Value of: Fowler + Stoner to New Jersey

  • 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/

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
41,741
38,209
Looks pretty decent as a top pair on team NA at the world cup...i wonder if the same would happen if his NHL team was...oh, i don't know....good? Nope, not possible...he's a Leaf...he sucks.

So his stats look better playing on an allstart team :popcorn:

AMAZING :sarcasm:
 

LEAFANFORLIFE23

Registered User
Jun 17, 2010
46,978
15,608
I personally would stay far away from Fowler, especially given his price tag. I have a feeling his advanced stats will keep us away. Plus he is a LHD, so we might as well just use Gardiner there then.

So unless we flip him right away for a RHD, no thanks. Plus we would never take Stoner.

He's a top 4 d that's what matters
 

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,184
13,199
Looks pretty decent as a top pair on team NA at the world cup...i wonder if the same would happen if his NHL team was...oh, i don't know....good? Nope, not possible...he's a Leaf...he sucks.

Sample size.

I'm not saying Riellys Toronto advanced stats paint a picture about his ability but you can't use stats from the World Cup off a 3 game sample size to draw any conclusions.
 

Luger

Registered User
Aug 21, 2016
380
398
Clearwater, FL
It's a defenseman market, if you want one, you have to overpay. There are so many good forwards this generation, but nowhere near enough defensemen.
 

Ducksgo*

Guest
If Fowler and Stoner are both being moved, It's because Anaheim already has an abundance of D so why would Anaheim need another D-man back in Merrill and how does Reid Boucher help their top 6 he doesn't neither helps Anaheim. Pretty sure they pass.

Gladly pass. We absolutely won't be taking a D back while dumping 2 defenseman. It's extremely counter productive on WHY we would be moving Fowler in the first place. And Boucher isn't what we need in our top 6 or even third line for that matter. Just give us Tatar + and get this thing done already
 

DANTHEMAN1967

Registered User
Aug 10, 2016
4,181
1,940
Ducks will wait for the perfect deal before making any moves. I mean it's not like they don't have the cap space to sign their best defenceman! They can afford to wait...

What about signing Rakell too?Unless you were being sarcastic with your cap space comment.
 

Finnish your Czech

J'aime Les offres hostiles
Nov 25, 2009
64,453
1,983
Toronto
Can't you just move Despres to NJ instead to clear up enough cap to sign Lindholm/rakell or is it not enough? Anaheim still needs Fowler IMO. Their young guns aren't 100% ready to replace Fowler
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
41,741
38,209
Ya, kinda the same say his stats look worse playing for a borderline AHL team last season....no?
I didn't say anything bad bout Reilly I like him personally... my point is advanced stats don't always paint a full picture.... and there are other effective ways of being a good dmen.
 

heilongjetsfan

Registered User
Jul 4, 2011
3,598
1,582
Stoner doesn't have much trade value maybe even negative value. Maybe Arizona or the New Jersey would take him for free out of their need.

Unless someone thinks Fowler is in their top three Dmen (for expansion purposes), he might not of not be of great value. Also I wonder if teams with Dmen needs and cap space like NJ or Arizona who are rebuilding would give up much in a trade for two years then UFA Fowler.

I think its implied that Stoner is a cap dump in this scenario, and there's a good chance that Anaheim would insist on moving him as part of any deal for one of their dmen.

I'm hesitant to offer because I usually get roasted, but how would Ducks fans feel about a deal with the Jets:
Anaheim:
Perreault
Winnipeg:
Fowler + Stoner

Value seems pretty decent and fills holes for both teams. Winnipeg will definitely be protecting 8+1 instead of 7+3+1, so expansion won't be an issue either.
 

TopShelfWaterBottle

Registered
Mar 16, 2014
3,421
1,440
I think its implied that Stoner is a cap dump in this scenario, and there's a good chance that Anaheim would insist on moving him as part of any deal for one of their dmen.

I'm hesitant to offer because I usually get roasted, but how would Ducks fans feel about a deal with the Jets:
Anaheim:
Perreault
Winnipeg:
Fowler + Stoner

Value seems pretty decent and fills holes for both teams. Winnipeg will definitely be protecting 8+1 instead of 7+3+1, so expansion won't be an issue either.

The same Perrault the ducks GM didn't want any part of so he let him test free agency as a RFA?
 

Weezeric

Registered User
Jan 27, 2015
4,660
7,000
What about signing Rakell too?Unless you were being sarcastic with your cap space comment.

It was sarcastic. I just don't see how the ducks can get out their cap crunch with losing a trade substantially. I also like how ducks fans think they have 7-8 present and future #1 D men in their system right now. But jets fans are the same way with their wingers so I can't complain too much
 

dracom

Registered User
Dec 22, 2015
13,462
9,509
Vancouver, WA
It was sarcastic. I just don't see how the ducks can get out their cap crunch with losing a trade substantially. I also like how ducks fans think they have 7-8 present and future #1 D men in their system right now. But jets fans are the same way with their wingers so I can't complain too much

Where are people getting the idea that we think all our defenseman prospects are #1 potential players? Lindholm is the only one with that potential, Theo is more a #2 guy imo.
 

Ducksgo*

Guest
Can't you just move Despres to NJ instead to clear up enough cap to sign Lindholm/rakell or is it not enough? Anaheim still needs Fowler IMO. Their young guns aren't 100% ready to replace Fowler

The question is if Lindy will even sign here. If he doesn't want to it's all moot. Fowler is signed and we have Theo who can obviously take Lindholms place. I'm expecting this week Lindholm will be treated like Bobby Ryan scenario. So the next trade threads should be Lindholm to whomever
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad