It's the 'Armchair GM' thread. Capsize?
I sense autocorrect at work
Kronwall was the only guy they drafted the past decade that is top 2 legit. He's getting old.
Past decade? Kronwall was drafted over 15 years ago.
It's the 'Armchair GM' thread. Capsize?
Kronwall was the only guy they drafted the past decade that is top 2 legit. He's getting old.
I sense autocorrect at work
Past decade? Kronwall was drafted over 15 years ago.
Calgary looks to have some very good D-men and their goaltending problems seem to be nearing the critical level; seems no one can stop a puck for that team. Our goalie tandem has been one of the few bright parts of this young season but seems like an ideal trading partner.
Not by themseves or right now. It would either be a larger package or 1-2 years from now when Svech/Holmstrom/anyone has increased their value. I just feel like that's the luxury a player like Larkin affords you, making other assets expendable. Ducks don't move Fowler/Lindholm, they will move Vatanen/Theodore. Identify your core players (Larkin, Mrazek), move others. Moving a part of the future core for another part is a lateral move at best, and at worst a downgrade since I doubt Larkin gives us a 19 year old stud d-man to build around for 20 years.Those types of guys also won't return much.
That shouldn't be a surprise. Ducks aren't desperate for a guy like Larkin (they have more need for someone like Nyquist/Tatar in the short term) and you don't move a guy like Fowler unless you want to shake up your core or he demands a trade.
Calgary looks to have some very good D-men and their goaltending problems seem to be nearing the critical level; seems no one can stop a puck for that team. Our goalie tandem has been one of the few bright parts of this young season but seems like an ideal trading partner.
Thinking about it some more, I feel something like Nyquist/Tatar+Dekeyser would be a 'fair' deal for Fowler/Lindholm. Maybe not according to Ducks fans (who almost certainly would want Larkin included), but in reality it would be pretty reasonable imo. But I maintain that I don't see Anaheim moving either of those two guys. Vatanen/Theodore could definitely be shopped around though if they continue to struggle, and I think Holland should be the first one to call and kick those tires.It makes sense when you have Getzlaf locked up until 20-21 and Kesler locked up until 21-22 that it doesn't move the needle for their fan-base.
We wouldn't offer it anyway.... Fowler would be a huge get for the Wings something they should offer up a lot for, but that would be an incredibly substantial package. One of Nyquist/Tatar would have to be involved and you're building out from there and not with anything small or easy to swallow on the couple of assets that follow.
It makes sense when you have Getzlaf locked up until 20-21 and Kesler locked up until 21-22 that it doesn't move the needle for their fan-base.
We wouldn't offer it anyway.... Fowler would be a huge get for the Wings something they should offer up a lot for, but that would be an incredibly substantial package. One of Nyquist/Tatar would have to be involved and you're building out from there and not with anything small or easy to swallow on the couple of assets that follow.
For what it's worth:I don't want to trade Larkin, but I am having a hard believing Nyquist, Tatar and Dekeyser all packaged up could get the young elite dman Wings seek.
Tatar+Dekeyser
for
Cam Fowler
or
Tatar
for
Sami Vatanen
I'd do either one of these. But I really doubt Detroit would.
Those types of guys also won't return much.
You guys both make completely valid points.
The trouble really is this:
I do not think Nashville is very interested in trading Jones.
I think it is clear we need to be drafting more D men, or actively scouting other teams "Prospect" D-men, and trading more established guys for their prospect D. While they still have lower trade value. Only trouble is again you would be gambling on our scouts ability to select D men, which has not been turning out so great as of late.
Trading DeKeyser to get Fowler would be dumb. Not exactly a lateral move because Fowler is better than him, but it would still defeat the purpose.
We need to add to DeKeyser, not trade him for a slight upgrade while the rest of the D still sucks.
Agreed including DeKeyser in any deal is borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. It leaves the wings with the same problem on the backend and less solution on the front end. Factoring in Kronwall's age DeKeyser is the wing's most important D on the roster.
I am not 100% sure this analogy fits
fowler is a better NHL dman than dekeyser today and arguably will be so for the rest of their respective careers
fowler is a top pairing nhl dman, is dekeyser, will dekeyser ever be?
a top pairing nhl dman is a guy who can(could) log 23-26 mins a game and consistently put up 40-55pts a season and play in all situations and in all moments of the game
the hole fowler would fill is much harder to fill then that left by moving dekeyser, its like trading a 2nd line centremen for a first line centremen(you do that move every day of the week)
I am not 100% sure this analogy fits
fowler is a better NHL dman than dekeyser today and arguably will be so for the rest of their respective careers
fowler is a top pairing nhl dman, is dekeyser, will dekeyser ever be?
a top pairing nhl dman is a guy who can(could) log 23-26 mins a game and consistently put up 40-55pts a season and play in all situations and in all moments of the game
the hole fowler would fill is much harder to fill then that left by moving dekeyser, its like trading a 2nd line centremen for a first line centremen(you do that move every day of the week)
Dekeyser + for Fowler is not an ideal move (esp if it's DK + Tats), but it sure as hell ain't lateral for our back end.
No but I believe the gains are marginal. You are also taking a risk by removing a player that fits well and has performed well with the team and replacing him a with a player that potentially would not. Fowler could end up working out great but there is still a risk there. There's better ways to address the defense in my opinion.
Trading DeKeyser to get Fowler would be dumb. Not exactly a lateral move because Fowler is better than him, but it would still defeat the purpose.
We need to add to DeKeyser, not trade him for a slight upgrade while the rest of the D still sucks.
Well, the way I see it there's almost a 0% chance the Ducks trade Fowler. And if they did, it certainly wouldn't be for scraps, picks or prospects. They want to win now. Tatar would fill a big hole in their top 6, and Dekeyser could step right in on their top 4 and take over some of Fowler's responsiblity until Vatanen/Theodore are ready to be top-pairing guys.Agreed including DeKeyser in any deal is borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. It leaves the wings with the same problem on the backend and less solution on the front end. Factoring in Kronwall's age DeKeyser is the wing's most important D on the roster.
But we're moving other pieces along with DK. Obviously a straight up trade is a no brainer, but that's not what we're discussing.
We have too much forward depth, and too many 3rd line defenseman. Would Fowler make the D better? Yes. But the team will stay more or less the same due to losing Dk and Tatar and we've lost a piece to upgrade the D.
Tatar for Vatanen on the other hand upgrades the D( include picks if necessary but I don't think that's necessary). For a piece we can sacrifice. We just can't afford to lose DK.
(At the worst Dk-Vatanen is a very good 2nd pairing that will last for years to come, at best one develops into a first line D). Imagine:
Kronwall-Green
DK-Vatanen
Ericsson-Quincey
I like that much more than:
Kronwall-Fowler
Ericsson-Green
Quincey-Smith/Kindl/whoever
Because the 2nd line is going to be awful.
I don't know you are loosing the number 2 D +. To bring in the number 1 D. I am not arguing that Fowler doesn't fill an important hole but loosing Danny D + to fill that hole is mostly a lateral move for the team as a whole. Secondary D and wingers might be easier to find but it still leaves the problem of having to find them. If its just forwards prospects and Danny D stays to me that is a world of difference based on where the roster is at.
i guess to me those wingers and depth dman are a dime a dozen and are nothing more than complimentary pieces that are of course needed to succeed but that are also easily found once your core is well established
I am gonna not come across looking good saying this but we will never ever win a cup because of guys like tatar or pulkinnen or jurco, they're not integral elements to success in the NHL
i would gladly package dekeyser and tatar for a true stud blueliner that will be in that role in detroit for the next decade or more because that role is essential to success
is fowler that guy? that perhaps is the only question that needs be asked