Proposal: [ANA/WPG] Despres for Dano

[Mortimer Snerd]

dano for larsson lmao

Dano is still a VG prospect with 2nd line potential. If you don't like him suggest someone you think is the right value - don't bother with Laine, Ehlers or Connor. They are in Lindholm territory.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

Despres belonged there, and was actually successful there.

The part that makes me shake my head is your assertion that you know better about an Anaheim player, than Anaheim fans. You're speaking from a place of ignorance. Stop pretending you're coming to your conclusions based on an informed opinion.

Despres can play top pairing, one of those few players that can compliment a true #1. If not, he can be the #4 shutdown guy. Or on the 3rd pairing, he can be a match-up problem.

The big question with him is his health, and how he rebounds from the concussion. Concussions can obviously have lingering side effects. For that reason, I'd understand if someone wasn't interested in a trade for him.

That is an issue, but I don't know his history with concussions off hand.

If he can come back, he should be on Anaheim's protected list.

I look at Despres as one of those rare(nowadays) defenseman that makes the forward think...

"He might get suspended 5 games, but I might miss the season"...before the game.

 

[Sojourn]

Despres can play top pairing, one of those few players that can compliment a true #1. If not, he can be the #4 shutdown guy. Or on the 3rd pairing, he can be a match-up problem.



That is an issue, but I don't know his history with concussions off hand.

If he can come back, he should be on Anaheim's protected list.

I look at Despres as one of those rare(nowadays) defenseman that makes the forward think...

"He might get suspended 5 games, but I might miss the season"...before the game.

That would be a tough one. Assuming Fowler is moved, Despres vs. Manson. I think, at his best, Despres is currently better.

If he bounces back strong, the next question is what steps Manson takes this season, if any.

 

[Hunter368]

First off, I never said Despres was a top pairing guy. I said he was effective in a complementary role. As in, he and Fowler worked well together in that role. Separate from Fowler, that doesn't mean he can handle a top pairing role. But with Fowler, they worked well together.

Secondly, whether Stuart and Chariot looked decent really isn't relevant. I'm not saying they are complementary top pairing guys. I wouldn't try to say that, because I don't watch them enough. You might want to learn the difference between an informed opinion, and just making an assumption. You're doing the latter. You've come to your conclusion, not based on facts or observations, but by your own assumptions that Despres is a poor quality player because, why? It clearly isn't from viewing him for more than a game or two. And yes, I'm assuming there, because either you aren't watching him, or you're just not a particularly good judge of opposing players.

Anaheim has two of them. Fowler and Lindholm. That's not a long list, but I suppose when you're lacking facts you need to resort to exaggeration.

1) I know exactly what you meant that's why I used the exact same type of example as Stuart and Chariot.....I wasn't insulting you.....I was giving the exactly same type of example from the Jets. Pointing out anyone's mistake in believing Stuart or Chariot belonged there.

2) Judging Despres from a small sample size is prone to mistake, like some who believed Chariot was a top 4 guy just b/c he looked ok beside Buff. Chariot isn't top 4, I've watched Drepres on the Pens (daughters fav team) and Ducks (plays in the west) a fair bit actually. Not sure why you assume I haven't, I've likely seen him play more games then many ducks fans.

You keep Drepres, I'm happy he's working out so well for the ducks.....hopefully he keeps that up and stays healthy for 82 games.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

That would be a tough one. Assuming Fowler is moved, Despres vs. Manson. I think, at his best, Despres is currently better.

If he bounces back strong, the next question is what steps Manson takes this season, if any.

Huh?

I was just agreeing with Despres being good.

 

[Sojourn]

1) I know exactly what you meant that's why I used the exact same type of example as Stuart and Chariot.....I wasn't insulting you.....I was giving the exactly same type of example from the Jets. Pointing out anyone's mistake in believing Stuart or Chariot belonged there.

2) Judging Despres from a small sample size is prone to mistake, like some who believed Chariot was a top 4 guy just b/c he looked ok beside Buff. Chariot isn't top 4, I've watched Drepres on the Pens (daughters fav team) and Ducks (plays in the west) a fair bit actually. Not sure why you assume I haven't, I've likely seen him play more games then many ducks fans.

You keep Drepres, I'm happy he's working out so well for the ducks.....hopefully he keeps that up and stays healthy for 82 games.

1) Your mistake is in assuming that because Stuart and Chiarot don't belong that, that neither does Despres.

2) In that case, you're judging him from a small sample size too. He just turned 25, and he's played a total of 200 games over 5 seasons. Every sample size, thus far, is small. The difference is, my sample size is more recent. I'm also not assuming he can't improve, or take a step back. That seems to be exactly what you're doing. You've come to the conclusion that he, apparently, can't be a top pairing complementary guy because you saw him in the past.

See, I'm not saying he is, and will always be a top pairing complementary guy. I'm saying he's shown that he can be that, and he has. You're saying, outright, that he's crap, and a 3rd pairing guy.

Stuart and Chiarot may suck. I don't watch them enough to say one way or the other. Despres does not. He did, however, struggle after his concussion last season. It remains to be seen how he does on a consistent basis, but so far he's definitely shown he can be more than the 3rd pairing label you seem adamant he deserves.

 

[HanSolo]

FYI, that Marko Dano post is a running joke around the Lounge.

 

[Sojourn]

Huh?

I was just agreeing with Despres being good.

That was in response to protecting Despres in the draft. That would be a tough decision, between him and Manson.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

That was in response to protecting Despres in the draft. That would be a tough decision, between him and Manson.

Oh ok, brain fart, gotcha.

 

[HanSolo]

That was in response to protecting Despres in the draft. That would be a tough decision, between him and Manson.

I don't think it would be that tough IMO. I'd rather go forward with Manson.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

I don't think it would be that tough IMO. I'd rather go forward with Manson.

Based on talent or salary?

 

[Hunter368]

1) Your mistake is in assuming that because Stuart and Chiarot don't belong that, that neither does Despres.

2) In that case, you're judging him from a small sample size too. He just turned 25, and he's played a total of 200 games over 5 seasons. Every sample size, thus far, is small. The difference is, my sample size is more recent. I'm also not assuming he can't improve, or take a step back. That seems to be exactly what you're doing. You've come to the conclusion that he, apparently, can't be a top pairing complementary guy because you saw him in the past.

See, I'm not saying he is, and will always be a top pairing complementary guy. I'm saying he's shown that he can be that, and he has. You're saying, outright, that he's crap, and a 3rd pairing guy.

Stuart and Chiarot may suck. I don't watch them enough to say one way or the other. Despres does not. He did, however, struggle after his concussion last season. It remains to be seen how he does on a consistent basis, but so far he's definitely shown he can be more than the 3rd pairing label you seem adamant he deserves.

1) Assuming? No, just my opinion....we both have one and we don't agree.

2) I agree with his very spotty health history it's harder to fairly evaluate him.....but durability is also an ability to evaluated.

We'll how he plays later long term, if he can stay healthy. At this point he's far too big of a risk and somewhat unknown due to his poor health (as you pointed out).

 

[RandallRitchey]

Thought this was a legit trade and could only think Winnipeg got the short end of the stick.

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

If that's the case, then why didn't Chicago play him more?

Hawks rarely play real young guys full time in NHL. Usually are in AHL to develop. Pretty tough roster for a young kid to crack. He played majority of time on Hawks AHL team and played real well... and when called up to Hawks for his limited games, he played limited mins due to depth

 

[Pennaduck]

I read through the entire Eklund-Fowler rumor thread and now this thread and just can't believe there are hockey fans out that don't see that Fowler is a top pairing defenseman and Despres is a good top four defenseman, or that when they are both healthy and playing together they make a very effective pairing capable of taking on top pairing assignments. What gets me even more is that when these fans of other teams are confronted about this by actual ducks fans on here who watch every game, they refuse to concede even an inch in the argument/discussion/whatever the f* that Fowler thread turned into. There must be some sort of mental condition that sports fans have, where they think they know more about an opposing team and its players than the die hard fans of that team.

Anyway, I'm not as high on Dano as most seem to be, but we need to move a d-man or two and I'd rather that be Despres over Fowler. If Dano or a comparable talent is the return, I'm fine with that.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

Hawks rarely play real young guys full time in NHL. Usually are in AHL to develop. Pretty tough roster for a young kid to crack

Like Paranin
Like van Riemsdyk
Like Gustafson

 

[Pongs21]

I read through the entire Eklund-Fowler rumor thread and now this thread and just can't believe there are hockey fans out that don't see that Fowler is a top pairing defenseman and Despres is a good top four defenseman, or that when they are both healthy and playing together they make a very effective pairing capable of taking on top pairing assignments. What gets me even more is that when these fans of other teams are confronted about this by actual ducks fans on here who watch every game, they refuse to concede even an inch in the argument/discussion/whatever the f* that Fowler thread turned into. There must be some sort of mental condition that sports fans have, where they think they know more about an opposing team and its players than the die hard fans of that team.

Anyway, I'm not as high on Dano as most seem to be, but we need to move a d-man or two and I'd rather that be Despres over Fowler. If Dano or a comparable talent is the return, I'm fine with that.

9/10 Jet's - Ducks thread about D men always turns to ****. From my point of view, SOME Duck fans on here believe that every D man they have are top pairing, worth the ****ing moon +++ and see lots of >>>> and lmao thrown around everywhere. to a point where it's getting ridiculous. Despres is not a crap D man, however ideally he would be in your bottom pairing, and 3.7 per year is a steep price to pay for a bottom pairing D man.

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

Like Paranin
Like van Riemsdyk
Like Gustafson

No cause they are all 3-4 years older and expected to contribute right away. Dano was only 20 with a deep group of forwards ahead of him

 

[SEALBound]

From a neutral fan of both teams who likes both players, I like the deal. Given Peg's vast treasures of forward talent and their aging defense, I think this trade makes sense. Anaheim needs a top 6 forward to boot. Hockey trade.

I'd do it.

 

[xxreact9]

I really don't understand why Dano is so highly valued.

Can someone explain it to me?

Don't really know. He's overrated but still a good prospect.

Despres for Dano is a pretty fair swap. No one is saying Dano doesn't have higher upside in terms of value, but Despres is a proven asset for many seasons at the NHL level.

Bottom line: when you trade a proven asset for a prospect, you will 100% of the time sacrifice quality and upside for risk aversion. Not a difficult concept.

 

[Daximus]

Despres is okay. But if were going after a dman I want a legit top 4. I'd be willing to pay a price and would prefer it if one of our righties (Myers) were included to relieve some of our Dcore spending. We'd likely be trading with a team that has a lefty-righty imbalance to our righty-lefty imbalance.

 

[Pennaduck]

9/10 Jet's - Ducks thread about D men always turns to ****. From my point of view, SOME Duck fans on here believe that every D man they have are top pairing, worth the ****ing moon +++ and see lots of >>>> and lmao thrown around everywhere. to a point where it's getting ridiculous. Despres is not a crap D man, however ideally he would be in your bottom pairing, and 3.7 per year is a steep price to pay for a bottom pairing D man.

Well i'm new to posting on here so I can't speak for anything that's been said before a few days ago, but I can tell you that I think I have a pretty realistic opinion on our defensemen and try not to overvalue any of our players too much. I rarely ever see a Ducks fan say Fowler is elite, for example. Most of us agree that he is a good #2 or a very good #3 when paired with a competent D partner. Unfortunately he hasn't had that luxury much in his young career but that's getting off topic obviously.

If people want to say Despres is a bottom pairing defensemen that are entitled to that opinion. My point was that when fans of the team who watch every game and follow the sport closely enough to post on boards like this are saying he is a good 2nd pairing guy, that should be taken with some respect by fans of other teams.

I could see him being a bottom pairing guy if we had say, two elite top pairing defensemen and an additional two steady top four defenseman. In that case sure he would be overpaid for that role. I think I get it now though. The debates arent really about whether player x is or is not a top pairing or top four defenseman, they are actually debates over what consitutes a top pairing or top four defenseman, and those criteria seem to differ from person to person.

For my money, if a guy is getting the minutes and assignments of a top four dman and does not look lost out there doing so, he should be considered as such. It seems like a lot of people prefer to reserve the top pairing status for only the elite Dmen in the league, and reserve the top four status for whether that player would be in that role on a cup winning team.

This is, in my opinion, a fundamentally flawed logic. There are 30 and soon to be 31 teams in the league, whereas I would venture to guess most fans who view things this way could only list 15 or 20 'top pairing guys.' By extension, there should be about 120 defensemen in the league who play top four roles/minutes. Obviously some teams are more fortunate with what they have than others, but it would be hard for me to believe that these people such as yourself who are viewing Despres as a bottom pairing d-man could muster a list of 120 Dmen who are better than him and more deserving of the title of top four defenseman. Even if you want to be conservative in this approach and take the position that many teams only have 3 'top four' capable Dmen at any time, you are still looking at a list of nearly 100 players who are, in your opinion, better at defense than Despres.

Like I said, I try to be objective and reasonable in my valuation of Ducks players, but I have a hard time putting together a list of that many players who would be ahead of him on any given teams depth chart. Maybe a nice exercise to emphasize this point would be for someone like yourself to explain where a guy like Fowler and a guy like Despres would be on the depth charts of some of the better defenses in the league, and take the debate from there.

 

[Daximus]

Like Paranin
Like van Riemsdyk
Like Gustafson

Panarin was 23-24 last year, TVR was the same, Gustafsson was 22-23 last year. All guys with a lot more pro experience.
Dano will be good but like those guys, needs time.

 

[johna2626]

Not sure why some Jets fans are so fascinated with trading for life time bottom pairing crap defence while giving up good young prospects.

Christ sake if you want to trade away good prospects at least target good defensive prospects not crap.

GTFO Despres

Preach....

 

[lindholmie]

Somebody suggested Dano for Larsson. Thats more like it I think. Larsson is still quite a way from the NHL but he has decent upside too.

Agreed.

Dano for Larrson I would agree with and see logic in.

You see only jets fans saying yeah? There is a reason for that. Larsson has the potential to be a top pairing defensemen. Dano doesn't touch that