Proposal: Ducks - Devils

[WhatTheDuck]

- D Simon Despres, 4th round pick, G Matt Hackett



- F Reid Boucher, G Scott Wedgewood


I think it's fair to say the Devils are short on top 4 defensemen after today's trade. Upon joining the Ducks, Despres quickly found chemistry playing with Fowler, and showed down that stretch drive that he can more than handle himself as a complimentary top 4 guy. Unfortunately a concussion this season raising question marks about his durability but that would be an issue for the Devils medical staff to address. Despres does have five years remaining with an AAV of $3.7M, so the Devils would obviously have to be sure he's healthy. At his best, he's a versatile, multi-talented dman with great physical tools.

Despres has the ability the play both sides so they could pencil him in next to Greene or Severson depending on who else claims the other top 4 spot. Could be an interesting way for the Devils to get their hands on a blue liner who is both younger and cheaper than the top 4 guys they would be pursuing in free agency, still without having to trade core assets. They take on Hackett to balance contracts & as a minor league veteran back up for Blackwood, and add a mid round pick.

The Ducks accomplish a couple things here. Most importantly they save some budget room, which most know is of utmost importance at the moment. In Boucher they get a young LW with legit scoring potential who could be penciled in to a top 9 spot. Wedgewood would hopefully take a hold of the back up job, giving us just about the most economical goalie tandem possible (appears to be an NHL ready prospect). In that scenario, assuming Boucher would be a cheap signing, the Ducks save at least $1.3M in salary and fill two roster slots for peanuts.


Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[HanSolo]

I like it. But only if we can unload Stoner to someone. If we have to trade Fowler too I hate it.

 

[eternalbedhead]

I'd probably rather go pick up a more experienced goaltender to take the load off of Gibson, but otherwise I like this trade from a Ducks perspective.

 

[HanSolo]

I'd probably rather go pick up a more experienced goaltender to take the load off of Gibson, but otherwise I like this trade from a Ducks perspective.

That can be accomplished with other avenues tbh

 

[Exit Dose]

Has Boucher's stock fallen or something? If it hasn't, then I can't imagine New Jersey considering this until Despres regains his form.

 

[eternalbedhead]

That can be accomplished with other avenues tbh

I'm not saying we can't pick up another goaltender, but I was more replying to the OP saying that Wedgewood could fill in as a backup, which I'm not exactly comfortable given Gibson's experience. A guy like Chad Johnson, if we could afford it, would be lovely.

 

[McDonald19]

Can we leave the goalies out of it?

Despres for Boucher.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

Can we leave the goalies out of it?

Despres for Boucher.

That's a bad deal for Anaheim.

They can get better for Despres.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Has Boucher's stock fallen or something? If it hasn't, then I can't imagine New Jersey considering this until Despres regains his form.

I don't believe that Boucher's stock has fallen, but a Devils fan could probably speak more to that. I guess my response would be that I don't believe this package would be enough to fetch the regained to form version of Despres or any other youngish top 4 dman with no question marks. Is it more than anyone would give up for the current version of Despres? Tough to say, but that's why I targeted a team who can seemingly both stand and afford to take the risk.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

I don't believe that Boucher's stock has fallen, but a Devils fan could probably speak more to that. I guess my response would be that I don't believe this package would be enough to fetch the regained to form version of Despres or any other youngish top 4 dman with no question marks. Is it more than anyone would give up for the current version of Despres? Tough to say, but that's why I targeted a team who can seemingly both stand and afford to take the risk.

NJ can take that risk, but Anaheim needs a little bit more back than Boucher.

 

[AfroThunder396]

I'd rather keep Boucher, he's going to be a good one.

I'd offer NJ's 1st 2017 + Joe Blandisi for Fowler.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

NJ can take that risk, but Anaheim needs a little bit more back than Boucher.

I guess that depends on how you perceive Boucher's value and upside. I don't see why he shouldn't be considered a legitimate candidate to score us a very affordable 20 goals this season.

Keep in mind there's more positives for the Ducks in this trade beyond the pieces they get in return. They save money to use for other moves and get value in return for a guy they would possibly be leaving unprotected a year from now, or in the least help clear those waters.

 

[dracom]

I'd rather keep Boucher, he's going to be a good one.

I'd offer NJ's 1st 2017 + Joe Blandisi for Fowler.

Terrible offer. Larsson got Hall, yet Fowler only gets a 1st and an average prospect? Ducks shouldn't be trading Fowler for futures.

 

[Exit Dose]

I don't believe that Boucher's stock has fallen, but a Devils fan could probably speak more to that. I guess my response would be that I don't believe this package would be enough to fetch the regained to form version of Despres or any other youngish top 4 dman with no question marks. Is it more than anyone would give up for the current version of Despres? Tough to say, but that's why I targeted a team who can seemingly both stand and afford to take the risk.

That's not entirely true. Having the room to take on risk doesn't mean that they're going to pay you off for taking that risk. Something like this might be feasible at the TDL, if Despres improves to a level that makes taking on a four million dollar risk more sensible, but right now you may as well be asking if Shero is a big enough sucker to take this risk on without sending a similar risk back. While I'm not Shero's biggest fan, I still realize that he's not Milbury, and is going to want something fairer in the exchange - room or not.

 

[Arthuros]

Terrible offer. Larsson got Hall, yet Fowler only gets a 1st and an average prospect? Ducks shouldn't be trading Fowler for futures.

I'm fairly certain that Chiarelli went insane there, so we should be taking Larsson for Hall with a pinch of salt.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

That's not entirely true. Having the room to take on risk doesn't mean that they're going to pay you off for taking that risk. Something like this might be feasible at the TDL, if Despres improves to a level that makes taking on a four million dollar risk more sensible, but right now you may as well be asking if Shero is a big enough sucker to take this risk on without sending a similar risk back. While I'm not Shero's biggest fan, I still realize that he's not Milbury, and is going to want something fairer in the exchange - room or not.

I see what you're saying, but I'd say the Ducks are taking a risk on selling Despres for less than he would be worth if returned to form. The Devils assume the financial risk, but I don't see this as a true salary dump situation where they would be sending no value back. As I said, maybe this is more than anyone would pay for the Despres right now, but there's surely more upside involved here for the Devils than in most salary dump scenarios.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

I guess that depends on how you perceive Boucher's value and upside. I don't see why he shouldn't be considered a legitimate candidate to score us a very affordable 20 goals this season.

Keep in mind there's more positives for the Ducks in this trade beyond the pieces they get in return. They save money to use for other moves and get value in return for a guy they would possibly be leaving unprotected a year from now, or in the least help clear those waters.

For a team that was starving offense, their top offensive prospect did what?

Did he force the Devil's to make a choice?

 

[HanSolo]

I'm fairly certain that Chiarelli went insane there, so we should be taking Larsson for Hall with a pinch of salt.

As I said in another thread, it's like if we got Galchenyuk for Fowler.

 

[Ducks in a row]

I'd rather keep Boucher, he's going to be a good one.

I'd offer NJ's 1st 2017 + Joe Blandisi for Fowler.

Need a much better win now piece coming to Anaheim.

 

[Exit Dose]

I see what you're saying, but I'd say the Ducks are taking a risk on selling Despres for less than he would be worth if returned to form. The Devils assume the financial risk, but I don't see this as a true salary dump situation where they would be sending no value back. As I said, maybe this is more than anyone would pay for the Despres right now, but there's surely more upside involved here for the Devils than in most salary dump scenarios.

The Devils would be taking the same risks by moving Boucher. That doesn't balance the real risks of taking on a speculative deal that compounded those inherent risks in the signing with injury risks right after the signing - that to date, the player in question has shown no signs of overcoming.

 

[mytduxfan*]

The Devils would be taking the same risks by moving Boucher. That doesn't balance the real risks of taking on a speculative deal that compounded those inherent risks in the signing with injury risks right after the signing - that to date, the player in question has shown no signs of overcoming.

Both sides take on risk at the cost of addressing a major need. I understand your point, but I think heusy has presented a solid justification as to why NJ would consider such a deal. IMO, it's certainly a proposal within the realms of possibility.

Good job heusy.

 

[DaDucks*]

Can we please stop trying to keep Fowler on the team...

 

[Rorschach]

Came in for Taylor Hall for Sami Vatanen. Dissapoint.

 

[HanSolo]

Can we please stop trying to keep Fowler on the team...

Let's just trade him for the first crap deal that comes our way amirite?

 

[dracom]

Came in for Taylor Hall for Sami Vatanen. Dissapoint.

man, it's going to take me awhile to get used to Hall being a Devil.