Speculation: 2018-2019 Trade rumors thread

[Dryish]

I don't understand your vehement enmity towards Friedman. Sure he reports a lot of the rumours he hears circulating, so his reports are often about things that don't end up happening for very good reasons, but you can't deny that he wouldn't have actual contacts and reliably good insight into things that aren't player moves.

On the basis of your posts you'd think he was Eklund's second coming or worse.

 

[Spazkat]

The Pens make bad trade partners atm, I don't see much there.

Ive seen some speculation that the Pens thought they were going to be able to dump Maatta on us for Montour and call it a "change of scenery" thing. IMO if BM did that he should be fired on the spot. Maatta's skating is Perry level bad, so he routinely gets caught out of position and unable to get back to the play.

It would be par for the course at this point though... that whole "get faster" thing seems to have gone by the wayside given the signings they've made so far. Just that trading one of our better skaters for the guy the Pens are dumping because he cant keep up seems counter-intuitive

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Day 20- Thanksgiving

The team wins, but do the fans win? With every passing win or overtime loss, it extends the time we have to deal with RC at the helm.... the ducks nation grows restless wanting change. Some start to doubt if BM can fire his friend again, the outlook doesn't look good.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

I've seen a lot of references here to how even if the team wanted to move Fowler, his contract would make that difficult due to the 4 team NTC. According to Stephens in the Athletic, he submits a list of 4 teams he cannot be traded to. The other 26 are fair game.

Carry on.

 

[bsu]

I've seen a lot of references here to how even if the team wanted to move Fowler, his contract would make that difficult due to the 4 team NTC. According to Stephens in the Athletic, he submits a list of 4 teams he cannot be traded to. The other 26 are fair game.

Carry on.

game changer if true

 

[Paul4587]

I've seen a lot of references here to how even if the team wanted to move Fowler, his contract would make that difficult due to the 4 team NTC. According to Stephens in the Athletic, he submits a list of 4 teams he cannot be traded to. The other 26 are fair game.

Carry on.

Cap friendly states it’s a 4 team trade list. Both are reliable sources but one has to be wrong, I’m sure at the time it was reported as being almost a full NTC.

Cam Fowler - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

 

[DavidBL]

Cap friendly states it’s a 4 team trade list. Both are reliable sources but one has to be wrong, I’m sure at the time it was reported as being almost a full NTC.

Cam Fowler - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

I haven't really looked into the verbage of other clauses but it's a Modified No Trade Clause with a 4 team list. That could easily suggest he has 4 teams that are a no trade.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

Cap friendly states it’s a 4 team trade list. Both are reliable sources but one has to be wrong, I’m sure at the time it was reported as being almost a full NTC.

Cam Fowler - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

It does seem to border on semantics, but I actually asked ES that in the comments section and that was his response. He didn't hesitate.

Which Ducks are most likely to be traded?

 

[Getzmonster]

Day 20- Thanksgiving

The team wins, but do the fans win? With every passing win or overtime loss, it extends the time we have to deal with RC at the helm.... the ducks nation grows restless wanting change. Some start to doubt if BM can fire his friend again, the outlook doesn't look good.

I was perusing the Canucks GDT last night, and a couple of their posters mentioned "word is" and "rumor has it" that Carlyle would be fired if we lost last night. I don't know where that comes from, and I can't see the outcome of any one game deciding a coaching change, but I choose to throw out logic and believe.

 

[dracom]

It does seem to border on semantics, but I actually asked ES that in the comments section and that was his response. He didn't hesitate.

Which Ducks are most likely to be traded?

for those of us who don't have a subscription, what did he say?

 

[Getzmonster]

Ive seen some speculation that the Pens thought they were going to be able to dump Maatta on us for Montour and call it a "change of scenery" thing. IMO if BM did that he should be fired on the spot. Maatta's skating is Perry level bad, so he routinely gets caught out of position and unable to get back to the play.

It would be par for the course at this point though... that whole "get faster" thing seems to have gone by the wayside given the signings they've made so far. Just that trading one of our better skaters for the guy the Pens are dumping because he cant keep up seems counter-intuitive

Montour hasn't had the kind of season so far that I'd hoped, but he would have to completely **** the bed over a much longer period to fall into the 'change of scenery' category. Even with the injuries, Murray doesn't need to do anything to address our D. And even if he did, it makes zero sense to sell crazy low on Monty and make a D for D swap. Pens fans must think we still owe them for Despres.

 

[ADHB]

for those of us who don't have a subscription, what did he say?

That he has a 4-team list he CANNOT be traded to.

 

[Paul4587]

for those of us who don't have a subscription, what did he say?

If you mean in terms of the article and not the stipulations of Fowlers NTC I’ll summarise briefly, he ranked likeliness of being traded in multiple categories:

Untouchables:
Getzlaf
Gibson
Terry
Steel
Lundestrom
Comtois

Doubtful:
Fowler
Lindholm
Rakell
Kase
Manson

Too hard to move:
Perry
Kesler
Miller (not as in unmovable contract but more that there’s not a huge market, he wants to stay here and we need a backup)

Highly unlikely (due to not being appealing to other teams)
Eaves
Gibbons
Rowney

The conceivables:
Henrique
Cogliano
Montour
Ritchie
Larsson
Schenn/Sustr (I think they belong above but whatever)

The one that makes the most sense:
Silfverberg

Then he ranks Aberg in the one that was never thought to be possible.

He does have a paragraph for each, justifying his selections but also admits in the comments sections that m Fowler and Lindholm should possibly be up a category. Personally I don’t know how Terry, Steel etc are untouchable they’re not can’t miss prospects and would certainly be moved in the right deal.

 

[HockeyDBspecialist]

Habs fan here

We need a top 4 fluid skater, shutdown, good first pass LHD

What can the ducks offer ?

Habs fans are high on:
-Mahura
-Larsson
-lindholm
-fowler

Personally I love Manson and Montour but can they play at LD ?
We also have a profusion of Wingers prospects.

 

[Opak]

Habs fan here

We need a top 4 fluid skater, shutdown, good first pass LHD

What can the ducks offer ?

Habs fans are high on:
-Mahura
-Larsson
-lindholm
-fowler

Personally I love Manson and Montour but can they play at LD ?
We also have a profusion of Wingers prospects.

Mod edit

IMO the Ducks are not looking to sell anyone on D at this time. Way too many injuries to make anything happen.

 

[dracom]

Habs fan here

We need a top 4 fluid skater, shutdown, good first pass LHD

What can the ducks offer ?

Habs fans are high on:
-Mahura
-Larsson
-lindholm
-fowler

Personally I love Manson and Montour but can they play at LD ?
We also have a profusion of Wingers prospects.

no offense, but there's nothing from the Habs (that's realistically available) that I would want in exchange for the players you listed.

 

[Dryish]

Naw, don't say that. I'd take one Kotkaniemi for sure. Maybe talk him and a high draft pick for Montour and we'll have a discussion.

 

[dracom]

Naw, don't say that. I'd take one Kotkaniemi for sure. Maybe talk him and a high draft pick for Montour and we'll have a discussion.

Realistically though, Kotkaniemi isn't available (he shouldn't be at least) and I don't see a reality where the Habs are interested in the move you suggested. Kotkaniemi is someone I would like, but don't think we have the available assets for him.

 

[Trojans86]

If there is a potential 1c prospect on the block we should definitely be looking to package up a d for him. Would be very hard to find a 1c prospect on the block.

 

[MMC]

If there is a potential 1c prospect on the block we should definitely be looking to package up a d for him. Would be very hard to find a 1c prospect on the block.

Maybe in a few years if it turns out we really need one, but I'd rather see how our current group does (Steel, Lundestrom, Morand, 2019, 2020 picks) at filling the void whenever Getzlaf declines before trading for one out of desperation.

 

[mightyquack]

Good teams are proactive. If there is a potential 1c prospect you could get - you 100% go for it, even with Getzlaf being here.

Waiting to see if one of Steel/Lundestrom/Morand can fill the void AFTER Getzlaf declines would be rather silly - especially if it turns out none of them are a possible 1c. Which in turn would make Anaheim even more desperate, because they wouldn't have time to find a replacement like they do now.

 

[Dryish]

Barring some miraculous Bergeron-esque growth story, I am hard-pressed to believe any of the Steel/Lundeström/Morand trio could come even close to being a Stanley Cup caliber 1C in the future. We'll have good center depth down the lineup, but good 1Cs tend to exhibit a certain dominance and readiness to jump into teams very fast. I don't see that with any of our prospects, and that shouldn't be too surprising considering where we've drafted.

So yeah, I'm absolutely all for trying to look for a 1C prospect. Unfortunately I can't see what we'd trade for one right now. We don't exactly have anyone so coveted that they'd reasonably be exchanged for a top prospect.

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

Barring some miraculous Bergeron-esque growth story, I am hard-pressed to believe any of the Steel/Lundeström/Morand trio could come even close to being a Stanley Cup caliber 1C in the future. We'll have good center depth down the lineup, but good 1Cs tend to exhibit a certain dominance and readiness to jump into teams very fast. I don't see that with any of our prospects, and that shouldn't be too surprising considering where we've drafted.

So yeah, I'm absolutely all for trying to look for a 1C prospect. Unfortunately I can't see what we'd trade for one right now. We don't exactly have anyone so coveted that they'd reasonably be exchanged for a top prospect.

I can see Steel being a really good second line center, but Lundestrom has the potential to be right up there to be a 1C

 

[Trojans86]

Good teams are proactive. If there is a potential 1c prospect you could get - you 100% go for it, even with Getzlaf being here.

Waiting to see if one of Steel/Lundestrom/Morand can fill the void AFTER Getzlaf declines would be rather silly - especially if it turns out none of them are a possible 1c. Which in turn would make Anaheim even more desperate, because they wouldn't have time to find a replacement like they do now.

Exactly. You also have to factor in that you are probably looking at a prospect or pick and it may take a couple of years for that player to develop into a 1c.

 

[Trojans86]

Barring some miraculous Bergeron-esque growth story, I am hard-pressed to believe any of the Steel/Lundeström/Morand trio could come even close to being a Stanley Cup caliber 1C in the future. We'll have good center depth down the lineup, but good 1Cs tend to exhibit a certain dominance and readiness to jump into teams very fast. I don't see that with any of our prospects, and that shouldn't be too surprising considering where we've drafted.

So yeah, I'm absolutely all for trying to look for a 1C prospect. Unfortunately I can't see what we'd trade for one right now. We don't exactly have anyone so coveted that they'd reasonably be exchanged for a top prospect.

The only way I can see us getting a potential 1c is by moving a nice package that includes one of Lindholm, Fowler, Montour or Rakell. We could also trade up at the draft if needed.