Cam Fowler Trade Speculation Thread

[Hoss]

NFW they trade Subban.

At the risk of derailing the thread - I agree. I think Bergevin played it a little too loose on this which is why the media continues to focus on that. It'd take the world.

[IKnowPhysics]

I'm not quick to join the -on-Ennis wagon. I think we should retain his potential skill... for now... unless something huge is on the table.

 

But Pysyk plus Zemgus for Fowler I would do in a heartbeat, and I like both those guys. Fowler is a much better and much more seasoned Dman at the same age as Pysyk. The upgrade cost is Zemgus, who plays a great style of game, but lost his way a little, either under Bylsma or with the influx of young centers. Zemgus has become less valuable to us, but maybe not to other teams, and in this scenario could end up a win-win for ANA and BUF.

 

A low round pick (4-6) to Buffalo would lube this trade up to be a no brainer.

[Crusader1969]

I understand the sentiment, and I don't want to trade 8 for Fowler, either. But I don't think it's accurate to say that the D we draft at 8 (IF we draft one there!) is more than likely as good if not better that Fowler. He would have a chance to be, nothing more. 

 

IMO you are either over-valuing Fowler or undervaluing the top 3dmen in this years draft.

 

not that I'm a huge analytics guys at all but .....

 

This is not a good graph for a top pair Dman!

[dudacek]

we can trade 8 for Fowler and there is a realistic chance we have neither in 2 years.

 

You are really going to trade a guy away who you can have for 10 years and who will more than likely be as good if not better than Fowler for a guy you could have only for 2 years??? makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

There are three faulty premises in this:

"a guy you can have for 10 years"

Not untrue, but it implies you likely will have him for 10 years. How many of the 40-something Sabre first-rounders over the years have played with them for 10 years?

"who will more than likely be as good if not better"

There is no evidence to suggest this is true. There is circumstantial evidence in this thread demonstrating it is not.

"a guy you could have only for 2 years"

Again, not untrue but misleading. You can quite easily re-sign him, Murray's brief track record indicates he will. If you don't, you are likely to re-coup a late first-rounder in the process after two years of competent play.

 

We aren't talking about acquiring Brent Seabrook here. Fowler is only 24.

And, again, I am on the fence about trading eight for him.

But let's be honest about the cost/benefit.

Edited June 24, 2016 by dudacek

[Crusader1969]

I'm not quick to join the ######-on-Ennis wagon. I think we should retain his potential skill... for now... unless something huge is on the table.

 

But Pysyk plus Zemgus for Fowler I would do in a heartbeat, and I like both those guys. Fowler is a much better and much more seasoned Dman at the same age as Pysyk. The upgrade cost is Zemgus, who plays a great style of game, but lost his way a little, either under Bylsma or with the influx of young centers. Zemgus has become less valuable to us, but maybe not to other teams, and in this scenario could end up a win-win for ANA and BUF.

 

A low round pick (4-6) to Buffalo would lube this trade up to be a no brainer.

 

 

Let's not forget the Ducks HAVE to trade Fowler to fit in their budget - no need to overpay

[TrueBlueGED]

Risto's graph would look worse. Take that as you will.

[dudacek]

Baker just said on WGR he might like Fowler better than Shattenkirk.

[Crusader1969]

There are three faulty premises in this:

"a guy you can have for 10 years"

Not untrue, but it implies you likely will have him for 10 years. How many of the 40-something Sabre first-rounders over the years have played with them for 10 years?

"who will more than likely be as good if not better"

There is no evidence to suggest this is true. There is circumstantial evidence in this thread demonstrating it is not.

"a guy you could have only for 2 years"

Again, not untrue but misleading. You can quite easily re-sign him, Murray's brief track record indicates he will. If you don't, you are likely to re-coup a late first-rounder in the process after two years of competent play.

 

We aren't talking about acquiring Brent Seabrook here. Fowler is only 24.

And, again, I am on the fence about trading eight for him.

But let's be honest about the cost/benefit.

 

I will admit you can re-sign him as long as you don't spend $10 million on other UFA's this summer and next.

 

You sign Stamkos and you aren't able to afford Fowler.

[nfreeman]

Let's not forget the Ducks HAVE to trade Fowler to fit in their budget - no need to overpay

 

Of course, but there are other teams bidding for him too.

 

FWIW, I do not think GMTM will trade #8 for him, and I would not do so either, but I wouldn't be shocked if GMTM does so.

[Crusader1969]

Risto's graph would look worse. Take that as you will.

 

The graph clearly demonstrates that the Ducks were a better team when Fowler wasn't on the ice.

[pi2000]

The graph clearly demonstrates that the Ducks were a better team when Fowler wasn't on the ice.

 

FWIW, Fowler was paired with Bieksa who was awful last season (I live in Orange County and watch all the Ducks games).   

 

Lindholm and Vatanen were the top pairing, they're both fantastic.   Put Fowler with either of those two and his adv stats would look much better. 

[TrueBlueGED]

The graph clearly demonstrates that the Ducks were a better team when Fowler wasn't on the ice.

 

Yes, and the Sabres were "clearly" better when Risto wasn't on the ice. Would you trade Risto for peanuts? I mean, he made us worse! Numbers without proper context are a good way to make poor decisions.

[SarasotaSabre]

thinking about something which I haven't seen posted here yet: does GMTM make a sweet coup to get Fowler by not giving up #8, and in the process providing more rationale for Vesey to sign here? i.e., Vesey and his camp sees & buys into GMTM making the necessary moves to get us off the scheid ?

thinking about something which I haven't seen posted here yet: does GMTM make a sweet coup to get Fowler by not giving up #8, and in the process providing more rationale for Vesey to sign here? i.e., Vesey and his camp sees & buys into GMTM making the necessary moves to get us off the scheid ?

 

schneid .... fixed

[Crusader1969]

FWIW, Fowler was paired with Bieksa who was awful last season (I live in Orange County and watch all the Ducks games).   

 

Lindholm and Vatanen were the top pairing, they're both fantastic.   Put Fowler with either of those two and his adv stats would look much better. 

 

Maybe he isn't in the top pair for a reason? again not saying dont trade for him, just don't give up the 8th pick for him and be prepared to only have him for 2 years.

[North Buffalo]

thinking about something which I haven't seen posted here yet: does GMTM make a sweet coup to get Fowler by not giving up #8, and in the process providing more rationale for Vesey to sign here? i.e., Vesey and his camp sees & buys into GMTM making the necessary moves to get us off the scheid ?

 

 

schneid .... fixed

That and whatever other moves he may make.., thinking it cant hurt.

[Hoss]

Let's not forget the Ducks HAVE to trade Fowler to fit in their budget - no need to overpay

They don't need to trade him immediately, though. They will get value.

Ennis isn't overpaying. I love Ennis, but if we could get Fowler with Tyler being the main piece going back that'd be good news.

[Thorner]

Baker just said on WGR he might like Fowler better than Shattenkirk.

 

Boom. 

 

Maybe he isn't in the top pair for a reason? again not saying dont trade for him, just don't give up the 8th pick for him and be prepared to only have him for 2 years.

 

I am operating under the assumption that if we trade for him, we will likely sign him eventually to another deal. It's a bit of an assumption, but likely given Murray's track record and the fact that I doubt he'd be seeing himself trade for 2 years of Fowler. 

[dudacek]

FWIW, Fowler was paired with Bieksa who was awful last season (I live in Orange County and watch all the Ducks games).   

 

Lindholm and Vatanen were the top pairing, they're both fantastic.   Put Fowler with either of those two and his adv stats would look much better. 

 

 

Maybe he isn't in the top pair for a reason? again not saying dont trade for him, just don't give up the 8th pick for him and be prepared to only have him for 2 years.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Fowler get the most difficult minutes on the Ducks?

Ennis as a centrepiece for Fowler trade would be a dream.

 

All of this talk about not wanted to give up eight; I don't want to give up Girgensons.

Love that guy and still think he has a high ceiling.

[pi2000]

Maybe he isn't in the top pair for a reason? again not saying dont trade for him, just don't give up the 8th pick for him and be prepared to only have him for 2 years.

 

Vatanen likes to free wheel with the puck.   Him and Fowler are their best skaters so they split them up.    Fowler's knock is that he doesn't have very good offensive insincts, his decision making when to jump in the play or stay back is poor.    Considering how great of a skater he is, he should be a weapon offensively, but he is not.... at least not at this point in his career.   How much of that has to do with who he is paired with, who knows.   But the skill set is there.    He'd be top pairing in BUF, no question.    

[Brawndo]

Keep an eye on #mnwild. Some dialogue there. With high prices for Subban and Shattenkirk, #mnwild have a couple second-tier options on D.

 

From Frank Servalli

[North Buffalo]

Keep an eye on #mnwild. Some dialogue there. With high prices for Subban and Shattenkirk, #mnwild have a couple second-tier options on D.

From Frank Servalli

Came up yesterday in discussion but yes its a bkup possibility.

[Rasmus_]

I want some tweets from McKenzie.  All this speculation is starting to get annoying :D

[Doohicksie]

Nah, Duff's would be a good choice, and Colorado's management doesn't make good choices.

 

Applebees.

[Drunkard]

Let's not forget the Ducks HAVE to trade Fowler to fit in their budget - no need to overpay

 

Yep the Ducks have an internal cap lower than the actual cap. I would think this would make Ennis less of a fit for them as well since he makes more than Fowler. I could be wrong though since their problem isnt what Fowler makes now but what's he expected to make in 2 year after he gets a new contract.

Edited June 24, 2016 by Drunkard

[Huckleberry]

Would you do.... Ennis, #8 and #69 for Fowler, #24, and #30?

 

I would.