Yeah the Blues gave up a good but not elite prospect and a third pairing Dman yet Murray was willing to give up Kase. That would have been a massive overpayment in comparison. Murray was saved from himself.
I don't comprehend this dichotomy of "trading away Kase is bad" and "we have too many forwards, and no one behind our top-3 defensemen". There's a lot of unknowns who could be a #4 and it looks like Guhle could be that player, but Larsson still is in development. Do the Ducks have a problem at #4 or don't we? Didn't the fan base panic when Fowler didn't return after getting hit in the face with the puck?
Here's a much better query, "which scenario can the Ducks absorb better between losing RW Kase and one of the Ducks top-3 defensemen?"
We already know the answer to that question. The Ducks were able to thrive under Murray as head coach and that was without Kase. The Ducks were able to absorb Fowler's absence last year due to injury, but we had Montour and Pettersson at our disposal. We don't have a known quantity like a Montour at our disposal right now. We have a prospects in Guhle and Larsson. Faulk would have become our #1 PP guy and the guy has some grit in him to eat up 20+ minutes a game and hit.
The Ducks lack known balance on their roster, which is why switching to zone makes even better hockey sense. Also why Murray kicked tires on FA Shattenkirk and inquired about Faulk. Murray wants a particular type of defenseman, which is why he didn't care to sign FA Gardiner.
The problem doesn't lie in the trade portion, but the term extension. Bob didn't want to get hemmed into a long extension, which Faulk received a 7-year extension, that ends when he's aged 34. Fowler's extension ends at age 33. Murray has a long term plan and seven years with Faulk wasn't one of them. I don't understand why Murray doesn't get credit for walking away? Instead, the trade didn't happen luckily to save Murray. That isn't what transpired at all. It's been reported that the trade between the organization was set and the only thing stopping it was Faulk's side. Both Murray and Faulk wanted an extension, but the difference in years was the line that Murray would walk away from. Also, we don't know the full details of what was involved in the trade such that the Ducks could have had a draft pick coming back to them b/c Kase is a far better player involved.
Yet, here we are trying to fantasize about trading for a #5 defenseman, who might be a #4 in a pinch. That's what Del Zotto was last year. That's a band-aid answer. We already have Guhle and Larsson who could use those minutes to be a long term solution as a #4. So which other forward prospect are you going to send off for a #5 defenseman? The Ducks don't seem to benefit from such a trade. Saying it aloud sounds even far more ludicrous, "The Ducks are trading for a third pairing, #5 defenseman." Seems asinine. I'd rather just keep what we have and see who develops. We have an abundance of #5-7 defenseman at the AHL and NHL level. We're hoping Guhle and/or Larsson will be a 2nd pairing defensemen for the future today. The only reasons I'm okay with that is b/c we have a franchise goaltender in Gibson and we're playing zone.
If we're trading for a defenseman, then it better be a top-4 defenseman who can play the PP. If not, then why bother and let's see what the youth has in store to begin the season.