Flyers rumours - Could Simmonds be on the move?

[Podein25]

 

Ladd? Wheeler?  It's assume not Little, but I guess it's possible. 

 

Is Hakstol going to Chip Kelly this team? 

 

Simmer or Schenn for Ladd or Wheeler? 

 

Wheeler seems like a Hakstol kind of player.  But trading the leading scorer for the last few years plus this year's current leading scorer for Ladd or Wheeler doesn't seem like a great way to increase secondary scoring.

 

Not sure I'm buying this.  Tyler Myers Maybe?  Then we'd have to move more D men since we know Luke and Manning wouldn't make it through waivers most likely.

 

 

 

FYI Hakstol is not the GM.

 

Regarding Jets players that could possibly be in discussion it would likely only be the ones who have not been extended yet and become UFAs next June. And that's only Byfuglien and Ladd. Little and Wheeler and Myers are not going anywhere.

 

Would the Jets trade their Captain? Maybe, if he's greedy  - and there are some signs that he is being greedy. But I would not want the Flyers to trade a young prospect and a pick for Ladd. Byfuglien maybe, depending.

[terp]

Or do like Lombardi did with Richie plant some oxies in Vinny's car and then call the cops and tell them...problem solved...

Edit: But Hexy should make Homer do it since he offered the deal.

If it means unloading that contract, we should draw straws and the loser breaks into VLC's car.

[RonJeremy]

Lets put things in perspective. How many of Eklunds trade rumors have ever come true? He is full of crap, he has no sources and just has to come up with rumors to keep his web page alive. His rumors never come to fruition, if he actually had a source, he might hit on a few rumors. but he never does.  Why would we trade Wayne Simmonds? he is the ONLY big physical, forward we have left. We have no enforcers, we dumped Rinaldo , our best hitter. Our top prospects are defensemen, and our forward prospects are all small guys. I just don't see it happening.

[murraycraven]

New Coach, Team playing solid defense, just beat the defending cup champs, team playing hungry physical hockey.

Sounds like a perfect time to trade one of the core players that lead the team in goals last year and is a staple on the PP.

Ek be in Ek..

[Samifan]

New Coach, Team playing solid defense, just beat the defending cup champs, team playing hungry physical hockey.

Sounds like a perfect time to trade one of the core players that lead the team in goals last year and is a staple on the PP.

Ek be in Ek (e5)

 

fixed it for you MC  

[ruxpin]

 

Scouting the Flyers and Blackhawks game …

• Adam Kimelman: Jets (three including GM Kevin Cheveldayoff), Flames (2), Predators (2), Avalanche, Blues, Lightning, Rangers, Maple Leafs, Canadiens, Kings, Blackhawks, Panthers, Oilers, Red Wings and Senators.

 

 

From this article.

 

Now you have to wonder.   Are they there for the Flyers or for the Black Hawks?  Or both?

 

Simmonds doesn't make sense to me on several of those teams (although I'd buy the Preds).    But B. Schenn would.  Even Luke on some of them (especially the Oilers).

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

From this article.

 

Now you have to wonder.   Are they there for the Flyers or for the Black Hawks?  Or both?

 

Simmonds doesn't make sense to me on several of those teams (although I'd buy the Preds).    But B. Schenn would.  Even Luke on some of them (especially the Oilers).

Unless they were there to see how he served popcorn, it wasn't Luke they were there to see. He wasn't in the line up.

[ruxpin]

Unless they were there to see how he served popcorn, it wasn't Luke they were there to see. He wasn't in the line up.

Agreed. But, IMHO, there are very few flyers that could/would garner that much attention (pretending for no reason that they were all there for the same players/player).

I still REALLY don't like our forward lines.

[OccamsRazor]

Unless they were there to see how he served popcorn, it wasn't Luke they were there to see. He wasn't in the line up.

But doesn't mean he couldn't be part of the equation, it's not like there isn't a lot of game film on him. So he could be part of a deal still.

[ruxpin]

But doesn't mean he couldn't be part of the equation, it's not like there isn't a lot of game film on him. So he could be part of a deal still.

I caught very little of the Chicago game. Who played in favor of Luke?

[AJgoal]

Gudas

[brelic]

I still REALLY don't like our forward lines.

 

Really? What don't you like?

 

I think they've played well together so far. 

[ruxpin]

Really? What don't you like?

 

I think they've played well together so far. 

 

 

They have.  There is some team cohesion so far (other than the 7-1 game).  It's also very good that their goaltending has been very good (other than the 7-1 game).

 

But these were the lines for the game vs. Chicago:

 

12 Michael Raffl - 28 Claude Giroux - 93 Jakub Voracek    --if Raffl is a first line winger, then Tim Tebow is a starting quarterback.

10 Brayden Schenn - 14 Sean Couturier - 89 Sam Gagner  --This could turn into something, I guess, but it just looks like one of the weakest second lines in the league to me.

24 Matt Read - 21 Scott Laughton - 17 Wayne Simmonds --Matt Read should be trade bait.  He does little.  You have a rookie at center (which is okay) and then Simmonds who should either be further up the lineup or on another team.

76 Chris VandeVelde - 78 Pierre-Edouard Bellemare - 25 Ryan White   --I like Ryan White.  The other two do nothing for me.  I realize this is the fourth line and I'm not expecting the Gretzky/Kurri line, and they are  serviceable I guess, but  both are quite "meh"  to me. 

 

Overall, this is a lineup that is going to have to work as a unit to keep the opponent to as little scoring as possible and hope to squeak out with 2-1, 1-0, 3-1 games.  There's just very little offensive ability there.

 

#GoBeavers

[brelic]

Overall, this is a lineup that is going to have to work as a unit to keep the opponent to as little scoring as possible and hope to squeak out with 2-1, 1-0, 3-1 games.  There's just very little offensive ability there.

 

I think this is bang on. The whole has to be bigger than the sum of its parts. That's usually a characteristic of winning teams, right?

 

IIRC, Simmonds was moved up to the 2nd line and Gagner to the 3rd line against Chicago. I don't disagree with any of your comments on the lines - individually, they are all kind of ok. The key is for them to be opportunistic offensively and sound defensively. That was a hallmark of Devils' squads and even the Hawks to some extent - they have no scoring superstars other than Kane. What they do have is a strong team commitment and parts that elevate entire units. I would even throw LA in the mix. There's no Crosby or Ovechkin or Stamkos on those teams.

 

And all have proven they can win cups with that formula.

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

But doesn't mean he couldn't be part of the equation, it's not like there isn't a lot of game film on him. So he could be part of a deal still.

 

Can't argue with that, but he is certainly not the main reason why all those scouts were at the game.  Hexy would have made sure he was in the line up.

 

The conversation would go like this:

Hexy:  There are a bunch of scouts here to see (insert player name here) tonight.  He needs to be in the line up.

Hak:  Yes, Sir.  He is in.

[ruxpin]

I think this is bang on. The whole has to be bigger than the sum of its parts. That's usually a characteristic of winning teams, right?

 

IIRC, Simmonds was moved up to the 2nd line and Gagner to the 3rd line against Chicago. I don't disagree with any of your comments on the lines - individually, they are all kind of ok. The key is for them to be opportunistic offensively and sound defensively. That was a hallmark of Devils' squads and even the Hawks to some extent - they have no scoring superstars other than Kane. What they do have is a strong team commitment and parts that elevate entire units. I would even throw LA in the mix. There's no Crosby or Ovechkin or Stamkos on those teams.

 

And all have proven they can win cups with that formula.

 

 

I think we agree overall.  I don't want to overstate my case.  I don't think it's a total loss and I completely agree with you on "the whole has to be bigger than the sum of its parts."  And that's the hope here.   If that ends up being the case, they will be okay.  But on paper...thankfully, the game is not played on paper.

[OccamsRazor]

Can't argue with that, but he is certainly not the main reason why all those scouts were at the game.  Hexy would have made sure he was in the line up.

 

The conversation would go like this:

Hexy:  There are a bunch of scouts here to see (insert player name here) tonight.  He needs to be in the line up.

Hak:  Yes, Sir.  He is in.

As you said can't argue that. But i don't want to move Simmer without knowing the return first. Others i'm ok with moving but i like Simmer what he brings to the team and his contract.

It's like when they traded JVR i was ok moving him....i just didn't and still don't like the return.

[Jam1986]

Would not do to trade line Would trade  anybody in the right deal. Younger, bigger,faster and good for our team.Also dump money too! Vine and others.

[canoli]

Trading Simmonds without getting a "highway robbery" return would be incredibly stupid - and the odds of getting back that type of return are slim to none. 

 

He's the only mature power forward on the team. Apparently Hakstol isn't impressed yet but he will be. Simmonds is one of the Flyers best players.

[brelic]

More from Ek on the same topic:

 

First I am told that "serious discussions" have taken place between both the Flyers and both the Jets and the Oilers...The Rumor out there is the Flyers have discussed Byfuglien on a "Very serious level and groundwork is being laid out to begin the next step."

 

The Oilers are also in the market for a d-man and have talked to the Flyers about a combination of a "current D, and a D prospect as well" for a significant return...stay tuned.

 

 

I still find it impossible to believe any move for Byfuglien. I really don't understand what it would accomplish - at all. It does not all feel like a Hextall type of move.

 

The Oilers one is interesting. In terms of moving a D prospect, I would say Sanheim, Provorov and Ghost are off limits. If you can get someone like a Yakupov, it might be worth it. 

 

 

[murraycraven]

 

More from Ek on the same topic:

 

 

I still find it impossible to believe any move for Byfuglien. I really don't understand what it would accomplish - at all. It does not all feel like a Hextall type of move.

 

The Oilers one is interesting. In terms of moving a D prospect, I would say Sanheim, Provorov and Ghost are off limits. If you can get someone like a Yakupov, it might be worth it. 

 

 

 

 

 

the Buff rumor has been part of Ek's schtick for for at least 2 seasons now...   

 

I would in no way trade the D prospects you stated as well.   Even if you dangle Morin out there it would need to net a very good return - not sure if Yak would do it for me.

[brelic]

Even if you dangle Morin out there it would need to net a very good return - not sure if Yak would do it for me.

 

I hear you - but given what we have in terms of D prospects and the lack of top flight talent up front, I would make that trade.

 

Gotta give to get, right? It's a lot easier to find/draft a middle pairing defenseman than a top line winger.

[murraycraven]

I hear you - but given what we have in terms of D prospects and the lack of top flight talent up front, I would make that trade.

 

Gotta give to get, right? It's a lot easier to find/draft a middle pairing defenseman than a top line winger.

 

totally agree... I would be willing to do the deal but just tentative given that it is Yak...  no doubt there is a ton of skill there.

[OccamsRazor]

I would make that trade.

 

For Yak??? NO WAY IN HELL!

[OccamsRazor]

no doubt there is a ton of skill there.

 

Am i missing someone jumping into this? Are you saying a ton of skill in Yak??? I have to disagree if that is the case...if you're talking about someone else then who?