HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Anaheim Ducks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Cam Fowler

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-17-2014, 11:53 AM
  #1
Corey Peary
The Doghouse
 
Corey Peary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 1,301
vCash: 500
Cam Fowler

Scott Niedermayer needs to inject some confidence in this kid. It seems like Cam has been playing with his tail between his legs, so to speak.

Corey Peary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2014, 01:00 PM
  #2
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 30,014
vCash: 50
Last night might have been the worst game I've ever seen him play.

Beyond that, he's been good this season, but he can be so much better(as shown last season). I'm not sure what his deal is.

__________________
"From now on, I'll connect the dots my own way." -- Calvin
Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2014, 01:07 PM
  #3
CrazyDuck4u
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
Last night might have been the worst game I've ever seen him play.

Beyond that, he's been good this season, but he can be so much better(as shown last season). I'm not sure what his deal is.
You guys know he is playing hurt right? All those early concussion, hes afraid of hits now, Thats why he never engages physically.

CrazyDuck4u is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2014, 01:47 PM
  #4
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 30,014
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDuck4u View Post
You guys know he is playing hurt right? All those early concussion, hes afraid of hits now, Thats why he never engages physically.
Those two things aren't the same.

I don't know if he's playing hurt. I know he was earlier in the season, or at least it was likely, since he was injured during training camp. Currently, though, I have no idea if he's injured.

As for being afraid of hits, he played all of last season without it being an issue. Now, if he's avoiding it a bit more because he's currently injured, again, that's another matter. That's somewhat understandable, but I'd like to see evidence of that.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2014, 02:15 PM
  #5
Eddie Shack
The doctor is in!
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 10,212
vCash: 500
He is quite the enigma. We've seen him make plays and do things that make you drool. But so often he does look like he is playing with no confidence. It's more obvious on the offensive side of his game, but I'm beginning to wonder if the lack of self confidence is starting to spread to all aspects of his game. IMO, his problem is squarely between his ears. The team should send him to a hypnotist or a witch doctor. Somebody who can get inside his head.

Eddie Shack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 10:26 AM
  #6
Tyler Durden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,992
vCash: 500
Goes to show again that he is quite the enigma, what do you guys think of his play as of late? And what about going forward?

Tyler Durden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 11:28 AM
  #7
anezthes
Registered User
 
anezthes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Durden View Post
Goes to show again that he is quite the enigma, what do you guys think of his play as of late? And what about going forward?
I don't get all the hate. I think he's great.

anezthes is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 01:23 PM
  #8
Lord Flashheart
Moderator
Squadron Commander
 
Lord Flashheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bananaland crapital
Country: Croatia
Posts: 5,491
vCash: 500
It's easy to forget he just turned 23 couple of months ago.

Or, he's a pussie, signed by yours truly, -Internet tough-guy.

Lord Flashheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 03:34 PM
  #9
DuckJet
Poster of the Year
 
DuckJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Funkytown
Country: Kazakhstan
Posts: 50,899
vCash: 69
He isn't Scott niedermayer in his prime at the age of 23 ergo he sucks.

DuckJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 04:11 PM
  #10
OCSportsfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 783
vCash: 500
He is an Olympian and incredibly gifted on the ice. I think this is close to where his peak will be as a hockey player, and although I like him, I would include him in a trade if it meant an upgrade for a #1.

That is not a shot at him as a player, I just don't think his skill set is what is missing on the Ducks with LIndholm, Vatanen and Theodore (Which I am assuming since I have only seen a couple of his games).

OCSportsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 05:12 PM
  #11
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 30,014
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by OCSportsfan View Post
He is an Olympian and incredibly gifted on the ice. I think this is close to where his peak will be as a hockey player, and although I like him, I would include him in a trade if it meant an upgrade for a #1.

That is not a shot at him as a player, I just don't think his skill set is what is missing on the Ducks with LIndholm, Vatanen and Theodore (Which I am assuming since I have only seen a couple of his games).
Then why are you trying to get rid of him for Phaneuf or Myers?

And of course Fowler's skill set isn't missing on the Ducks. They have his skill set, because they have him. Vatanen isn't good enough to make Fowler expendable by himself at this point, and Theodore simply isn't an NHL player right now. Lindholm is the only one who really has an argument, and that isn't a reason to move him. It's a reason to be optimistic because we have both of them.

Using your argument, if we added a #1 defenseman, who is to say we'd miss Lindholm, or Vatanen? That logic applies to every one of our defensemen, because none of them bring what a legitimate #1 does. And how can we miss Theodore when he isn't even on the team? What you're essentially saying is "A #1 defenseman would make any other single defenseman we have expendable." That isn't specific to Fowler. We don't have a defenseman who would, or should, be untouchable in that situation. I'm not sure we have a player who would be either, save for Getzlaf and Perry.

The issue isn't the availability of these Anaheim players. The issue is that #1 defensemen just aren't moved. Your best bet is to draft one, or sign one in the off-season.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 05:19 PM
  #12
Tyler Durden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,992
vCash: 500
Would you guys rather have someone like Faulk or Klingberg over Fowler?

Tyler Durden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 05:24 PM
  #13
Bodacious Wits
Porkins the White
 
Bodacious Wits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: He is risen!
Posts: 12,861
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckJet View Post
He isn't Scott niedermayer in his prime at the age of 23 ergo he sucks.
That's one way to dismiss the criticism.

Bodacious Wits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 05:33 PM
  #14
AngelDuck
Keith MF Richards
 
AngelDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,136
vCash: 500
Fowler isn't great but he's not the problem. Hopefully we can dump Stoner and get someone who can move the puck because Stoner just doesn't get it done

I'd love to see a defense without guys like Lovejoy and Stoner who can't make an outlet pass and constantly get hemmed in the zone because of it. The hawks have Oduya, Keith, Hjalmarsson, Seabrook, Rosival, and even Rundblad can make an outlet pass this year. That's how you build a defense not through pylons who spend their time chasing the puck around


Last edited by AngelDuck: 02-02-2015 at 05:45 PM.
AngelDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 05:33 PM
  #15
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 30,014
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Durden View Post
Would you guys rather have someone like Faulk or Klingberg over Fowler?
Faulk is a lateral move. They are pretty even, though I'd give Faulk the edge this season. Klingberg, however, would be a step back. Arguably a pretty big step, too.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 05:47 PM
  #16
Getz2perry
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,899
vCash: 500
People over react to much on here, hes seemed pretty fine to me. Hes playing with a 6-7 dmen.

Getz2perry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:02 PM
  #17
OCSportsfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 783
vCash: 500
I agree with Angel, we need guys who can move the puck to upgrade lovejoy ,but we still are missing a true #1. I am not advocating moving Fowler for a lateral piece, just to move him. I would rather keep Fowler, he is a great player. But I think this team needs to upgrade 2 defenseman in order to win the SC.

Fowler is not the problem, but if his position can be upgraded, then upgrade. If it cant, than don't, but lets not pretend that doing so is not an option. If you don't like Myers, so be it (I cant remember saying Phaneuf straight up, but it would not be the worst trade), but if he is traded, then I think his skill set would be easier to fill than Lindholm or Vatanen with our current prospects.

OCSportsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:03 PM
  #18
Bodacious Wits
Porkins the White
 
Bodacious Wits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: He is risen!
Posts: 12,861
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Durden View Post
Would you guys rather have someone like Faulk or Klingberg over Fowler?
No. If I was going to trade Fowler I'd get an actual, right now upgrade.

Bodacious Wits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:27 PM
  #19
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 30,014
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by OCSportsfan View Post
I agree with Angel, we need guys who can move the puck to upgrade lovejoy ,but we still are missing a true #1. I am not advocating moving Fowler for a lateral piece, just to move him. I would rather keep Fowler, he is a great player. But I think this team needs to upgrade 2 defenseman in order to win the SC.

Fowler is not the problem, but if his position can be upgraded, then upgrade. If it cant, than don't, but lets not pretend that doing so is not an option. If you don't like Myers, so be it (I cant remember saying Phaneuf straight up, but it would not be the worst trade), but if he is traded, then I think his skill set would be easier to fill than Lindholm or Vatanen with our current prospects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OCSportsfan View Post
How about Fowler and DSP (may have to add a second) for Myers. Then trade for Sekera (might cost a first). I think we need two defensemen.

Right now I think Jackman is playing as good as anyone that could play on the 4th line, so DSP is available.

Would be a big trade, but after last night, I am okay with letting Fowler go if it is for an upgrade which I think Myers is. We are going to struggle in the playoffs when our best defenseman is 21 years old, and is still learning, and his partner is on the wrong side of 30, and looks slow out there. Fowler and Lovejoy get too easily hemmed in our zone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OCSportsfan View Post
What a brutal game i saw live last night. I was okay with the San Jose loss because it looked we still moved the puck well and just had some breakdowns. This was a dominating performance by Chicago. I love this Ducks team, but we can't win the Cup until we upgrade the Defense, and change the way we exit the defensive zone.

I hate to say it, but with theodore coming up, i would trade Fowler for Myers/Phaneuf and get some guys that can move the puck but can also play a bit physical. i like the way Fowler plays, but it is alarming how non physical he is. He never takes the body and always tries to fight the puck away.

We had no answer for their pressure and our D just would throw it against the boards, except for Vatanen who would skate it out. Our forwards do not get into the passing lanes, so unless the d-man skates through 2-3 guys, there is no one to pass the puck to. We try to do that to them, but it looks like we are a bit late every time.

Freddie was good last night and there were 2-3 more goals that were stopped by a d-man getting his stick in the way.

would not be surprised if a move was made shortly for somebody.

You were prepared to -add- for Myers. Myers, a defenseman who is basically a taller, but slightly less talented version of Fowler, and you've got Myers and Phaneuf together as possible players to trade Fowler for. Phaneuf may not be the worst trade, but it would be pretty close to the worst. It would make us worse, handicap us with his contract, and saddle us with a player who is, to be blunt, a moron.

Theodore has nothing to do with Fowler right now. And I say this as someone who is very high on him as a prospect. He's a promising prospect, but he has zero games of NHL experience, and no real professional experience to speak of. Why are you already pencilling him in as a replacement? Or even Vatanen, for that matter. Sami is much better than Theodore right now, and he can't replace Cam at this stage either.

The only person who has a realistic argument in doing that, right now, is Lindholm, and as I said in the Lindholm/Fowler thread, I still think Cam is the more dependable player right now. He basically does just as much, with less.

Edit:

Even if I'm really generous, what you're suggesting is a lateral move at best for the short term. Neither one of Phaneuf or Myers are better than him. What makes it worse, is that you're talking about adding to get Myers, for the weaker player, and with Phaneuf, not only are you getting the weaker player, but you're getting one who is quite a bit older and on an absolutely terrible contract. What is the gain here for Anaheim? In both cases, again, even if I'm being very generous, it isn't a gain for the team at all. They don't improve making either deal. If I'm being more realistic, they get worse, older, and spend more. Why would we do that? It's one thing to try to add one of those players to our current blue line(personally, I don't want Phaneuf), because then you're adding to what we have, but if you're just replacing Fowler with one of them, there is no gain. It isn't a cap advantage for us, it doesn't make us younger, neither of them have much experience in the playoffs, we don't get better offensively or defensively. We essentially get worse for an extremely tall guy who doesn't use his size well, or we get worse and spend a lot more, for an extremely physical guy who is worse in every other area. We also still have Lovejoy and Stoner, which means teams can still isolate whoever replaces Fowler, and Vatanen, but we also get worse in that regards, because the player taking Fowler's place is also a weaker skater, and not as good on the breakout.

Summary? We get worse.


Last edited by Sojourn: 02-02-2015 at 06:48 PM.
Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:34 PM
  #20
PuqTalk
@PuqOT on Twitter
 
PuqTalk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Getz2perry View Post
People over react to much on here, hes seemed pretty fine to me. Hes playing with a 6-7 dmen.


I'm not so sure he won't improve to the point where he's dominant with these guys eventually, and admittedly he hasn't yet even though we've seen glimpses. But I'm just about done with the criticism that his progress is stagnant or that he lacks confidence when the fact of the matter is both he and Vatanen are carrying terrible defensemen under their belts enough to keep this team afloat at the top of the NHL.

You know why Lindholm looks fantastic? Because he's got a solid NHL defenseman next to him that can handle his uptempo play, keep up with his movement of the puck, and make the occasional outlet pass. And for as questionable as he is at times offensively, Beauchemin is stable enough to have handled top-four duties most of his career (and is at his best dishing the puck to someone whose better suited at handling it).

Murray and Co. have been excellent at pinpointing talent and effective defensemen in the draft, but miss the mark when it comes to finding them others to play with. Where management fails is their apparent lack in ability to look past a Beauchemin or Boychuk's physicality, edge, size, and defense-first mindset to see that they're competent with the puck, at least enough to make plays and handle it when their partner is pressured and needs to dish it away. This is what makes them so effective defensively. Not the fact that they can make a big hit, or win a board battle, but the fact that they retain possession after these plays.

PuqTalk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:50 PM
  #21
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 30,014
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuqTalk View Post


I'm not so sure he won't improve to the point where he's dominant with these guys eventually, and admittedly he hasn't yet even though we've seen glimpses. But I'm just about done with the criticism that his progress is stagnant or that he lacks confidence when the fact of the matter is both he and Vatanen are carrying terrible defensemen under their belts enough to keep this team afloat at the top of the NHL.

You know why Lindholm looks fantastic? Because he's got a solid NHL defenseman next to him that can handle his uptempo play, keep up with his movement of the puck, and make the occasional outlet pass. And for as questionable as he is at times offensively, Beauchemin is stable enough to have handled top-four duties most of his career (and is at his best dishing the puck to someone whose better suited at handling it).

Murray and Co. have been excellent at pinpointing talent and effective defensemen in the draft, but miss the mark when it comes to finding them others to play with. Where management fails is their apparent lack in ability to look past a Beauchemin or Boychuk's physicality, edge, size, and defense-first mindset to see that they're competent with the puck, at least enough to make plays and handle it when their partner is pressured and needs to dish it away. This is what makes them so effective defensively. Not the fact that they can make a big hit, or win a board battle, but the fact that they retain possession after these plays.
To be fair, I do think Lindholm deserves credit. I just can't ignore the difference in his play when Beauchemin returned. He played more confidentially, took more chances, and has just been that much better.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:51 PM
  #22
PuqTalk
@PuqOT on Twitter
 
PuqTalk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
To be fair, I do think Lindholm deserves credit. I just can't ignore the difference in his play when Beauchemin returned. He played more confidentially, took more chances, and has just been that much better.
Oh, by all means. We've got three absolute gems. I didn't mean to downplay it.

PuqTalk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:53 PM
  #23
El Zilcho
Still mighty
 
El Zilcho's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,772
vCash: 420
Fowler is having a good year, just not as good as last year. It's insane that people think he won't improve anymore and we should trade him, development is not linear. He's still young and has flashed considerable upside. There's no way we trade him, and if we can get another top 4 d the defense will be fine. No stud #1, but a very capable group that can do the job by committee.

El Zilcho is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 06:54 PM
  #24
nbducksfan19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,178
vCash: 500
Fowler is an effective 2-4 dman, i think thats what he has been for a couple years and what he will be. Not a dig at him, I just dont see him making the step to elite.

nbducksfan19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2015, 07:03 PM
  #25
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 30,014
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuqTalk View Post
Oh, by all means. We've got three absolute gems. I didn't mean to downplay it.
I agree with what you're saying, though. I'm curious to see how Brewer looks when he returns, but in general if we're worried about getting hemmed up in our own end, what we need to be doing is adding players who can move the puck or making it easier for guys like Vatanen and Fowler to do so. That means making it tougher to isolate them.

I think Lovejoy did a decent job at first at that, but over time I think teams have learned that he just isn't very dangerous with the puck so they'll try to make sure he has it. You can see it on the forecheck. When Fowler gets it, there is someone nearby. When Lovejoy gets it, he has more room, but not much ability to do much with it. Sami is suffering from the same thing these days. I think earlier in the season he was catching teams by surprise, but now they know he's the guy on that pairing to focus on.

Teams are just learning the best ways to exploit the weaker links in Anaheim's line-up, and unfortunately that is one of the ways to do it. In terms of actual D ability, I think they are okay. Not great, but solid. But you need to be able to get the puck out, and you need to be able to get it to your forwards in motion. That's how you create offense and push the opposition back. That issue on defense creates issues on offense.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:45 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.