elmatus

That's fair. It's definitely my own subjective view of things, and it's completely based on what I feel they've offered to date, not what potential they may or may not have going forward. If the exercise is meant to judge how good our scouts are, I don't think it makes much sense to base their success on projections.

Yeah, this is fine, but I'm hesitant to claim this is one of the best scouting staffs until we have evidence of their effectiveness. So far, we really don't, so the claim they're one of the best seems dubious to me. It's worth noting that other teams have had some real success stories from their picks over that same time span. We haven't really, at least not such impactful ones. Draft picks w/ decent nhl experience since 2011 (w/ my own admittedly subjective ranking based on impact on the ice to date): 2011: Couturier 5/5 2012: Laughton 3/5, Ghost 2/5 2013: Morin 0/5, Hagg 1/5 2014: Sanheim 2/5, NAK 2/5, Lindblom 4/5 2015: Provo 5/5, TK 4/5, Vorobyev 0/5 2016: Rubstov 0/5, Hart 3/5 2017: Patrick 2/5, Frost 2/5 2018: Farabee 2/5 Everyone else in the system is guesswork at best. It makes no sense to judge the scouting staff on players who have no NHL experience of note. That's four or so players who have become impact players at the NHL level over the last decade (Couts, Provo, TK, and Lindblom). Of the four, Lindblom is the only one who might have been considered a stretch, chosen based on some sort of scouting hunch. TK was taken later than he was projected to, and Couts and Provo were both very highly touted prospects in their respective draft classes. Even if you add Hart to that list (which I might if he plays well down the stretch here), that's still only four such players, and Hart also was very highly touted as a goalie prospect. Again, is that a bad record overall? No, it's not bad. I'm sure there are other teams with worse records in the last ten years. But I'm not sure that record is enough for me to get behind "one of the best scouting staffs in the league". Also, I'm not convinced this team is measurably better with a fully healthy Patrick... He was hardly a force in his time to date. If anything, he was disappointingly overrated and a lesser player than a number of others taken after him and in lower drafting positions since. That's not really on the Flyers scouting staff though. He was the consensus 2nd pick (even possible 1st, if you can believe it). They picked who anyone else would have.

I agree. I've spent plenty of posts around here defending draft picks over the Hexy era especially, and yet this team has been "in the works" now for a decade. If the scouting was so good, we would have had better than such marginal hockey over the last ten seasons. Ten seasons is plenty of time to have a few success stories in there. That's not to say it's all been bad. I just have to agree with you that a very good scouting staff would almost certainly have had a number of real gems in a ten year period, and I dont' think we have. Lindblom? Okay, sure... Provo? Yeah, but he was a top pick anyway, it's not a stretch. Hart? He still has a lot to prove to live up the hype, and he was also a very highly regarded pick, so not much of a stretch. Most of the possible gems have yet to really find their footing in the NHL, and many of them have been around long enough that they should have by now if that potential was to be real. So how good is the scouting staff? Well, it's probably better than many, but I'm not sure i'd consider it one of the best in the league.

I think some may have come in judging him on his tenure in Min, which i do think is fair. He was hardly a genius in his time there, and it was the best projection tool we had. That said, I think only a very few people were really sounding off on him. Most of us were and are willing to give him the benefit of time before coming down on his record here. As with many things, we seem to extrapolate posts that are more extreme and largely ignore more balanced posters and their thoughts. That’s human nature, and this board isn’t immune. As far as Fletch’s work goes to date, I do think it’s been generally positive. Certainly the coaching has been a mammoth change for the better. Also, I agree with you that Niskanen and Hayes were good adds (though i maintain we will almost certainly come to regret Hayes’ contract in the future). I think most of us were pretty on board with both acquisitions though. Those who weren’t just seem to be more memorable. I don’t think we know how these latest two depth acquisitions will go, but they seem like reasonable adds also. I don’t think either of them will have a huge impact on the team, but they both seem to be solid depth options, and we all know how important depth is in the playoffs. I do wish he had moved Ghost for someone with a bit more potential, but it’s likely he tried and just found it to be a very hard sell given Ghost’s play and the injuries. Overall, i would say Fletch has done a good job though. Is it enough to make a playoff run? I don’t know, but he hasn’t made too many mistakes i’d say.

You said BJ.

Huge games -- easily some of the most important of the season at this point. Get some regulation Ws boys.

This is two years old, but it may be of interest to you. I found it interesting anyway: https://thehockeywriters.com/top-ten-nhl-playoff-making-teams/

Your trip down NHL memory lane seems to have conveniently left out the Motor City.

We're all happy about your clear-minded decision also, @Howie58.

Sure, it happens to all players, that doesn't change his boatload of talent. Also worth noting Huberdeau is far from a slouch either. I'm not saying the Flyers can't win by any stretch. They absolutely can. I'm just saying that line is a serious contender for one of the most talented in all of the NHL. As such, slowing them down somehow really has to be a priority. Put another way, our top line in pts this season: Couts (50), TK (47), and Giroux (41). Their top line in pts this season: Huberdeau (68), Barkov (55), and Dadonov (41) Despite that, both teams are fairly even in terms of wins and positioning. That's a very measurable difference in on-ice performance between top lines (~25 pts difference). To me, it suggests Florida relies on their top line to win games a lot more than we do. If we can find a way to slow down that top line, that would be a substantial mark in our favour. Obviously scoring first and more often are also clear advantages. No reason to choose one or the other. Do both!

That top line of Barkov, Huberdeau, Dadonov has a ridiculous amount of high end talent. Any chance at winning this game starts with slowing those guys down somehow. Barkov is one of the most highly skilled players in the league, and an expert at just taking what little bits other teams give up and making magic happen out of nothing.

I'm not too proud to say I chuckled audibly at Clitlick.

I've thought this before, but part of me would be curious to see if boards for other teams exhibit the same type of bias as I worry many of us (myself included) can tend towards here. I feel we have a habit of overvaluing or undervaluing players based on our own emotional responses to the team, and it does seem to cloud any real objective judgement we might pose. The best examples of this for me have to be Ghost and Giroux. I think some of us are severely overvaluing Ghost both as a player and in terms of what he might bring home in a trade (and undervaluing Giroux). Why do we do this? Well, Ghost has had a couple good offensive seasons. That's enough for us to largely ignore some of his glaring flaws. His rookie season was phenomenal, but so many of those pts were racked up on the PP. And since that season, he's been mostly a fixture on the PP (aside from just this year), and our PP has been occasionally decent and often laughable with him on it. If I'm a GM looking at that, I would say that he has PP QB potential, but that he's just not consistent enough to be a sure thing. If getting a PP QB is what my team needs, I would keep him in mind and check to see what other boxes he checks off. He had a solid 17-18 season. What happened that year that may have helped him stand out? I don't know. Giroux went beast mode in a fight vs Connor McJesus for the scoring lead, so that likely helped. Provorov also played like the best overall Flyers dman since Pronger, which doesn't hurt (especially since they were partners most of the time). But at the end of the day, Ghost remained a severely flawed player defensively, with Provo bailing him out every game to a point where really the star here has to be Provo and his ability to make up for his partner's flaws. Either way, what this tells me is that Ghost can be offensively good, but he's typically not the catalyst. He needs other players around him who are gifted and playing well, in order to raise his game to a higher level offensively. It also suggests that doing so often exposes him to even more defensive gaffes, enough so that coaches have felt the need to tame his riskier on-ice tendencies, because that just gets the team in more trouble than it's worth a lot of the time. Aside from that, he has three seasons now of meh offensive play, and he remains a significant defensive liability always. So again, if I'm a GM, I would see him as having good offensive potential, but as a player that will need babysitting from a more well-rounded and defensive partner. That's not impossible to work with, but it does come with a set of important challenges when it comes to trade value. What is that worth, and what kinds of teams would want him? Well, age is a big factor in today's NHL, with a youth movement in full effect, seemingly dropping the prime age from what used to be 26-27 to what is now more like 23-24. Ghost at 27 this year would be seen as a finished product, unlikely to develop much more in the coming years. So GMs would figure they know what they're getting into with him. At that age and given his narrow skillset, I would suggest a team that is playoff-bound and is in particular need of a powerplay QB. Desperate enough that a GM would be willing to overlook the last couple seasons and trade for Ghost on the value of his couple good years (especially his rookie season *five* years ago). So what playoff-bound or at least playoff-potential teams could use an injection on the PP? Columbus, Us(!), Islanders, Avalanche, The Pens. These are teams with a 65+ pts and under 20% conversion on the PP, which I would say is a fair metric given how late in the season we are. We can eliminate the Pens and probably both the Isles and Jackets (we're unlikely to trade Ghost to an inter-divisional rival at the trade deadline, though maybe in the off-season). So we're looking at possibly the Avalanche as maybe our best bet. If we're going to talk possible trades, we may want to start there. A shorter metric here is probably a better one: If we're sitting here actively trying our best to shop him around to almost anyone listening, it's unlikely he carries all that much trade value. If what we want is a return that can really change the current team dynamic, that's likely to mean trading a player we don't really want to trade. If we're reluctant to trade a guy, it's probably because he offers something especially valuable. Those are the guys teams will shell out for, not the guy we've been tossing around aimlessly for two years now. The other option of course is Seattle picking him up in the upcoming draft, which may really be the most likely outcome at this point.

Maybe. I have to say though, Ghost really hasn't looked much like a top four dman for quite some time now. He's certainly no replacement for Shea Weber by any stretch. I have my doubts we'd be able to snag a high potential player like Domi in return for just Ghost. It seems very likely MTL could find a more effective dman elsewhere if that's what they want. I do think Ghost will be traded, but Fletch will need to flex some muscle to get a return like Domi. I should also note (again) that Domi is nothing at all like his father. He's small and quick and not a hitter or fighter. He's sort of like TK but with less of a mouth on him. While I would be plenty fine with seeing him in the O&B, I think it's important to understand what he brings. Folks talking about how we're not big or mean enough -- 5'10 Max Domi won't do much to change that.

I would consider it. Part of me is tempted to say no partially because Nylander sounds like a self-centered pansy and Myers is a player I'm very curious about going forward (he also happen to be from my hometown, which is far from common). But some measure of that is quite possibly my own risk aversion. I'm not sure I'd do it necessarily, but I'd consider it. If it were a similar player who seemed like less of a d***, i'd consider it more.

Yeah, that does make sense. I would agree certainly that Myers is much more attractive than Ghost at this point. That said, I wouldn't be giving up Myers for Johnsson or Kapanen for exactly the reasons you've mentioned. To me, a guy like Myers is much harder to find than a likely mid-six winger like those two. But yeah, if I'm Dubas, starting with Myers would make more sense than Ghost. He seems to be much more of what they need anyway. The Leafs don't need another Ghost. This may be one reason why a trade between PHI and TOR is unlikely at this point.

I could see something like this work. Ghost isn't a defensive stalwart though, so I guess it would depend on what Dubas wants in a dman. I imagine Kapanen may be on the block also. I'm not sure which of the two would be a better acquisition. I would probably lean towards Kapanen in the admittedly very few times I've seen them play (usually against us!). I find he tends to show a bit more potential. I would take either of them for Ghost at this point though. Ghost isn't doing anyone any favours as it stands. Maybe the change of scenery would do him some good.

I imagine part of it is owing to a pretty lacklustre season, but how does this conversation keep coming back? Hayes is no where near the reason this team isn't winning more games. He was always a middle six NHLer, and he has been a middle six NHLer in his time in PHI. There really is nothing more to say about the guy at this point... Hayes is doing what he was expected to do -- no more, no less. He's been a good addition to the team, giving us solid defensive play and a few more options for center depth at a time when we really don't have a ton of centers to roll. He will never be a real point producer, unless via some sort of fluke season with great linemates. The jury may still be out on Fletch, but I really don't think he was dumb enough to think he'd be getting a point producer. It seems far more likely he saw what was available and went for the best option he felt he could get at the time. Yeah, Fletch overpaid. Yeah, we're going to regret it. I'm just not sure it warrants more discussion at this point. Like it or not, Hayes is here to stay for quite some time. We may as well get used to it and move on. If Fletch wanted points, he likely would have gone after someone like Duchene. He didn't, or at least it looks like he didn't. There could be plenty of reasons for that, but none of them really matter a ton at this point anyway. Hayes is playing fine at the moment. He may not be winning us a bunch of games, but he's not losing them either. He's been entirely consistent with previous play on other teams, and it's been fine. Let's move on.

A lot of this has been said before, but yeah, the NHL game has essentially opted to evolved with the times. Tough guy style game play is still coveted, but it's not as prominent as it may have been in the past. League rule changes are one thing, but really they're just a reflection of a growing social sensitivity to things like head shots, especially in sport. Hockey still hangs on to a reputation of being much rougher than the majority of other high profile sports -- it's just not quite as overt for those of us who remember days where every hit under the sun was waved away as "just a part of the game" regardless of the health repercussions involved for the players. With a growing understanding of the importance of mental health and neurobiology has come a tempering of sorts to things like hockey and other institutions with a goon-style tradition. Are key players targeted more now? I dunno about that. I think they always were targeted. As with so many things related to mental health, we're just talking about it much more now than we did 20+ years ago. Concussions are no longer just part of the game now; they're something that the league actively tries their best to suppress. And when potential concussions happen, players are taken off the ice to try and limit the impact as quickly as possible. In reality, this is exactly what should happen if the goal is to reduce the damage done by concussions, so it's understandable. The NHL is just trying to change with the times. They feel they have the licence to do so in part because none of the big sports tolerate things like fighting anyway. Hockey has always been an outlier in this regard, so this might be a sort of course correction in a way. The hitting is still very prominent in the game; it's just not as commonly the type of hitting that'll land you in the hospital with two years off your life. The other important element here is likely money too. If the NHL doesn't work to reduce the negative health outcomes of certain play styles, they know they're going to be dropping into court cases like mad. They need to be seen to be doing something for both social perception and to save on the bottom line and stay out of trouble, so they're trying to do what they feel they can. I also agree with the talk on Lindros. I do think that is exactly the period where things began to change. Again though, they changed socially before changing within the game. The NHL is just trying to adapt to the times. While we can certainly talk about whether their moves have worked, I don't know that it's fair to blame them for trying to change at all. It's an evolve or die scenario, like so many others.

Math checks out.

I think you're probably right about that, but I don't think we'll be getting a Max Domi out of that kind of trade. At least not unless we're tossing something else that is shinier than Ghost along with him, which frankly we don't have much of right now.

I agree with a lot of this. Ghost should have been traded at least last season of course, but he wasn't. What we might be able to get for the guy now is something fairly questionable unfortunately. First thing of note is that Ghost is expected to contribute scoring more than anything, and he just hasn't done that consistently at all throughout his career. Sure, he's had two good seasons, but then he's had two poor ones, and he's on track for his lowest scoring total to date in 19-20 (~24-25pts). The other reason for his being on any NHL team is to be a PP quarterback. He's been supplanted in that role this season by a much better dman in Provo, and I would argue Niskanen as well. So he's not doing his job. Period. Not only that, but this season isn't some sort of anomaly. He wasn't good last season either. What can we get for a guy like Ghost in a trade? Honestly, probably a lot less than what we'd want. I'm not even convinced Seattle would take him at this point. Hell, even Voracek, universally panned though he so frequently is, remains significantly more valuable to a team than Ghost at this point. To your second point about Domi: I like Domi, but Ghost is definitely not going to cut it. Not only is he on pace for 65-70pts this season, he got 72 last season as well. If anything, he's getting better as he enters his prime years. Getting a guy like that at all would be tough as hell. So not only is Ghost not enough, we may not like what it would take to get him at all. I should add also that Domi really isn't all that tough in the sense you might think. He's smallish, and fast, and skilled, and nothing at all like his dad. I know you're a fan of the Tkachuk types. He's not really that kind of guy.

The bystander effect is a thing for a reason.

I think it's a combination of both things. Certainly it looks like Giroux is declining, which is fair enough given his age I guess. What I'm more worried about at this point is replacements. TK is the only guy we have whose production seems to be improving to a fairly high level. Couts is still hanging strong, but he does need talented linemates to really shine. Beyond that, I'm just not sure who we have kicking around to be part of a true top line in the future. Frost maybe, Farabee maybe, but both of those guys are young and still unproven and could very well max out as mid-six players rather than top line guys. No telling when we'll get Lindblom back, and this is all without mentioning the complete enigma that is Patrick. I guess I'm just worried about future talent. I feel like our recent history is littered with mid-tier guys, and I'm worried that just isn't enough to get it done in this day and age. It's good enough to make us a bubble team, which we've been now since forever, but going beyond that level seems to require more.

As opposed to when it was not so legal? When exactly did you start looking at 29 year old Jennifer Lawrence? Or are you talking some sort of deep fake stuff of another variety?