Hextall year-end presser - 2pm EST

[radoran]

He said his wishlist is a top 6 forward

 

From the Hartnell trade: http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/flyers/Flyers_trade_Scott_Hartnell_for_RJ_Umberger_and_fourth-round_draft_pick.html

 

Hextall said the Flyers are comfortable playing Umberger on the top line or the checking unit - or any line in between.

"He can play up or down the lineup, and that's one of the things that attracted us to him," said Hextall, who also was attracted to Umberger because of his penalty-killing ability.

[/.quote]

 

I don't believe that Umburglar got more than a handful of minutes on "the top line"

 

More? OK: http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2015/2/13/8019701/philadelphia-flyers-stats-penalty-killing-improvement-grossmann-is-still-bad

 

Which two players do you think have been the worst on the team at shorthanded shot prevention? Hint: it's not a trick question.

If you guessed R.J. Umberger and Nicklas Grossmann, you're right! Funny how poor even strength play carries over into all facets of the game.

...

With players like Del Zotto and VandeVelde seeing their roles increase, there had to be a corresponding decrease in the roles of more established members of the penalty kill. In January, it was Umberger and Grossmann who took the biggest hit.

Umberger's decrease in PK time seems tied solely to performance. Each month, he's been used less and less, finally bottoming out in January, when he was used during only 12% of the Flyers' shorthanded minutes. Grossmann, on the other hand, lost his minutes entirely due to the injury he suffered on January 8 against Washington.

 

The Umburglar trade has been an abject disaster.

 

We can only hope it improves in the next two seasons - if they don't buy him out this June.

[radoran]

Harts handcuffs the team for five years

 

If they could trade him for a useless bag of injured parts in Y1, why couldn't they trade him for a useless bag of injured parts in Y3 or 4 and keep the 27 goals in the top line LW slot?

 

There was no "need" to make the deal when they did.

 

None.

[Mad Dog]

@ brelic...   there were always questions surrounding Jake's commitment to fitness as well.  I dont think that played a part in the trade at all.   If Hextall decided to trade a true leader in the locker room who happens to be a true first line winger that produces every year for a guy that was committed to fitness then we are all screwed.   If this is the case Hextall is indeed another puppet...

 

Hartnell was the backbone (and Kimmo) of that locker room and all the while was a pretty damn good player for the Flyers (now a pretty damn good player w/ the Jackets).   If that was the reason for brining Umberger back to Philly I think this organization is in some pretty bad hands.  Sure, bring RJ back and let him play at a sub-par AHL level for a few years.  Meanwhile, Hartnell is putting up numbers as usual...   all the while we are now again in need of leadership and a first line winger. Go figure...

Not to mention that Hartnell was the only agitator with skills on the team that severely lacked personality.  He knew how to get under the skilled players' skin and get them off their game, while still finding a way to contribute offensively.  He was Esa Tikkanen or Pat Verbeek, if you will.  Every team needs that.  Simmonds does that, but I have a feeling that when he does, he loses focus on the actual game.  The good hting about Hartnell was that he did get under players' skin and *still* scored goals.  That's a rare trait.

 

Other than shedding the last 2 years off Hartnell's contract, this trade set the team back.  And like Rad said, if the whole purpose of that trade was to accomplish just that (losing 2 years of a bad contract), they could've found a trading partner who could give them the same (or a similar contract) back without compromising the quality of a player.  That was a bad trade.

[brelic]

@radoran

 

The guy just went out and put up 27 goals and 58 points in this league. How many players do that that aren't "fit"?

 

 

Forget those numbers - they didn't exist at the time of the trade. There was a perception that Hartnell wasn't fit, and that Umberger was more committed to that aspect of hockey, and was quicker. We know how that turned out! 

 

Moreover, why did the team extend a guy who wasn't "fit" (let's recall that Chief has been an assistant coach for all(?) of Hartnell's time here - where did Hartnell pick up these "bad habits" that weren't noticed until after they signed him to a six year extension)?

 

 

I dunno. Same reason they extended MacDonald's $525k salary into a $30M 6-year contract after 19 games? Short-sightedness? 

 

It's reflection of the state of the team that we obviously can't believe anything they're saying and that there must be something more to it.

 

Except that they have made these stupid moves so often.

 

For example, trading away two top line LWs and then turning around looking amazed saying "gosh, why don't we have a top line LW?"

 

It's a mystery.

 

Or something. 

 

 

More evidence that it wasn't a goals/points based trade, obviously. They mention versatility a few times. Hartnell was not versatile. Umberger turned out to be less than useless, so that's not very helpful. 

 

It's not a great trade after year 1, no doubt. I liked Hartnell the person, and sometimes as a hockey player, but mostly not. He was a frustrating player to watch, and his contract extension was just a representation of the glaring ineptitude of this organization's management.

 

Or maybe there was something else that we just don't know about. 

[radoran]

Forget those numbers - they didn't exist at the time of the trade.

 

Hartnell had just come off a 20/52 season. Those numbers did exist at the time of the trade. +11, FWIW.

 

So did these: 74 games, 18 goals, 34 points. -3. Healthy scratch for Columbus.

 

That's RJ Umburglar.

 

 

 

I dunno. Same reason they extended MacDonald's $525k salary into a $30M 6-year contract after 19 games? Short-sightedness?

 

Well, gosh, that makes it all better then

 

 

 

They mention versatility a few times. Hartnell was not versatile. Umberger turned out to be less than useless, so that's not very helpful.

 

Yeah, replacing an effective first line LW with an injured player (and they knew he was injured and "credit" him for "playing through it" despite being ineffective and a drag on the entire team) helps the "versatility".

 

What "versatility" do you need from your 20/50 top line LW?

 

 

 

Or maybe there was something else that we just don't know about.

 

What? He slept with Brind'Amour's wife?

 

I refuse to continually excuse away this organization's missteps as "well, there's probably a reason for it."

 

The organization already had practically zero credibility and Hextall is spending his goodwill capital like a drunken sailor in a red light district.

 

Remember - they knew Umburglar was injured when they traded for him until they didn't know he was injured when they traded for him.

 

And then they ran him out there as one of the least effective players all season and refused to scratch him until he was shut down for the season (despite "fitness" being something they were "concerned" about with Hartnell).

 

Or something.

 

There "must be something else" solely because they made absolutely no sense in what they actually say.

 

Unless they were just abjectly incompetent in every aspect of this deal from the jump.

 

Sadly, I can get on board with that faster than the "must be something else" bandwagon...

[brelic]

If they could trade him for a useless bag of injured parts in Y1, why couldn't they trade him for a useless bag of injured parts in Y3 or 4 and keep the 27 goals in the top line LW slot?

 

There was no "need" to make the deal when they did.

 

None.

 

I think this may be where we're coming at the trade from different perspectives.

 

The way I view it, it was never about trading Hartnell's goals/points for Umberger's. And there's no way they anticipated Umberger to be this bad.

 

Hextall may have jumped on the deal because in his mind, it was a way out of a contract that handcuffed him.

 

It was also his first deal, so you know, rookie mistake and all There is no undo button, unfortunately, so he'll learn from this.

[radoran]

The way I view it, it was never about trading Hartnell's goals/points for Umberger's.

 

It was about "versatility" - trading for a guy they knew was injured and would need surgery.

 

It was about "penalty kill" - trading for a player who was one of the worst guys on the PK on the team.

 

It was about "speed" - trading for a guy with "two cam lesions on his right hip."

 

It was about "getting cap relief in 2017" - that might be the only thing that actually goes right about this "deal."

 

And there's no way they anticipated Umberger to be this bad.

 

Lots of folks - like, for example, the Columbus Blue Jackets - certainly did.

 

I honestly can't find one analysis from the time of the trade that thought it was a positive for the Flyers. Well, OK, one not written by paid PR staff of the Philadelphia Flyers or that doesn't look at "positives" three seasons later..

 

Can you?

 

There is no undo button, unfortunately, so he'll hopefully learn from this.

 

Fixed it for you

[murraycraven]

he way I view it, it was never about trading Hartnell's goals/points for Umberger's. And there's no way they anticipated Umberger to be this bad.

 

So this makes it a good trade then??!??  

 

Brel, I posted on this board a 100 times that Umberger was DONE in Columbus.  I watched him play on numerous occasions in Columbus and he was shot.   Injury or not he is not a good player anymore.   If you are going to make a trade you expect some kind of tangible asset back - what did we get back aside from a shorter contract?   Both Ron and Snider said they can build for the future while maintaining a competitive team - how did this trade make them more competitive?  

 

This was loss of assets and a complete and utter sham of trade for the Flyers.  We got nothing in return except a few years at the end of the deal.  Meanwhile RJ can barely skate anymore and is taking up the second highest cap hit on the Team.   This was Hextall's doing and he should not get a free pass whatsoever.

 

For Christ sake - even Pens fans know we got fleeced here (Polaris - please help )

 

I admire your faith... personally, I will withhold judgement until Hextall actually starts making moves.  This move along w/ extending Rinaldo (for no given reason) are both black marks on his record to me.   

[Bertmega]

@brelic

 

I can get on board with all that you are saying. I like Hextal, but I also like Holmgren until he went batty with the contracts. I will reserve any further judgement until August...

[brelic]

So this makes it a good trade then??!??  

 

Absolutely not. But, I would be surprised if, privately, Hextall wasn't aware that he was getting an inferior player. For all of Hartnell's flaws, he outproduces Umberger. Period. Hartnell's been up and down over the years, but Umberger was in a serious 4-year decline. So I can't believe that Hextall honestly thought they were getting a better hockey player. Maybe he alluded to such things, but that's window dressing.

 

And maybe now, after only one year, Hextall would privately say it was a mistake, he was hasty, and he would not make that trade again - despite what he says publicly. He can't very well come out and throw a player under contract for two more years under the bus.

[brelic]

It was about "versatility" - trading for a guy they knew was injured and would need surgery.
 
It was about "penalty kill" - trading for a player who was one of the worst guys on the PK on the team.
 
It was about "speed" - trading for a guy with "two cam lesions on his right hip."
 
It was about "getting cap relief in 2017" - that might be the only thing that actually goes right about this "deal."

 

So was it really about all those things that just didn't pan out? Or was it never about those things - except for contract relief - and just window dressing?

 

It doesn't make it a good deal in either case.

[brelic]

I honestly can't find one analysis from the time of the trade that thought it was a positive for the Flyers. Well, OK, one not written by paid PR staff of the Philadelphia Flyers or that doesn't look at "positives" three seasons later..
 
Can you?

 

No.

 

But I honestly can't find one analysis ahead of the MacDonald trade - or the subsequent signing - that thought it was a smart move either  

 

The fact that Hartnell was such a popular teammate and loved in the community, and part of the leadership group made it even more of a headscratcher.

[radoran]

But I honestly can't find one analysis ahead of the MacDonald trade - or the subsequent signing - that thought it was a smart move either

 

Check some of the threads around here at the time

 

 

 

(I'm not trying to jump all over you, I'm just frustrated with the state of the franchise)

[brelic]

Check some of the threads around here at the time

 

 

 

(I'm not trying to jump all over you, I'm just frustrated with the state of the franchise)

 

Haha, not at all. We're all very civil. I'm asking questions in earnest, and there is no assumption of judgment behind my comments or questions.

 

I'm equally frustrated, but hopeful. 

 

So, if you look at any given stretch of moves from Homer, what would be the winning %, or the ratio of good to bad moves?

 

And what about Hextall? Much smaller sample size. So far, I would say his only miscue is the Hartnell/Umberger swap (which might change in 2 years time). The defensive signings, and trades have been excellent. Schultz and MDZ have provided much more value than *any* of Homer's scrap heap signings.

 

The Timo and Coburn trades were also better than the majority of Homer's deadline trades.

 

I like the Schultz resigning. Didn't he resign PEB too? I like that one. Ryan White was a great acquisition. 

 

Those are the things that have me hopeful beyond anything Homer ever did. I see forward-looking moves, not reactive or short-sighted ones. Even as bad as the Hartnell/Umberger trade looks now, it was a 'forward-looking' move that thus far has been a failure. 

[radoran]

So, if you look at any given stretch of moves from Homer, what would be the winning %, or the ratio of good to bad moves?

 

I honestly thought Homer started wonderfully. The Timonen/Hartnell/Briere contracts were all fairly masterful examples of what his initial philosophy was. They were designed to be a slight overpayment up front and a boon to the team over the long term. As I've said many time, the Briere buyout was inevitable (quite frankly, IMO they shouldn't have used a "compliance" on him, given the numbers involved) but he turned out to be BY FAR the best of the "Big Three ZOMG Absolutely Must Have Number One Centers" that season (Briere/Drury/Gomez).

 

The Pronger deal - the trade - was an understandable effort. I had an (in)famous IRL disucssion with the dear, departed @davies at the time and asserted that if they didn't win the Cup with Pronger, it wasn't worth it. I still stand by that, to an extent. The subsequent re-signing and contract were, for me, the harbinger of things to come.

 

He "got the best assets" from the Crater/Richards deals, but those assets haven't panned out quite as expected.

 

Simmonds and Voracek were fabulous RFA "bridge" deals.

 

Then you get into Bryzgalov (a solid goalie to target in that situation, a terrible, horrible contract) and the Hartnell extension (six years!?!?) and the VLC signing (which was ridiculous at the time with an outcome that was beyond predictable) and the MacDonald deal. Failing to see that Laviolette's time had expired. The JVR deal..

 

I can see "both sides" of the Weber offer but still question the wisdom there. Seemed very knee-jerk following the Pronger Problem and was such an obvious attempt at circumvention the very next CBA stopped those shenanigans the next summer.

 

IMO, the wheels came off as the impatience grew. They blew up a 2010 Cup Finalist (a lucky Finalist, but a Finalist nonetheless) and simply haven't gotten back to that level. Yes, the Pronger injury was a factor (whocouldanode that hulking, physical players might get injured after age 35? inconceivable!).

 

But it is really the impatience and the hubris that in the end define the Holmgren Era for me. The cherry on that particular sundae was hiring "one of the brightest hockey minds (he) knew" as coach.

[radoran]

And what about Hextall? Much smaller sample size. So far, I would say his only miscue is the Hartnell/Umberger swap (which might change in 2 years time). The defensive signings, and trades have been excellent. Schultz and MDZ have provided much more value than *any* of Homer's scrap heap signings.

The Timo and Coburn trades were also better than the majority of Homer's deadline trades.

I like the Schultz resigning. Didn't he resign PEB too? I like that one. Ryan White was a great acquisition.

Those are the things that have me hopeful beyond anything Homer ever did. I see forward-looking moves, not reactive or short-sighted ones. Even as bad as the Hartnell/Umberger trade looks now, it was a 'forward-looking' move that thus far has been a failure.

 

I like what Hextall has done, but there are red flags.

 

Schultz/MDZ/Coliacovo - all great additions. The Bellemare signing and extension - fine. He's a nice bottom six guy.

 

The Rinaldo extension? Um...

 

And I can get on board with "forward thinking" until we're making deals that will benefit the team three seasons later. That's an awful long time to reap a reward from a team that is supposedly "a playoff team"* that is "competing for the Stanley Cup" next season.

 

Hextall hasn't had much chance to undo the "problems" of the Holmgren Era, because he was saddled with a team for two more years based upon the contracts he had.

 

Coburn was a step in the right direction. The return for a spent Timonen was fabulous.

 

But I don't think we'll know what "Hextall's team" looks like for at least another season.

 

 

 

* No. Doubt.™

[Poulin20]

I honestly thought Homer started wonderfully. The Timonen/Hartnell/Briere contracts were all fairly masterful examples of what his initial philosophy was. They were designed to be a slight overpayment up front and a boon to the team over the long term. As I've said many time, the Briere buyout was inevitable (quite frankly, IMO they shouldn't have used a "compliance" on him, given the numbers involved) but he turned out to be BY FAR the best of the "Big Three ZOMG Absolutely Must Have Number One Centers" that season (Briere/Drury/Gomez).

 

The Pronger deal - the trade - was an understandable effort. I had an (in)famous IRL disucssion with the dear, departed @davies at the time and asserted that if they didn't win the Cup with Pronger, it wasn't worth it. I still stand by that, to an extent. The subsequent re-signing and contract were, for me, the harbinger of things to come.

 

He "got the best assets" from the Crater/Richards deals, but those assets haven't panned out quite as expected.

 

Simmonds and Voracek were fabulous RFA "bridge" deals.

 

Then you get into Bryzgalov (a solid goalie to target in that situation, a terrible, horrible contract) and the Hartnell extension (six years!?!?) and the VLC signing (which was ridiculous at the time with an outcome that was beyond predictable) and the MacDonald deal. Failing to see that Laviolette's time had expired. The JVR deal..

 

I can see "both sides" of the Weber offer but still question the wisdom there. Seemed very knee-jerk following the Pronger Problem and was such an obvious attempt at circumvention the very next CBA stopped those shenanigans the next summer.

 

IMO, the wheels came off as the impatience grew. They blew up a 2010 Cup Finalist (a lucky Finalist, but a Finalist nonetheless) and simply haven't gotten back to that level. Yes, the Pronger injury was a factor (whocouldanode that hulking, physical players might get injured after age 35? inconceivable!).

 

But it is really the impatience and the hubris that in the end define the Holmgren Era for me. The cherry on that particular sundae was hiring "one of the brightest hockey minds (he) knew" as coach.

 

This is a very fair assessment of the Homer saga and matches my recollection.  I recall when he first arrived and was making good moves the term "Holmgenius ^TM" was a popular term used on the old Philly.com board!   We are a long way from those days I am afraid.  The impatience and questionable contracts caught up with him in a big big way as we are living this now.  Heck as as a STH I am literally paying for it now (although I am saving money on playoff tickets FWIW). 

[murraycraven]

from here on out I am just going to say " what Rad said."   Could not agree more...

[brelic]

@radoran

 

I agree with your assessment of Homer. He made some great moves, and he made some of the worst moves I've ever seen by a GM. I never really got the sense from Homer that he had any sort of plan or vision for the Flyers.

 

The Rinaldo extension? Um...

 

The best I can figure is Hextall likes the idea of building from within. Along with Coots and G, they are the only 3 to be drafted and brought along by the Flyers. You can add Read and Raffl to that list, but they were just free agent signings. It jives with Hextall's shock at having only 4 Flyers draftees in the Phantoms lineup when he went to a game with Homer. 

 

Rinaldo is a dime a dozen player, so I can't figure any other reason for why they were so quick to extend him.

[hf101]

Maybe I'm a bit late to this thread, but TP posted the entire Flyers State of the Union Address on Hockeybuzz.

 

A couple of points that I found interesting especally after the Berube Firing.

 

1. It's the same "Just Make the Playoffs - anything can happen"  mentality.  Just now it is without sacrificing picks and youth for the big name veteran player.  -- nothing about building a Championship franchise for the near future anyway.

 

2. Hextall - "I talked to R.J. yesterday, and he’d been hurt for maybe a year and a half. It’s been bothering his training last summer. So he’s going to get in the best shape of his life and come back and be the best he can be."  -- can we really believe this?

 

3.  On creating leaders within the team.  It appears Schultz has stepped up to that role in the Timonen vacancy which is probably a big reason why he was resigned.  Meltzer talked about Mason to be added to the Leadership group as well.

 

4. Del Zotto will be resigned - he is an RFA so there is time.

 

5.  Hextall's wish list -  "I’d like to find an upgrade on defense, whether it be a free agent or whatever. I’d like to find a skilled forward. That’s my wish list. Free agency, trade, [whatever.] We’ll look at that. We’ll see what’s out there and look around at the trade market."

[radoran]

1. It's the same "Just Make the Playoffs - anything can happen" mentality.

 

While technically true, the odds are stacked ever against your favor with this mentality. It bugs me probably the most about the organization. And fanbase, for that matter... No offense™

 

2. Hextall - "I talked to R.J. yesterday, and he’d been hurt for maybe a year and a half. It’s been bothering his training last summer. So he’s going to get in the best shape of his life and come back and be the best he can be." -- can we really believe this?

 

No. #simpleanswerstosimplequestions

 

HOW is he going to come back and be in the best shape of his life? Wasn't that what he was supposed to do this year?!?!?

 

Another painfully stupid move by the organization, by the player and by the smartest hockey mind Homer knows. Umburglar was an anchor around the neck of this team all season and for him to not come forward with it, the team to not recognize it and the coach to continue to play him while scratching others is ridiculous.

 

3. On creating leaders within the team. It appears Schultz has stepped up to that role in the Timonen vacancy which is probably a big reason why he was resigned. Meltzer talked about Mason to be added to the Leadership group as well.

 

Shultz =/ Timonen. Not. At. All. I'm pleased and all, but this is grasping at straws IMO. I think he does bring a (needed) veteran perspective but the guy has played eight playoff games since 2003. He is no Timonen.

 

Thank GOD they got rid of Craig "Mason Has Other Things To Worry About" Berube. That was one of the dumbest things I ever heard the smartest hockey mind Homer knows say.

 

I think the team uses "leadership group" instead of "core" all the time. To the extent that it's another hockey cliche that I'm sick to death of. Stop adding people to the leadership group - start effin' LEADING.

 

4. Del Zotto will be resigned - he is an RFA so there is time.

 

Never really had a doubt.

 

5. Hextall's wish list - "I’d like to find an upgrade on defense, whether it be a free agent or whatever. I’d like to find a skilled forward. That’s my wish list. Free agency, trade, [whatever.] We’ll look at that. We’ll see what’s out there and look around at the trade market."

 

That player doesn't exist in this FA class, as far as I've seen.

 

So the question becomes - what's going the other way?

[murraycraven]

5.  Hextall's wish list -  "I’d like to find an upgrade on defense, whether it be a free agent or whatever. I’d like to find a skilled forward. That’s my wish list. Free agency, trade, [whatever.] We’ll look at that. We’ll see what’s out there and look around at the trade market

 

The problem is we currently have 8 (8!!!) 3/4 and 5/6 type defensmen on this Team.  In order to get an upgrade on defense we need to bring in a true first pairing type player which is not available in this FA class.   In order to get a 1st pairing type player we are going to have to overspend which is a huge concern.   I dont think getting another 3/4 is going to help this Team that much.   Hextall has his hands full but I really hope they look at the future.   Somehow, some way Hextall has to find a way to move some contracts...  

 

How that happens I have no clue.   One can only hope someone wants our castaways...

[Podein25]

The problem is we currently have 8 (8!!!) 3/4 and 5/6 type defensmen on this Team. In order to get an upgrade on defense we need to bring in a true first pairing type player which is not available in this FA class. In order to get a 1st pairing type player we are going to have to overspend which is a huge concern. I dont think getting another 3/4 is going to help this Team that much. Hextall has his hands full but I really hope they look at the future. Somehow, some way Hextall has to find a way to move some contracts...

How that happens I have no clue. One can only hope someone wants our castaways...

Maybe Homer has a problem with math or is dyslexic or something and thought 8 3/4 guys would add up to to 4 1/2 guys?

Nah, he's just an idiot.

[brelic]

The problem is we currently have 8 (8!!!) 3/4 and 5/6 type defensmen on this Team.  In order to get an upgrade on defense we need to bring in a true first pairing type player which is not available in this FA class.   In order to get a 1st pairing type player we are going to have to overspend which is a huge concern.   I dont think getting another 3/4 is going to help this Team that much.   Hextall has his hands full but I really hope they look at the future.   Somehow, some way Hextall has to find a way to move some contracts...  

 

How that happens I have no clue.   One can only hope someone wants our castaways...

 

 

So the bottom line is that we might be able to move a few contracts for spare parts or late round picks, but we're not getting a top pairing defenseman in return. Period. Unless we trade away valuable pieces, like Couturier, Schenn, a 1st rounder, etc. Hextall has repeatedly said he wouldn't do that - for a "29 or 30 year old veteran." So, he might be willing to do that for a top pairing prospect or one in his mid-20s entering his prime.

 

I then ask you - who in their right mind is trading away a player like that?

[OccamsRazor]

So the bottom line is that we might be able to move a few contracts for spare parts or late round picks, but we're not getting a top pairing defenseman in return.

I'll take it. One slow plodding Dman is enough on one blueline. So i want to keep Gudas because he is young and has a burable contract if need be.