ruxpin Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 15 minutes ago, King Knut said: who could we get for that top 6 role? I'm thinking this would have to be done via trade, but then the question becomes, "we've already traded the most likely asset to do this, so who?" I don't know that. The free agent pickings are not deep. Would you take a year or two flyer (no pun intended) on a 32 year old Vanek? Patrick Sharp would be a maybe, but he's already 35, is starting to break down a little, and would have to take a significant pay cut before I'd consider him. Vanek would at least be in the $2.5-$3M range. I'm not really high on the idea myself, but what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 25 minutes ago, sekkes85 said: How about Schenn, MacDonald (we retain say 50% of salary), and a 3rd since we have Boston's 3rd round pick from the Rinaldo trade (this still cracks me up). The Blues don't WANT to trade Shattenkirk as they are a playoff team, but it makes sense longterm. The Blues get an NHL caliber dman (and he is just that, just paid entirely too much), an upgrade at the offense, and a draft pick. As I type this I realize the cap numbers wouldn't work... Blues would be $2.11 million over the cap DOH! A Schenn + prospects/picks for Shattenkirk would only leave them with $.388 left, yikes. That .388 would only be for this year right? They could work with that for a few months. If they have Schenn, they can let Berglund walk which should leave them with enough room to resign Yakupov to a RFA bridge deal. The downside for St. Louis is that if they make this deal and acquire Schenn, they're probably going to have to expose a forward they wouldn't necessarily want to. Schenn would leave them with 7 pretty good forwards for Vegas to choose from. They can't protect them all AND I can't imagine they'd be trying to lose one for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 16 minutes ago, ruxpin said: I'm thinking this would have to be done via trade, but then the question becomes, "we've already traded the most likely asset to do this, so who?" I don't know that. The free agent pickings are not deep. Would you take a year or two flyer (no pun intended) on a 32 year old Vanek? Patrick Sharp would be a maybe, but he's already 35, is starting to break down a little, and would have to take a significant pay cut before I'd consider him. Vanek would at least be in the $2.5-$3M range. I'm not really high on the idea myself, but what do you think? Yeah, I think unfortunately (as I've said above) a trade is the only way to do it and we'd have to trade one of our D prospects... which is undesirable, but I think not unreasonable depending on the deal. But it would have to be the right deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 One thing about Schenn's powerplay production: This year is an aberration, not the norm. He's never had a season where more than ~40% of his goals and points come on the PP. Schenn's also historically one of the best shooters the Flyers have, and is running with a shooting percentage of almost 13 again this year. This year, 2/3 of his goals are on the PP, and 55% of his total points. At even strength, Schenn has 2 fewer goals and 6 fewer points than Giroux, in 3 fewer games. He's all of 7 points total behind Giroux. Add to that the fact that he doesn't get the prime linemates in OT, where Giroux has 3 points (1g, 2a) to Schenn's 1 goal. 5 on 5, Giroux has outscored Schenn by a whopping 3 points. The Flyers don't have a Schenn problem. They have a 5 on 5 problem which rolls down through their entire forward lineup, with the exception of Voracek, Simmonds, and Konecny. WRT Streit and the powerplay production, I don't see how he really factors in here. He was on the second unit, not the first. The first unit has gone cold. The second unit was never really even warm (I think 4 goals all season). It may coincide with his absence, but that's like attributing a dip in Giroux's scoring to Weal being out of the lineup in LV. The thought that adding a Shattenkirk might help that isn't without merit, but I don't know if I want to go down this rabbit hole again. If you trade Schenn, you need to replace Schenn and Raffl (As I agree Raffl is better suited to the third line on a strong team). Konecny has promise, but to me he's too similar a player to Giroux and Voracek to put them all together. I think you'd lack someone to really get in the crease area. So you slide Simmonds up to Giroux's right with Konecny on the left. That leaves you with Couturier and Voracek together, with Raffl on the wing. I'm not really crazy about that setup. And then your bottom 6 is a collection of not much when it comes to scoring threats. You do have options next year. Maybe Laughton figures some things out in the AHL. Maybe Lindblom can come over from the SHL and contribute immediately. Leier played well in limited time. But there's nobody in the system that screams "top 6 potential" at me right now. Lindblom is the closest thing. We'll see what Rubtsov can do in the CHL. So if you want to make the team immediately better, you are talking two trades. And I don't think we're at the point where that's something Hextall is going to be willing to do. I do wonder what would happen if the Flyers shifted some things around a bit again. Leave Raffl with Giroux, but move Simmonds up there. Put Schenn between Konecny and Voracek. Put Couturier, Weise, and Read together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 1 hour ago, King Knut said: Yeah, I think unfortunately (as I've said above) a trade is the only way to do it and we'd have to trade one of our D prospects... which is undesirable, but I think not unreasonable depending on the deal. But it would have to be the right deal. Nashville had a similar situation and I bet somewhere on some message board, people really didn't want to trade Seth Jones for a forward. That turned out okay. I'm not thrilled with the prospect of trading one of the kids for a forward, but who knows? If it's for JVR I really won't be happy, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 6 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Nashville had a similar situation and I bet somewhere on some message board, people really didn't want to trade Seth Jones for a forward. That turned out okay. I'm not thrilled with the prospect of trading one of the kids for a forward, but who knows? If it's for JVR I really won't be happy, though. I think it's a matter of risk vs. reward. When you have 4 or so blue chip d men and you're losing 3 veterans each making 3-5 million, trading one prospect isn't as much of a risk as even the preds trading Jones at the time. I'll also say that I don't know that Morin or Even Sanheim or Hagg are as highly touted a prospect as Jones was at the time. You have to trade in the currency you have. Shattenkirk is 27. He's in his prime and has a pretty good track record. It really comes down to what he'll sign for and who we might be able to trade said prospect for as far as I'm concerned. I have zero issues trading schenn to make this happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 I'll add one other point: Schenn led the team in 5 on 5 points last year, tied with Simmonds, though Simmonds had 15 goals to Schenn's second-place 14. I don't get why Hakstol is so insistant on NOT putting the Schenn - Giroux - Simmonds line back together. They may have struggled in the beginning of the season, but they were excellent 5 on 5 last season. And Konecny - Couturier - Voracek looks like it just might work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 39 minutes ago, AJgoal said: The Flyers don't have a Schenn problem. They have a 5 on 5 problem which rolls down through their entire forward lineup We did have a Schenn problem, but we traded it. Nicely said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 5 minutes ago, AJgoal said: I'll add one other point: Schenn led the team in 5 on 5 points last year, tied with Simmonds, though Simmonds had 15 goals to Schenn's second-place 14. I don't get why Hakstol is so insistant on NOT putting the Schenn - Giroux - Simmonds line back together. They may have struggled in the beginning of the season, but they were excellent 5 on 5 last season. And Konecny - Couturier - Voracek looks like it just might work. Schenn just hasn't settled. These are good points, but I can't get my head around how he can't seem to be consistent at anything. I thought the Coots, Jake Konex line looked amazing to start the year even when they weren't scoring. I'd have kept them together longer. Seems like they were broken up specifically to help G get going, which helped... for a while. I hope they can make it work together well now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Just now, King Knut said: Schenn just hasn't settled. These are good points, but I can't get my head around how he can't seem to be consistent at anything. 1st line LW. 4th Line C. 2nd line C. 3rd line C. I wonder why he can't find consistency? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 7 minutes ago, Podein25 said: We did have a Schenn problem, but we traded it. Nicely said. Maybe we should get Luke back so we can trade him again to wake BRayden up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, AJgoal said: 1st line LW. 4th Line C. 2nd line C. 3rd line C. I wonder why he can't find consistency? Same thing for most everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 10 minutes ago, King Knut said: Maybe we should get Luke back so we can trade him again to wake BRayden up? Reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 1 minute ago, King Knut said: Same thing for most everyone else. No, not really. When has Giroux been on the 4th line (well, maybe these last couple of games with Read and Raffl)? Yet, he's still producing almost equal to Giroux 5 on 5. 3 points fewer. 7 points overall. But Schenn is inconsistent. I'm not opposed to trading Schenn, but he gets a heck of a beating for a guy who's actually been one of the Flyers' best overall and 5 on 5 performers over the past couple of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 11 minutes ago, AJgoal said: But Schenn is inconsistent. G hasn't been on the 4th line and is yet the posterboy for inconsistency i say without doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: G hasn't been on the 4th line and is yet the posterboy for inconsistency i say without doubt. Numbers like goals are the easiest thing to talk about, but the fact is that consistency wise, we're talking about moving the play in general. When you look at advanced metrics, even strength Giroux's Corsi for is about 5 points higher than Schenn's and his Corsi for relative is over 6% higher (Schenn's is negative). And you're looking at about the same for Fenwick. Schenn also gets more offensive zone starts and fewer defensive zone starts. Giroux also averages about three minutes more per night than Schenn which includes :45 seconds of Shorthanded time more than Schenn (who virtually plays no short handed minutes). Giroux does however exactly the same amount of PP time as Schenn which means that about 21% (give or take) of Schenn's total time on the ice is on the PP whereas Giroux's is more like 19%. These aren't particularly wonderful numbers for either player mind you, but it sort of gets at the point especially when you factor in the assignments they're pulling in that 5 on 5 time. Again, I'm having a hard time understanding why they can't seem to make Schenn fit. It's not that I don't like him. I do. I want him to score 75 points. But if he's going to score 55 points and Hakstol can't seem to figure out what the hell to do with him and we can get one of the league's top D men to help guide this young crop coming up and to help us win games... I'm not sure I'm having any difficulty with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, King Knut said: Again, I'm having a hard time understanding why they can't seem to make Schenn fit. The thing i notice and this is just my 2 cents is that Brayden just isn't good carrying the puck...he needs to carry it for a short amount of time and then pass it. It seems to me the more he tries to carry or hold onto it the chances of him fumbling it or turning it over increase greatly. Some guys like G and Jake are just better at holding onto it. Simmer as well doesn't need to carry it long or he too falls in the same realm as Brayden. Not sure if it's them or maybe their stick and the curve on it doesn't help. This is just what i notice. And we all know great things can't happen if you don't have the puck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 3 minutes ago, King Knut said: Numbers like goals are the easiest thing to talk about, but the fact is that consistency wise, we're talking about moving the play in general. When you look at advanced metrics, even strength Giroux's Corsi for is about 5 points higher than Schenn's and his Corsi for relative is over 6% higher (Schenn's is negative). And you're looking at about the same for Fenwick. Schenn also gets more offensive zone starts and fewer defensive zone starts. Giroux also averages about three minutes more per night than Schenn which includes :45 seconds of Shorthanded time more than Schenn (who virtually plays no short handed minutes). Giroux does however exactly the same amount of PP time as Schenn which means that about 21% (give or take) of Schenn's total time on the ice is on the PP whereas Giroux's is more like 19%. These aren't particularly wonderful numbers for either player mind you, but it sort of gets at the point especially when you factor in the assignments they're pulling in that 5 on 5 time. Again, I'm having a hard time understanding why they can't seem to make Schenn fit. It's not that I don't like him. I do. I want him to score 75 points. But if he's going to score 55 points and Hakstol can't seem to figure out what the hell to do with him and we can get one of the league's top D men to help guide this young crop coming up and to help us win games... I'm not sure I'm having any difficulty with it. All need to be taken as part of the whole, though, and people tend to get hung up in the now and fail to take into account that all players have ups and downs in their careers with any number of factors that play a part. Last year, Schenn was a positive Corsi player. Giroux has also played a significant portion of the season this year with Voracek, who is even better at maintaining control of the puck than Giroux is - a fact which will affect his numbers. And at the end of the day, while useful, Corsi doesn't win games. Goals do. I can handle a player with a middling Corsi who actually puts up points. Again, I'm not opposed to trading Schenn in the right deal. But trading Schenn for a defenseman necessitates yet another trade to replace the scoring that was just jettisoned. If we're going to acquire Shattenkirk, trade D for D and be done with it. I don't think the Flyers are in the right place for the approach, but at least it stops the need to make a string of trades where you create weaknesses to fill other weaknesses and end up chasing yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 I'll throw this in regarding Schenn's Corsi numbers. Last year, Giroux has a CF% of 52.4 without Schenn, and 52.2 with him. Schenn was a 48.4 without Giroux. So while Schenn didn't necessarily drive play himself, he didn't have a deleterious effect on the ability of his line to control the puck. It's also no surprise that Schenn's Corsi numbers were best with the players he spent the largest part of the season with - Giroux and Simmonds. The same can be said of Simmonds - his CF% went up slightly when with Schenn. Of course that has a lot to do with Giroux's puck control, but it also is likely tied to having consistent linemates. I'm not a fan of Hakstol's juggling. It's not a college season where each loss is magnified to the point where you have to squeeze every win out you can. Of course points are important, but over such a long season you can afford to give lines a chance to gel over a few losses so players get used to the abilities and tendencies of their linemates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 7 hours ago, ruxpin said: I'm thinking this would have to be done via trade, but then the question becomes, "we've already traded the most likely asset to do this, so who?" I don't know that. The free agent pickings are not deep. Would you take a year or two flyer (no pun intended) on a 32 year old Vanek? Patrick Sharp would be a maybe, but he's already 35, is starting to break down a little, and would have to take a significant pay cut before I'd consider him. Vanek would at least be in the $2.5-$3M range. I'm not really high on the idea myself, but what do you think? No real idea. Carter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 4 hours ago, AJgoal said: All need to be taken as part of the whole, though, and people tend to get hung up in the now and fail to take into account that all players have ups and downs in their careers with any number of factors that play a part. Last year, Schenn was a positive Corsi player. Giroux has also played a significant portion of the season this year with Voracek, who is even better at maintaining control of the puck than Giroux is - a fact which will affect his numbers. And at the end of the day, while useful, Corsi doesn't win games. Goals do. I can handle a player with a middling Corsi who actually puts up points. Again, I'm not opposed to trading Schenn in the right deal. But trading Schenn for a defenseman necessitates yet another trade to replace the scoring that was just jettisoned. If we're going to acquire Shattenkirk, trade D for D and be done with it. I don't think the Flyers are in the right place for the approach, but at least it stops the need to make a string of trades where you create weaknesses to fill other weaknesses and end up chasing yourself. The blues maybe into a d man. They won't be able to protect all the Fwds they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 2 hours ago, King Knut said: No real idea. Carter? You know what's nagging me? We trade Schenn and in 2-3 years he's the new Jeff Carter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 3 minutes ago, ruxpin said: You know what's nagging me? We trade Schenn and in 2-3 years he's the new Jeff Carter. He's not nearly as good a center as Carter, especially not defensively. And I think this might be where the issues are coming from with his lack of 5v5 scoring this year. Schenn's loked best at wing (imo), but he's been playing center most of this season. Might be a contributing factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 4 minutes ago, AJgoal said: He's not nearly as good a center as Carter, especially not defensively Yeah, but neither was Carter at Schenn's age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 7 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Yeah, but neither was Carter at Schenn's age. What's really ironic is that Carter was traded for exactly the player you needed to play on his wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.