Proposal: Rangers - Ducks

[Exit Dose]

I think the problem is that we're arguing over a small margin. You think he's a solid #2D. I think he's a solid #3D. How exactly do you differentiate between those things in a way that everyone can accept? Not particularly easy, given the question marks Fowler has regarding his history of poor defensive partners. It's impossible to precisely extrapolate what Fowler would be like playing with a #1D since he never has played with a #1D.

You refer to him as a 2/3 defenseman, which is basically what Ducks fans have been doing in most of these trade threads.

 

[bernmeister]

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.

Basic agree, but if they overpaid enough to make it worth our while, we should do it.

If they gave us expansion exempted Theodore AND Montour for Zuc+ I would do the half, and reasonable adds in the right currency.

 

[Exit Dose]

Basic agree, but if they overpaid enough to make it worth our while, we should do it.

If they gave us expansion exempted Theodore AND Montour for Zuc+ I would do the half, and reasonable adds in the right currency.

There is no scenario where Anaheim is trading both of Theodore and Montour to New York. It doesn't matter if you retain.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Can't we just leave this argument at Fowler, or LD for that matter, isn't a fit for the Rangers at the moment. We have McDonagh-Staal-Skjei-Holden down the left side at the NHL level, and Ryan Graves is due for a cup of coffee sometime later this season.

We need right-handed defenseman because the only young one we have that can play at the NHL level is Dylan McIlrath. Klein is a good top-4 stopgap, but he's getting older, and Girardi has so much wear and tear on his body that he's been steadily declining for the past 3 years. We signed Paliotta and Clendenning, but they need work in Hartford before we can expect them to contribute on the third-pairing.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Can't we just leave this argument at Fowler, or LD for that matter, isn't a fit for the Rangers at the moment. We have McDonagh-Staal-Skjei-Holden down the left side at the NHL level, and Ryan Graves is due for a cup of coffee sometime later this season.

We need right-handed defenseman because the only young one we have that can play at the NHL level is Dylan McIlrath. Klein is a good top-4 stopgap, but he's getting older, and Girardi has so much wear and tear on his body that he's been steadily declining for the past 3 years. We signed Paliotta and Clendenning, but they need work in Hartford before we can expect them to contribute on the third-pairing.

With Vats locked up to a new long term deal, I'd say Montour would be the guy I'd see the Rangers being most interested in from the Ducks.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

I'd laugh in the Ducks face if they brought this deal up. The Rangers hang up and don't even listen

 

[KaseMeOutside]

It's a fair point. Why would an elite puck-mover have bad possession numbers?

you are referencing shot attempt numbers, not actual possession

 

[KaseMeOutside]

no ducks fan is saying the rangers should trade for fowler

there has just been a series of stupid comments

 

[Cassano]

Fowler just led the Ducks in time on ice, and they were the best defensive team in the NHL: 1st in Goals against, 4th in shots against, 6th in shot attempts against. Only the LA kings had comparable results defensively but they have Jonathan Quick whereas Anaheim didn't even have a clear starting goaltender, and surely no one as good as Quick.

So how can you possibly dismiss such blatant evidence: the guy who played the most on the best defensive team? He has also played with a bad defensive partner for his entire career: Bieksa, Brookbank, Lovejoy,....

His corsi% and all players for that matter are meaningless unless contextualized. It's a stat that tends to indicate a result, but the result itself is a far more significant piece of evidence to evaluate Cam Fowler.

Meh, Dan Girardi played the most minutes for the Rangers who finished 2nd in goal goals against 2 seasons ago and won the President's Trophy. I would not however point to this as 'solid evidence' that he was a great defenseman.

Cam Fowler can't hit, can't create(despite his physical gifts) and is not great at suppressing shots. He is a very overrated defenseman - in fact the most overrated in the game IMO. There are dozens of LHD better than Fowler in the NHL today.

There is no way in hell the Rangers would part with Miller or Hayes - let alone both for him.

 

[tomd]

Meh, Dan Girardi played the most minutes for the Rangers who finished 2nd in goal goals against 2 seasons ago and won the President's Trophy. I would not however point to this as 'solid evidence' that he was a great defenseman.

Cam Fowler can't hit, can't create(despite his physical gifts) and is not great at suppressing shots. He is a very overrated defenseman - in fact the most overrated in the game IMO. There are dozens of LHD better than Fowler in the NHL today.

There is no way in hell the Rangers would part with Miller or Hayes - let alone both for him.

This thread has officially jumped the shark with the idiocy of the above comment. Fowler may not be a need for the Rangers and that is fine but holy cow the above comment is just plain dumb. Are there really Canadians who don't even know how to watch their own game?

 

[Sojourn]

Meh, Dan Girardi played the most minutes for the Rangers who finished 2nd in goal goals against 2 seasons ago and won the President's Trophy. I would not however point to this as 'solid evidence' that he was a great defenseman.

Cam Fowler can't hit, can't create(despite his physical gifts) and is not great at suppressing shots. He is a very overrated defenseman - in fact the most overrated in the game IMO. There are dozens of LHD better than Fowler in the NHL today.

There is no way in hell the Rangers would part with Miller or Hayes - let alone both for him.

Ah yes. The Girardi argument. I love that one.

Conveniently left out of that increasingly common argument, is the fact that Dan Girardi spent(and spends) most of his time with Ryan McDonagh. See, a defensive pairing is called a pairing because it involves two players. Now, let's be honest here... Girardi isn't the lynch pin of that pairing. He isn't the guy. McDonagh is.

So, in this counter argument you've laid out, Girardi and his minutes? The equivalent player on Anaheim isn't Fowler. It's Bieksa. Bieksa would be Girardi, because Girardi leans on McDonagh to handle the minutes he does. If you split them up, Girardi drops down the depth chart, while McDonagh stays where he is. When you split up Bieksa and Fowler? The same is true. Bieksa drops. Fowler remains.

Edit: So, to summarize, you wouldn't say Girardi is a good defenseman, despite his minutes, and that's fair. We wouldn't call Kevin Bieksa a good one, despite his. We would call Fowler one. And no team can afford to have two crappy players on their top pairing and still win a Jennings. Even making the playoffs would be questionable.

 

[gorangers0525]

Your first paragraph couldn't be more wrong. The irony here is amazing, since a lot of Rangers fans like to base their opinions of Fowler solely off of stats. You're saying Fowler often makes good defensive plays and then turns the puck over? The stats show he's amongst the league's elite in terms of controlled zone exits.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/defencemen-best-exiting-zone/



The difference there is that Girardi is the weaker Dman being propped up by a better player. Fowler is the one forced to do the carrying.

This supports what I said...you're measuring his ability to get it past the blueline, which is usually (or always...) the result of a good defensive play. In this case, it's his ability to get the puck and skate the puck out, past the blueline. However, anything past there is a **** show. I've only seen it recorded for small sample sizes, I recall a blog posting a few entries/exits stats for the Ducks/Blackhawks 15' series. I'll try to find it, but Fowler was the among the worst at A.entering the offensive zone. And B. Letting the opposition into his own zone. Which is why his corsi blows.

 

[charliemurphy]

Well this thread can be locked up now I'd say... Miller and Hayes aren't getting dealt. End of Fowler trade discussion. Please.

 

[nbducksfan19]

Meh, Dan Girardi played the most minutes for the Rangers who finished 2nd in goal goals against 2 seasons ago and won the President's Trophy. I would not however point to this as 'solid evidence' that he was a great defenseman.

Cam Fowler can't hit, can't create(despite his physical gifts) and is not great at suppressing shots. He is a very overrated defenseman - in fact the most overrated in the game IMO. There are dozens of LHD better than Fowler in the NHL today.

There is no way in hell the Rangers would part with Miller or Hayes - let alone both for him.

Haha why even comment on a subject if you are so obviously clueless?

 

[gorangers0525]

Ah yes. The Girardi argument. I love that one.

Conveniently left out of that increasingly common argument, is the fact that Dan Girardi spent(and spends) most of his time with Ryan McDonagh. See, a defensive pairing is called a pairing because it involves two players. Now, let's be honest here... Girardi isn't the lynch pin of that pairing. He isn't the guy. McDonagh is.

So, in this counter argument you've laid out, Girardi and his minutes? The equivalent player on Anaheim isn't Fowler. It's Bieksa. Bieksa would be Girardi, because Girardi leans on McDonagh to handle the minutes he does. If you split them up, Girardi drops down the depth chart, while McDonagh stays where he is. When you split up Bieksa and Fowler? The same is true. Bieksa drops. Fowler remains.

Edit: So, to summarize, you wouldn't say Girardi is a good defenseman, despite his minutes, and that's fair. We wouldn't call Kevin Bieksa a good one, despite his. We would call Fowler one. And no team can afford to have two crappy players on their top pairing and still win a Jennings. Even making the playoffs would be questionable.

Everybody and their grandmothers stats get better away from Girardi. Can't say the same for Fowler, no matter who his buddies are.

 

[perrygetzanother]

This supports what I said...you're measuring his ability to get it past the blueline, which is usually (or always...) the result of a good defensive play. In this case, it's his ability to get the puck and skate the puck out, past the blueline. However, anything past there is a **** show. I've only seen it recorded for small sample sizes, I recall a blog posting a few entries/exits stats for the Ducks/Blackhawks 15' series. I'll try to find it, but Fowler was the among the worst at A.entering the offensive zone. And B. Letting the opposition into his own zone. Which is why his corsi blows.

I screamed at my TV for years watching the ducks dump and chase. If you dump it before crossing the blue line, did it count as a zone entry?

It might be a system issue. Vats would skate it coast to coast, Fowler could but he would be responsible to the system and dump it in (aka give it away, I hate it so much) to let the forwards forecheck and hope for a turnover in the zone.

Did I mention I hate the system they ran? That was certainly their system though.

 

[Sojourn]

This supports what I said...you're measuring his ability to get it past the blueline, which is usually (or always...) the result of a good defensive play. In this case, it's his ability to get the puck and skate the puck out, past the blueline. However, anything past there is a **** show. I've only seen it recorded for small sample sizes, I recall a blog posting a few entries/exits stats for the Ducks/Blackhawks 15' series. I'll try to find it, but Fowler was the among the worst at A.entering the offensive zone. And B. Letting the opposition into his own zone. Which is why his corsi blows.

Fowler isn't tasked with entering the offensive zone with it. He's tasked with exiting the defensive zone. Sure, there are obviously times he will enter with it, but he'll also just dump it in and go for a change. It's clearly coach mandated.

As for letting the opposition into his own zone... what does that even mean? Which sport have you been watching? You only stand up at the blue line if you have a lot of support. If the opposition has equal or greater numbers, you aren't supposed to stand up at the blue line. You let the opposition enter the zone and attempt to keep them to the outside. That's the safe, statistical play. Trying something other than that is just asking the opposing team to get a high quality scoring opportunity, when they exploit the gap you've just given them.

 

[Sojourn]

Everybody and their grandmothers stats get better away from Girardi. Can't say the same for Fowler, no matter who his buddies are.

That's not really relevant to my point. But okay.

Edit: Unless you're trying to say that Bieksa is the lynch pin on that D pairing, which would be one of the most absurd things I've ever seen. I've been on these boards a while. That's saying a lot.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

This supports what I said...you're measuring his ability to get it past the blueline, which is usually (or always...) the result of a good defensive play. In this case, it's his ability to get the puck and skate the puck out, past the blueline. However, anything past there is a **** show. I've only seen it recorded for small sample sizes, I recall a blog posting a few entries/exits stats for the Ducks/Blackhawks 15' series. I'll try to find it, but Fowler was the among the worst at A.entering the offensive zone. And B. Letting the opposition into his own zone. Which is why his corsi blows.

Watch him play, he rarely attempts to gain the opposing blueline with the puck, that's one area about his game that Ducks complain about the most. More often than not he makes a simple dump or chip to a safe area. It's not a lack of ability, it's that he isn't assertive offensively in most situations. He was when he broke in, playing a more sheltered role. Vatanen did the exact same thing when asked to fill Fowler's shoes, which leads one to believe that Boudreau mandated his most heavily relied upon dman to keep things as simple as possible.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I'm not a fan of advanced stats, but I think its too much to give up. Miller or Hayes for Fowler, not both of them.

 

[bernmeister]

Can't we just leave this argument at Fowler, or LD for that matter, isn't a fit for the Rangers at the moment. We have McDonagh-Staal-Skjei-Holden down the left side at the NHL level, and Ryan Graves is due for a cup of coffee sometime later this season.

We need right-handed defenseman because the only young one we have that can play at the NHL level is Dylan McIlrath. Klein is a good top-4 stopgap, but he's getting older, and Girardi has so much wear and tear on his body that he's been steadily declining for the past 3 years. We signed Paliotta and Clendenning, but they need work in Hartford before we can expect them to contribute on the third-pairing.

We are targeting the more needed RD. That means maybe Montour. However, Theodore, with his ability to not have to be protected for the expansion draft, is an exception --- at the price.

But yes, for the love of that is holy, please no more Fowler DO NOT WANT.

With Vats locked up to a new long term deal, I'd say Montour would be the guy I'd see the Rangers being most interested in from the Ducks.

You know how Gort rolls, al la bernmeister. Will reasonably overpay in currency of choice, vets. Not likely to touch the young core. Will listen politely, but unless exceptional anything with young core is doa.

I'm not a fan of advanced stats, but I think its too much to give up. Miller or Hayes for Fowler, not both of them.

Neither, and again not for Fowler

 

[One Winged Angel]

To be clear, this thread was started by a Leafs fan notorious for bad proposals. I dont think anyone is trying to argue that Fowler is a fit for the Rangers, I can clearly see why he isn't a target based on your depth chart.

It's more so AV's stubbornness to get past the left/right side crap. As long as he's here, he'll continue to play Girardi with McDonagh just because of the handedness and the side he plays.

No Ranger fan will argue that they would rather have Cementfeet McGee over Cam Fowler on their top pairing. It's just a matter of it having zero chance of happening with the moron behind the bench in NY.

That being said, there are multiple Rangers fans who routinely demonstrate an irrational hatrid for this player based on his advanced stats. That's why I was so surprised to see this very rational conversation take place on your boards yesterday - http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2107933&page=7

It seems that in general, Rangers fans are completely aware that advanced stats mean very little without context. Yet when the name Cam Fowler comes up, the hate blinders come on and a lot of those same fans are completely dismissive of the context we provide.

I'd actually like to thank you, because you're one of a few people who actually understands that advanced statistics are all a matter of context. It's exactly why I haven't bothered to go crazy trying to read and understand them. There are so many variables (most notably quality of linemates - which to me almost negates the point of having these stats if they're not going to properly quantify how their performance affects said player in question's said statstic) that are not properly evaluated and included in the breakdown of the analytics. There are so many things that can go wrong with a said play down to the most smallest detail that one would think of that could affect a play that could change these statistics for the better or worse.

With that said, they're in the early stages. Maybe years down the road, they fix these problems and the stats become so advanced that all variables are accounted for.

There isn't one rational Ducks fan who will try to claim that Fowler is a #1 Dman. Yet the only statistical data we have for him over the past couple years, is him being employed as a #1, alongside bottom pairing types. The only real conclusion to be drawn from that data, is that Fowler has been used over his head in that role. Make him the complimentary guy on a top pairing (which is what we're saying he's suited for by referring to him as a #2) and his advanced stats would inevitability normalize.

I won't argue any of that. I watch bits of ducks hockey. As someone who has had the center ice package since 2002 and access to out of market games since 1998, I can only begin to tell you just how hard it is to watch all of the other teams on a regular basis.

I can guarantee you right now that 95% (at the very least) of the people on this website are lying through their teeth when it comes to how much they watch said player. Whether it's because of pride and wanting to look like they know everything, because after all, HF is a pissing contest of hockey intelligence, or whether it's just the simple desire to want to be included and not look stupid in said conversations, people will jump aboard what I call the HF Mob Mentality. They will see someone say something about a said player regardless of whether it's true or false and if enough people say it, others and soon everyone will believe it to be true.

Which is exactly why when it comes to these boards and "player value", unless it's something absolutely outlandish or can be proven by recent past history, I always claim to not know value because no one here does. Then again, like I said before, at least 95% of the people on here will feed you BS about how much they watch the player that's being discussed if he's not on their team.

I had someone telling me that Rick Nash's game changed, but couldn't give me details on a game to game basis, went straight to selke voting, which is a flawed system to begin with.

I know it's annoying, but I wouldn't get bent out of shape over it. Long story short, I'd take Fowler and I may not agree with him being a #2 (personally I think he's a very good #3, but how am I going to quantify that other than it being my opinion from my own personal eye test?) but he doesn't fit here at all and especially not for Hayes AND Miller.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Yuck to the whole thread

 

[Ducks in a row]

Basic agree, but if they overpaid enough to make it worth our while, we should do it.

If they gave us expansion exempted Theodore AND Montour for Zuc+ I would do the half, and reasonable adds in the right currency.

Theodore played some games for us during this past season showing the skill he has and ability to produce 3 goals 5 assists 8 points in 19 games. Montour has been developing nicely he has good value. We are not trading both Theodore and Montour for Zuccarello who makes 4.5 million per year for 3 years then is a UFA who we probably wouldn't be able to afford to re-sign. Nothing really can be added that would be worth it or we can afford with our budget to get us to make the trade. You want clear cut overpayment instead of a solid hockey deal look elsewhere because we are not looking to overpay for any Rangers players or any players at all like Rangers have done in trades themselves for players.

 

[gorangers0525]

Watch him play, he rarely attempts to gain the opposing blueline with the puck, that's one area about his game that Ducks complain about the most. More often than not he makes a simple dump or chip to a safe area. It's not a lack of ability, it's that he isn't assertive offensively in most situations. He was when he broke in, playing a more sheltered role. Vatanen did the exact same thing when asked to fill Fowler's shoes, which leads one to believe that Boudreau mandated his most heavily relied upon dman to keep things as simple as possible.

Not being able to enter the zone you should be in is a huge ****ing weakness, and one that the Rangers already have.

Vatanen is one of the best zone entry defenseman in the league.