Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
The problem with that is as is we need to shed some salary (we are a budget team) and doing a trade like that would increase our salary. Hate being a budget team
LeetchisGod
This is a bad hockey team.
I'd rather sign him as a free agent next year. No reason to give up assets.
Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
He is still signed past next year and if he does become a UFA you would have to compete with many other teams no guarantee you would have him. If you trade for him he would be more likely to stay with your team.
smoneil
Registered User
He was talking about Shattenkirk, not Fowler. I have yet to see that many Rangers fans who have any interest in Fowler whatsoever. Just not a need for us, and too many questions. Not knocking the player, but he's not the kind of player the Rangers need to spend assets on.
salsa man
SALSA
Doubt it since it doesn't solve two of the Ducks key issues:
1. Ducks need to shed salary not add. Krieder for Montour is a big salary add
2. Adding Krieder means another body that needs to be protected in the expansion draft. Ducks are already in trouble there which is why Fowler is available.
Sojourn
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2006
- 50,523
- 9,377
Because possession isn't actually measured in available statistics. Shot differential is. A player who is relied on to break the puck out of the D zone can easily have poor possession statistics if he is breaking the puck out and then getting off the ice for someone like Vatanen or Lindholm.
People need a better understanding of the statistics they are trying to use to measure players.
I like how you tried to pretend you observed this first hand from Fowler, but then when the bold came up I knew you just googled his analytics like everyone else. Fail.
One Winged Angel
You Can't Escape
One Winged Angel
You Can't Escape
What about someone like myself who has center ice and although admittedly doesn't watch a ton of ducks hockey, recognizes that while skilled offensively, he isn't a fit on the Rangers?
We need defenders stronger in our own zone. Fowler is strong at moving the puck, however just like other defenders on the team, his troubles come down to when he's pinned in his own zone.
Also, if the analytics are as bad as people are saying, that doesn't bode well for the Rangers either. We already have the Super Corsio Brothers in Staal and Girardi and it showed how bad they were this past year.
Fowler is also left side. We need right side.
Not a fit and definitely not at the cost of Miller and Hayes. I'm going after someone better at that price.
So it's not that Fowler sucks. He's just not the guy for the Rangers.
However. It brings me to the question, why is he put in every trade proposal involving the Ducks on here if he's so good? I don't put much stock in HF's mob mentality, but if you see the same player over and over again in trade proposals, something tells me the honeymoon is over.
KaseMeOutside
Based
- Oct 18, 2011
- 44,277
- 10,197
Because shot attempts are not the only measure of possession, I mean if you look at his raw corsi numbers he was -44 in 69 games with the highest defensive zone start % of all D on the team, playing the majority of his ES mins with Kevin Bieksa who is a human traffic cone most of the time.
When you look at fenwick the difference is minimal and again you have to account for playing the most minutes per 60 on the team, taking the highest % of defensive zone starts of all D on the team, as well as mediocre to worse partners. Bieksa is a glorified 6th dman and Despres did not play well after having a concussion.
Of course if you only look at a stat sheet, and don't dig deeper it's easy to make the kinds of conclusions I frequently see from ranger fans on the player
KaseMeOutside
Based
- Oct 18, 2011
- 44,277
- 10,197
ranger fans hardly ever watch the ducks play so they depend on about 2 stats to justify their opinions, the ducks might trade fowler because of the mismanaged salary cap by the gm when it comes to the defense and the team desperately needs a top 6 forward, with the deal vatanen got it's logical to presume the ducks may trade fowler.
I don't know why you are invoking mcilrath, 6 years after that draft and he has done absolutely nothing worthwhile in the league
KaseMeOutside
Based
- Oct 18, 2011
- 44,277
- 10,197
If we wouldn`t be a budget team then definitely. But unfortunately we have no space to just add salary. Unless you want to take Bieksa and Stoner
well said. AA is usually spot, this is no exception.
McIl lost time w/knee injury and rehab, then, no fault of his own, pushed back to accommodate AV, who, results now conclude clearly, was wrong to give more mins to Boyle and Girardi.
No, it does not. Kreider not being offered. Pretty much every thread, he is the ask, but NY not surrendering unless overpayment or as in package for an elite (def not Fowler, who NY cannot use, not good in his own end).
The solution to your W problem is Zuc
offer something Rangers want, or advise no thanks, and we move on.
The young core stays
Step/Zuc and others go.
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
I know the Ducks are a budget team. What would the Ducks offer for Zucc at 50% retained (cap hit would be $2.25).
With the talent Zucc has plus retention I would think something significant. One of the young D (not Fowler) +?
With the talent Zucc has plus retention I would think something significant. One of the young D (not Fowler) +?
GAGLine
Registered User
- Sep 17, 2007
- 24,327
- 21,248
Why would we retain on Zucc? If Anaheim can't afford him, then trade him somewhere else. Or take back a contract like Cogliano. Better to get a semi-useful player than to have 2.25 mil in dead cap space for 3 years. Zucc is a good player on a good contract. Retaining on him is the last thing we should do.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
This question has already been asked and addressed several times in this thread. The Ducks have arguably yhe best group of U25 defenseman in the league. We can't protect all of them. Fowler represents the most valuable trade piece that we could perhaps afford to part with in order to add a much needed impact forward. Maybe you're just taken aback by a fan base on HF actually realizing that we need to give to get.
Zats Muccarello
Grinder
Miller is worth way too much for this type of deal. A deal could be built around Hayes but I doubt the Rangers move him to be honest.
Shootertooter
Registered User
- Feb 20, 2016
- 3,676
- 1,487
If your cap or internal spending is botched up or you have too many guys with NMC's and you truly think he is one of your better defensemen, wouldn't it make sense to make sure you make that room to insure this guy stays on your team....or, he is just overvalued as I have said all along.
With the expansion draft looming, who are you protecting, surely someone can be moved to make space for your #2 or #3?
But as it stands, Fowler is a LHD, the Rangers need RHD. There is likely no real fit here especially if you refuse to take back contract.
Just an observation but it seems rather odd that some of the posters here in these various Fowler threads claim he is the best defenseman they have but discredit his negative stats and production. Interesting though that to them stats matter when they cite Nash is washed up despite being a season removed from a 42 goal campaign or is terrible in the post season....despite good playoff production the past 28ish games or so and obviously not watching him actually play.
Shootertooter
Registered User
- Feb 20, 2016
- 3,676
- 1,487
