Proposal: Buf - ana

[mytduxfan*]

You will usually get fans that say that the guy their team got is better than a similar guy that they were rumored to be in on.

Personally, I think they are both top 4 LHD that might make a good partner for Risto in the top pairing.

I would be excited about the Sabres LHD depth if Murray were able to get both of them this offseason.

Although, I'm not expecting it.

True, but considering that Kulikov has been 2nd, 4th and 3rd in TOI/GP for FLA these passed 3 seasons and Fowler has been 1st, 3rd, 1st in TOI/GP for ANA over the same period, I question anyone who sees them as "similar" players. Fowler also produces 50-100% more points then Kulikov whilst getting significantly less offensive zone starts.

IMO, Fowler is a #2, Kulikov is more of a #3/4. I completely disagree with those who see Fowler and Kulikov as comparables both in terms of play style and overall ability.

I think the big question about what the Ducks can get for Fowler is how much salary, if any, Bob Murray can take on in a deal.

I can't see any team giving up a legit 1st line LW that makes less than Fowler for Fowler.

Tatar? DET is desperate for help on the back-end and is swimming in forward talent with guys like AA and Mantha waiting to come through.

The optimal window for making a Fowler for futures trade definitely would have been back when there were legit top 6 LW options available in free agency. I still won't be shocked if BM moves him for a Ryan type package though.

I think that would be a terrible mistake and I'd, unfortunately, have to significantly lower my expectations for this team next season.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

True, but considering that Kulikov has been 2nd, 4th and 3rd in TOI/GP for FLA these passed 3 seasons and Fowler has been 1st, 3rd, 1st in TOI/GP for ANA over the same period, I question anyone who sees them as "similar" players. Fowler also produces 50-100% more points then Kulikov whilst getting significantly less offensive zone starts.

IMO, Fowler is a #2, Kulikov is more of a #3/4. I completely disagree with those who see Fowler and Kulikov as comparables both in terms of play style and overall ability.



Tatar? DET is desperate for help on the back-end and is swimming in forward talent with guys like AA and Mantha waiting to come through.



I think that would be a terrible mistake and I'd, unfortunately, have to significantly lower my expectations for this team next season.

It would definitely leave us worse off without any corresponding move, though there's nothing to say we couldn't move Fowler for a young top 9 forward + futures, and then turn around and move some futures for another forward. If we moved Fowler for Ryan type package, we'd be armed with two 1sts, two 2nds and a very good prospect pool, could just be a roundabout way of getting an ideal return for Fowler if that can't be achieved with the teams who are in on him.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Yeah Evander Kane would be the last player that Bob Murray would trade for, Yeah that's not happening.

 

[Skobel24]

E. Kane(1mil retained)
BUFs 2nd
BUFs 3rd

for

Fowler
Stoner


You get your high end winger, we get our Dman. You also get "cap relief" and a pair of picks.

Kane is not a high end winger. He's a middle 6 winger with major problems attached to him.

 

[mytduxfan*]

It would definitely leave us worse off without any corresponding move, though there's nothing to say we couldn't move Fowler for a young top 9 forward + futures, and then turn around and move some futures for another forward. If we moved Fowler for Ryan type package, we'd be armed with two 1sts, two 2nds and a very good prospect pool, could just be a roundabout way of getting an ideal return for Fowler if that can't be achieved with the teams who are in on him.

Objectively speaking, I think that's wishful thinking. It's rare that top players are moved for those kind of packages unless there is something wrong i.e. they've requested a trade (Kesler), the GM/coach/team is unhappy with said player (Kane), financial restrictions (Ryan), etc. In general, teams are going to want a like-for-like, talent-for-talent swaps. Right now, we need a top 6 LH LW or C. IMO, if that's a guy that's not available for Fowler (which I doubt), then I just keep Fowler and plug the problem until the TDL. That isn't to say that a guy like Girgs or any other good quality top 9 forward wouldn't be a good add, but I just don't see it as enough of a need to give up Fowler. Although money is tight, we're not in one of the aforementioned situations. Therefore, I don't feel obliged to move Fowler for anything short of a like-for-like swap.

Essentially, I just don't think it's a justifiable move. If you move Fowler for futures, I don't see us getting a 1st line LH LW or C and, thus, we've taken a huge step back. At that point, you might as well blow everything up and just start retooling because other contenders like CHI, DAL, STL and even divisional rivals like EDM, CGY and VAN are only getting better.

 

[Emerald Duck]

I think the big question about what the Ducks can get for Fowler is how much salary, if any, Bob Murray can take on in a deal.

I can't see any team giving up a legit 1st line LW that makes less than Fowler for Fowler.

I don't think that the Ducks require a 1st line LW that makes less than the $4M/yr that we are paying Fowler. We are pretty deep on defense and a light on Top 6 forwards at this point, and the only reason to move Fowler or Despres is to re-align the salary allocations. We are also a few NHL forwards short at this point, so some of the money that would be spent on another forward slot could also be put into the deal.

If we can also move Stoner in the same or another trade, then that's even better. As of right now Stoner will be competing for the #6/7 dman slots and we can't afford to have his salary eating popcorn most nights in the press box.

 

[Jim Bob]

Tatar? DET is desperate for help on the back-end and is swimming in forward talent with guys like AA and Mantha waiting to come through.

Is a guy like Tatar that has a less than 0.6 Pts/GP in his career the type of LW that is a top line guy?

Evander Kane and Tyler Ennis have produced more and Ennis has done it on far less talented rosters.

Tatar just doesn't have the attitude and injury concerns that the Sabres duo have.

 

[Jim Bob]

I don't think that the Ducks require a 1st line LW that makes less than the $4M/yr that we are paying Fowler. We are pretty deep on defense and a light on Top 6 forwards at this point, and the only reason to move Fowler or Despres is to re-align the salary allocations. We are also a few NHL forwards short at this point, so some of the money that would be spent on another forward slot could also be put into the deal.

If we can also move Stoner in the same or another trade, then that's even better. As of right now Stoner will be competing for the #6/7 dman slots and we can't afford to have his salary eating popcorn most nights in the press box.

The other huge factor in how they spend is the Lindholm extension.

I'm guessing that that situation might need to be finalized before Murray moves on to something like dealing Fowler.

 

[Heraldic]

Let's compare a bit Kulikov and Fowler...

First usage:

Corsi rel QoC

Fowler: 0.712
Kulikov: 0.964

So Kulikov faced tougher opponents.

O-Zone start %

Fowler: 44.3
Kulikov: 48.2

Fowler had relatively less o-zone starts.

5v5 TOI/60

Fowler: 16.74
Kulikov: 16.87

Their TOI on 5v5 was pretty much the same.

Then impact:

GA/60

Fowler: 2.59
Kulikov: 2.13

Kulikov was clearly better goal preventor

GF/60

Fowler: 2.06
Kulikov: 2.18

Kulikov's impact on goal scoring was also better, but only marginally so.

GF%

Fowler: 44.3
Kulikov: 50.6

Clear difference in favor of Kulikov.

Points on 5v5:

Fowler: 2+7=9
Kulikov: 1+10=11

Kulikov was actually more productive on 5v5 than Fowler.

Corsi rel

Fowler: -9.4
Kulikov: -6.5

Both had negative impact relatively, but Kulikov's impact was less negative.

***

It seems that Fowler's advantage comes from being a better PP player. Outside of that Kulikov's impact seems to be just better. Especially defensively.

I'm more than happy that we ended up trading for Kulikov (and grabbing Asplund in the process) instead of Fowler, when it was about giving Pysyk or 8th overall. Fowler will also likely demand a lot bigger contract based on his history (which in the present means a ****) and his better PP game (which is not meaningless factor either). And that's also likely the reason why TM ultimately ended up trading for Kulikov.

That being said, I would still welcome Fowler to Sabres. He would likely fir well with Bogo.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Objectively speaking, I think that's wishful thinking. It's rare that top players are moved for those kind of packages unless there is something wrong i.e. they've requested a trade (Kesler), the GM/coach/team is unhappy with said player (Kane), financial restrictions (Ryan), etc. In general, teams are going to want a like-for-like, talent-for-talent swaps. Right now, we need a top 6 LH LW or C. IMO, if that's a guy that's not available for Fowler (which I doubt), then I just keep Fowler and plug the problem until the TDL. That isn't to say that a guy like Girgs or any other good quality top 9 forward wouldn't be a good add, but I just don't see it as enough of a need to give up Fowler. Although money is tight, we're not in one of the aforementioned situations. Therefore, I don't feel obliged to move Fowler for anything short of a like-for-like swap.

Essentially, I just don't think it's a justifiable move. If you move Fowler for futures, I don't see us getting a 1st line LH LW or C and, thus, we've taken a huge step back. At that point, you might as well blow everything up and just start retooling because other contenders like CHI, DAL, STL and even divisional rivals like EDM, CGY and VAN are only getting better.

There's a big looming factor in the expansion draft that seems likely to expand the market of good players who could be "for sale" for the right price rather than a straight talent swap. I'm absolutely in agreement that I would love to see a Fowler for top 6 winger(+) swap, but I don't know if that's any less wishful thinking than suggesting we basically do the same thing in two moves.

Either way, I think we are in agreement that Fowler should stay if the right move(s) aren't out there. Trading him next year before expansion as a one year rental probably still gets us a solid return.

Let's compare a bit Kulikov and Fowler...

First usage:

Corsi rel QoC

Fowler: 0.712
Kulikov: 0.964

So Kulikov faced tougher opponents.

O-Zone start %

Fowler: 44.3
Kulikov: 48.2

Fowler had relatively less o-zone starts.

5v5 TOI/60

Fowler: 16.74
Kulikov: 16.87

Their TOI on 5v5 was pretty much the same.

Then impact:

GA/60

Fowler: 2.59
Kulikov: 2.13

Kulikov was clearly better goal preventor

GF/60

Fowler: 2.06
Kulikov: 2.18

Kulikov's impact on goal scoring was also better, but only marginally so.

GF%

Fowler: 44.3
Kulikov: 50.6

Clear difference in favor of Kulikov.

Points on 5v5:

Fowler: 2+7=9
Kulikov: 1+10=11

Kulikov was actually more productive on 5v5 than Fowler.

Corsi rel

Fowler: -9.4
Kulikov: -6.5

Both had negative impact relatively, but Kulikov's impact was less negative.

***

It seems that Fowler's advantage comes from being a better PP player. Outside of that Kulikov's impact seems to be just better. Especially defensively.

I'm more than happy that we ended up trading for Kulikov (and grabbing Asplund in the process) instead of Fowler, when it was about giving Pysyk or 8th overall. Fowler will also likely demand a lot bigger contract based on his history (which in the present means a ****) and his better PP game (which is not meaningless factor either). And that's also likely the reason why TM ultimately ended up trading for Kulikov.

That being said, I would still welcome Fowler to Sabres. He would likely fir well with Bogo.

Flawed data....Kulikov's most common linemate - Aaron Ekblad, Fowler's most common linemate - Kevin Bieksa

One guy spent his year playing with a top 20 defenseman in hockey, and the other with a guy the Ducks would have to pay significantly to get rid of.

 

[Heraldic]

Flawed data....Kulikov's most common linemate - Aaron Ekblad, Fowler's most common linemate - Kevin Bieksa

One guy spent his year playing with a top 20 defenseman in hockey, and the other with a guy the Ducks would have to pay significantly to get rid of.

Valid point about partner. But Ekblad's impact is pretty much only GF/60.

Let's take another breakdown G/60:

Kulikov w Ekblad 60
GF 2.42, GA 2.32, o-zone% 52.3

Kulikov w/o Ekblad 60
GF 1.96, GA 1.96, o-zone% 45.6

So, while Ebklad inflated Kulikov's offensive numbers, he also dragged down his defensive numbers. There was also a big difference how they were deployed together and without (Ekblad's o-zone% without Kulikov was 58.7. A HUGE difference).

Let's take a breakdown with Fowler and Bieksa G/60:

Fowler w Bieksa
GF 1.94,GA 2.33, o-zone% 45.8

Fowler w/o Bieksa
GF 2.21, GA 2.90, o-zone% 43.2

So while Fowler's goal prevention was pretty bad overall, it was especially bad, and worse, without Bieksa. While Bieksa dragged down Fowler a bit offensively, he carried Fowler more defensively than he was dragged by him offensively. Fowler's usage (o-zone based) didn't really differ with or without.

So what did we learn here? Ekblad inflated Kulikov's numbers while dragged him down defensively. Bieksa inflated Fowler's defensive numbers while dragged him down offensively.

That taken into account, the gap between them defensively is actually pretty huge, while the gap offensively (but not that extensively) is on favor of Fowler.

But that doesn't really still explain the point production (unless every point Kulikov made was a result of Ekblad). Fowler should have produced way more points on ES compared to Kulikov.

And lol for "Ekblad beind a top-20 d-man in the league". That guy is getting severely overrated here. I mean, SEVERELY.

 

[mytduxfan*]

Is a guy like Tatar that has a less than 0.6 Pts/GP in his career the type of LW that is a top line guy?

Evander Kane and Tyler Ennis have produced more and Ennis has done it on far less talented rosters.

Tatar just doesn't have the attitude and injury concerns that the Sabres duo have.

I think at worst Tatar ends up producing at a similar rate to Evander Kane, but without all the baggage and injury concerns. Yeah, he's not my first choice, but, from what I've heard and read, Tatar's drop in production is the result of the coaching change in DET. Tatar received 2 less mins of TOI/GP last season, going from a top 6er in TOI/GP in 2014-15 to a bottom 6er in TOI/GP this passed season. Tatar also lost his place on the 1st PP unit. Now whether this was due to his play or because Blashill has a different vision for the team going forward, I have no idea. However, DET fans seem to believe that Blashill is mistreating and misusing Tatar. I see no reason why Tatar's production wouldn't increase if given top 6 mins again. And if it does go back up, then Tatar > Ennis or Kane, even ignoring Ennis' horrendous defensive game and Kane's off-ice antics.

Let's compare a bit Kulikov and Fowler...

First usage:

Corsi rel QoC

Fowler: 0.712
Kulikov: 0.964

So Kulikov faced tougher opponents.

O-Zone start %

Fowler: 44.3
Kulikov: 48.2

Fowler had relatively less o-zone starts.

5v5 TOI/60

Fowler: 16.74
Kulikov: 16.87

Their TOI on 5v5 was pretty much the same.

Then impact:

GA/60

Fowler: 2.59
Kulikov: 2.13

Kulikov was clearly better goal preventor

GF/60

Fowler: 2.06
Kulikov: 2.18

Kulikov's impact on goal scoring was also better, but only marginally so.

GF%

Fowler: 44.3
Kulikov: 50.6

Clear difference in favor of Kulikov.

Points on 5v5:

Fowler: 2+7=9
Kulikov: 1+10=11

Kulikov was actually more productive on 5v5 than Fowler.

Corsi rel

Fowler: -9.4
Kulikov: -6.5

Both had negative impact relatively, but Kulikov's impact was less negative.

***

It seems that Fowler's advantage comes from being a better PP player. Outside of that Kulikov's impact seems to be just better. Especially defensively.

I'm more than happy that we ended up trading for Kulikov (and grabbing Asplund in the process) instead of Fowler, when it was about giving Pysyk or 8th overall. Fowler will also likely demand a lot bigger contract based on his history (which in the present means a ****) and his better PP game (which is not meaningless factor either). And that's also likely the reason why TM ultimately ended up trading for Kulikov.

That being said, I would still welcome Fowler to Sabres. He would likely fir well with Bogo.

So by "let's compare" you mean stat-watching. Never change man. :

There's a big looming factor in the expansion draft that seems likely to expand the market of good players who could be "for sale" for the right price rather than a straight talent swap. I'm absolutely in agreement that I would love to see a Fowler for top 6 winger(+) swap, but I don't know if that's any less wishful thinking than suggesting we basically do the same thing in two moves.

Either way, I think we are in agreement that Fowler should stay if the right move(s) aren't out there. Trading him next year before expansion as a one year rental probably still gets us a solid return.

I think the 7 forward 3 D-man rule kind of kills any hopes of a big name forward being available due to the expansion draft. I don't think anyone is that deep at forward.

Flawed data....Kulikov's most common linemate - Aaron Ekblad, Fowler's most common linemate - Kevin Bieksa

One guy spent his year playing with a top 20 defenseman in hockey, and the other with a guy the Ducks would have to pay significantly to get rid of.

No Kulikov carried his pairing. Just like how Manson carries Lindholm, remember?

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Valid point about partner. But Ekblad's impact is pretty much only GF/60.

Let's take another breakdown G/60:

Kulikov w Ekblad 60
GF 2.42, GA 2.32, o-zone% 52.3

Kulikov w/o Ekblad 60
GF 1.96, GA 1.96, o-zone% 45.6

So, while Ebklad inflated Kulikov's offensive numbers, he also dragged down his defensive numbers. There was also a big difference how they were deployed together and without (Ekblad's o-zone% without Kulikov was 58.7. A HUGE difference).

Let's take a breakdown with Fowler and Bieksa G/60:

Fowler w Bieksa
GF 1.94,GA 2.33, o-zone% 45.8

Fowler w/o Bieksa
GF 2.21, GA 2.90, o-zone% 43.2

So while Fowler's goal prevention was pretty bad overall, it was especially bad, and worse, without Bieksa. While Bieksa dragged down Fowler a bit offensively, he carried Fowler more defensively than he was dragged by him offensively. Fowler's usage (o-zone based) didn't really differ with or without.

So what did we learn here? Ekblad inflated Kulikov's numbers while dragged him down defensively. Bieksa inflated Fowler's defensive numbers while dragged him down offensively.

That taken into account, the gap between them defensively is actually pretty huge, while the gap offensively (but not that extensively) is on favor of Fowler.

But that doesn't really still explain the point production (unless every point Kulikov made was a result of Ekblad). Fowler should have produced way more points on ES compared to Kulikov.

And lol for "Ekblad beind a top-20 d-man in the league". That guy is getting severely overrated here. I mean, SEVERELY.

The only thing getting severely overrated here is the ability to draw conclusions from stat watching, it makes you spit out some pretty hilarious and complete off base narratives.

You're the one with the outlying opinion on Ekblad, not the other way around. The folks who vote for the Norris Trophy have access to all the same data you do, and Ekblad landed 16th in voting. He's universally considered to be one of the best young dman in hockey and earned a massive extension, keep laughing all you want.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Yandle trade as the comparison?

1st rounder
Prospect
Player

-Sabres 2017 1st
-Justin Bailey RW (before you downplay him, check out what he did in the AHL during the second half of the season)
-Roster player (or take back salary to in an Anaheim player to even it out.)

 

[Jim Bob]

I think the 7 forward 3 D-man rule kind of kills any hopes of a big name forward being available due to the expansion draft. I don't think anyone is that deep at forward.

Yeah, there are going to be a lot more quality D available than F.

My guess is that the bulk of the quality forwards that aren't pending UFAs that will be exposed will be those on contracts that their teams would rather get rid of. Well, unless you are a team with a few NMC F that won't waive...

 

[Heraldic]

The only thing getting severely overrated here is the ability to draw conclusions from stat watching, it makes you spit out some pretty hilarious and complete off base narratives.

I already corrected your "flawed" statement... Your next move to debunk my post?

You're the one with the outlying opinion on Ekblad, not the other way around. The folks who vote for the Norris Trophy have access to all the same data you do, and Ekblad landed 16th in voting. He's universally considered to be one of the best young dman in hockey and earned a massive extension, keep laughing all you want.

Ekblad is already a good defender offensively, but he's not that good defensively. He has been used in a really beneficial role. He hasn't been even used in all-around top-pairing role ever on his career. Like the Kulikov deployment shows you, Kulikov was used to shelter him defensively, because he's not that good defensively.

And yeah, I laugh at statements like that. Brian Campbell landed 17th on that same freaking voting. Aaron Ekblad got four (4) fifth (5th) place votes. That means absolutely NOTHING.

 

[mytduxfan*]

Yandle trade as the comparison?

1st rounder
Prospect
Player

-Sabres 2017 1st
-Justin Bailey RW (before you downplay him, check out what he did in the AHL during the second half of the season)
-Roster player (or take back salary to in an Anaheim player to even it out.)

Unless you have a prospect that is as good as Duclair was in the Yandle trade, it's a pass.

Yeah, there are going to be a lot more quality D available than F.

My guess is that the bulk of the quality forwards that aren't pending UFAs that will be exposed will be those on contracts that their teams would rather get rid of. Well, unless you are a team with a few NMC F that won't waive...

Agreed. IMO, the league has really ****ed us on this. I don't mind the 7 F 3 D 1 G rule, but wtf is up with 8 s 1 G as the alternative. So you have to forfeit 2 players? How is that fair? At least make it 9 skaters or make it 6 F 3D 1G. That at least makes some sense i.e. you're exposing 50% of roster D-men and 50% of roster forwards. At least then we'd have a better opportunity of picking up a solid forward in a trade. Ah well... it is what it is I guess. Probably going to lose Despres. Could be worse I guess.

D-corp next season:

Lindholm - Manson
Despres - Vatanen
Theodore - Bieksa

D-crop after the draft:

Lindholm - Manson
Theodore - Vatanen
Stoner - Montour

Bieksa is bought out to free up protection slot for Manson and Despres is lost in the expansion draft.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

I already corrected your "flawed" statement... Your next move to debunk my post?



Ekblad is already a good defender offensively, but he's not that good defensively. He has been used in a really beneficial role. He hasn't been even used in all-around top-pairing role ever on his career. Like the Kulikov deployment shows you, Kulikov was used to shelter him defensively, because he's not that good defensively.

And yeah, I laugh at statements like that. Brian Campbell landed 17th on that same freaking voting. Aaron Ekblad got four (4) fifth (5th) place votes. That means absolutely NOTHING.

Your statement remains flawed. Kulikov had a legit top flight partner in Ekblad, Fowler carried a 200lbs backpack around in Bieksa. If your stats are telling you different, it's proof that your stats aren't telling the whole picture. You didn't address my statement, you just threw more flawed numbers at me. You don't have a stat that will convince anyone here that playing 53% of your season with Bieksa isn't going to severely damage the validity of Fowler's other numbers.

 

[Mattilaus]

Unless you have a prospect that is as good as Duclair was in the Yandle trade, it's a pass.



Agreed. IMO, the league has really ****ed us on this. I don't mind the 7 F 3 D 1 G rule, but wtf is up with 8 s 1 G as the alternative. So you have to forfeit 2 players? How is that fair? At least make it 9 skaters or make it 6 F 3D 1G. That at least makes some sense i.e. you're exposing 50% of roster D-men and 50% of roster forwards. At least then we'd have a better opportunity of picking up a solid forward in a trade. Ah well... it is what it is I guess. Probably going to lose Despres. Could be worse I guess.

D-corp next season:

Lindholm - Manson
Despres - Vatanen
Theodore - Bieksa

D-crop after the draft:

Lindholm - Manson
Theodore - Vatanen
Stoner - Montour

Bieksa is bought out to free up protection slot for Manson and Despres is lost in the expansion draft.

if it was 9 skaters everyone would pick that option. It's done this way to ensure some teams need to leave a quality D man dangling so LV doesn't start off with 6 #7 D men on their roster. It's supposed to hurt because if it didn't then that would mean you aren't losing any good players and LV wouldn't get anything good to start out with.

 

[HanSolo]

It's obvious Anaheim is going to have to move some salary. From what I've heard, they are also in the market for a LW. What type of player are would best suit that role?

Someone that doesn't get in trouble with Johnny Law would be a start.

 

[Heraldic]

Your statement remains flawed. Kulikov had a legit top flight partner in Ekblad, Fowler carried a 200lbs backpack around in Bieksa. If your stats are telling you different, it's proof that your stats aren't telling the whole picture. You didn't address my statement, you just threw more flawed numbers at me. You don't have a stat that will convince anyone here that playing 53% of your season with Bieksa isn't going to severely damage the validity of Fowler's other numbers.

Lot of words to say "I have no idea how I'm going to back my point".

I already answered your question... If you don't get it, then you should just try to educate yourself more.

You're basically saying that "this data is flawed because it doesn't fit into my narrative". If there were a "homer" award, I would absolutely vote for you.

And let's focus a bit more on your "top-20" statement.

On Norris-voting Drew Doughty got 1254 points while Ekblad got 4... And you actually think that it is an universal truth? You actually don't have any idea that landing top-5 on that voting and landing 16th have absolutely nothing to do with each other?

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Lot of words to say "I have no idea how I'm going to back my point".

I already answered your question... If you don't get it, then you should just try to educate yourself more.

And let's focus a bit more on your "top-20" statement.

On Norris-voting Drew Doughty got 1254 points while Ekblad got 4... And you actually think that it is an universal truth? You actually don't have any idea that landing top-5 on that voting and landing 16th have absolutely nothing to do with each other?

I've already backed my point, I've shown that trying to draw a conclusion about Fowler vs Kulikov based on those stats is a flawed and pointless exercise due to the fact their situations couldn't be more different. Any disputing that on your behalf is nothing but nitpicking unless you're actually going to sit there and tell me there's any comparison to playing with Ekblad and Bieksa.

By no means did I state that the Norris trophy voting is to be taken as gospel, it was just to further prove my point that you're the one with the strange and laughable opinion of Ekblad.

"Let's focus a bit more on the top-20 statement"...why? To help you distract from the main point that Ekblad is light years better of a partner than Bieksa?

 

[Jim Bob]

if it was 9 skaters everyone would pick that option. It's done this way to ensure some teams need to leave a quality D man dangling so LV doesn't start off with 6 #7 D men on their roster. It's supposed to hurt because if it didn't then that would mean you aren't losing any good players and LV wouldn't get anything good to start out with.

I just don't get the 7F 3D part.

That means the average team probably has to expose one 2nd pairing D, but no top 6 forwards.

I guess LV will be building from the backend out....

Personally, it should just be 8 or 9 skaters and 1 goalie and that's it.

 

[mytduxfan*]

if it was 9 skaters everyone would pick that option. It's done this way to ensure some teams need to leave a quality D man dangling so LV doesn't start off with 6 #7 D men on their roster. It's supposed to hurt because if it didn't then that would mean you aren't losing any good players and LV wouldn't get anything good to start out with.

So the league is ensuring that LV gets some quality D-men, but they aren't ensuring that LV gets any quality forwards? I mean, seriously, LV isn't going to get any top 6 forwards with the system the way it is. This is only further compounded by the fact that lots of teams have exempt forwards playing in their top 6, thus allowing them to protect forwards deeper in the line-up. Look at EDM for example:

Lucic
Eberle
RNH
Drai
Pouliot
Yakupov
Maroon

Leaving guys like Letestu, Kassian and Lander exposed. What a selection?

Even on a stacked team like DET, who are bound to move a forward or two for help at D, you have:

Zetterberg
Nielsen
Nyquist
Tatar
Abdelkador
Sheahan
Mantha

Leaving guys like Helm, Jurco, Pulkkinen, Miller... all bottom 6 guys or struggling kids. Meanwhile, you look at teams stacked with D like ANA, STL, TB, WSH, and OTT and we're exposing:

Despres, Shattenkirk (right now) or Gunnarsson (if Shatty is moved), Coburn, Orpik, Methot... all top 4 guys.

I just think it should 6 F. Then you're exposing someone decent i.e. one of Maroon, Yakupov or Pouliot in EDM. You say it's supposed to hurt, but hurts those who've invested assets in developing young D a lot more then those investing in young forwards. At least, IMO it is.