MCB
Registered User
- Jun 21, 2019
- 955
- 1,095
I wish this would have been split, or just focused on the Fowler news. Gibson trades and rumors are nothing new.
Rumor: Cam Fowler potentially available, Gibson, too
- Thread starter Gaylord Q Tinkledink
- Start date
Fowler is probably fair value at his contract. He is absolutely not a 24+ minute a night, #1 D that the Ducks have been using him as. He can play PP2 and PK2, and is probably still a pretty solid #3 or play on a top pair with a good #1 (doesn't need to be carried, but shouldn't be the best player on that pair). He's been used to carry lesser players and rookies on the top pair for years, which he can't do. Despite playing minutes that he shouldn't and being on a cursed team, he's only missed 1 game in the last 2 years (and 6 the year before), so durability shouldn't be an issue either.
Gibson normally starts the year pretty good just wait a month or two into the season and then trade him
AcerComputer
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2014
- 5,331
- 3,404
I fail to see how this benefits the Ducks at all lol.
Can you possibly think of any reason the Ducks would make this trade?
All Mighty
Registered User
Too much term on both of those players for me to be interested from a Ducks’ perspective.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,548
- 39,390
We get younger /shrug
Graves is better at what we need than fowler.
Jarry is prob a better fit for us than Gibson.
But i dont think that really gets us to trade them.
Name them. 7.85% x 8 years and never cracked .905%. Some of Kurt Overcharge’s finest work. They would have been better off giving that money to James Reimer.
Ya thats pretty weak. Especially when part of the reason the Ducks would look to move on from Gibson and Fowler is because there are replacements in the organization already.
Not sure how Jarry is a better fit. At their best Gibson is better. At their worst they both are replacement level. I would much rather keep Gibson for 1 less year then save 1 mil in cap, especially since in theory Gibson could decide he wants to win again.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,548
- 39,390
I imagine gibson trade speculation is because he wants out and wants a chance to be a starter
Of course. That doesn't mean the Ducks have to make themselves worse in the process.
HockeyVirus
Woll stan.
- Nov 15, 2020
- 19,443
- 29,715
Gibson is like Chychrun the other year. Held onto the player forever trying to get value and if someone does pay, it will be clear they lost the deal by the end of the next season
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,548
- 39,390
- Sep 27, 2017
- 5,700
- 3,010
featherhawk
Registered User
- Dec 13, 2006
- 14,429
- 5,090
fowler likely draws some attention IMO. Gibson could be a perfect fit for a team making a run...
- May 3, 2016
- 9,149
- 5,553
Would a signed Marner move the needle for a Fowler+Carlsson or McTavish? pkg?
All Mighty
Registered User
All Mighty
Registered User
Something with notably more value than Veleno or Berggren needs to be involved, especially if Holl is in the deal. In this proposed deal, the Ducks are giving Detroit an unequivocal upgrade to their defense, reducing Detroit’s total cap, and taking back a multi-year bad contract. Veleno and Berggren are not enough of a payment for all of those favors you’re asking of the Ducks.
If Detroit were able to fit Fowler’s salary in without moving money out, then I don’t think the cost would be that expensive. But the Wings would theoretically have to send back bad money to fit him in, which would definitely increase the price.
Gurglesons
Registered User
Shaves 3 million off the cap commitments for the next several years.
Jarry's contract is probably easier to move than Gibson's.
The return to Boston from Columbus in draft picks would be a bad move for the Jackets IMO.
