Toggle sidebar

Proposal: Ducks/Avalanche Insanity

Corey Perry is one of the last players i ever expect to see traded, but Weber used to top that list so what do I know.
I doubt Anaheim ever looks at trading either of their big 2, and Why are they acquiring Barrie? creates more holes in anaheim than it fills
 
Duchene $6M per 3 more years Iginla $5.33M 1 more year Barrie $6.5M+ Long term and what part of Anaheim being a internal budget team isn't being understood. In what world would Ducks GM Bob Murray move Fowler who's making $4M per for 2 years for Barrie who is seeking around at least $6M per long term plus have to give big money to Lindholm. How's this help the Ducks again. And Corey Perry isn't getting traded.
 
They're in the market for a LW so I could see Landeskog heading there in a crazy blockbuster.

Fowler, Montour/Manson, 1st?
 
To :avs

Corey Perry
Cam Fowler
Clayton Stoner

To :ducks2

Matt Duchene
Jarome Iginla
Tyson Barrie

Added Stoner in an attempt to make the cap work somewhat better.

My assumption is both teams want to a change and potentially both GM's know they will eventually lose Barrie/Fowler.

Maybe swap Landeskog for Duchene?

Ducks POV: Get younger with Duchene/Landy. Looking for a change in the locker room. Fowler is on the block.

Avs POV: Defense, defense, defense. Dump Iginla. Cant work out a deal with Barrie.
 
Last edited:
Rather have Duchene than Perry given contracts and age. Rather have Barrie over Fowler. Hell no Stoner. Iginla has a year left, we'll suffer through it.
 
belair said:
They're in the market for a LW so I could see Landeskog heading there in a crazy blockbuster.

Fowler, Montour/Manson, 1st?
Click to expand...

Agreed, Landeskog for Fowler makes a lot of sense. However, I think it would be 1 of those additional assets, not two. I think Landeskog + 4th for Fowler + Montour is fair value. Would love to move Stoner in a deal, but its not a deal breaker.
 
Perry makes no sense. The Avs are relying on prospects to build up their team, easily rather keep the younger players. Regarding the Fowler/Landeskog idea, the Avs asked for Lindholm for Landeskog. With all due respect, take a hike with that one.
 
mytduxfan said:
Agreed, Landeskog for Fowler makes a lot of sense. However, I think it would be 1 of those additional assets, not two. I think Landeskog + 4th for Fowler + Montour is fair value. Would love to move Stoner in a deal, but its not a deal breaker.
Click to expand...

Yes, trading our captain who's our only top notch two way forward (and one of few top 6 wingers) and is under control for 5 years, for two years of Cam freaking Fowler makes all the sense in the world.

Get real.
 
Avs44 said:
Perry makes no sense. The Avs are relying on prospects to build up their team, easily rather keep the younger players. Regarding the Fowler/Landeskog idea, the Avs asked for Lindholm for Landeskog. With all due respect, take a hike with that one.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Lindholm is MacKinnon+.
 
anezthes said:
Exactly. Lindholm is MacKinnon+.
Click to expand...

Great. Avs keep Landeskog. He's 23, signed on a great deal, our only real top 6 winger, and brings an element nobody else does. Avs can thumb their nose at anybody who doesn't pay what they want. According to Lavoie, who is a credible source, the Ducks are set on moving Fowler. The Ducks have the cap crunch, the Ducks have an expansion draft coming up which means unless Bieksa waives, they have to move Fowler, and the Ducks only have two years left with Fowler anyway. They have zero leverage. The Avs have all of it when discussing Landeskog with anyone.
 
Avs44 said:
Great. Avs keep Landeskog. He's 23, signed on a great deal, our only real top 6 winger, and brings an element nobody else does. Avs can thumb their nose at anybody who doesn't pay what they want. According to Lavoie, who is a credible source, the Ducks are set on moving Fowler. The Ducks have the cap crunch, the Ducks have an expansion draft coming up which means unless Bieksa waives, they have to move Fowler, and the Ducks only have two years left with Fowler anyway. They have zero leverage. The Avs have all of it when discussing Landeskog with anyone.
Click to expand...

Can ANA not buy out Bieksa before the expansion draft?
 
I'd rather have Duchene over Perry and 3 more years of an RFA Barrie over Fowler so this doesn't help tbh.
 
Avs44 said:
Great. Avs keep Landeskog. He's 23, signed on a great deal, our only real top 6 winger, and brings an element nobody else does. Avs can thumb their nose at anybody who doesn't pay what they want. According to Lavoie, who is a credible source, the Ducks are set on moving Fowler. The Ducks have the cap crunch, the Ducks have an expansion draft coming up which means unless Bieksa waives, they have to move Fowler, and the Ducks only have two years left with Fowler anyway. They have zero leverage. The Avs have all of it when discussing Landeskog with anyone.
Click to expand...

Sure they have leverage. They can just tell GMs "hey if you don't like our offer we'll just try our luck in the expansion draft and protect Fowler" young defenders are at a premium right now and most of them are getting paid more than Fowler is currently making.

Anaheim has options. I understand that to you any deal involving Fowler for Landeskog is absurd. Believe me. I get it. But saying we have no leverage in this market is pretty silly. When all's said and done they can take the chance on protecting four defenders if they have to. And there arent any defenseman like Fowler who hasn't reached his prime yet, getting paid the money he is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom