Voracek Signed

[Claude Monet]

@brelic

I don't know if I am confident he is poised to improve on the last-year numbers. What gives me a lot of hope is that after he came to Philadelphia, statistically he did show a steady and well-defined improvement:

49 point in 2011,

46 points in 48 games of the 2012 lockout year which projects to 78 points in a full 82-game season,

62 points in 2013, and

81 points in 2014.

So if you throw out the 2013-2014 as an outlier (which was still a VERY good season for him), I think the growth is evident.

Now... to improve on the numbers of the last year would be difficult. But I don't' know if he needs to, which was kind of my point. I don't need a jump from 81 points to 100 points. I want consistent 81-85 point seasons. And I do believe that's absolutely within his reach. In fact, I am not very optimistic he *can* improve on these numbers. Plus, being that Giroux is such a huge factor in Jake's performance, obviously much depends on Giroux's own production and health as well.

Again, for my liking, I would like to see another 80'ish points season before I give him that much cash and sign him to 8 years. But it is what it is.

Another factor is having a consistent LW.

[jammer2]

@Mad Dog  The good part is, there is definate room for improvement 5-5...and Hak seems like the kind of coach to tap into that faucet of the game and turn it around. That alone could assure Jake comes very close to, or even improves upon last years totals.

[Poconono]

Reminds me  a lot of the Mike Richards' contract....and he was the team "leader" when he signed after seemingly putting it all together.   Not like the Flyers are the first team to make the same mistake twice or more.

[brelic]

Not sure if this was posted or not. Meltzer wrote a nice piece on Voracek the person. It seems pretty clear that he believes Voracek is a strong leader and the whole package.

 

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=70254&blogger_id=45

 

Here's part of the article:

 

When the Flyers had their locker clean-out day and series of press conferences at the Skate Zone in Voorhees, NJ, back in August, there was only one Flyers player for whom the assembled media stood up and formed a handshake line of sorts when his session was finished. That player was Jakub Voracek.

 

One by one, Voracek exchanged well-wishes for the summer and referred to each person by name as he shook hands. It was a small gesture on both sides but one that showed how highly respected -- and why -- Voracek has become not only for his stellar play on the ice the last few seasons but for his unaffected and vibrant personality. 

 

Over the course of the last year in particular, Voracek has not only continued to grow his game on the ice but has emerged as a team spokesman and leader by example. He arrived at training camp in the best shape of his career -- lighter, quicker and ready to get right down to business. He had a spectacular first half of the season and gave his all in each and every game right down to the bitter end. Even during the stretches of the second half where points became much harder to come by, Voracek never failed due to lack of effort. 

 

Dealing with Voracek in the locker room is almost always a pleasure. He is funny, engaging and honest to a fault. He makes no excuses, dodges no tough questions with platitudes. There are also things he simply will not do -- throw a teammate or a coach under the bus, divulge anything about what gets said behind closed doors or on the bench -- but that is the mark of a good team player. 

 

 

[fan4ever]

@brelic

 

Saw that over the weekend and was very impressed.  Meltzer doesn't sugar coat things and is a very honest reporter from all indications.  I think he's dead on!

[canoli]

Wow yeah, hadn't seen that article but it sure fits with the guy we see on the ice. Thanks for posting it B.

[Mad Dog]

@Mad Dog  The good part is, there is definate room for improvement 5-5...and Hak seems like the kind of coach to tap into that faucet of the game and turn it around. That alone could assure Jake comes very close to, or even improves upon last years totals.

 

I am sure there is almost every single player in the NHL who can use some improvement. Players who are viewed as team's franchise players and get paid tons of cash - they all have weaknesses.  Like you said, the hope is that Hakstol is going to help Jake work on some flaws in his game, which, honestly, he doesn't have many.  He did have more flaws when he was in Columbus, which I am going to guess was the main reason why the management in Columbus gave up on him.  But he was younger and perhaps he is one of those players who simply got better with experience.

 

But again, I am not really looking for him to improve statistically on the numbers of the last year.  And I sure hope the team is not looking for that either.  I hope they are not going with the mindset that we just signed you to such a great contract, so you're better set the world on fire...  That could be a recipe for failure if they actually think that. 

[Phillygrump]

The facts are the same thing was said about VLC and AMac.  The adage that "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" certainly holds some validity , but so does "sometimes the best deal is the one you don't make."

 

 

 

You gotta make some deals. You can't just wait around until you get only the perfect bargain deals for your club. If not Jake and G who do you roll the dice on? 

 

This is a business and the business pays these players. If you want to compete then you'll have to be willing to pay them as well. You can't say this deal is like AMac or VLC. That isn't the same. Those were obvious overpays on guys that were well over 30.

 

All I'm saying is its ludicrous to expect that every deal you sign is going to be the most team friendly. Sometimes you pay the guys. Unfortunately deals like the ones you mentioned make everyone here gun-shy or critical of every contract. If Jake and G aren't worth those contracts then who is? 

[Phillygrump]

 The problem was Jake was in a *great* position for these negotiations, his agent was able to dictate the years and the length. Cave or he goes elsewhere. It was basically legal blackmail. He held all the cards. If the Flyers did not meet his agents demands, all they could do was trade him as a rental, which would be substantially below his actual worth.

 

 One other thing Jake had in his back pocket...was 3 years ago, during the strike shortened season, he had 46 pts in 48 games.....so this past year was not the first time he flirted with a point per game average. He had done it before, strike shortened season or not....

 

Exactly. People that say "I would have preferred this or that" need to realize the Flyers probably would have preferred that too. But Jake held most of the cards. He could always have walked. Then everyone would be bitching that the AMac and VLC contracts prevented us from keeping Jake. 

[Phillygrump]

this is what no one is seriously trying to understand, it's easy to say we spent money on this position and that position but when it comes to cap it's going difficult to sign players that are much more important like mason he wants a big payday, you lose him, it's back to square one because you spent all the money on offense,

plus what about injuries, giroux or voracek suffers a bad injury or they start declining, you cant get rid of them and what's worse is that you cant replace them because of the money they have against them, no one wants to understand the risk of big contracts, it's all about filling the positions.

 

 

Anyone is susceptible to injuries. Long contracts are a risk but that is the nature of the NHL these days.

 

I'd rather take a budding elite guy entering the prime of his career for 8 years at big money than a guy at the end of his career for 5 years at pretty high money.

 

You can stay away from long contracts but then you probably aren't going to have elite players. You'll have a team of Schenns and Raffles and Couturiers and McDonalds. 

[OccamsRazor]

I think Jake was just given an 8 year deal becuase of his elevated Midi-chlorians levels...time will tell.

[briere48]

Anyone is susceptible to injuries. Long contracts are a risk but that is the nature of the NHL these days.

 

I'd rather take a budding elite guy entering the prime of his career for 8 years at big money than a guy at the end of his career for 5 years at pretty high money.

 

You can stay away from long contracts but then you probably aren't going to have elite players. You'll have a team of Schenns and Raffles and Couturiers and McDonalds. 

 

what happens if they turn into carter and richards? then it's going to be a problem. i dont care about how great players are, this team was suffering for almost 5 years because of long term contracts with pronger, briere, hartnell and homer had no cap room to fix the team and been bad since the finals. that's why i have a problem with this.

 

i would have let him play out the contract this year and traded him with a cheaper/younger player that would give this team the same amount of production. you need cap space to sign depth players on this team, otherwise it's going to be the same problems all over again. if the cap number goes down, it's going to be a problem.

[AJgoal]

I think Jake was just given an 8 year deal becuase of his elevated Midi-chlorians levels...time will tell.

 

You know, you can be banned for using that word.

[flyercanuck]

what happens if they turn into carter and richards? then it's going to be a problem. i dont care about how great players are, this team was suffering for almost 5 years because of long term contracts with pronger, briere, hartnell and homer had no cap room to fix the team and been bad since the finals. that's why i have a problem with this.

 

i would have let him play out the contract this year and traded him with a cheaper/younger player that would give this team the same amount of production. you need cap space to sign depth players on this team, otherwise it's going to be the same problems all over again. if the cap number goes down, it's going to be a problem.

 

I would have traded him for TWO cheaper younger players who put up twice as many points each and FOUR 1st round picks, and a zamboni

[radoran]

You can't say this deal is like AMac or VLC. That isn't the same. Those were obvious overpays on guys that were well over 30.

 

AndyMac is about to turn 29 (September). He was 27 when he signed the deal. Jake is about to turn 26 (August).

 

The comparison is based upon the idea that those were "market-value" deals the team "had to sign" or the player would "walk."

 

Quite frankly, the Flyers would never have let Jake "walk" - they would have traded him in lieu of a deal and likely got a return that would rival the deal that brought him here in the first place.

 

And I don't think there's anyone on this board that wouldn't say the Flyers would be in much better shape had they let VLC and AndyMac walk rather than sign them to the "market value" deals they "had" to sign to get the players.

 

To be clear - as I believe I have been throughout this thread and the other - I like Jake and want him to be a part of the core. But the question of $8M for 8 years is a horse of a different color.

 

I'd be happier if either of these players had ever scored 30 (or if Jake had ever scored 25). And if we were talking about guys who weren't the "core" of a team that has one playoff round in three years. Or weren't the sixth-highest goal scoring tandem in The Metropolitan Division.

 

There are only so many of these big money deals teams can give out in a capped league. I'm simply not convinced that this is a Cup winning foundation.

 

Happy to be wrong. Blissful. Ecstatic. You're invited to my house a block off South Broad Street for the parade.

 

We'll find out on the ice.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

@BobbyClarkeFan16

@jammer2

@Mad Dog

 

I notice that the three of you seem to hold the same opinion that Jake will be hitting his prime and improving his numbers. Just curious why that is? Statistically, that is not the case. He's already had his best season. So has Giroux. It used to be conventional wisdom that forwards hit their prime in their late 20s - 26, 27, 28 - but there are a number of studies that show that simply isn't the case anymore.

 

I *hope* that Jake can be an exception, and with a highly skilled third man on the line - i.e. a sniper - it could make a huge difference. 

 

 

 

 

I agree that Giroux is the face of the franchise, and he wears the C on his shirt. He is growing nicely into the leadership role. Last season, though, I felt that Jake was just as strong a leader on the ice, if not moreso for the way he defended his teammates, and wore his emotions on his sleeve. It is not a slight to Giroux at all - just my observation that Jake is turning into a pretty solid leader too. What do you think?

 

I have no idea what happens off the ice, though. 

 

@radoran I honestly believe that Voracek still has another season or two where he can really pull a rabbit out of his hat and put up even better numbers than this past season. Once he finally got himself into fantastic shape, we all saw what Voracek could do and more importantly, he saw what he could do. I think this year, he shows up in even better shape for training camp and I really believe he'll put up even better numbers. He's also not going to be running around all over the place and having structure in place will help his numbers even more. Same with Giroux. They put up great numbers in a system that stressed "work harder" and not "be positionally aware of where you are on the ice". I believe that Hakstol's system might help them increase their numbers even more because they won't be running around like chickens with their heads cut off. 

 

As for leadership, everyone on the club takes their cues from Giroux. Voracek might be a more lead by example kind of guy, but Giroux is definitely an intense leader who isn't afraid to call people out when they need to be called out. He doesn't do it through the media, but isn't afraid to let loose behind closed doors. I guess you can say that Giroux and Voracek feed off each other and everyone else on the team notices. 

[OccamsRazor]

You know, you can be banned for using that word.

What words? 8 year deal?

[brelic]

To be clear - as I believe I have been throughout this thread and the other - I like Jake and want him to be a part of the core. But the question of $8M for 8 years is a horse of a different color.

 

I guess maybe it comes down to teams accepting they will have to pay top dollar and term to their core players - the two or three guys who are the foundation of the team. So if not Jake, who? You can get assets and picks for him, but that again is a bit of a reset button that was hit when Richards and Carter were shipped out. You can maybe get a player of equal value who fits better (i.e. a sniper) but I would ask why a team would be giving up such a player in the first place.

 

In my opinion, I would rather put my money on a guy who has a built in chemistry with the captain, put up a career year and finished in the top 5, has a strong work ethic, is emerging as a team leader, and is only 25 than go out and get an unknown quantity - because success elsewhere is no guarantee of success here. We have seen that over and over.

 

Put another way, I think signing Voracek to an 8 year deal is a smaller risk than bringing in someone else.

[briere48]

I guess maybe it comes down to teams accepting they will have to pay top dollar and term to their core players - the two or three guys who are the foundation of the team. So if not Jake, who? You can get assets and picks for him, but that again is a bit of a reset button that was hit when Richards and Carter were shipped out. You can maybe get a player of equal value who fits better (i.e. a sniper) but I would ask why a team would be giving up such a player in the first place.

 

In my opinion, I would rather put my money on a guy who has a built in chemistry with the captain, put up a career year and finished in the top 5, has a strong work ethic, is emerging as a team leader, and is only 25 than go out and get an unknown quantity - because success elsewhere is no guarantee of success here. We have seen that over and over.

 

Put another way, I think signing Voracek to an 8 year deal is a smaller risk than bringing in someone else.

 

how? how is it any different than signing pronger, hartnell, briere? we were lucky to get out of those deals, now if giroux and jake turn into richards and carter, you cant get out of those deals, what's worse is you cant replace them with different players because no team will want those contracts.

[radoran]

Put another way, I think signing Voracek to an 8 year deal is a smaller risk than bringing in someone else.

I don't question the logic, I question whether it will get the desired results - a Stanley Cup.

They can put up big numbers, they can play entertaining hockey, but they've been to one playoff round in three years and when you look around just their divison, there are guys more productive in terms of winning games and getting to the playoffs - and they're not going anywhere.

I like both guys, but they still have a lot to prove and are being paid as if they've done something*.

I guess I'm just saying DO SOMETHING. Win freaking hockey games. Get to the playoffs. Win a damn playoff round.

In old school terms: earn it.

* yeah yeah, most points since whenever it works out to stop counting. One playoff round. One.

[brelic]

I don't question the logic, I question whether it will get the desired results - a Stanley Cup.

They can put up big numbers, they can play entertaining hockey, but they've been to one playoff round in three years and when you look around just their divison, there are guys more productive in terms of winning games and getting to the playoffs - and they're not going anywhere.

I like both guys, but they still have a lot to prove and are being paid as if they've done something*.

I guess I'm just saying DO SOMETHING. Win freaking hockey games. Get to the playoffs. Win a damn playoff round.

In old school terms: earn it.

* yeah yeah, most points since whenever it works out to stop counting. One playoff round. One.

 

You're absolutely right. The last 10 Stanley Cups have been won by seven different teams, and only three of them in the East (Detroit won before realignment). It's insanely hard to win a Stanley Cup. 

The Flyers have a lot of work to do to get there - but the common link with all the winners is that they had two or three top guys, a great supporting cast, and two or three guys who stepped it up in the playoffs. 

 

That doesn't really make me feel any better though I just want to watch an entertaining, competitive team, and I think they are on their way there.

[brelic]

how? how is it any different than signing pronger, hartnell, briere? we were lucky to get out of those deals, now if giroux and jake turn into richards and carter, you cant get out of those deals, what's worse is you cant replace them with different players because no team will want those contracts.

 

The difference, at least for me, is that none of those guys were from the Flyers organization. It was a way of trying to buy their way into contention. It almost worked once Pronger was here. But at the end of the day, it was a house of cards. 

 

Voracek had a chance to prove himself here over four seasons, showing progress year over year not only in points, but in his overall game. Seriously, is there a better puck possession player on this team? It's like watching Jagr out there the way he protects the puck. I put his skills above Giroux's for puck possession.

 

Pronger and Briere were already past their primes, so committing to them was always going to be a gamble. It's much less of a gamble with a known quantity like Voracek, especially at his age. 

[ruxpin]

I don't question the logic, I question whether it will get the desired results - a Stanley Cup.

They can put up big numbers, they can play entertaining hockey, but they've been to one playoff round in three years and when you look around just their divison, there are guys more productive in terms of winning games and getting to the playoffs - and they're not going anywhere.

I like both guys, but they still have a lot to prove and are being paid as if they've done something*.

I guess I'm just saying DO SOMETHING. Win freaking hockey games. Get to the playoffs. Win a damn playoff round.

In old school terms: earn it.

* yeah yeah, most points since whenever it works out to stop counting. One playoff round. One.

Honestly, do you really think one playoff round in three years is on Giroux and Voracek? (NO, you did not say that, but you do keep hammering on this as argument against the likelihood of their being a winning core).

I mean, I realize it's 3 series to 1 (including a DNQ) for the Caps' highest scoring, highest paid tandem in the Metro, but what has that gotten them? At least as many coaches.

Maybe if the Flyers had an NHL defense, for starters. Maybe a winger. I *do* get the argument that the $16MM+ makes it harder to build that supporting cast, but hopefully continued attrition helps that.

Rad, I didn't disbelieve you with the sixth highest goals in the Metro thing. I know you don't harp on a stat without being absolutely sure. But I had to see that for myself.

They're sixth only because New Jersey was so horribly offensively inept they had to beat them. They really weren't that close to anyone else aside from Pittsburgh (depending upon how you define "tandem" in their case - - I used Crosby/Hornqvist. YMMV. I used Crosby and his most common winger on leftwinglock.com).

I know goals are a little more apples/apples because you're just counting what those players actually put in the net, but Giroux/Voracek actually had the highest assist totals (by a LOT) and finished just behind the more expensive Ovechkin/Backstrom in total points (in the Metro).

And they were the fourth highest paid tandem last year. So sixth in goals is Meh, but first in assists and five points behind Washington isn't bad for fourth highest. Sadly, the rest of the team and the head coach didn't show up.

We'll stay fourth this season (I think) but will move to third still behind Washington and Pittsburgh for price for our tandem the following year. But NYI will need to resign Tavares at that point.

Just saying that the price vs. The numbers isn't bad (for now).

The duration is a different story, of course, because it's likely the numbers don't hold up for the last three years (assuming they do until then).

But I'm okay with the amount.

[radoran]

Honestly, do you really think one playoff round in three years is on Giroux and Voracek? (NO, you did not say that, but you do keep hammering on this as argument against the likelihood of their being a winning core).

 

I don't really intend to keep "hammering" things, any more than other "hammer" the "positives" of the situation. It's a complex situation and one that is certainly open to interpretation and debate.

 

The over-reliance on the PP is another issue - and the lack of success in the shootout (favorite stat being tossed around a lot - if the Flyers had gotten the 11 points they missed in shootout they would only have missed the playoffs by three points #winning).

 

They're sixth only because New Jersey was so horribly offensively inept they had to beat them. They really weren't that close to anyone else aside from Pittsburgh (depending upon how you define "tandem" in their case - - I used Crosby/Hornqvist. YMMV. I used Crosby and his most common winger on leftwinglock.com).

 

Yeah, Crosby/Hornqvist - neither of whom played a full season.

 

And they were the fourth highest paid tandem last year. So sixth in goals is Meh, but first in assists and five points behind Washington isn't bad for fourth highest.

 

Fourth in their division. You realize the top three teams get guaranteed playoff spots, right?

 

Giroux/Voracek actually had the highest assist totals (by a LOT) and finished just behind the more expensive Ovechkin/Backstrom in total points (in the Metro).

 

Three teams had two players in the top 12 for points last season (DAL, WAS, PHL). One made the playoffs. That team lost in the second round (Washington).

 

Again, I fully acknowledge the logic and the reasoning behind making the move. I am questioning whether it will bring the desired results. Which, for me, is a Cup*.

 

Maybe it is a case of 27-times bitten, twice shy. But, again, until they go out and prove it on the ice, for me nothing else matters.

 

And I am looking forward to the season.

 

 

 

 

* hardest trophy to win in organized sport IMO

[ruxpin]

I don't really intend to keep "hammering" things, any more than other "hammer" the "positives" of the situation. It's a complex situation and one that is certainly open to interpretation and debate.

 

The over-reliance on the PP is another issue - and the lack of success in the shootout (favorite stat being tossed around a lot - if the Flyers had gotten the 11 points they missed in shootout they would only have missed the playoffs by three points #winning).

 

 

 

 

Yeah, Crosby/Hornqvist - neither of whom played a full season.

 

 

 

 

Fourth in their division. You realize the top three teams get guaranteed playoff spots, right?

 

 

 

 

Three teams had two players in the top 12 for points last season (DAL, WAS, PHL). One made the playoffs. That team lost in the second round (Washington).

 

Again, I fully acknowledge the logic and the reasoning behind making the move. I am questioning whether it will bring the desired results. Which, for me, is a Cup*.

 

Maybe it is a case of 27-times bitten, twice shy. But, again, until they go out and prove it on the ice, for me nothing else matters.

 

And I am looking forward to the season.

 

 

 

 

* hardest trophy to win in organized sport IMO

 

I honestly can't argue with any of that.   Just saying other metrix may justify the amount.  The term scares me. 

 

By the way, I have to admit "hammer" probably has a negative connotation.  I didn't mean it in a negative way, though.  Middle of the night and on my phone and couldn't come up with a better word/phrase.   Only meant that you'd mentioned it several times (because it's ultimately valid).