Your Unpopular Flyers Related Opinions

[flyerfan2]

^ pff... and I thought I was trollin' with the Ghost = Bust comment.

You were, I'm not.!

[ruxpin]

Sure , i'll elaborate.

Umberger , do I need to say anymore on this deal?  Please don't.  The subject makes me nauseated.  I get the "trade a bad long contract for a worse shorter one" in theory.  But I'm having a very hard time believing we couldn't have done better at the deadline.

 

The amount and length given to couts, based on potential rather than on actual performance.

This could turn out to be a bargain, or it could turn out to be a bust , with another overpaid un movable contract. To much to long for unproven.  I understand what you're saying, but given his age I'm okay with this one.   It's a [relatively speaking] cheap contract.  (Did I really just say $4.33M was cheap???  Good thing we had two lockouts!)

 

Voracek, way to long for the amount being paid, especially coming off a career year, should have been shorter term to see if last year was a career year or whether it will become the norm. 

If it was the peek of his career then it will be another unmovable huge contract.  That's the risk.   A little too high and too long for my tastes.  I cannot argue with you on this one.

 

Hextall is adding to the problem with big pay long term contracts that are a long term risk,that could lead to the Flyers being stuck with multiple over paid unmovable players.  We shall see, but there is certainly that danger.

 

He is putting his personal stamp on this team for years to come , and as of right now I don't have that much faith in him in this roll considering what he has handed out thus far.  At least the long-term is on 20-somethings rather than 30-somethings.   Baby steps, my friend.  Baby steps.

[King Knut]

I think he'll be a bust b/c of a combination of his size, position, and injury issues. His play is predominantly based upon speed and carrying the play. He's already suffered a very significant knee injury and who knows if that will effect his mobility/top end speed. If it has... he's toast. He doens't have the size, positioning, or over whelming shot to make up for the lost speed.

He's already bigger than kimmo ever was and Kimmo was never terribly fast and frankly, I think Ghost has better "eyes" - though Kimmo was better defensively than Ghost will ever be.

Just saying I hope you're wrong. And it's way to soon to assume you're right.

[King Knut]

Of all the defensive prospects, Ghost's risk/ reward factor was the highest. The kid dominated in the NCAA so what does that mean in an NHL context ? He could be Tory Krug or a faceless 3rd pairing guy ... a couple of our defensive gems will not work out and reach their ceiling and Ghost's road toward reaching that ceiling is one of the more difficult , i get that whole sentiment.

@fishbulb is right about the size and now knee injury thing, it could turn Ghost into that "tweener" player. Too good for the A not quite right for the bigs. that would be a bummer .

But what's the risk on him really?

[King Knut]

Sure , i'll elaborate.

Umberger , do I need to say anymore on this deal?

The amount and length given to couts, based on potential rather than on actual performance.

This could turn out to be a bargain, or it could turn out to be a bust , with another overpaid un movable contract. To much to long for unproven.

Voracek, way to long for the amount being paid, especially coming off a career year, should have been shorter term to see if last year was a career year or whether it will become the norm.

If it was the peek of his career then it will be another unmovable huge contract.

Hextall is adding to the problem with big pay long term contracts that are a long term risk,that could lead to the Flyers being stuck with multiple over paid unmovable players.

He is putting his personal stamp on this team for years to come , and as of right now I don't have that much faith in him in this roll considering what he has handed out thus far.

For what they're paying, Coots would have to play worse to not be worth it over that duration. It's a good deal.

That said, he'll be WAY worth it. It'll end up being a steal unless he gets hurt.

[OccamsRazor]

So, you're saying it's an unpopular Flyers-related opinion, then?

 

Yeah is something wrong with confirming it. Or you are just confirming the confirmation?

[radoran]

Yeah is something wrong with confirming it. Or you are just confirming the confirmation?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=fVq4_HhBK8

[canoli]

 

Sure , i'll elaborate.

Umberger , do I need to say anymore on this deal?  Please don't.  The subject makes me nauseated.  I get the "trade a bad long contract for a worse shorter one" in theory.  But I'm having a very hard time believing we couldn't have done better at the deadline.

 

The amount and length given to couts, based on potential rather than on actual performance.

This could turn out to be a bargain, or it could turn out to be a bust , with another overpaid un movable contract. To much to long for unproven.  I understand what you're saying, but given his age I'm okay with this one.   It's a [relatively speaking] cheap contract.  (Did I really just say $4.33M was cheap???  Good thing we had two lockouts!)

 

Voracek, way to long for the amount being paid, especially coming off a career year, should have been shorter term to see if last year was a career year or whether it will become the norm. 

If it was the peek of his career then it will be another unmovable huge contract.  That's the risk.   A little too high and too long for my tastes.  I cannot argue with you on this one.

 

Hextall is adding to the problem with big pay long term contracts that are a long term risk,that could lead to the Flyers being stuck with multiple over paid unmovable players.  We shall see, but there is certainly that danger.

 

He is putting his personal stamp on this team for years to come , and as of right now I don't have that much faith in him in this roll considering what he has handed out thus far.  At least the long-term is on 20-somethings rather than 30-somethings.   Baby steps, my friend.  Baby steps.

 

 

 

RJ-Hartnell - agreed, Hextall could've - should've - done better. We get the early reprieve of 2 years but that's about it. As KingTut said 2 years is not nothing and I get that. But you're right - both of you - we got a bit hosed on the deal.

 

Couturier - imho you're wrong FF2, this contract has Fair Value written all over it. Couturier is already worth $4.33 million and the length is fine for a 22-year old. He won't even be 30 when the contract expires. No complaints about this deal and qualifying it with things like "If he scores more" is just nonsense. Couturier is already one of the best defensive forwards in the NHL...his stock can only go up and when it does (if he's given the offensive opportunities) $4.33 will be a bargain.

 

Voracek - imho it's not much of a risk at all. Assuming you've watched the guy play the last 4 or 5 seasons does he strike you as a guy who's likely to backslide into a safe, FU-I-Got-Mine mode? Hardly. This guy models himself on Jaromir Jagr, the post-KHL Jagr, the guy who won over everyone in Philly, then Jersey now FL. Voracek is aiming high and from everything I've read and seen on the ice he fully expects to make it all the way - Hart, Art Ross, Rocket, the sky's the limit...ultimately hoisting the Stanley Cup.

 

Voracek had "one good season" and hasn't had many chances to work the POs. OTOH over a few seasons his steady progress is unmistakeable; his confidence his willingness to take chances, to command respect, etc. and finally last year he got results that had everybody talking. I can always agree that "it's a risk" to sign anyone for 8 years but in Voracek's case the risk is small.

 

To your point about long-term burdensome contracts...welcome to the NHL. Every team has a few that are necessary - Kane/Toews, Perry/Getz, Ovechkin/Backstrom while also riding out a few they wish they never signed. Hextall's club is no different. Sure he's got a few he inherited - Vinny and McDonald - but so does every new GM when they take over. You can't have it both ways - you either retain talent and hand out 6, 7, 8-year deals or you try to build a champion without marquee players.

[mojo1917]

But what's the risk on him really?

the risk was quite small.  he was the ideal third round pick, a guy with high skill but a small frame, he is the guy a gm takes a "flyer" on and if he works out , awesome ! and if he doesn't , doesn't hurt the organizational depth.  That is what I was saying.  I reckon not clearly enough though. 

[Howie58]

Hello:

 

This is an interesting thread--the common theme is that we are some kind of crossroads for the franchise.  There's a new coach and a relatively new GM.  Some of the prospects under old regime will pan out. Some won't...and some "legacy" players will be an anchor for years to come.  

 

As for identity...I think it has to start with the realization that '04-'05 marked a new start point for the NHL and we have been very inconsistent since then.  We have to get over the past. I am hoping the change in OT can help us.  And keeping a goon-free squad helps.  I hope Hexy and Company lead us to a different space.  It's a little like my backyard Dolphins who refer to the Perfect Season and their Super Bowls 40+ years ago.  OK...good.  But what have you done for me lately?  

 

The days of winning a Cup with a gifted goalie and winning a lot of 2-1 or 3-2 games are over.  Playoff games..maybe.  But comparing a Tampa Bay or Detroit to what our squad has been over the past few years is like comparing a Corvette Sting Ray to a Smart Car.  We are slow and disconnected.  Being physical helps but in this league, we need to mobility as well.  

 

So...let's collectively hope that 2-3 years from now this squad is exemplary.  Meanwhile, I suspect keeping points total where it was last year will be a good goal for this year in a tougher division, with new coach/system and player interchange.

 

Best,

 

Howie