Any chance Hartnell goes?

[CoachX]

I have not really been following anything hockey related for a while now, so I am out of touch. However, with the signing of Vinny and the log jam of forwards, I was wondering if there was any way Hartnell might be moved. I kind of like the idea of Read staying and maybe playing on a line with Giroux and Voracek. hartnell had a good year two seasons ago, but I think that was more an anomoly then a constant. Read is younger and in my opinion, more skilled. Hartnell is...well, Hartnell.

Anyway, I am interested in hearing opinions on this

[Samifan]

He has a No Movement Clause so he would have to agree to go.

[AJgoal]

He has a full NMC, which limits your options to move him. I think he'd waive to go to LA, but not sure where else he'd be willing to go. You'd also have to find a team willing to take on his cap hit.

[Jmdodgesrt4]

What's the deal with everyone hating Hartnel?

[xganarchy]

I like Hartnell, but his cap hit would be great to get rid of. I'd want him out West preferably, and I could see LA, Edmonton, Dallas being interested. A team with a need for a power forward OR a team looking to get up to the salary cap floor?

[AJgoal]

Not going to be a good "cap floor" deal until the last year. Contract is front-loaded over the first four years.

[aziz]

What's the deal with everyone hating Hartnel?

not hating on hartnell, except that he got a contract based on the play of jaromir jagr. who...isn't with the team anymore. it's the john leclair syndrome, where a guy is outstanding at letting select players bounce pucks off their stick and into the net, and once that select player goes, so does every bit of the first guy's production.

[BearOnIce]

I have not really been following anything hockey related for a while now, so I am out of touch. However, with the signing of Vinny and the log jam of forwards, I was wondering if there was any way Hartnell might be moved. I kind of like the idea of Read staying and maybe playing on a line with Giroux and Voracek. hartnell had a good year two seasons ago, but I think that was more an anomoly then a constant. Read is younger and in my opinion, more skilled. Hartnell is...well, Hartnell.

Anyway, I am interested in hearing opinions on this

His worth will never be better than now. Move him. Keep Read. Get young.

[toughfighter83]

I have not really been following anything hockey related for a while now, so I am out of touch. However, with the signing of Vinny and the log jam of forwards, I was wondering if there was any way Hartnell might be moved. I kind of like the idea of Read staying and maybe playing on a line with Giroux and Voracek. hartnell had a good year two seasons ago, but I think that was more an anomoly then a constant. Read is younger and in my opinion, more skilled. Hartnell is...well, Hartnell.

Anyway, I am interested in hearing opinions on this

you are right on all points, chicago won the cup because of their speed which the flyers dont have, hartnell is a player that just cant skate, i would keep gagne and read over him, they have speed, get rid of hartnell and package him for a good defensive speedy player.

[CoachX]

I guess the issue is "how". He cannot be moved unless he agrees. Is there a team he would go to that could offer a value of some sort? Would it be in the Flyers best interest to get anything for him, just to open his spot?

His toughness isn't that tough. His offense could probably be replaced by Read. The only value is skating offers is Youtube videos, comedy relief and drinking games. I guess he is a good guy in the room, but hell, so was Jody Shelley.

[canoli]

not hating on hartnell, except that he got a contract based on the play of jaromir jagr. who...isn't with the team anymore. it's the john leclair syndrome, where a guy is outstanding at letting select players bounce pucks off their stick and into the net, and once that select player goes, so does every bit of the first guy's production.

LOL, wow that is harsh. You know that "first guy" still actually has to do the standing there right, taking (and dishing out) all sorts of physical punishment etc.? Not any Joe Blow can do it. It takes some skill even to tap pucks in...not to mention having the brains, balls and muscle to not only be in the right place / right time - but to create it when the seam doesn't magically appear on its own. ....harsh too harsh on The Hartnell...

[aziz]

@canoli

Just saying, just as leclair was meh until Lindros and meh after him, with amazing in between....hartnell was meh before jag and has become meh since he left. With amazing in between. I don't mean total disrespect for either guy, it does take something to get that done, but neither appears to have the ability to get it done with just anyone feeding them.

The real point is that hartnell got a long contract based on that one season, a season whose output is very not likely to be replicated.

[canoli]

The real point is that hartnell got a long contract based on that one season, a season whose output is very not likely to be replicated.

no argument there..."not likely" is the right way to say it. It's not out of the question if the team is clicking, the PP clicks etc. maybe he finds 30 again. Assuming the top line stays as is I guess a lot will depend on what Voracek does. This past year he found his scoring touch. Does he now forgo play making entirely or does he find a balance? Does he become more of a Crater or more of a Sedin (either one)? His tendency until last year was always to pass the puck, we'll see whether he hones those play-making skills or if they're used less often in favor of goal-production.

[edit: maybe that's Giroux's big task now too, establishing a balance between dishing off and attacking with shots. I'm not sure his shot is as respected as it could be. If he finds that balance his threat-level goes up even higher than it is now.]

Edited July 7, 2013 by canoli

[TimKerrFan12]

I guess I am a big idiot, because I love Hartnell and what he brings to the team. If it is that easy to score garbage goals, then why doesn't every team have a player to do that. They use to say the same about Tim Kerr and his "garbage" goals, but he managed to get lucky and put in 50 a Season.

[toughfighter83]

I guess I am a big idiot, because I love Hartnell and what he brings to the team. If it is that easy to score garbage goals, then why doesn't every team have a player to do that. They use to say the same about Tim Kerr and his "garbage" goals, but he managed to get lucky and put in 50 a Season.

because great teams like chicago, boston, LA have speed and skill players that wins cups, they dont have players that rely on garage goals, that's not how you win because great defense teams can knock garbage players like hartnell off your skates.

[aziz]

<br />If it is that easy to score garbage goals, then why doesn't every team have a player to do that.<br />

it is only that easy when there is a guy who specializes in putting pucks in off someone's stick. that's the thing. I mean, hartnell

44 points

49 points

heycheckitouthere'sjagr 67 points

28 points (projected)

something is going on there, you know? same with leclair:

44 points

43 points

w00tnowonlindros'sline 108 points (projected)

97 points

97 points

87 points

90 points

77 points

whoopsnomorelindros:( 61 points (projected)

51 points

65 points (projected)

55 points

I know the projections are annoying, but point totals make the point more starkly than points per game. suffice to say, the timing of the offensive explosion is uncanny. in both hartnell's and leclair's cases.

[jammer2]

@aziz I think only a portion of Hart's contract is point related. He does a lot of the intangible things that don't show up on the scoresheet. He's paid to take a beating in front of the net, smash opposing players frequently, sustain the cycle, in general, make the Flyers harder to play against. He's quite efficient at those things also. Not to mention he can hit hard enough that he could potentially knock out an opposing d-man during a long playoff series.

Offensively, he's not as bad as the injury riddled single digit effort this past year and he's not as good as the 36 goal season either. I think he falls somewhere closer to 25-28. If he only potted 20 goals I'd still think he was earning his paycheque (but really, that would be cut off point for respectable totals) If he did that every year, and threw in the intangibles with consistancy...I'd feel he is earning that big raise. As time goes by and the cap goes up, I believe in 3-4 years this contract will be looking like a lot more of a bargain than it does now.

I think he's respected enough among his piers that he can be an outstanding veteran presence. Seems like the type to stand up and be vocal, which is usually a good thing. It shows the kids how they should be conducting themselves (glove throwing aside....ha ha) and his passion for the game is certainly something that can rub off on the kids also. These are all part of the Scotty package they purchased, and the team is better because of it. You can count on one hand the players who score 30+ and fight 15 times in this league. That's a pretty special skill set. Another factor, his presence on G's line insures that G does not have to fight or we have to worry he breaks a knuckle in a meaningless fight. Ditto for Vorachek. He makes a lot of sense on that line, although the thought of adding a speed demon with hands as the 3rd member of that line is a tempting thought.

[TimKerrFan12]

@aziz Well I guess I love the illusion that Hartnell offers something to the team. Well the solution is...play him with good linemates and he will produce....is that so bad?

Edited July 7, 2013 by TimKerrFan12

[radoran]

not hating on hartnell, except that he got a contract based on the play of jaromir jagr. who...isn't with the team anymore. it's the john leclair syndrome, where a guy is outstanding at letting select players bounce pucks off their stick and into the net, and once that select player goes, so does every bit of the first guy's production.

You had to know you were going to be corrected on the Actual History as opposed to Accepted Conventional Wisdom, right?

95-96 Lindros played 73 games with 68 assists; JLC had 51 goals in 82 games

96-97 Lindros 52 games, 47 assists; JLC 50 goals, 82 games

97-98 Lindros 63 games, 41 assists; JLC 51 goals, 82 games

98-99 Lindros 71 games, 53 assists; JLC 43 goals, 76 games

99-00 Lindros 55 games, 32 assists; JLC 40 goals, 82 games

At that point he was 30, had made his living in front of the net and was suffering from the effects of multiple injuries - after missing six games in five seasons.

His horrible pre-lockout contract was a classic "pay for past production" and exemplary of how the Flyers always seem to do things, but this myth that JLC was somehow a guy who just had people "bounce pucks off his stick" is ridiculous. He was a consistent 40+ goal scorer for five years, averaging 81 games a season while Lindros averaged 20 less than that.

Thereafter, LeClair (usually not in a first line scoring role) never had less than 20 goals in a full season and had 18 goals in 35 games in 02-03 when Lindros was playing for the New York Rangers. Not bad for a guy who lost "every bit" of his production.

I could also mention the two overtime goals to help the Habs win the last Canadian (and Canadien) Cup in 1993 while Lindros was watching the playoffs from home, but that just seems like piling on at this point...

[toughfighter83]

@aziz Well I guess I love the illusion that Hartnell offers something to the team. Well the solution is...play him with good linemates and he will produce....is that so bad?

no but as much i liked briere that's no denying the fact he has regressed and hartnell is not the same player that he was once was, he only had good one year because of jagr although in the playoffs he hasnt much of a difference maker. Simmonds is a better player than hartnell, he's younger and a better skater. hartnell is not a good skater that's why he's struggling, you have to face the fact he's not the same player.

[aziz]

You had to know you were going to be corrected on the Actual History as opposed to Accepted Conventional Wisdom, right?

not sure what point you are trying to make here. notice the goal totals compared to Lindros's assist totals. I wish we still had access to game logs from back then to really make the point. the only one I can find is for 99-00. put his game log next Lindros's and you'll notice an uncanny pattern where leclair's goals came in bunches, and coincidentally in the same games that Lindros's assists were in bunches. odd.

this myth that JLC was somehow a guy who just had people "bounce pucks off his stick" is ridiculous.

no. it isn't.

He was a consistent 40+ goal scorer for five years, averaging 81 games a season while Lindros averaged 20 less than that.

and, weirdly, leclair scored the huge bulk of his goals in 20 games less than 81. again, odd.

Thereafter, LeClair (usually not in a first line scoring role) never had less than 20 goals in a full season and had 18 goals in 35 games in 02-03 when Lindros was playing for the New York Rangers. Not bad for a guy who lost "every bit" of his production.

his point totals doubled when he got to philly and Lindros's line, tapered off as Lindros played less and less, and finally dropped almost by half when Lindros finally left. leclair's point totals ebbed and flowed with Lindros's impact, going up and down in direct correlation to Lindros's availability, with the single exception of 97-98. "lost every bit" was hyperbole, i'll admit, but the guy was a 20g/50pt player sans Lindros. and hartnell, the point of this thread, is a 20g/40pt player without jagr.

I could also mention the two overtime goals to help the Habs win the last Canadian (and Canadien) Cup in 1993 while Lindros was watching the playoffs from home, but that just seems like piling on at this point...

yes, it is piling on to mention 2 specific goals when discussing a player's career in general. good thing we aren't talking about dave bolland, because mentioning his OT goal and assist last spring would go a long way towards establishing his elite status.

this is where I do the ninja, right?

[radoran]

this is where I do the ninja, right?

Sure, if you like.

But you restated your position from "every little bit of a guy's production" vanishing to "not an elite player".

"Every little bit" of LeClair's offense did not "vanish" without Lindros and he played - and was productive - for extensive periods of time without Lindros.

If you want to keep moving the goalposts, you can be eventually right about just about anything.

[aziz]

@radoran

And you can always respond by focusing on the already confessed hyperbole and ignoring the central thesis entirely, if you like.

The point to this thread is hartnell. My point was that hartnell got credit for production he was incapable of delivering on his own, and unless he is deployed with a talent similar to jagr, he will never deliver again. He's a 40 point skater, under normal circumstances, not the 70 point skater he is credited as being under his current contract. Similarly, john leclair is historically credited for production he was incapable of delivering on his own, a 100 point scorer with lindros, 50 without.

The situations are entirely analogous, and nothing you have said contradicts that. All you have said focuses on one particular bit of poetic license that I acknowledged as such two posts ago. The goal posts haven't moved, you just keep tilting at windmill vanes. They go round and round; that's what they're supposed to do.

Edited July 7, 2013 by aziz

[canoli]

I'm a betting man so I say no way Rad lets it go at that.

(tried for the Ninja face but couldn't secure the patent waiver in time)

[radoran]

@radoran

And you can always respond by focusing on the already confessed hyperbole and ignoring the central thesis entirely, if you like.

The point to this thread is hartnell. My point was that hartnell got credit for production he was incapable of delivering on his own, and unless he is deployed with a talent similar to jagr, he will never deliver again. He's a 40 point skater, under normal circumstances, not the 70 point skater he is credited as being under his current contract. Similarly, john leclair is historically credited for production he was incapable of delivering on his own, a 100 point scorer with lindros, 50 without.

The situations are entirely analogous, and nothing you have said contradicts that. All you have said focuses on one particular bit of poetic license that I acknowledged as such two posts ago. The goal posts haven't moved, you just keep tilting at windmill vanes. They go round and round; that's what they're supposed to do.

Well, yes, it does, actually. Because the question - if you want to (again) shift the conversation - about Hartnell is whether or not he will be on the top line - as was the question with JLC at 30 after a decade in the trenches. As noted, even then he had 18 goals in 35 games before his first major injury in eight years. Hartnell, I agree, will not do that. He is, at best, a 25-30 goal scorer who had a career year and parlayed that into a big contract (again, different from LeClair where, in fact, they were paying for his past performance - scoring the most goals in the NHL over a period of seasons - on what everyone in hockey agreed was the worst contract in organized sport).

Which is quite different from scoring 37 goals. Once.

I'm a betting man so I say no way Rad lets it go at that.

(tried for the Ninja face but couldn't secure the patent waiver in time)

Because anyone who can read can see what @aziz did here.

Flip hyperbole doesn't suit anyone well, least of all the poster resorting to it. One winds up saying that Nodl (currently unemployed) will outscore Jagr (played in the last Cup Final), for example.

I like aziz. I respect the posts and enjoy the repartee.

But there are precious Flyer legends that are completely erroneous yet often repeated.

Eric Lindros was a great player. John LeClair was a very good player - better than Hartnell eleven times out of ten - unquestionably made better playing with high quality talent.

But you don't score 50 goals in three consecutive seasons and 40 in two after that by letting other guys "bounce the puck off your stick."

You might score 37. Once.