Next year we are going to suck so I'm cool with letting the young guys grow into the position if it gives us another 1c and another good draft pick that year. The year after that will be Steel, Terry and Jones 4th year. That is also when these horrible salaries start coming off. That should be the target year to push for the playoffs. We can use whatever salary savings and fill a whole if we need to to round out the team.
What am I missing?
You and others on here seem to be missing quite a bit...
1) This organization is apparently only profitable if we make the playoffs. The Samuelis and Murray will not be on board with any moves that cripple the chance to be competitive next year, after this season's disappointment and likely playoff miss.
2) Even a partial tear down can go sideways and end up into a full rebuild, and there is a good chance the Ducks wouldn't be able to weather a prolonged rebuild if it does the way of Edmonton or Buffalo. Once a losing mentality spreads into a locker room you run the risk of it taking years to rebuild a winning culture. Filling holes in your lineup with prospects that aren't ready yet is how you get mired in an Edmonton or Buffalo rebuild.
3) None of our prospects look ready for full time NHL action right now and most, if not all, will likely need some of next year to get there. Even guys that are further along line Terry and Steel and Jones won't be getting into their productive years for another season at least. They might make the team out of camp but we shouldn't expect them to be Calder candidates. Bringing them into a lineup with h0les in it means we can't insulate them as much and that is not how you want to develop young players.
4) The organization just committed on long-term extensions to Fowler and Henrique. Moving either is a bad look for a team that already kind of struggles to draw in bigger name UFAs and could be remembered by guys like Gibson, Lindholm, Rakell, Manson, etc when it comes time for them to re-sign after their current deals. In general, trading a guy after you re-signed them long term is not a common practice in this league for these reasons.
5) Even if you wanted to move Fowler and/or Henrique, moving them for futures won't have a measurable impact on the team for years. There is no way Murray would move either guy unless it is a hockey trade for a comparable player that is perhaps younger or more cost-controlled. If you think otherwise, you've just not been paying attention to how Murray operates.
6) Assuming the above point is wrong and we swap those guys and others and somehow accumulate multiple 1st round picks for this year and next, there is no guarantee any of them will pan out into impact players or players that are the caliber of Fowler and Henrique.
7) The guys people are talking about trading are still in their prime years and young enough to still be playing at the same level by the end of their current contracts, meaning they will still command the same trade value a few years from now (if not more) and you can still get several more seasons of productivity from them.
8) Neither the Fowler or Henrique contract are reasons for our cap issues. Both of those players are paid what comparable players in those positions would be paid elsewhere. It is the Kesler and Eaves contracts that are impacting the cap. Eaves can be bought out this offseason with minimal cap implications. Kesler looks like he is well on his way to an LTIRetirement that shouldn't be too much of a cap burden because I recall that his contract is at least partially insured. If things really get tight, you can always move a bad contract in this league if you sweeten the deal with enough assets. It might not be palatable for most of you, but moving assets to get rid of and LTIR'ed Kesler deal is not a big issue and won't cripple our prospect pool too much.
9) We are already very quietly doing a re-tool and are already over a year into it. Tearing down more is not necessary. We just need to be patient while the bad contracts are dealt with and the good prospects are ready to produce. This could be as soon as next season or the season after, so why move quality players that you don't have to if you aren't even going to jump start a retool by doing so????
10) No big moves of core players should be done until this team has a new coaching staff. Right now it is impossible to gauge what this team is capable of doing when healthy and playing under a different coach. This applies to Fowler and Montour especially because our defense has been a mess all season due to coaching/systems/team structure/heart/injuries/accountability (yeah I said it), and various other reasons. You trade these guys to a team with a top coaching staff and see what they can actually do in a better environment and you will regret it.
11) Fowler and Henrique are both players that could potentially be exposed at the next expansion draft, which would give us some added cap room and prevent losing better, younger talents. Not an ideal solution, but it is something to consider. Personally I'd rather lose a guy around 30 years old at a 5 or 6 million per year contract to Seattle than one of our best players in their 20s on a more affordable contract.
12) Big moves that involve players with high dollar salaries and lots of term rarely happen for futures during the season. Even if you wanted to pull something like this off, it would have to wait until the draft or free agency when more teams are on the market and all teams know their cap situations for next season better. Doing something now limits the amount of teams that you can trade with, and that limited market means the value coming back goes down.
13) This season sucks but we will be getting a mid to high 1st round pick and should get a late first from a Silf trade. We can grab a good center prospect and a good D prospect from those and still be in a good position moving forward without moving a core player. We'll still have some promising young players in the system after guys like Steel, Terry, Jones, Mahura, Larsson, Lundestrom, and Comtois make the jump over the next year or two. In fact, our system is actually fairly stocked at the moment and many look ready to contribute over that time span so the more I type this out the more insane it sounds to want to move good roster players with NHL experience for futures that we don't really lack in at the moment. What is the goal here? To have an entire roster under 25? What team has ever made that work?
I don't care about anyone's response to this. Just pick one of the reasons above and go with it.
