radoran

Hextall also didn't trade for Voracek or dump everything and the kitchen sink on Giroux. But if Hextall, Voracek, and Giroux were the problem, it's not seeming like Fletcher, Atkinson, and Couturier are the solution...

The Rangers have seven guys over 30. One is their backup goalie. None of them are defenders. Two of them they just acquired. They are long term committed to three of them. That's how you position yourself to acquire talent to bolster youth. You don't build around players who are 28-32, you add those types of players to the foundation you built.

So, more than half the league is already better and another four got better than the Flyers. But, hey, FIFTH!

"Your way" already has them halfway to two decades of losing...

@OccamsRazor Three more years after this. Three more years. And these other teams "looking for help at 2C" from a guy who was bounced from the last team that was "looking for help at 2C," bounced from the team that had him as a 2C before that, was dropped of his center duties by the current coach, and has been a healthy scratch this season despite "leading the team" in scoring. That's NHL logic right there. How ever did they get themselves into this mess?

Did I mention that they are paying both players MORE?

This is an important note - we notice these things on the Flyers because we watch the Flyers. Of course, then there's the instance of paying a team a 2nd and a 7th to take a player because you think he's got offensive talent but is a defensive liability, so you can trade a roster player, 1st and a 2nd to get a defenceman, leaving you in a position where you then trade a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th for an offensively talented defensive liability that is $500K more than the guy you started this sentence with for another year of term. They paid a 1st, 3 2nds, 3rd, 4th, and a 7th to turn Gotstobethere and Hagg into Deangelo, Ristolainen and a 7th. With the idea that they would be more competitive. True story. How ever did they get to be where they are?

And there's Eeli Tolvanen in Seattle and you're still right. Patrick Maroon couldn't cut it here and he's only won the Cup three times.

The Flyers losing to the Cup Finalist Rangers in seven games was a "good sign" in 2014. The Rangers went to the Conference Final the next year. Lost in the 1st. Lost in the 2nd. Had one playoff round in four years. And now are back in the playoffs for the second year in a row, having won a playoff round last year and making moves to acquire "superstars" for a Cup run. For the Flyers over the same stretch made the playoffs three times, won one playoff round, and are about to miss the playoffs for the third year in a row. It's a "good sign" that Couturier and Atkinson might be back next season from the injuries that weren't going to keep them out all season. If they don't keep doing the same things they've always done, how can they expect to duplicate their track record of success?

It's not a Flyers website. Here endeth the lesson.

What is Chuck sending as the future considerations? And does he know he's getting future considerations from a guy who is retiring?

As a Flyers fan it's strange and mysterious that they chose the winningest coach in franchise history...

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/david-poile-to-step-down-as-nashville-predators-gm-barry-trotz-to-take-over-1.1924062 Barry Trotz will take the GM reins in Nashville. If nothing else, Poile definitely made "Smashville" a hockey town - something many said couldn't be done. The only thing really missing - and he says it himself - is that elusive Cup.

We can safely say the past decade would have been much different...

Well they saw what a great job of it he did in Minnesota...

It's not that hard to be mediocre in the NHL. You have to work to be bad (Arizona). You have to work to be good. You can muddle along in the middle for quite a long time.

"The problem" was that Giroux and Voracek simply weren't good enough to build a competitive team around. Everything done in service of the idea that they were was doomed to failure.

The Devil's picks in those drafts aside from Hischier aren't much to write home about. It's picking top 10 in five of the last six drafts. It's not "spending to the cap" just to spend to the cap. It's not an "aggressive retool." It's not "make the playoffs and anything can happen."

He did spend the first two years digging out from under the Pronger, Lecavalier and assorted other cap problems. Sucks that the second best FA that year was then JVR... But a lot of what he was trying to do was set a floor foundation to build on and, having set that, he got fired and they immediately plunged back into the cap hell that they have been known for... He had his blunders and didn't do anything that makes you go "wow" but when you look at Seattle and St. Louis it might not have been the coaches that were the problem...

No, but it is year one bad he's benched guys on long term deals. No, not a bad thing in and of itself and with potential benefits. It's year 3/4/5 where this approach starts to wear. It's not "playing for the money" but if you can play somewhere else where this guy isn't trolling you for three years you might consider it. Again, not a huge issue "today" but certainly one to be aware of in the medium term.

You can't make a guy a guaranteed millionaire and keep treating him like a servant with the penalty being that he'll be paid millions of dollars to be somewhere you aren't. Again, it works sometimes but it really hasn't shown to be an effective tactic at least since the lockout.

The thing is that the tactic works sometimes for him and so he employs it all the time. It works with some players, so if it doesn't work with this player it's the player's fault. Thing is, Sanheim has eight years and fifty million reasons that he doesn't give a rat's ass what Tortorella says. And his No Trade Clause likewise gives him a perspective that the coach just might not be here longer than the player. So, here's the deal, if I play bad, you might bench me, and they might trade me to another team, but it's far more likely they'll change the coach. They have before. That's the danger side of the tactic with "today's player."

This has ALWAYS been the problem since Homer "won the trades" (and honestly before that, but they had actually built a core that their vaunted organizational culture apparently allowed to become party central - why don't they just buy everyone a Porsche? #toosoon - if you want to believe that instead of the obvious fact that they just BROKE Mike Richards and then dumped his contract). But I digress... The organization* insisted that building around the VeeGees would work, despite the fact that they were never the best players in their division, much less the league. They now insist that building around a bunch of guys in their late 20s and early 30s that no one else wanted is the core of a successful franchise. And that's not working. The Rangers and Devils are already ahead of the Flyers and the Flyers losing in seven to the Cup Finalist Rangers TEN YEARS AGO was a "good sign." Both of them never pretended that "spending to the cap" and "competing every year" was a viable strategy. The Rangers were a Cup Finalist, tore it all down, and are a seriously competitive franchise making deadline moves to acquire "star" rental players ALL SINCE THEN. The Flyers were a Cup Finalist and continue to aspire to be a middling bubble playoff team. The main difference between them and the Coyotes is that the Flyers don't need to pretend to get to the cap floor. Like the Habs, they spend to the ceiling to get mediocre results. That's the unfortunate truth.

They were saying they needed a keeper.

Tortorella took the 8th place Blue Jackets in the Metropolitan and over the course of five years transformed them into the 8th place team in the Central. In the middle were some playoff years, and they even won a round. And were right back where they started five years later. So, a middling, bubble playoff team that makes the playoffs more often than they miss, eh? Well, it's a marginal improvement on the past decade, I guess... Talent wins playoff rounds. Talent wins Stanley Cups. Grit, hard work, and determination can only get so far without talent. They have a fifth of the cap on IR - and I don't mean @OccamsRazor's fifth, either. Potentially for the next two seasons, and $13+M on the cap potentially for two more after that. It just goes to show that you don't build around guys in their early 30s.