Eklund Rumor: Leafs in on Cam Fowler

[Ducks DVM]

The expansion draft can't be ignored while considering Fowler's or any other players trade value.
While there are probably many teams that would like to add a top 4 d-men there is a cost to be considered, that being who can be protected and who would be exposed/lost to LV in the Summer.

A team with a strong top three defencemen under contract for more than two years (or a d-men with a NMC who must be protected lol) might want Fowler but knowing that they will have to expose and probably lose him in the expansion draft won't be offering what Duck's fan consider a fair return.

Teams can't wait indefinitely for Anaheim to get back to them to accept a proposed trade for Fowler.
They will move on to their plan B. Once the number of interested teams gets smaller the return will probably diminish as well this is the urgency.

The number of teams with three defensemen all better than Fowler is a pretty short list.

 

[DANTHEMAN1967]

The number of teams with three defensemen all better than Fowler is a pretty short list.

True but Fowler's value is what he brings in 2016-2017 and the difference between his worth (with only one year remaining on his contract) next Summer and whichever defencemen gets bumped and must be exposed.

 

[Ducks DVM]

True but Fowler's value is what he brings in 2016-2017 and the difference between his worth (with only one year remaining on his contract) next Summer and whichever defencemen gets bumped and must be exposed.

It's nowhere near that simple. The displaced defenseman is not an auto-loss to expansion. If good enough, they can still be traded. If not, they may not be taken. Not all teams have enough quality forwards to make it untenable to protect 4 defensemen. Any team trading for him will have the ability to re-sign him, or trade him for a pretty good haul at the trade deadline the following year if they choose not to. It's not just his value minus the value of the guy he displaces.

 

[Ciao]

Let's see if I've got this right:

- The Leafs really need Fowler because other than Rielly the rest of their defence is crap, and it doesn't matter that a preponderance of LHD would favour Rielly playing on his off-side

- the Leafs won't be any better or worse off with or without JVR because although he's a reasonably good player he's not Ovechkin (and, of course, no one but Ovechkin is Ovechkin) nor Kessel (ditto), and wingers that aren't at that level make little or no difference to winning or losing.

So far, so good?

If I've got that right, I'd love to know what the Leafs' management team thinks of those premises, even though their GM has not won a Stanley Cup championship for a good long while.

It seems that Eklund might be on board with this kind of transaction for one reason or another, though.

I'm not getting the sense that Leafs Nation is buying in. We must be very stupid not to see what is so plainly obvious.

I think I'll check in on that other thread and see where the Messiah -- I mean Jimmy Vesey -- is going. Wait a minute: isn't he just a winger? What's all the big deal over him? He's not a proven first-team all-star either as far as I konw

 

[crowi]

Yes, it was basically just that.

Toronto worked the deal beforehand and then pulled the trigger. For example ROR wasn't traded like that. It increases the value by great degree.

Fowler for Ristolainen? Good deal yes???

 

[Ciao]

I probably follow the Leafs better than most that proclaim themselves to be Leafs fans so that type of jab isn't going to do much here. lol Their explanations aren't substantive. It doesn't make them wrong but it doesn't make them right either.

Oh yes, you probably do. You certainly sound very knowledgeable about . . . everything -- and especially about the Leafs

I am quite sure there is nothing that would shake your confidence in this proposal.

Despite that, some of us still hope that the Leafs would not trade their first-line left-wing for a second-pair left-handed defenceman. We just don't think it helps the Leafs very much, if at all.

 

[dracom]

This is pretty much the exact same situation as it was before this when a certain Ducks fan was telling that, even though as credible source as Renaud Lavoie (almost as credible as it gets) told that Sabres and Ducks were talking about a trade of Myers <-> Fowler + player, there was no way Ducks would ever trade Fowler. It was all assumptions, and Fowler will 100% sure be a part of Ducks core.

And here we are.

Guess what, Fowler is still with the Ducks. At this point, he is still part of our core. You just sound like someone who is upset they haven't gotten what they wanted from us so you go and talk **** on Ducks fans and especially on Fowler.

The sources were credible enough. Just better deal with it. Just like the other Ducks poster likely has learned to deal with the fact that he was just daydreaming.

The sources being credible have nothing to do with the actual content of them. No source said either side said no for Fowler for a top 10 pick. You just keep assuming it was the Sabres who said no because you want Fowler, but you don't want to give up value for him; so saying the Sabres "balked" at the idea makes you feel better. That's fine, just don't act like it's fact because it's not.

No one is saying that Ducks won't get anything valuable back. They likely just won't get a premium return.

And yet all the offers for Fowler on here are terrible for us, so it's either we accept the offers that don't help us or we're just being greedy and need to be told how Fowler has no real value and we have to accept the bad returns.

And Andersen was basically a sign and trade case. Really rare, and something that increases value a lot. Bernier, with his cap hit, probably had negative value in that trade.

Sign and trade would mean we signed him and then traded him, which we didn't. Once again, you're spouting out nonsense and making assumptions (I'm referring to your other post about this btw).

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Ok...sure. But that still leaves negative 25-35.....

And Fowler would not save more than 25-35 goals ?

Look at your initial post...

PS: If you need a reminder, you wrote:

"Furthermore, as far as impact, lets say JVR scores 25-30 goals....and assists and assists on 25-30 more (pretty much what he has done), that means that he has a positive impact on 50-60 goals. Now, unless Fowler is guaranteed to prevent 50-60 goals that the Leafs would allow without him, how can you say he has more impact than JVR?"

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

I think i'll believe him before you....

Do you mean that he's Burkie no 2 ?

We saw the same picture ad nauseam from Leafs fans with Burke holding the Cup...

 

[4thline]

Tell me...
How many pleats does this song have?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWqKPWO5T4o

 

[Heraldic]

Yeah, making up an artificial an unrealistic definition of the term "urgent" in this context isn't exactly making a point. There's very few things that just "cannot wait" for a bit longer - even your proclaimed Lindholm trade in case the Ducks wouldn't sign him before he became an offer sheet target wasn't that kind of urgent, it appears. If you don't see a whole bunch of teams looking to add a top-4 defender, that's your problem.

So basically you admitted that you're not able to give a proper answer... Not that I'm surprised about that.

For example, if Sabres were still to address their top-4 LHD need, they would have an urgent need for that. They likely lost lot of points last season because they had to play Gorges on a role which was way over his head, and they had to put a rookie McCabe to a top-4 position where he really wasn't ready.

Despite that, Murray didn't pay a premium price. He said during the season that he has been looking to make that trade but is just not willing to pay a premium price. And so he waited, and got the piece without paying a premium.

So you now tell me the list of those teams, who simply cannot wait later than the start of the season to get that top-4 LHD. Because if they wait a bit longer, there will be exceptionally lot supply because of the expansion draft.

And no team is going to land an offersheet as long as they have their own players still unsigned. I have to admit that I didn't expect so many high end RFAs being still unsigned. It changes the situation a lot. As far as I remember, last year wasn't really the same.

Fowler for Ristolainen? Good deal yes???

What?

And it is as good deal as would be Kulikov for Lindholm.

It's nowhere near that simple. The displaced defenseman is not an auto-loss to expansion. If good enough, they can still be traded. If not, they may not be taken. Not all teams have enough quality forwards to make it untenable to protect 4 defensemen. Any team trading for him will have the ability to re-sign him, or trade him for a pretty good haul at the trade deadline the following year if they choose not to. It's not just his value minus the value of the guy he displaces.

And you think it would be the only team in that position? Of course not. There will likely be a lot of teams trying to get their position better regarding expansion draft.

Guess what, Fowler is still with the Ducks. At this point, he is still part of our core. You just sound like someone who is upset they haven't gotten what they wanted from us so you go and talk **** on Ducks fans and especially on Fowler.

I was told on Sabres board by a certain Ducks poster that Fowler is not going to be traded (at all), because he is a core guy. I told him that he is likely going to be shopped at this off-season the latest, because of Ducks financial situation and their need to try to get a proper value out of him. He just told me how I have no clue about Ducks, and moved away. And here we are.

With Ducks fans it seems to be the same kind of situation all the time.

Why would I be upset? We got a d-man without giving anything substantial who fits better as a partner for Risto than Fowler likely would had? Why the hell would I be upset about that? My opinion about Fowler has been the same for a long time already.

The sources being credible have nothing to do with the actual content of them. No source said either side said no for Fowler for a top 10 pick. You just keep assuming it was the Sabres who said no because you want Fowler, but you don't want to give up value for him; so saying the Sabres "balked" at the idea makes you feel better. That's fine, just don't act like it's fact because it's not.

The report was that neither of the teams wanted to part their top-10 pick for Fowler. If you expect to get a better value than a blue chip prospect like Alex Nylander for Fowler, I hope you don't be too disappointed. I recommend you to check those reports and figure out was it Ducks who balked at the top-10 pick or who.

And yet all the offers for Fowler on here are terrible for us, so it's either we accept the offers that don't help us or we're just being greedy and need to be told how Fowler has no real value and we have to accept the bad returns.

Fowler has value, but no GM is going to throw life jackets for B.Murray. All the GMs likely know, that before next off-season, there will be top-4 d-men on the market more than there usually is. So why pay a premium for one now, when you can get one likely lot cheaper if you wait a bit? And they also know that their ability to wait past the season opener is WAY better than B.Murray's.

Sign and trade would mean we signed him and then traded him, which we didn't. Once again, you're spouting out nonsense and making assumptions (I'm referring to your other post about this btw).

Oh Jesus Christ... If you simply cannot understand the word "basically"...

 

[Vipers31]

So basically you admitted that you're not able to give a proper answer... Not that I'm surprised about that.

No, I basically admit that I'm not willing to spend time educating you about the most basic things. And you shouldn't be surprised about that.

For example, if Sabres were still to address their top-4 LHD need, they would have an urgent need for that.

That's one of a bunch of teams that would immediately come to mind, yes.

Despite that, Murray didn't pay a premium price. He said during the season that he has been looking to make that trade but is just not willing to pay a premium price. And so he waited, and got the piece without paying a premium.

He got the piece? The Kulikov for Pysyk deal? I get not paying premium, but if that's the alternative...

So you now tell me the list of those teams, who simply cannot wait later than the start of the season to get that top-4 LHD.

As I said, that's an unrealistic definition. There's an incredibly small number of trades that "cannot" wait. Not that fitting that articifial definition of your's matters, because it doesn't require GMs to absolutely be unable to wait, in only requires them to want to make a trade. If you can't see teams looking to trade for a top-4 defender, browse through the 30 team boards and their trade threads, or open a poll.

Because if they wait a bit longer, there will be exceptionally lot supply because of the expansion draft.

There's no reason to believe there will be an exceptionally lot of supply in the Fowler range. And GMs put some value on the upcoming season, as well, and don't have half a season to wait to address a big need, when the points lost by then may cost them the season.

 

[Heraldic]

No, I basically admit that I'm not willing to spend time educating you about the most basic things. And you shouldn't be surprised about that.

But you still spent time answering for my post in the first place... You're not exactly doing a great job covering your bases.

That's one of a bunch of teams that would immediately come to mind, yes.

They already got their top-4 d-man... You should update your news, man.

Or you mean that when Murray wasn't feeling so urgent need without Kulikov to pay a premium for a top-4 d-man, he suddenly feels that need with Kulikov?

He got the piece? The Kulikov for Pysyk deal? I get not paying premium, but if that's the alternative...

Your implying that Kulikov is not a top-4 d-man? I mean the player who did a lot better job goal prevention wise against clearly tougher opponents than Fowler? And who also happened to produce more points on 5v5 than Fowler? I really want to hear your reasoning behind this if that is actually your stance...

As I said, that's an unrealistic definition. There's an incredibly small number of trades that "cannot" wait. Not that fitting that articifial definition of your's matters, because it doesn't require GMs to absolutely be unable to wait, in only requires them to want to make a trade. If you can't see teams looking to trade for a top-4 defender, browse through the 30 team boards and their trade threads, or open a poll.

You mean like what I just told you about Sabres and Murray? Or Detroit? Detroit and Sabres have been looking that d-man for a long time already. Murray decided to skip Fowler (at least for now), and take Kulikov. And Detroit suddenly, after delaying that kind of trade for several seasons, feel that they need to make that trade before the season? Yeah right...

There's no reason to believe there will be an exceptionally lot of supply in the Fowler range. And GMs put some value on the upcoming season, as well.

There will be more than enough in at least close to the range of Fowler. Vancouver and Sabres addressed their need without Fowler, for example.

 

[Vipers31]

But you still spent time answering for my post in the first place... You're not exactly doing a great job covering your bases.

I don't have interest in covering my bases for you. I don't mind taking the time to respond, just to let you know that you're remarkably wrong on an impressive number of the things you keep saying. I'll keep choosing the ways in which I'll waste my time on you, thanks for your concern.

They already got their top-4 d-man... You should update your news, man.

And you don't see a need for a top-4 left? I get lowered standards after the least years, but...

Or you mean that when Murray wasn't feeling so urgent need without Kulikov to pay a premium for a top-4 d-man, he suddenly feels that need with Kulikov?

He should probably feel about the same.

Your implying that Kulikov is not a top-4 d-man?

Not considerably more than Pysyk.

I mean the player who did a lot better job goal prevention wise against clearly tougher opponents than Fowler? And who also happened to produce more points on 5v5 than Fowler? I really want to hear your reasoning behind this if that is actually your stance...

See above, not so much more of a top-4 than Pysyk, so if all that even were true by more than just stats, the need hasn't been evaporated, just adjusted.

You mean like what I just told you about Sabres and Murray? Or Detroit? Detroit and Sabres have been looking that d-man for a long time already. Murray decided to skip Fowler (at least for now), and take Kulikov. And Detroit suddenly, after delaying that kind of trade for several seasons, feel that they need to make that trade before the season? Yeah right...

You're right, it's much more reasonable to expect that they will never make a trade again.

There will be more than enough in at least close to the range of Fowler. Vancouver and Sabres addressed their need without Fowler, for example.

We'll see if their GMs even feel that way, or how they succeeded in that.

 

[Heraldic]

And you don't see a need for a top-4 left? I get lowered standards after the least years, but...

Kulikov suits a lot better to play with Risto against top competition than Fowler would. That basically drops Gorges down to top-4 position. Gorges is not the ideal type of d-man to play with Bogosian, but he is still good enough to play solid defensive game on a top-4 role. And while McCabe had problems on his top-4 role last year, he started to look considerably better on that role at the end of the season. Considering his age, he might be ready to actually play on that role.

So yeah, the top-4 situation is a lot better for two reasons: Kulikov enabled to push Gorges down the depth charts into a role where he is actually competent. And McCabe should be better next season.

Gorges could be upgraded with Fowler, but there really isn't any urgent need for that. McCabe might as well be the upgrade.

He should probably feel about the same.

Not considerably more than Pysyk.

Not even taking into account that Pysyk is RHD, I would really love to hear you explaining how Pysyk and Kulikov offer the same impact on ice on your opinion. I know that I'm not going to see you explain anything, but it still is nice to see you avoiding questions and think yourself credible at the same time.

See above, not so much more of a top-4 than Pysyk, so if all that even were true by more than just stats, the need hasn't been evaporated, just adjusted.

You didn't really explain anything. The ball is on your hands now.

You're right, it's much more reasonable to expect that they will never make a trade again.

Detroit with Holland as their GM. That probably is pretty close to the truth.

But seriously, there will likely be trades, but no need to trade for a higher value when the prices are likely going to drop. B.Murray will either have to drop his asking price or try to find other ways to shed salary. For the sake of Ducks organisation, I hope he is not as delusional as thinking that dumping players like Bieksa/Stoner is going to be an easycake.

Chicago was actually in a similar kind of situation couple of seasons ago. You think they got a proper value for Nick Leddy?

We'll see if their GMs even feel that way, or how they succeeded in that.

We will. But not before the season starts. And that's basically the point.

 

[Liferleafer]

Do you mean that he's Burkie no 2 ?

We saw the same picture ad nauseam from Leafs fans with Burke holding the Cup...

Well...when you look at the context in which i posted this pic (saying i would favor a cup winning GM's opinion over a random HF poster) then ya, i would take Burke's opinion over said random poster as well....

 

[Liferleafer]

And Fowler would not save more than 25-35 goals ?

Look at your initial post...

PS: If you need a reminder, you wrote:

"Furthermore, as far as impact, lets say JVR scores 25-30 goals....and assists and assists on 25-30 more (pretty much what he has done), that means that he has a positive impact on 50-60 goals. Now, unless Fowler is guaranteed to prevent 50-60 goals that the Leafs would allow without him, how can you say he has more impact than JVR?"

Do i think Fowler will save 25-35 goals? By himself? Who knows? But even if we lose 25-35 goals in production...but save 25-35 in defense, it's a wash....so why bother.

I will stick with my stance. If we had another 1LW...maybe. If Fowler was RHD....maybe. but niether of those things are reality. I don't think these 2 teams work for a Fowler deal...we just can't offer what the Ducks need.

 

[Vipers31]

So you're basically trying to throw **** on the wall and see does it stick...

I don't particularly care how you classify it. I think it's less **** than what you're offering, and I'll take my chances with my **** sticking over your ****, yet again.

Kulikov suits a lot better to play with Risto against top competition than Fowler would.

You're free to believe that. I don't.

Not even taking into account that Pysyk is RHD, I would really love to hear you explaining how Pysyk and Kulikov offer the same impact on ice on your opinion.

I never said anything like "they have the same impact". That's you deforming my statement into something you can build an argument on, which is something you enjoy doing. They obviously have a different impact, and depending on whether there's any chemistry to be found between Ristolainen and Kulikov, pieces start moving around. But Pysyk wasn't a no-factor in Buffalo's defensive lineup, and we don't know the impact Kulikov will actually have on the ice. It has a real chance to be an entirely lateral move, maybe not in terms of specific individual impact, but overall result.

I know that I'm not going to see you explain anything, but it still is nice to see you avoiding questions and think yourself credible at the same time.

I avoid your questions, because you're not the one dictating the discussion. I don't care for the tangents you're bringing up, or your misinterpretations of statements. They aren't deserving of explanations.

Detroit with Holland as their GM. That probably is pretty close to the truth.

Fair play on that.

But seriously, there will likely be trades, but no need to trade for a higher value when the prices are likely going to drop. B.Murray will either have to drop his asking price or try to find other ways to shed salary.

Prices might drop, but the clock will be ticking for teams looking to improve early enough, and I just don't believe for a second there aren't any that would really like to do it. We have seen it reported for a lot of teams, only few of which actually addressed things. Maybe Murray will have to drop his asking price - I don't discount that possibility. Then again, I have no idea what his asking price is, so it's not saying much on my part. Which seems like the wise thing to do, without insider information.

The same thing about prices expected to drop going forward holds even more true for goaltenders, and yet we saw a team with an alleged non-urgent need in Toronto (due to their immediate non-competetiveness) go out and pay a price higher than most expected for Andersen. All it took was a GM seeing a piece he thought would improve his organisation. That's all.

Chicago was actually in a similar kind of situation couple of seasons ago. You think they got a proper value for Nick Leddy?

Singular somewhat-comparables from a couple years back aren't really a perfect reflection of the market. And since the people that work with advanced stats in actual hockey positions know how to use them, I don't worry about Fowler's current value not being held in higher regard than Leddy's at the time of the trade.

We will. But not before the season starts. And that's basically the point.

Why not before the season starts? Even if GMs came out and said they were happy with what they have done or even haven't done, that wouldn't mean much. There's no reason to believe nothing will happen. You're saying it won't because teams have no suffocating need. I'll say we'll see, and it doesn't take a need of that level for it to happen.

 

[ps241]

I think i'll believe him before you....

Is that Scott Niedermayer in the background? If so man does he look young.

 

[Ciao]

Well...when you look at the context in which i posted this pic (saying i would favor a cup winning GM's opinion over a random HF poster) then ya, i would take Burke's opinion over said random poster as well....

Well, what about the random poster who says he knows more about the Leafs than Leafs fans? I mean, THAT sounds very, very authoritative and credible, right?

He might be back up with another post shortly to say he knows more about hockey in general than Burkie and Lou put together! That would really blow the rest of us away. We would really have nothing left after that! Who could compare with such a self-assured hockey-genius?

 

[Liferleafer]

Well, what about the random poster who says he knows more about the Leafs than Leafs fans? I mean, THAT sounds very, very authoritative and credible, right?

He might be back up with another post shortly to say he knows more about hockey in general than Burkie and Lou put together! That would really blow the rest of us away. We would really have nothing left after that! Who could compare with such a self-assured hockey-genius?

Well, if you are speaking about the poster who's name is also that of one of the best rock bands of all time.....that's exactly who that pic was for. I posted Lou has spent time with Zaitsev, and that he feels he can play top 4...said poster told me Lou doesn't know what he's talking about....i said that having built a team in the past that has won that big shiny cup thingy gives his opinion the edge over said poster's. To which i was told that because it was so long ago, that Lou's opinion wasn't relevant today...to which i will now reply, Scotty Bowman hasn't won a cup in a while either, but I'm pretty sure i would still pay attention when he lends an opinion about hockey.

 

[Ciao]

^. Come to think of it, I think I have heard of that guy.

Geez, I wish I were as smart as him!

I haven't been that smart since I was 15 years old! I knew everything there was to know then, and it seems there's more and more I don't know and some other people (like my father) have become a whole lot smarter in the forty years since!

I do wonder if he's still at the prime age of reason -- because it sometimes sounds like he (or she) is

Despite all that, I would also prefer the hockey judgment of Leafs management too.

JVR for Fowler just doesn't make sense to me. I don't see how it would make the Leafs a better team, and I would be very surprised if Lou were to make a trade like that.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

So basically you admitted that you're not able to give a proper answer... Not that I'm surprised about that. (...)

You writing it does not make it so... but nice try.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Well...when you look at the context in which i posted this pic (saying i would favor a cup winning GM's opinion over a random HF poster) then ya, i would take Burke's opinion over said random poster as well....

But we all saw what happened with the Leafs under Burke, n'est ce pas ?

 

[Ciao]

But we all saw what happened with the Leafs under Burke, n'est ce pas ?

What's your winning record?