Rumor: Cam Fowler potentially available, Gibson, too

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

lwvs84

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
4,298
2,980
Los Angeles, CA
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stl76 and Ducks DVM

Seanaconda

Registered User
May 6, 2016
9,690
3,441
Gibson normally starts the year pretty good just wait a month or two into the season and then trade him
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
41,724
38,068
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?
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.
 

TS Quint

Stop writing “I mean” in your posts.
Sep 8, 2012
8,372
5,809
Top 5 of all time is a little excessive
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.
 

Gliff

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2011
16,367
11,452
Middle Tennessee
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.
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.
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
41,724
38,068
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.

I imagine gibson trade speculation is because he wants out and wants a chance to be a starter
 

HockeyVirus

Woll stan.
Nov 15, 2020
18,057
27,630
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
 

All Mighty

Registered User
Sep 20, 2014
12,122
19,209
California
allmightyhockeytalk.com
Fowler

For

Maatta
Holl
Berggren
Veleno

?
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
Dec 18, 2009
95,040
76,847
Joshua Tree, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
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.

Shaves 3 million off the cap commitments for the next several years.

Jarry's contract is probably easier to move than Gibson's.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad