Eklund Rumor: Leafs in on Cam Fowler

[Pinkfloyd]

All bickering aside, Fowler is a decent 2nd pairing LH puck mover and we already have one in Gardiner and with Reilly on the 1st pairing and likely Marincin on the 3rd moving forward why would we trade assets for a guy who doesn't fit a need. Top 4 RHD or bust and that's that

Your assessment is not founded in reality. Not on Fowler and probably not on the Leafs either. If you bust on a top four RHD or hell even if you get one, Leafs will still likely have to put Rielly on the right side like they have been doing for a while now.

 

[Machinehead]

So that's really your counter argument?

The NHL is full of idiots, and you know better because Corsi is amazing?

And you're the one trying to tell us about our own player? Not really helping your point there, man. I have to say, as arguments go, that's one of the poorer ones I've seen. That's about as close to blind faith as you can probably get.

Tanner Glass has had a job with four teams. Yes, the NHL is full of idiots.

I don't know where people get this idea that the NHL is full of execs running around with IQ's of 170. Most of them are former players and if you've ever been in a hockey locker room...it's like a death farm for brain cells.

The only blind faith here is the continued defense of a player who has absolutely nothing positive on his resume over the course of his entire career, outside of team success and trust from his coach. It's just the Dan Girardi fallacy all over again.

 

[Sojourn]

Tanner Glass has had a job with four teams. Yes, the NHL is full of idiots.

I don't know where people get this idea that the NHL is full of execs running around with IQ's of 170. Most of them are former players and if you've ever been in a hockey locker room...it's like a death farm for brain cells.

The only blind faith here is the continued defense of a player who has absolutely nothing positive on his resume over the course of his entire career, outside of team success and trust from his coach. It's just the Dan Girardi fallacy all over again.

So that is what you're saying. You know better than the people running, in some cases, billion dollar franchises. Or the people that they can hire. That's a pretty bold claim.

 

[Flair Hay]

Throwing your own judgment out the window and going with the numbers isn't the best approach.

Ignoring them because the team did well isn't the best approach either.

If Fowler is being deployed as a first pairing guy, struggling badly in possession and goal differential, but still putting up good offense...

He's probably a second pairing guy.

A top 4 defenseman with offense is still pretty valuable. Probably fairly paid for what he does. Probably not worth trading for if you are Toronto.

 

[Sojourn]

Throwing your own judgment out the window and going with the numbers isn't the best approach.

Ignoring them because the team did well isn't the best approach either.

If Fowler is being deployed as a first pairing guy, struggling badly in possession and goal differential, but still putting up good offense...

He's probably a second pairing guy.

A top 4 defenseman with offense is still pretty valuable. Probably fairly paid for what he does. Probably not worth trading for if you are Toronto.

No one is ignoring them. Certainly not Ducks fans. The thing is, those aren't the only two ways to judge a player. We can actually watch him, and see how he contributes to the team's success. We can see how his usage can contribute to some of those numbers.

 

[Incetardis]

Your assessment is not founded in reality. Not on Fowler and probably not on the Leafs either. If you bust on a top four RHD or hell even if you get one, Leafs will still likely have to put Rielly on the right side like they have been doing for a while now.

Marincin was playing on his offside while paired with Reilly for the last 30 or so games of the season so there's that and I'm not sure why you'd be so resigned to playing Reilly on his weak side even after adding a top 4 RHD... Some combination of Zaitsev, Polak or Carrick will play on the right side on the bottom 2 pairings so where's the new guy going to play?

 

[aufheben]

If coaches are so infallible what is with all the 'Bieksa sucks' comments?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Marincin was playing on his offside while paired with Reilly for the last 30 or so games of the season so there's that and I'm not sure why you'd be so resigned to playing Reilly on his weak side even after adding a top 4 RHD... Some combination of Zaitsev, Polak or Carrick will play on the right side on the bottom 2 pairings so where's the new guy going to play?

It's not so much resigned as it is the understanding that out of all the options the Leafs have, it is best for their team for Rielly to be on the right side. If the Leafs do nothing else to go into this season, who do they have to put there? You probably won't want to do Zaitsev/Carrick/Polak down the right side. That will get the team killed. If you acquire someone like Shattenkirk, you're still asking for Zaitsev or Carrick to step into a 2nd pairing role which is a lot to expect of people with little to no experience and with them not being exceptionally talented. I think Zaitsev can be a solid all-around d-man in time but I doubt he steps into it right away.

In either instance, you can absolutely make great use out of a Cam Fowler and be much better for it. Blue line depth and especially puck-movement depth from the blue line is what helps teams the most.

 

[Sojourn]

If coaches are so infallible what is with all the 'Bieksa sucks' comments?

Well, consider the alternatives.

Bieksa started with Lindholm. That pairing was a disaster. Lindholm and Manson worked well together, so you need to keep them together. Vatanen wasn't well suited for that role, and he and Stoner made a good 3rd pairing. Stoner, on the other hand, doesn't belong anywhere near that spot.

Bieksa with Fowler was really the only realistic option, unless the idea was to be ridiculously top heavy with Fowler and Lindholm as a pairing, at the expense of the rest of the defense.

If Despres hadn't had his brains scrambled, there's the possibility he would have given Boudreau a real alternative, but that wasn't the case. When he finally returned, his play had fallen off a cliff and he was more of a liability than even Bieksa. By a pretty big margin, too.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

If coaches are so infallible what is with all the 'Bieksa sucks' comments?

Comes down to choices and the Ducks losing Despres for a significant portion of the season limited their options in the lineup.

 

[aufheben]

Comes down to choices and the Ducks losing Despres for a significant portion of the season limited their options in the lineup.

Did they have to sign him?

 

[Goose of Reason]

Throwing your own judgment out the window and going with the numbers isn't the best approach.

Ignoring them because the team did well isn't the best approach either.

If Fowler is being deployed as a first pairing guy, struggling badly in possession and goal differential, but still putting up good offense...

He's probably a second pairing guy.

A top 4 defenseman with offense is still pretty valuable. Probably fairly paid for what he does. Probably not worth trading for if you are Toronto.

I agree strongly with this premise. No Ducks fan is calling Fowler a legitimate #1 defenseman. We're saying he's a #2. Why? Because he gets top minutes and by the eye test he does well enough to cover for his boat anchor of a partner but is not some elite defensive monster out there whose presence shifts the ice in favour of the Ducks. Seriously, Kevin Bieksa is probably the worst defenseman to take a regular shift for the Ducks since Fowler came into the league (except maybe post-concussion Despres), the guy is just awful. His defensive tactics include sliding on his stomach as soon as the puck crosses the blueline and that's about it. For some reason he's also fond of forechecking up the ice like a winger; I once asked Canuck fans if they ran a system that used defenseman like this and they said "no, that's just Bieksa." It boggles the mind. When Fowler had a legitimate top 4 partner in a pre-concussion Despres he was fantastic. If he had a legitimate #1 beside him he would be awesome. However, only Rangers fans are allowed to use the excuse of a bad partner dragging down their top defenseman. Cam was used by Bruce to cover lesser partners because he does a pretty good job of it; better than Lindholm did with Bieksa at the start of the year that's for sure.

Your point is correct though, the fact that he's not dominating on the ice is why we aren't calling him a #1 defenseman. He was our #1, but that's different

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Did they have to sign him?

No but I don't think they initially intended on throwing him against top competition either.

 

[Sojourn]

Did they have to sign him?

That isn't really relevant if we're discussing coaching infallibility. Boudreau can only use the tools he has at his disposal.

 

[aufheben]

But the people who signed Bieksa work in hockey, it had to be a good decision.

 

[Sojourn]

But the people who signed Bieksa work in hockey, it had to be a good decision.

That's a pretty flawed argument, man. No one is saying they always make good decisions. Mistakes can be made. They are people. That's completely different than saying they're all idiots though, or assuming that Fowler falls into the same pattern.

That being said, you're also ignoring how that came about. Despres was injured like 3 games into the season. However Murray and/or Boudreau intended to use Bieksa, Despres' injury forced Boudreau's hand. His(Despres) continued struggles when he returned further contributed to that choice.

 

[tony d]

I know it's Eklund but sometimes he gets it right, this could be the 1 time he gets it right. Fowler for JVR makes sense to me.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Eklund said the deal wasn't JVR for Fowler, So i don't know who Toronto would move for Fowler Kadri was possibly mentioned..

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Do you know why the Ducks are so much better when he's off the ice? Because when he's off the ice chances are Lindholm (who has incredible advanced stats) is on the ice. That's obviously going to make his relative stats look bad.

Another reason they are better when he's off the ice - because nearly every time we had a defensive zone face off and the likes of Thornton or Kopitar or Kane Etc was on the ice BB would throw Fowler over the boards to try to get the puck out of the zone. Meanwhile when we have offensive zone faceoffs against bottom 6 players Vatanen would get the nod. Those are hardly favourable situations for Fowler and it didn't help he was playing with a number 6 defensemen the majority of the year.

I'm not a big fan of Fowler, I think Lindholm had clearly surpassed him last season and should have been given some of his minutes (particularly on the PP which is the area all the posters who don't watch Fowler think he's good at) But what I read on the main boards mostly from Rangers fans is absolute crap - that he's a second pair guy and nothing more. You guys are simply reading the hero charts and not applying any context whatsoever.

He's not a number one guy which is how he was used by BB but he is far from the mediocre second pairing guy he's made out to be by the advanced stats crowd. I would say on at least half of last years playoff teams he could have comfortably played as their number two guy.



See my answer above to your fellow Rangers fan who is basically taking the same stance you are.

I notice that those ranger fans skimmed over this post.

Fowler gets eaten alive by the qoc Fowler faces.

Breaking nearly even in FF/Corsi with a 53.2 DF% playing against other teams top 6 forwards alot is getting eaten alive? stop spreading lies ranger fans.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Throwing your own judgment out the window and going with the numbers isn't the best approach.

Ignoring them because the team did well isn't the best approach either.

If Fowler is being deployed as a first pairing guy, struggling badly in possession and goal differential, but still putting up good offense...

He's probably a second pairing guy.

A top 4 defenseman with offense is still pretty valuable. Probably fairly paid for what he does. Probably not worth trading for if you are Toronto.

Fowler is not struggling with possession when you account for 3 things.

His high DF%
The fact that Hampus Lindholm is on his team, AKA the highest non king possession wise in the league
and that a lot of his DF zone starts are against other teams top 6 forwards.

nearly breaking even in FF/Corsi is pretty good when you consider all factors AND that he's elite when it comes to breakouts

 

[aufheben]

I notice that those ranger fans skimmed over this post.



Breaking nearly even in FF/Corsi with a 53.2 DF% playing against other teams top 6 forwards alot is getting eaten alive? stop spreading lies ranger fans.

A top pairing defenseman shouldn't be last or second to last in multiple shot against statistics on his team. It's really not that complicated.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

A top pairing defenseman shouldn't be last or second to last in multiple shot against statistics on his team. It's really not that complicated.

A player that starts 53% of his shifts in the defensive zone, often times against the other teams top 2 lines is going to have a harder time boosting his corsi or fenwick stats, it's common sense. There are obvious factors at play that aren't being considered, such as said players team losing the D zone face off, often times that is going to lead to shot attempts on your net, even though Fowler himself has absolutely nothing to do with his center losing the draw, or the winger losing the battle off the faceoff.

I don't know how this is so hard to understand, of course a players shot based analytics are going to be affected in this role no matter how good he is, unless he is an elite player and nobody is calling Fowler elite, he is a no.2 dman being forced to play as a 1 something ranger fans consistently fail to understand

 

[aufheben]

Yeah a "harder time" doesn't mean last on the team.

 

[dracom]

So by some Rangers fans logic, Manson, Bieksa, and Stoner are better players than Fowler because fancy stats says so.

 

[Sojourn]

Yeah a "harder time" doesn't mean last on the team.

A player who is being asked to push the play offensively from the defensive zone, and then get off the ice for an offensive defenseman like Vatanen, is not going to have good shot differential statistics.

This isn't that complicated either. If you aren't willing to put some context to those numbers, you're going to see whatever you want to see. In the case of a number of Ranger fans, I suspect they want to see a poor player. Being able to observe said player, and see how he's used, is not just the so-called "eye test", it actually gives you an understanding of his role that your statistics do not.

This isn't beer hockey, where players just go out there and play, and everything is equal. Yet, that's how people use the shot metrics for individual players. All things are assumed to be equal. When they aren't, formulae are used to attempt to balance it out, again assuming that all things are equal. That's just not hockey.