Eklund Rumor: Leafs in on Cam Fowler

[Albus Dumbledore]

meh would pass on fowler for jvr. If we didnt get zaitsev then id be down or if zaitsev busts cause theres still a decent chance he does this can be revisited. But for now its a pass, mgmt thinks that zaitsev can be an instant top 4 dman, it might take him a little bit of time to adjust but hes in his mid 20's and i trust hunter and co.

 

[garyturner3]

Leafs aren't giving any assets for Fowler who is going to be UFA in two years.

Meaningless thoughts that the Leafs are "in" on Fowler.

There's a new rule that was just introduced allowing teams to resign players before they hit UFA

 

[dracom]

Leafs aren't giving any assets for Fowler who is going to be UFA in two years.

Meaningless thoughts that the Leafs are "in" on Fowler.

Ducks aren't giving any assets for JVR who is going to be a UFA in two years.

See how that logic doesn't make any sense?

 

[aufheben]

gardiner is not better lol

Why not?

no he says, "some of them" after listing the d. stop reading what you want to read and read what is actually there.

he is saying fowler isnt an upgrade or MORE THAN 1 (at the very least) of the dman he listed, which is wrong.

Uh what?

 

[Albus Dumbledore]

Ducks aren't giving any assets for JVR who is going to be a UFA in two years.

See how that logic doesn't make any sense?

Im not 100% sure but he may be reverse mocking fowler. Often times people bring jvrs value wayyy down cause he himself is a ufa in two years he may be doing the same to fowler or maybe just being annoying.

 

[Makar Goes Fast]

No, read that last sentence again. Hint : he actually said "I know Fowler is an upgrade on some"...

I won't speak for him, but I take Rielly over Fowler and he also isn't that much of an upgrade over Gardiner to warrant trading our #1LW for him... do you understand now?

no he says, "some of them" after listing the d. stop reading what you want to read and read what is actually there.

he is saying fowler isnt an upgrade or MORE THAN 1 (at the very least) of the dman he listed, which is wrong.

 

[Machinehead]

Why not?

Watch the gamez nurd

 

[Paul4587]

Stoner and Bieksa, meh.

I would trade a lot for Manson.

Out of curiosity do you think Manson is better than Fowler?

 

[Machinehead]

Out of curiosity do you think Manson is better than Fowler?

Do polar bears **** on the ice?

 

[Paul4587]

delete double post

 

[Paul4587]

Do polar bears **** on the ice?

Thanks. That's all I needed to know.

 

[sd1976]

I'd say he's a top end number 2

And you would be completely wrong. He is a competent number 3 and a good number 4. Just because he plays as a #2, doesn't make him one.

 

[Liferleafer]

the part that said SOME

which would indicate at the very least MORE THAN one and then he said fowler was not better than enough to be worth the upgrade.

try to keep up before trying to sewer me.

Try to answer his actual question before becoming condescending. The question was "what about the last sentence don't you understand? ". The last sentence said Fowler isn't enough of an upgrade to trade our only 1LW for him....which he isn't. He's another LH PMD....we have those....we don't have another JVR.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I don't think contextual factors are fleshed out enough to be useful right now. There's so much that can affect how a player handles a role that isn't captured by numbers such as QoC and ZS%.

Fowler hasn't been the best performer in his current role. I'd be surprised if that didn't change if moved though. He reminds me of Gardiner in many ways, guys that use their skating to find pucks and move them up the ice, and that are not really the offensive D-man they often get labeled as. And like Gardiner I think he shouldn't be out there against every type and level of opposition.

How are polak's advanced Stats? Going to go out on a limb and say they suck, mostly because he sucks. Yet here we are and Polak is back advanced stats are not as high on the priority list as you think or Polak wouldn't be here and Martin probably wouldn't be either.

Martin has strong stats where it matters to him in his role.
Polak has great stats on the PK, which would be a large part of his role.

Probably. There is no way Lindholm's CF% is going to drop by 9%, (1st to 21st). Usage really isn't an excuse unless you are a defensive forward who is getting absolutely shafted with defensive zone starts. There's only 6 defensemen playing at anytime, so their zone starts are rarely that extreme. Fowler's usage is not abnormal at all.

Yeah, I've found that when you deal with ZS%, you don't see much effect at all until you deal with the very extremes. QoC barely makes a blip. QoT does more simply because the differences are more profound between players there.

I'm not sure whether this isn't more that the stats themselves are faulty, than that contextual factors don't matter.

 

[Haatley]

Makes sense. The Leafs are weak on D. Have no legitimate top pairing options, at least until Rielly perhaps makes it there one day. Fowler would be their number one going into the year. I can see it happening.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

And you would be completely wrong. He is a competent number 3 and a good number 4. Just because he plays as a #2, doesn't make him one.

Just because he plays as a #2 , doesn't make him one.

I see

 

[Liferleafer]

Just to make my opinion clear, i am not bashing Fowler as a player, i just wouldn't trade JVR for him. It's trading from an area of exreme weakness to gain another PM LHD.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Just to make my opinion clear, i am not bashing Fowler as a player, i just wouldn't trade JVR for him. It's trading from an area of exreme weakness to gain another PM LHD.

I agree.

I've been for trading JVR before as his value is at its highest, but I think I've neglected to think of the additional value he brings as a veteran scoring winger who can shelter the young ones. With him, Bozak and Kadri, we have a group who can take the brunt of responsibility for success while the young ones focus on their own performance.

Furthermore, if there's one thing we have, it's transition LDs. I think Fowler, Rielly and Gardiner are all very close, and in a larger sense we trade JVR for the luxury of putting a top 4 LD on the third pairing. That's hardly a priority right now.

It's not always about value, it's also about how much use you get out of that value. That's why the trade itself doesn't make that much sense.

 

[Trapper]

I agree.

I've been for trading JVR before as his value is at its highest, but I think I've neglected to think of the additional value he brings as a veteran scoring winger who can shelter the young ones. With him, Bozak and Kadri, we have a group who can take the brunt of responsibility for success while the young ones focus on their own performance.

Furthermore, if there's one thing we have, it's transition LDs. I think Fowler, Rielly and Gardiner are all very close, and in a larger sense we trade JVR for the luxury of putting a top 4 LD on the third pairing. That's hardly a priority right now.

It's not always about value, it's also about how much use you get out of that value. That's why the trade itself doesn't make that much sense.

I don't think Gardiner/Fowler would be on the 3rd pairing.
You have the options of one playing the right side.
Fowler/Rielly
Gardiner/Zaitsev

Also who has more value in a future trade scenario?
A top 6 LW or a top 4 LD?
Would it be easier to move Gardiner for a better missing piece than JVR? Does position play a premium?

 

[Kamiccolo]

Makes sense. The Leafs are weak on D. Have no legitimate top pairing options, at least until Rielly perhaps makes it there one day. Fowler would be their number one going into the year. I can see it happening.

You are good at what you do, never change.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I don't think Gardiner/Fowler would be on the 3rd pairing.
You have the options of one playing the right side.
Fowler/Rielly
Gardiner/Zaitsev

Also who has more value in a future trade scenario?
A top 6 LW or a top 4 LD?
Would it be easier to move Gardiner for a better missing piece than JVR? Does position play a premium?

Probably, but you are still settling for a less than ideal solution of moving a LD to the right side.

As for value in a future trade, that kind of depends on the need of the future trading partner, doesn't it?

 

[Kamiccolo]

Probably, but you are still settling for a less than ideal solution of moving a LD to the right side.

As for value in a future trade, that kind of depends on the need of the future trading partner, doesn't it?

FWIW Rielly played RD this whole past season and it was his best ever.

 

[Nithoniniel]

FWIW Rielly played RD this whole past season and it was his best ever.

There's some good arguments for how playing D-men on their off-side makes the pairing worse.

https://hockey-graphs.com/2016/03/04/quantifying-the-importance-of-handedness/

And it's hard to gauge his season. He went into a bigger role, put up points and provided significantly worse possession numbers. Furthermore, he's a young D-man taking development steps each season. We can't rightly say that playing on the RD didn't weaken him, because we can't accurately say what his season would have been if he played the whole season as LD.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

There's some good arguments for how playing D-men on their off-side makes the pairing worse.

https://hockey-graphs.com/2016/03/04/quantifying-the-importance-of-handedness/

And it's hard to gauge his season. He went into a bigger role, put up points and provided significantly worse possession numbers. Furthermore, he's a young D-man taking development steps each season. We can't rightly say that playing on the RD didn't weaken him, because we can't accurately say what his season would have been if he played the whole season as LD.

I agree with your line of reasoning but how it relates to personnel decisions, I think it at least makes it an option for Lou to go out and get a d-man regardless of what side they play on because they can get Rielly to play effectively on the top pairing's right side so if the best deal and/or the best player to acquire happens to be on the left side, they can make that move and likely improve their lineup. Some people are too hung up on doing things to move Rielly back to the left when it isn't necessary to box themselves in like that on the trade market. Nobody should be saying top 4 RHD or bust when an LHD will help them as well. Leafs need quality depth on the blue line and have a whole hell of a lot of question marks past Rielly and Gardiner.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I agree with your line of reasoning but how it relates to personnel decisions, I think it at least makes it an option for Lou to go out and get a d-man regardless of what side they play on because they can get Rielly to play effectively on the top pairing's right side so if the best deal and/or the best player to acquire happens to be on the left side, they can make that move and likely improve their lineup. Some people are too hung up on doing things to move Rielly back to the left when it isn't necessary to box themselves in like that on the trade market. Nobody should be saying top 4 RHD or bust when an LHD will help them as well. Leafs need quality depth on the blue line and have a whole hell of a lot of question marks past Rielly and Gardiner.

Absolutely.

At the same time, while they shouldn't limit their thinking to RHD only, they are also not really in a hurry to make a move. Your scenario should be there in case the search for a RHD solution proves futile.