Proposal: Stoner (maybe small retention) 3rd round (maybe 2nd) for 7th or future considerations
- Thread starter Ducks in a row
- Start date
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
Hawks had to move TT for 1 year of Bickell with a $4M cap hit. Stoner's a better player than Bickell at this point (less dead cap), but he's also got 2 years left on the contract.
I'd be shocked if ANA could move by throwing in a 3rd round DP.
What stats? His points? Do you have any shot differential stats?
That's why there's a lineup to sign Runblad?
Have you projected the Ducks' salary next season? Do have any quotes they're even spending to the cap next season?
The only unrealistic scenario is the Ducks keeping every asset and signing Lindholm and Rakell. Everything else stated is plausible.
You're 100% right.
Ducks fans are being completely unrealistic about their roster and what it would take to make the necessary cap space.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
Rundblad, really? Do I really need to add "offensive RHD who haven't shown to be garbage at the NHL level"? Common sense would tell you I obviously wasn't talking about borderline NHLers.
Last edited:
Pennaduck
Registered User
Murray did say that he has some more money to work with next season, albeit he did not go into more detail than that. I'm of the opinion that we will be closer to the cap than most people think, because of the money coming to the Samuelis from the Vegas expansion fee. This is admittedly only speculation on my part, but I think it is plausible to assume that money paid by Vegas to the Ducks ownership will be reinvested into the franchise, so there is probably less hesitation to stick to an internal budget right now than we have ever had before. That doesn't mean we will be a team that spends right up to the cap, but we could be much closer than in years past.
You also have to remember that we have had a internal budget forever but in recent seasons we may not have even spent to the top of that budget since there have been a lot of young players on affordable contracts taking up roster spots. We also have a more favorable revenue sharing system now since the new CBA so I think the organization is getting more in that regard than ever before as well. I have also not read anything saying for instance that our budget limit last season was 64 million and that we hit that ceiling. It may have been 67 million and Murray just kept from spending that to roll it over to this seasons salaries.
I do agree that we won't enter this season will all of our assets and Lindholm and Rakell signed. Something has to give, but that doesn't necessarily mean we are going to see a top prospect moved out. There are other options than packaging a top prospect with Stoner to clear his salary.
I am using a comparison to show even if players have offence and have shown it at other levels it's far from a guarantee that the right hand offensive defenceman will translate to the NHL.
Some defencemen are good at creating offence, especially on the PP but are liabilities 5 on 5. If they cannot hold their own 5 on 5 they don't have much value.
Until Montour proves he's not a liability 5 on 5 he doesn't have the value you and several other Ducks fans say he has.
Maybe Anaheim can even spend to the cap this season. Even if they can, you're correct in stating that something has got to give.
You're also correct in saying there are other ways to make the cap work.
Cogliano-Getzlaf-Perry
Ritchie-Kesler-Silfverberg
Raymond-Rakell-Garbutt
Thompson-Vermette-Boll
EXTRA:Wagner
Lindhom-Vatanen
Fowler-Bieksa
Despres-Manson
EXTRA:Stoner,Holzer
Gibson,Bernier
Cap hit: 67 million
Ducks have to sign Lindholm AND Rakell for 6 million?!... If they even spend to the cap.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
He's one of the top offensive D prospects in hockey, guys like that are premium assets. They lose value if they prove to be a liability.
See your own example of Rundblad, who was used to acquire Ottawa's current #1C, a recent top 3 pick at the time.
We agree there are other ways for the Ducks to save money. Our GM has openly spoken out about not being willing to trade his top young assets for short term gain. If the price to get rid of Stoner would require giving up one of those types of assets, you can bet BM will go a different route.
Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
We can retain some making total between both season being less then Bickell in 1 season. Also veteran defenseman depth is never a bad thing while a 4 million AHL winger is always a bad thing.
I am not predicting anything other then we are going to sign Lindholm and Rakell and make some other move of some kind.
We could trade Despres to help. We could trade Fowler for Tatar + or Spooner + that will help. That is some stuff we could do if no team will take Stoner with some retention for a 2nd round pick.
Tatar makes quite a bit of money, not sure if trading for him would help.
It's silly on halfboards because NO ONE ever wants to trade their team's premium asset for lesser assets but it some cases that is the only realistic option, especially when the team with the premium asset is either against the cap OR has a budget. Anaheim is somehow both of these...
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
DavidBL
Registered User
Yes but they're also more costly. Having guys like Montour and Theo is what allows the Ducks to move players like Fowler or Despres.
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,206
- 13,233
Thompson will be starting the heat on LTIR so that frees up 1.7M in cap. If we were pressed up against the cap still after signing Lindholm we would simply only carry 7 defenseman and could send down Boll and bring up Noesen which would save a couple of thousand dollars.
But more likely we will just move Fowler or Despres.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
Fowler is, but he would be moved for some sort of young core piece and not for short term gain.
Despres is expendable because we have younger, cheaper dmen.
I love how you're basically lost without your precious possession stats. You're clearly champing at the bit to criticise Montour about his defensive game, but you're unable to without those stupid numbers.
If you want to find something to criticise Montour about, why not watch him play? He is by no means perfect. However, he is still a quality prospect.
Thompson played in Anaheim's last set of games, did he get hurt in the off season?
I agree cheap replacement always help but Montour is a right defencemen which the Ducks have Vatanen, Bieksa and Mason. All are unlikely to be traded for various reasons.
IMO if Fowler or Despres are moved for cap reasons you're going to be disappointed with the return.
I love how you're basically lost without your precious possession stats. You're clearly champing at the bit to criticise Montour about his defensive game, but you're unable to without those stupid numbers.
If you want to find something to criticise Montour about, why not watch him play? He is by no means perfect. However, he is still a quality prospect.
AHL games are not easily watched. How many AHL games have you watched of Montour's?
Statistics tell a story. From your comments it seems you don't understand the value of statisitics, maybe you don't comprehend them.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
Selling low on Despres is still likely more beneficial than paying to get rid of Stoner.
I completely disagree on Fowler - supply and demand. He's arguably the best dman with term on the trade market and there are plenty of teams needing help in that area. No single team has any leverage there if there are a handful trying to acquire him.
Speaking in terms of deals being talked about around here - Spooner +, Tatar+ etc...those offers save the Ducks money and bring in much needed offensive help up front.
Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
Ducks C Thompson Ruptures Achilles Tendon During Offseason Workout, Undergoes Surgery
http://ducks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=886048
