we're not routinely gonna run that kind of line it's probably a difference without a distinction.

I don't watch the Gulls, but based on what I've heard, I'd be really curious to see what a Lundestrom-Gaucher-Leason line might look like before we go firing two of those guys into the sun.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

a 4th line featuring a healthy McGinn and Fabbri seems like a huge asset but those guys are never healthy and we'd need major upgrades at every third line spot to make it work.

 

[JAHV]

I’d rather re-up Fabbri for much cheaper and play him in a 4th line role with youngsters coming in and filling the top 9.

I hear you, and he's certainly better than Johnston back there, but our 4th line needs some defensive chops. Fabbri does not have them.