Hartnell forced out by Hexy?

[radoran]

How much did those trades cost us in signing other free agents?

Like Hartnell for example? Or VLC?

 

Well, Hartnell I have cited as one of the centerpieces of the Holmgren era. By all accounts it cost $4.75M for six years. There were more than a few people who thought that length was a bad idea at the time, while under current dollars "and his importance to the franchise" perhaps on the high side.

 

VLC likewise got a longer length and reportedly top dollar as well to sign with the Flyers.

 

They've now traded away Hartnell one year into his deal and there is an absolute clamour to do the same with VLC.

 

I'd say the "price" was significant. You?

[radoran]

I don't disagree with a word of that. I'm really not concerned with the "but free agents won't come here" thing.

Until I hear some free agent's quote citing exactly that I won't spend a second worrying about it.

 

Keep it up and we might fool people into believing we're different people

 

Seriously, though how often would you ever see an agent say something like that? 

 

You've thought that Homer was overpaying and with extra length on a number of deals - why do you think that was? Could it be at least in part because of that?

 

And they're down to three members of the 2010 Finals team...

[OccamsRazor]

I don't disagree with a word of that. I'm really not concerned with the "but free agents won't come here" thing.

Until I hear some free agent's quote citing exactly that I won't spend a second worrying about it.

 

 

Me either you come here you best be in good shape and be prepare to work....period i don't care who you are this boat has no room for passengers, if you ain't rowing you are getting thrown overboard....no one rides for free....those days are over. If that is to much ask stay away....we want Cup! You're either part of the solution or part of the problem

Edited June 24, 2014 by OccamsRazor

[aziz]

Keep it up and we might fool people into believing we're different people

Seriously, though how often would you ever see an agent say something like that?

You've thought that Homer was overpaying and with extra length on a number of deals - why do you think that was? Could it be at least in part because of that?

And they're down to three members of the 2010 Finals team...

The again, the players for their deals. The primary motivation for an agent is most money, right? Hartnell is bummed he was traded, because he'd been here a long time and was tossed aside. vlc won't feel the same, what does he care? He gets paid, his agent got paid.

[canoli]

Yahoo seems to be down. 

 

Understandably, Hartnell was upset. The bait and switch is becoming the Flyers' MO, apparently.

 

But, really, this quote I think sums it up best:

 

 

Basically, Hextall inherited a certain team and the contracts that come with it. Hartnell, in a sense, is a victim of his contract. I'm sure there's no way he's traded if he has 3 years or less. 

 

so what is the "bait and switch" this time? I've been out of the loop. The one story I read had the Hartnell quote and the rest about how it's Hextall's team now. I don't see anything out of the ordinary on either side - Hartnell's bummed but he'll get over it / the Flyers saved a few bucks. A whopping 200 grand (something like that) for the next 2 years and then we're free of that $4.whatevermillion. Except we have Umburger instead of Hartnell in the meantime, which is not a very exciting prospect if you ask me.

 

It's good to unload Hartnell's contract -for sure- but he was a big part of the Flyers forecheck - when it was going - and he worked the crease, something nobody else did much of 5 on 5. Simmonds worked okay down low on the PP but even strength he wasn't there very often. Hartnell spent all his O time between the dot and the crease; maybe that can be Brayden's new job. Anyway I hope we don't miss Hartnell too much and I hope Hextall makes the Flyers at least imitate a puck possession team. Meanwhile I'd be rather watching Hartnell over Umberger any day of the week - even if he's falling down - but I'll get over it.

[brelic]

so what is the "bait and switch" this time?

 

I was just having some fun. The bait and switch would be signing a player to a long-term contract with NMCs, and then trading them before or within the first year of that new contract. Richards, Carter, JVR, Hartnell, Bryz (bought out, but same idea), and probably VLC.

[OccamsRazor]

Richards, Carter, JVR, Hartnell

 

Al traded on June 23rd what is with that are the Flyers part of the Illuminati??? Spoooooooooooooooooooooooooooky!!!!!!!!!!!! :blink:

[Vanflyer]

me neither...how angry can he be when he's been hooking up with this babe?

 

And will have nubile coeds galore at his beck and call. 

[brelic]

Al traded on June 23rd what is with that are the Flyers part of the Illuminati??? Spoooooooooooooooooooooooooooky!!!!!!!!!!!! :blink:

 

I know, I read that the other day. Very strange indeed!!

[radoran]

Hartnell is bummed he was traded, because he'd been here a long time and was tossed aside. vlc won't feel the same, what does he care? He gets paid, his agent got paid.

 

Again, it's not how the players being traded feel, it's the perception of future players.

 

And, again, it's quite possible that the "new regime" is able to parlay that into a "new restructuring" and eliminate the perception. And it's possible that the Flyers can throw longer term and more money at players to overcome it - which is what I was asking rux about with:

 

You've thought that Homer was overpaying and with extra length on a number of deals - why do you think that was? Could it be at least in part because of that?

 

But, as others have pointed out, if they, say, deal BSchenn immediately after signing him, that might send the wrong impression.

 

I really don't care how players traded away feel, as long as they don't affect future players' decision at all on whether to sign here or take a roughly similar offer.

 

Certainly saying to them "but we'll give you a NT/NMC" of some kind doesn't have quite the same cache it did before Crater, Richards, Bryzgalov, Briere, Hartnell and, perhaps, VLC and Coburn. When long time players who have signed to stay with the team and been given an NMC for it are "tossed aside" one year into a six year deal, people notice.

[brelic]

Crater, Richards, Bryzgalov, Briere, Hartnell and, perhaps, VLC and Coburn.

 

We can add Gagne to that, and also JVR (not eligible for an NMC but was traded before his new 6-year contract even kicked in).

[aziz]

When long time players who have signed to stay with the team and been given an NMC for it are "tossed aside" one year into a six year deal, people notice.

 

right, but that is specific to long time players, guys who have a connection to the team and specifically want to be a flyer.  i think most UFAs are less concerned with loyalty and more concerned with contract value and term.  the NMC/NTC clauses aren't there to keep a player from moving, they are there to ensure the player has a say in where they move.  

 

potential signees are, i think, less concerned that the flyers might trade them a year into a long term extension, and more concerned with how they are going to get paid.  i can't imagine VLC gives much of a crap about the flyers, he signed the best deal available, and is probably willing to play under that deal in any of several places.

[brelic]

right, but that is specific to long time players, guys who have a connection to the team and specifically want to be a flyer.  i think most UFAs are less concerned with loyalty and more concerned with contract value and term.  the NMC/NTC clauses aren't there to keep a player from moving, they are there to ensure the player has a say in where they move.  

 

potential signees are, i think, less concerned that the flyers might trade them a year into a long term extension, and more concerned with how they are going to get paid.  i can't imagine VLC gives much of a crap about the flyers, he signed the best deal available, and is probably willing to play under that deal in any of several places.

 

Great perspective, aziz.

[radoran]

potential signees are, i think, less concerned that the flyers might trade them a year into a long term extension, and more concerned with how they are going to get paid.  i can't imagine VLC gives much of a crap about the flyers, he signed the best deal available, and is probably willing to play under that deal in any of several places.

 

I agree it is a matter of degree.

 

But that's not top say that it has absolutely no influence whatsoever now, is it?

 

The point is when a team looks at you and says "we want you to come here to be an integral part of your future" - do players believe them?

 

MacDonald certainly did - for $5M over 6 years. For him, I'd say it was a true matter of money. Top dollar and longest term - player wins.

 

VLC certainly did - for $4.5M over 5 yaers. For him, it could surely have been a matter of money. Top dollar and longest term - player wins.

 

You want players who want to come here because they know the Flyers are stupid rich and handle their money like a drunken college kid in Vegas or ones that want to come here to win a Stanley Cup?

 

Again, a matter of degree.

[brelic]

The point is when a team looks at you and says "we want you to come here to be an integral part of your future" - do players believe them?

 

Is that, in fact, what the Flyers would say to a guy like MacDonald?

 

Or something as simple as "We want you on the Flyers next year and we're prepared to give you a 6-year contract."

 

It's a long-term signing, but no need to say he's an integral part of the future.

[aziz]

Again, a matter of degree.

 

agreed, and i'm sure it factors in a bit.  i think the money and short term prospect for success weigh in more than long term loyalty, but it is there.  and i'm sure there are some players out there for whom loyalty is paramount.  i just think they're rare.  a big enough paycheck is enough for most.  i don't think the flyers are going to have a noticeably more difficult time signing FAs, so long as they continue to be willing to sign the right contract.

[radoran]

Is that, in fact, what the Flyers would say to a guy like MacDonald?

 

Or something as simple as "We want you on the Flyers next year and we're prepared to give you a 6-year contract."

 

It's a long-term signing, but no need to say he's an integral part of the future.

 

Nor did they give him a NMC or NTC of any sort.

[radoran]

 i don't think the flyers are going to have a noticeably more difficult time signing FAs, so long as they continue to be willing to sign the right contract.

 

Neither do I - but the "right contract" has shown in many cases to be simply outright outbidding other teams, and not even being considered in others.

 

That's not bargaining from a position of strength.

 

I'm hopeful that this is a new start for the team - a "new perspective" if you will. 

[Vanflyer]

i don't think the flyers are going to have a noticeably more difficult time signing FAs, so long as they continue to be willing to sign the right contract.

 

Factor in also, that aside of the whole "loyalty contract" thing, the Flyers as an organization treat / care for their players very well while they are playing for the Flyers (or they want to because its an investment), but to a man that has played say more than two seasons in Philly, regardless of the nature of the divorce, they always say what a class organization the Flyers are. 

 

So, to your point, a player cares first about compensation and could give a rats ass about commitment / loyalty, because the money is already guaranteed. Add into that that they know while playing here, they are going to be treated very well (amenities, travel, training, facilities, housing etc.) and it becomes a no-brainer. 

 

The outlier to that would be those players that are longer on the tooth (take a Gaborik for example) that have already journeyed around the league and had several stops AND have a family with kids and say: ok, this is it, out LAST stop and choose a team- not only for the team, but also the community, schools, region, climate (all the quality of life stuff) and want to take root. Then they get traded. But that is the nature of being a pro. 

[radoran]

I absolutely concur that as long as the Flyers continue to overpay and outbid, they will not have problems.

And that's the point.