LW options

[Exit Dose]

Oh, great, this nonsense is coming to our board now. Thrilled.

But for the sake of it - a pre-draft statement about a GM having held off (perfect tense) on making a pick available is not a suitable piece of evidence for a claim that it remained off the table lateron. But we've come to learn that linguistics aren't exactly a strong suit of many HF'ers.

When they picked up Kulikov you'd think that we were done with this crap. This is worse than the Islanders.

 

[Duck Off]

No insider has talked anything about other pieces. The way both Dreger and Friedman posted their info indicate no other pieces being involved. At least the other pieces were pretty much non-factors because they weren't specified (if there ever was any).


Exactly... This shouldn't be that difficult, to be honest.


Sure, he might have wanted more. I just doubt it because if the 8th overall wasn't enough, why it obviously was the hot topic there? I doubt 2nd round pick or similar was the dealbreaker there.

But I would be more careful when comparing Larsson and Fowler here. Devils weren't shopping Larsson - it was Edmonton who decided to shop Hall and asked every team their price - they were pretty determined to move a big name. Larsson ended up being the best value available. The market usually doesn't favor the seller on off-season.

Just to be curious, what you think would have been a sufficient + in addition to 8th overall?

And the 8th overall wasn't offered - it was the opposite. Teams weren't willing to move it. Friedman was pretty explicit about it:

Before Sabres added Kulikov they were in a pressing need for top-4 LHD. That was the leverage B.Murray had. Now that Sabres had acquired top-4 LHD, they don't have a pressing need (but likely would add another). I don't think there is any team in a need of top-4 LHD as much as Ducks are in a need of salary and cheap forward options.

The 8th overall pick wasn't moved because there wasn't any top-pairing LHDs available. No Fowler, No Kulikov.

First off, no insider has really ever had any solid information on the Ducks. ESPECIALLY Freidman and Dregger. They are clearly speculating. Like others have mentioned, our GM is about as tight lipped as they come. What they were doing is clearly speculating. They didn't talk about other pieces because from a pure value stand point; 8th or 9th overall straight up is probably close. However, like I already said, that clearly doesn't factor in our needs. They are just looking at who's available, and what Montreal and Buffalo are looking for. The fact that other pieces weren't specified means nothing. It's all spec. Stop trying to act like its otherwise.

It's not that difficult. You're just being arrogant because a few insiders, who NEVER have any info on the Ducks, are speculating a certain way. Never mind that they are ignoring team needs right? It's very plausible that what you're saying is right, but it's no where near concrete or certain like you're insinuating.

Why was the 8th the hot topic and not other pieces? Because all they're doing is speculating, and from a value stand point; Fowler for that pick doesn't seem too far off. Tim is ridiculously open with the media and, and flat out admitted to being open to move that pick for a young, top pairing, lhd. That's exactly what Fowler is, whether you want to admit it or not. The group of us who see 70+ games a year know Fowler was easily our #1 defenseman. Lindholm started taking that role the last third/quarter of the season and the playoffs, but over the course of the regular season; Fowler was easily our #1 defenseman most of the year. Bruce even said so as well. Throw out stats that don't factor in everything all you want, but those of us that actually watch the team religiously know. This is like the guy saying Silfverberg was just as effective to start the year as he was to finish it, because his fancy stats said so. Watching the gsmes > stats. That simple.

Believe what you want, but the Ducks aren't just trying to get rid of Fowler. If it was a pure salary cutting move; we'd trade Cogliano and Despres for picks. Fowler is available because he can bring back the forward Murray spoke about. If he was being shopped, he wouldn't still be here as there were clearly several offers for him at the draft.

I didn't want anything from Buffalo for Fowler. Even 8th +. Why? Because there was no realistic piece that could be had in addition to the 8th from Buffalo that makes us better now. I have long said that I'd only trade Fowler for an elite forward, because taking him away from our defense severely cripples it overall. Like it or not, our window is closing, so I'm of the mind to not trade Fowler unless too good of an offer comes up, that also makes us better. The only reason I'm okay with this is because of the expansion draft next year. If no deal came along, i would rather see Murray shed salary elsewhere, and move Fowler (or one of our other D) next year. The return may not be as great, but it's worth taking another shot at the cup imo.

You don't know if the 8th was offered or not. You're just assuming based off some clearly speculating comments by guys that don't cover the Ducks. That assumption is fine but the arrogance to dismiss the other opinions entirely is wrong. If you insist on doing that repeatedly, you should just leave our board.

Fowler isn't the only way the Ducks can shed salary or add cheap forwards. Not sure why you cant understand that...

Fowler is a top pairing defenseman. Not a true #1, but definitely a top pairing defenseman. You're welcome to stare at stats to convince you otherwise though. Never mind actually watching the majority of the games.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Prove to me, an outsider who doesn't watch Ducks games, that what was obvious to everyone who watched actually happened. Data is perfect and will show it, so prove it to me. I'll be an unwelcome arrogant dick until you do. Also, I don't really get deductive reasoning, so you've got your work cut out for you.

 

[70sSanO]

Been on vacation for a couple of days... so are we really having an argument with a fan from Buffalo? ...Buffalo?

John

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Been on vacation for a couple of days... so are we really having an argument with a fan from Buffalo? ...Buffalo?

John

Selling us on Tyler ****ing Ennis. Usually I can just slam the door on hucksters selling garbage in my neighborhood, but I'm not the gatekeeper here, sadly.

 

[Heraldic]

But for the sake of it - a pre-draft statement about a GM having held off (perfect tense) on making a pick available is not a suitable piece of evidence for a claim that it remained off the table lateron. But we've come to learn that linguistics aren't exactly a strong suit of many HF'ers.

So you think the most plausible explanation is that after an obvious bargaining about the 8th overall, TM finally gave in and BM told him "Just kidding here". Really?

I'm sorry but please explain why Corsi Rel QOC is an objective way of measuring the competition one faces? Those with the best relative Corsi's aren't necessarily their teams best players. Look at Weber and Josi in Nashville for example. It also doesn't factor in deployment - someone starting in the defensive zone a lot more is going to have a much tougher time than someone starting in the offensive zone even if the latter is playing against tougher players.

There is no reliable statistic that is currently being measured which gives a good indication of who faces the top competition.

You don't really need to give a lesson about the epistemology of quantitative methods. No metrics is ever perfect. And if you want to have a war against the advanced stat moved, be welcome...

And if you actually think that those metrics don't give a good indication about usage, I think you're pretty badly wrong. I mean, they actually use those metrics in the business. I mean the people who make money in there.

So, Tim Murray just said out of the blue he'd be willing to move the 8th overall for a 25 year-old, top pairing LHD for no reason in particular? He was just hoping one would magically appear? He had no one in mind?

It wasn't the first time that Murray has said that ideally he sees a certain age player added. And he likely had/have some names on his mind. But it obviously wasn't Fowler, like it wasn't Kulikov (who happens to exactly 25 years old, unlike Fowler).

First off, no insider has really ever had any solid information on the Ducks. ESPECIALLY Freidman and Dregger. They are clearly speculating. Like others have mentioned, our GM is about as tight lipped as they come. What they were doing is clearly speculating. They didn't talk about other pieces because from a pure value stand point; 8th or 9th overall straight up is probably close. However, like I already said, that clearly doesn't factor in our needs. They are just looking at who's available, and what Montreal and Buffalo are looking for. The fact that other pieces weren't specified means nothing. It's all spec. Stop trying to act like its otherwise.

It's not that difficult. You're just being arrogant because a few insiders, who NEVER have any info on the Ducks, are speculating a certain way. Never mind that they are ignoring team needs right? It's very plausible that what you're saying is right, but it's no where near concrete or certain like you're insinuating.

Why was the 8th the hot topic and not other pieces? Because all they're doing is speculating, and from a value stand point; Fowler for that pick doesn't seem too far off. Tim is ridiculously open with the media and, and flat out admitted to being open to move that pick for a young, top pairing, lhd. That's exactly what Fowler is, whether you want to admit it or not. The group of us who see 70+ games a year know Fowler was easily our #1 defenseman. Lindholm started taking that role the last third/quarter of the season and the playoffs, but over the course of the regular season; Fowler was easily our #1 defenseman most of the year. Bruce even said so as well. Throw out stats that don't factor in everything all you want, but those of us that actually watch the team religiously know. This is like the guy saying Silfverberg was just as effective to start the year as he was to finish it, because his fancy stats said so. Watching the gsmes > stats. That simple.

Believe what you want, but the Ducks aren't just trying to get rid of Fowler. If it was a pure salary cutting move; we'd trade Cogliano and Despres for picks. Fowler is available because he can bring back the forward Murray spoke about. If he was being shopped, he wouldn't still be here as there were clearly several offers for him at the draft.

I didn't want anything from Buffalo for Fowler. Even 8th +. Why? Because there was no realistic piece that could be had in addition to the 8th from Buffalo that makes us better now. I have long said that I'd only trade Fowler for an elite forward, because taking him away from our defense severely cripples it overall. Like it or not, our window is closing, so I'm of the mind to not trade Fowler unless too good of an offer comes up, that also makes us better. The only reason I'm okay with this is because of the expansion draft next year. If no deal came along, i would rather see Murray shed salary elsewhere, and move Fowler (or one of our other D) next year. The return may not be as great, but it's worth taking another shot at the cup imo.

You don't know if the 8th was offered or not. You're just assuming based off some clearly speculating comments by guys that don't cover the Ducks. That assumption is fine but the arrogance to dismiss the other opinions entirely is wrong. If you insist on doing that repeatedly, you should just leave our board.

Fowler isn't the only way the Ducks can shed salary or add cheap forwards. Not sure why you cant understand that...

Fowler is a top pairing defenseman. Not a true #1, but definitely a top pairing defenseman. You're welcome to stare at stats to convince you otherwise though. Never mind actually watching the majority of the games.

I really appreciate your effort here, but..... I don't wanna sound like jerk, but your whole premise is standing on a basis that is pretty easily questioned.

You might be exactly right about BM never leaking anything. But you seem to forget that there are always two to tango. BUF and MTL might have been the leakers here, which would mean that Dreger/Friedman info is 100 % correct... They are (especially Friedman) one of the most credible insiders there.

***

This conversation has escalated a bit from my post where I tried to point out that Tyler Ennis is not that expensive top-6 winger salary wise, and the odds of finding someone cheaper for next season and especially the seasons after that are not that great.

I wish you luck on your quest shedding salary and icing an improved team at the same time.

 

[Vipers31]

So you think the most plausible explanation is that after an obvious bargaining about the 8th overall, TM finally gave in and BM told him "Just kidding here". Really?

That would indeed be implausible if there was any reason to believe all Bob Murray wanted was the pick. As all those sources show, there's no reason to be sure of that, at all. You have just chosen a narrative you like and are sticking with it. In reality, there's a pretty wide spectrum of plausible explanations. I personally prefer to not let my assumptions get in the way of the facts.

 

[Boot]

Prove to me, an outsider who doesn't watch Ducks games, that what was obvious to everyone who watched actually happened. Data is perfect and will show it, so prove it to me. I'll be an unwelcome arrogant dick until you do. Also, I don't really get deductive reasoning, so you've got your work cut out for you.

That's not how you get people to take you seriously, especially when you're on another team's board.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

That's not how you get people to take you seriously, especially when you're on another team's board.

He's a Ducks fan.

 

[Godzlaf]

He's a Ducks fan.

Plot twist lol.

 

[Boot]

He's a Ducks fan.

My bad, didn't pick up in that.

 

[Vipers31]

He's a Ducks fan.

Or is he? Might have been the long con...


That was perfectly played, though, BW.

 

[Exit Dose]

This conversation has escalated a bit from my post where I tried to point out that Tyler Ennis is not that expensive top-6 winger salary wise, and the odds of finding someone cheaper for next season and especially the seasons after that are not that great.

I wish you luck on your quest shedding salary and icing an improved team at the same time.

If only this was the end.

 

[Duck Off]

I really appreciate your effort here, but..... I don't wanna sound like jerk, but your whole premise is standing on a basis that is pretty easily questioned.

You might be exactly right about BM never leaking anything. But you seem to forget that there are always two to tango. BUF and MTL might have been the leakers here, which would mean that Dreger/Friedman info is 100 % correct... They are (especially Friedman) one of the most credible insiders there.

This conversation has escalated a bit from my post where I tried to point out that Tyler Ennis is not that expensive top-6 winger salary wise, and the odds of finding someone cheaper for next season and especially the seasons after that are not that great.

I wish you luck on your quest shedding salary and icing an improved team at the same time.

It's questioned because you clearly didn't factor in team needs. Freidman thinking Buffalo didn't want to give up their top pick is fine and all. However, yes I'll take factoring in team needs, Larsson's trade value, Tim Murray's comments, and even his reaction to making the pick over a few guys who don't have any connection to the Ducks.

My assumptions and reasons may be questionable but so are Freidman and Dregger's comments since they don't factor in team needs, at all. If Murray wanted to trade Fowler to clear salary, that would have been done already. Imo, it's pretty clear that Murray wants more help now. But if you choose to believe guys that are speculating and ignoring team needs, be my guest. We'll find out once Fowler has been moved.

There's just little to no interest in Ennis. Injury prone in the east. He'd get eaten alive in the West.

 

[Sojourn]

Yeah, we're done with this. This is the Anaheim board.

 

[Boot]

Or is he? Might have been the long con...


That was perfectly played, though, BW.

Really was . Mobile format makes it hard to pick people out.

 

[Ducks DVM]

So you don't only think that 8th overall pick in a top heavy draft is "a 1st", but you also think that Schneider was a "backup goaltender"?

I think that a top 4 pick this year was a big deal. Anything past that to the mid teens was a nice pick but not this amazing thing, and a low 1st is always a low 1st, so I'm not sure what you're implying. The people picked 8-10 MAY be better than Fowler, but you won't know for 3-5 years, SOME of them will be only as good as Fowler, and MANY won't be, based on looking at the players typically picked there. You pay for the time acceleration and the risk by getting the current player. It's not a 1 for 1 trade. If Schneider was actually a proven goalie (or not a goalie at all, because they bring crap returns) he would have brought more back too.

And yes, I consider a goalie who started 22, 28, and 30 games in his career a "backup". He may be a "promising young goalie", but he sure as hell isn't a "proven starter".

We should take your own words as more credible?

Considering that my words have been "we don't know all the facts, so we can't actually make dogmatic statements", absolutely. That's a 100% supportable position. Guesses, opinions, and vaguely worded click bait tweets by people who don't have all the data from both sides, and who are being fed propaganda by only one of the parties involved, are not dogma.

No insider has talked anything about other pieces. The way both Dreger and Friedman posted their info indicate no other pieces being involved. At least the other pieces were pretty much non-factors because they weren't specified (if there ever was any).

No insider talked about other pieces =/= there were no other pieces involved. That just fits your narrative. It doesn't mean that there weren't other pieces involved. The "he's not worth it", "it doesn't make sense", "nothing else was discussed" arguments don't actually mean squat unless one chooses to believe them. They also don't take into account BM's comments about only trading a defenseman to improve the team NOW, which the 8th overall doesn't.

 

[70sSanO]

Selling us on Tyler ****ing Ennis. Usually I can just slam the door on hucksters selling garbage in my neighborhood, but I'm not the gatekeeper here, sadly.

The 160lb center that is a -55 to fill BM LW for the Getzlaf line?

Even if Ennis was remotely viable forward for us it is still an academic discussion. Might as well be discussion the Milwaukee Bucks guard.

John

 

[Ducks in a row]

Are Ducks fans trying to bluff or they're just not aware? Or why is everyone operating under cap hits here, while it doesn't make sense?

And Ennis makes 2,65 this season for trade purposes. He had 1 million signing bonus, which Sabres already paid.

Ennis is not like Gagner. He's a tons of more dynamic and faster and isn't a perimeter player. That's why he actually has value.

Salary is important and cap hit could possibly be as well especially if any offer sheets come for Rakell and Lindholm.

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/tyler-ennis
http://www.generalfanager.com/players/288

Both those list him making $3,650,000 NHL salary for this year and the next 2

Both produced similar amount of points before both suck defensively don't want either on the Ducks and especially don't want Ennis coming back to us if we trade Fowler.