Town Hall

[brelic]

18 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

I am not for selling low with Giroux.

Right now the return isn't going to be for **** so why bother ? That's a poor use of an asset. 

There is something not right with him.

I don't think he has NFL running back syndrome where all of the sudden they can't find the creases anymore.

I think he's playing with an injury.

The sudden drop off in productivity is alarming and I think indicative of issues other than being 29. 

There are areas of his game that age doesn't affect and his puck handling always a strength bordering on wizardry is suddenly average, is it head injury related? the recurrence of his wrist injuries from a couple of springs ago...? I'm not sure #28's drop off is too acute and drastic for me to think he's finished ,

 

 

I agree.

 

It might have something to do with being surrounded by a bunch of stiffs. Only in the Flyers universe is Raffl a top line winger. It seems like he's been moved away from that position lately, but sheesh. The fact that he was there for any length of time is absurd. He has ELEVEN points! He's tied with offensive dynamo VandeVelde and behind Gudas and MacDud. 

 

Point being, the Flyers have about FOUR legitimate top six players. Giroux, Voracek, Schenn, and Simmonds. That's it. And no true snipers. Simmonds is a garbage goal collector, and Schenn is a PP specialist who is woefully inconsistent.

 

I think our 2C position is solved. It's Giroux. He can safely play that position for another 5-6 years and be productive, and he's the kind of veteran I'd want there when the team starts to gel with our incoming prospects. BUT, we need more legitimate top six players, and a new 1C to emerge eventually. Will that be Rubtsov? 

 

[fanaticV3.0]

On 2/17/2017 at 0:47 PM, jammer2 said:

 

 I think the whole thing comes down to this. The Flyers must choose, either a free-wheeling offensive style that encourages goals OR a defensive shell type of game that is conservative and basically means playing tight man to man, keep the game close and wait for your chances. The Flyers, out of pure necessity MUST go with the latter. They simply don't have the horses to play an up tempo offensive type of game. It's basically an identity crisis. When the Flyers go to the shut down defensive shell game, guys like Ghost and TK will be the odd people out, simply because the Flyers are a stronger defensive team when they are not in the line-up.

 

That's a little tricky since this team is a work in progress. Not that you should wait until you think you have the team you want, but a lot of adjustments might have to be made. You are right, they should  think defense since they don't have much offense. But they do need offense, so it's probable that they will go after that type of player; who might not fit the system, but you still need regardless.

[murraycraven]

7 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

I agree.

 

It might have something to do with being surrounded by a bunch of stiffs. Only in the Flyers universe is Raffl a top line winger. It seems like he's been moved away from that position lately, but sheesh. The fact that he was there for any length of time is absurd. He has ELEVEN points! He's tied with offensive dynamo VandeVelde and behind Gudas and MacDud. 

 

Point being, the Flyers have about FOUR legitimate top six players. Giroux, Voracek, Schenn, and Simmonds. That's it. And no true snipers. Simmonds is a garbage goal collector, and Schenn is a PP specialist who is woefully inconsistent.

 

I think our 2C position is solved. It's Giroux. He can safely play that position for another 5-6 years and be productive, and he's the kind of veteran I'd want there when the team starts to gel with our incoming prospects. BUT, we need more legitimate top six players, and a new 1C to emerge eventually. Will that be Rubtsov? 

 

 

 

so we are paying 8.3M per year through 2021-22 for a 2nd Center?   Awesome....

[OccamsRazor]

31 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

 

so we are paying 8.3M per year through 2021-22 for a 2nd Center?   Awesome....

 

With a NMC!!!

 

Saaaaweeeeeet!!!!

 

[brelic]

25 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

 

so we are paying 8.3M per year through 2021-22 for a 2nd Center?   Awesome....

 

Not now. We are paying that for a 1C. There's no one better at center on our current team. In 3ish years, he can be a 2C when we find/develop/trade for a 1C in the making, or a bonafide 1C. 

 

 

[murraycraven]

14 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

Not now. We are paying that for a 1C. There's no one better at center on our current team. In 3ish years, he can be a 2C when we find/develop/trade for a 1C in the making, or a bonafide 1C. 

 

 

 

but still paying 8.3M for a 2C....   

[brelic]

3 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

but still paying 8.3M for a 2C....   

 

Yes, but for 1-2 years. And he's more than a 2C. He's the longest tenured Flyer, he's the captain, and he's been through a ton of ups and downs. He's the embodiment of drafting, developing, and playing for one team - something this organization rarely does. 

 

In short, he has value way beyond the scoresheet.

[murraycraven]

36 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

Yes, but for 1-2 years. And he's more than a 2C. He's the longest tenured Flyer, he's the captain, and he's been through a ton of ups and downs. He's the embodiment of drafting, developing, and playing for one team - something this organization rarely does. 

 

In short, he has value way beyond the scoresheet.

 

 

I just feel paying for a 2C at 8.3M per year to be bit much considering the cap.   By that point you are going to have to either trade or resign Simmonds who is going to get a hefty raise, pay Ghost even if he is signed to a bridge deal, sign TK and Provorov, and deal w/ new contracts for expiring entry level deals.    

 

Back of a napkin math here:  If we do sign a bona-fide #1 I assume the contract is going to be in the 7M+ range b/c I don't see a 1C in our pipeline right now.   Just looking at the cap the Flyers would then have 8.3M per year for Jake and G, 7M for the newly acquired 1C, Simmonds making at a minimum of 6M...

 

Say the cap is 80M at that point the Flyers are at nearly 38M b/t 4 players...  that is a lot of dough wrapped up into a small group.   My view is that if you are being paid that type of money you better bring value on the score-sheet and off the score-sheet.  I am all for warm and fuzzy feelings but if that is the case then McDud gets way more flack than he ever should.   

[brelic]

6 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

 

I just feel paying for a 2C at 8.3M per year to be bit much considering the cap.   By that point you are going to have to either trade or resign Simmonds who is going to get a hefty raise, pay Ghost even if he is signed to a bridge deal, sign TK and Provorov, and deal w/ new contracts for expiring entry level deals.    

 

Back of a napkin math here:  If we do sign a bona-fide #1 I assume the contract is going to be in the 7M+ range b/c I don't see a 1C in our pipeline right now.   Just looking at the cap the Flyers would then have 8.3M per year for Jake and G, 7M for the newly acquired 1C, Simmonds making at a minimum of 6M...

 

Say the cap is 80M at that point the Flyers are at nearly 38M b/t 4 players...  that is a lot of dough wrapped up into a small group.   My view is that if you are being paid that type of money you better bring value on the score-sheet and off the score-sheet.  I am all for warm and fuzzy feelings but if that is the case then McDud gets way more flack than he ever should.   

 

I know what you're saying... but that might just be the formula in the NHL. 

 

The Pens have 4 guys at $6.8M +. The Hawks have 4 guys at $6M+, but two of those are making $10.5, so the average for the 4 players is $8M. The Ducks are in the same situation. So are the Caps, plus they have Kuznetsov and Orlov as RFAs.

 

So having four players at the top end of the salary scale doesn't seem to be prohibitive in icing a top tier team.

 

 

[murraycraven]

1 minute ago, brelic said:

 

I know what you're saying... but that might just be the formula in the NHL. 

 

The Pens have 4 guys at $6.8M +. The Hawks have 4 guys at $6M+, but two of those are making $10.5, so the average for the 4 players is $8M. The Ducks are in the same situation. So are the Caps, plus they have Kuznetsov and Orlov as RFAs.

 

So having four players at the top end of the salary scale doesn't seem to be prohibitive in icing a top tier team.

 

 

 

 

yup.... but when you have players like the Pens and Hawks I think that is a different equation.   Their players are being paid to be "stars" and they play like "stars."  Something we need desperately...

[brelic]

12 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

 

yup.... but when you have players like the Pens and Hawks I think that is a different equation.   Their players are being paid to be "stars" and they play like "stars."  Something we need desperately...

 

Well, our "stars" are playing like "stars" to the best of their abilities, I guess. Giroux was a 22nd overall pick, not 1st overall like Malkin and Crosby. But he's still the top star on our team, and deserves to be paid as such - and if we didn't, some other team would. That seems to be the prevailing mentality in the NHL.

 

I still think if our team had more talent overall and the coach was able to squeeze it out of them in the best way possible, we'd be seeing a better version of Giroux and Voracek. It's easy to soar when you're winning and sag when you're losing. They wouldn't be Crosby/Malkin good, but when the team clicks, it brings out the best in people. Look at our ten game winning streak.

 

So it begs the question: shouldn't our top tier guys be the ones that make the 'clicking' or 'winning' happen? Can't they will this team to victory? Well, sometimes. But not always. And we do have a lot of junk on our roster. To me, Giroux and Voracek are not my concerns even if they've been playing like poo for a while now. We now what they're capable of. 

 

I'm more worried about the dropoff in talent after those two, and the lack of identity and purpose for the role players. They're all just meh and kinda there taking up space. I would keep Giroux, Voracek, Simmonds, Konecny, PEB, and Lyubimov. The rest can go. 

[mojo1917]

@brelic

 

I appreciate your contrarian position on this topic.

The yearly howling for Giroux's head gets a little played out for me. 

When he's playing well, he's a legitimate top 15 player in the league. He has elevated the play of everyone he plays with. He has never been a shoot first guy, he has always been a play-maker.  I remember when the howling was for dealing the good Schenn because he was inconsistent, one of the points I made for keeping him around was he was the true representation of scoring depth for the team because he never saw 5 on 5 time with G. -Now that has changed but it wasn't more than 2 years ago, that G was driving the bus for the entire team when it came to scoring. Now that he's slumping or injured or "done" we're seeing that it is still the case. 

I don't think we need to strip him of the C, I don't think we should trade him, it is my hope he is still on the roster and contributing when the team is "built" and ready to contend. I don't want to see him shipped off for 3 quarters for a dollar and have him win on another team, the Richards and Carter situations are ongoing and I don't relish the thought of a new name to run down while touting our "trades won".  

[vis]

3 hours ago, brelic said:

It might have something to do with being surrounded by a bunch of stiffs.

Some of G's woes are in part related to the lack of talent on the team.  I'll give you that.  But shouldn't "star" players be able to succeed, to a degree, in spite of their linemates?  Or perhaps even elevate the play of their linemates?  I don't really see that being the case with G, at least 5v5.  Even when paired with Voracek, the other best offensive weapon on the team, his 5v5 production is scary bad.  

 

When watching him, it's clear he isn't the same dynamic player he once was.  Maybe it is injuries, but that has to be a concern going forward.  When will he return to being injury-free?  Seems this is a question every year.

 

I appreciate that he was developed here.  And I appreciate continuity of personnel to maintain some sense of "identity" for the franchise.  I also appreciate that perhaps he might bring other, intangible assets as a veteran when this team is in better position to compete.  I am tired of the roster turnover.  All that considered, in the context of rebuilding this team, his contract is problematic and I'm not sure any of the foregoing is worth that cap hit.

 

I'm not sure if his "value" ever increases from here.

[radoran]

4 hours ago, brelic said:

 

Yes, but for 1-2 years. And he's more than a 2C. He's the longest tenured Flyer, he's the captain, and he's been through a ton of ups and downs. He's the embodiment of drafting, developing, and playing for one team - something this organization rarely does. 

 

In short, he has value way beyond the scoresheet.

 

And that includes that his actual salary drops precipitously in the last two years of the deal making him more tradeable based on the Hartnell "thanks for being in the family, now get out of here" principle.

 

I think Giroux will benefit from playing a 2C role, as will the Flyers. With talented scoring wingers he can still IMO be very effective. Putting him with two young guys (like, say, Konecny, Lindblom and/or Rubtsov) could benefit everyone (much as it has Mikko Koivu in Minnesota). Yes, it's a $8.3M 2nd line center. Yes, like Voracek, it's about $2M too much.

 

It is what it is. Make the best of it. A very good argument can be made that when the contract was signed it made sense. He was in the middle of his "most points from time A to time B" - the Jagr year, the 48-game season and then the 13-14 year. We need that guy who was scoring 25-30.

 

Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before, but making Giroux #2 does leave open the questions of who is the #1C... And where to find one...

 

[jammer2]

7 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

I am not for selling low with Giroux.

Right now the return isn't going to be for **** so why bother ? That's a poor use of an asset. 

There is something not right with him.

I don't think he has NFL running back syndrome where all of the sudden they can't find the creases anymore.

I think he's playing with an injury.

The sudden drop off in productivity is alarming and I think indicative of issues other than being 29. 

There are areas of his game that age doesn't affect and his puck handling always a strength bordering on wizardry is suddenly average, is it head injury related? the recurrence of his wrist injuries from a couple of springs ago...? I'm not sure #28's drop off is too acute and drastic for me to think he's finished ,

 

 

 

 As per usual, you make a lot of valid points. A few things I have noticed, I don't think he has lost a step per say, but I don't think his top speed is equal to what it used to be a few years back either. He lost a gear somewhere along the way, probably due to being 29 and having a lot of hockey played in his last 16 or so years.

 

 The one thing you touched on is most alarming, that is going from a stickhandling wizard to just above average. How does one lose stickhandling proficiency? That is kinda something you are born with, develop it and it really never leaves, just the legs and the rest of the body start to go. I'm sure Wayne Gretzky could pick up a hockey stick and fake out people in a phone booth tomorrow if felt so inclined....lol.

 

 I think you are probably right about G having an injury. This could be the start of his body breaking down, the stress his body has taken playing over a decade in the NHL. It's all the more reason to at least consider what you could get for him. In his early years, he played a pretty physical brand of hockey for a smaller type of forward. He did not play with the same vigor as Mike Richards did, but I do believe G is starting to break down like Mike did a few years back. These small frames just cannot take the physical grind of back to back to back etc of 82 game seasons and or playoffs.

 

 The one thing that *can't* be associated with an injury is his alarmingly stinky 5 on 5 pts production. That slide started in earnest in 2014 and the sad sack futility continues to this day. He could not have been hurt all that time, so he has to own at least that horrid stat. 

 

 The odd thing, G used to LIKE to initiate contact. Now, if you watch him forecheck, he's just in survival mode, rarely punishing an opposing d-man, he just kinda half heartedly rolls off the hit, that more than anything tells me he is not at 100%, cause guys don't just stop enjorying the hitting aspect of the game, they stop to ensure the pain does not get worse.

 

 

 

[jammer2]

 

 

 

5 hours ago, brelic said:

In short, he has value way beyond the scoresheet.

 

    I'm sure Simon Gagne (Flyer drafted, developed and played with them for 11 of his 15 year career btw) thought he had some value beyond the scoresheet as well. Not only was he lied to, they then forced him to snake away to the Bruins in shame. That was WITH Mr.Loyal Ed Snider alive. One can only wonder how ruthless they will be moving forward.

[elmatus]

3 hours ago, vis said:

Some of G's woes are in part related to the lack of talent on the team.  I'll give you that.  But shouldn't "star" players be able to succeed, to a degree, in spite of their linemates?  Or perhaps even elevate the play of their linemates?

 

Yeah, of course, but only to a point. Giroux is not Crosby. Crosby can take Chris Kunitz and turn him into an offensive juggernaut even into his mid-30s. Giroux can't do that. He needs other equally talented folks to help share the load.

 

Look at someone like Backstrom or even St. Louis back in the day. They put up big numbers with legit talent surrounding them, most particularly talent in the form of snipers. Giroux doesn't have that. The closest he's ever had is Hartnell, and they actually did quite well in their time together. What would Backstrom's numbers be without Ovechkin (and vice versa)? They work in tandem and turn into one of the better combos in the league for a decade.

 

Brelic brought up a good point in that Giroux was a 22nd overall pick. He's become far better than that over the years, and as such can definitely be regarded as a great find -- if not a rather accidental one -- but he doesn't have the ability to conjure up an offensive drive from nothing with a bunch of inferior NHL talents on his wings. He needs someone playing shotgun.

[jammer2]

7 hours ago, brelic said:

It might have something to do with being surrounded by a bunch of stiffs. Only in the Flyers universe is Raffl a top line winger. It seems like he's been moved away from that position lately, but sheesh. The fact that he was there for any length of time is absurd. He has ELEVEN points! He's tied with offensive dynamo VandeVelde and behind Gudas and MacDud. 

 

 

 Amen bro, AMEN.  I really get the concept of spacing out your talent, not putting all your eggs in one basket kinda thing....BUT when that plan also involves Raffl playing on the top line, well....that just sad and silly all at the same time. To me, the guy is not really even 3rd line material and he does not have the physical chops to play the type of forechecking game that Philly expects out of their 4th line.  In short, he's no Carbomb....LOL! On ANY other team with decent amount of talent, he would be in the AHL or one of the least effective 4th liners in the entire league. Having him on the top line is a complete and utter joke of monumental proportions.

 

 I HATE the fact he scored 20 goals once. He pulled off that feat when G and V were actually playing an effective offensive game, and STILL, it took him almost a whole season of playing with them to pull it off. The way G and V were playing at the time, a fire hydrant (a non-working one at that...lol) could have potted 20 goals.

[jammer2]

8 hours ago, brelic said:

and Schenn is a PP specialist who is woefully inconsistent.

 

 A power play specialist that has no real elite skill. Usually, when a player is inserted on the top pp, they bring something specific to table. There are some playmakers, finishers with a lethal release, a puck dispersal expert etc etc the tippers and goalie screening (think David Clarkson 4 years ago or JVR in Toronto right now)....Schenn is NONE of those things.  He never did master the one timer, it's usually weak and off target.  The best way to describe Schenn is a Pro Wrestler with no finishing move.

 

 The alarming thing about Schenn is his total lack of vision. For instance, a lot of offensive stars can see, a short and abrupt cut to the right will open up a whole new shooting or passing lane. Brayden would probably just shoot it into the opposing d-mans shin pads. A lot of his goals are throw it on net, try to muck it up by whacking the rebound 2 or 3 times and hope like hell it goes in. Maybe a bit of an exaggeration he does score some talent goals, but they are far and few between. In short, he has a stunning lack of poise with the puck, more likely to treat it like a hot potato than make any kind of a creative play.

 

 

 

 This problem is compounded by Cooters lack of vision. You then have 2 guys in your top 6 that are basically pluggers. This means either one 3rd of the top line or 2/3rd's of the 2nd line lacks creativity and savvy play. Until this problem is solved, we will be a mediocre offensive squad. Raffl and Read are both in the same boat. Count Luybimov as well, and Cousins, Van Develde. It would a LOT easier to name the players *with* vision. That would be V and G, Konecny and Simmer, everyone else is a plugger. We don't have enough smart players, in fact, we are woeful in that department. The one shining point, our coming d-men, Sanhiem, Myers and Provorov and all super intelligent hockey minds with a ton of vision. That might be our saving grace, tons of poise with those kids.

 

 Brayden Schenn is like a cross between Rich and Ron Sutter, and that is not a compliment.

 

 

 

 

 

[vis]

2 hours ago, elmatus said:

Yeah, of course, but only to a point. Giroux is not Crosby. Crosby can take Chris Kunitz and turn him into an offensive juggernaut even into his mid-30s. Giroux can't do that. He needs other equally talented folks to help share the load.

 

He's had Voracek on his wing.  Simmonds as well.  Still, his 5v5 production is atrocious for a 1C with his contract.  Not good value.  There's no excuse for his 5v5 play, terrible linemates or not.

 

These are the 10 players in the NHL with higher cap hits than Giroux's.

 

1. Patrick Kane - $10,500,000 2. Jonathan Toews - $10,500,000  3. Anze Kopitar - $10,000,000  4. Alex Ovechkin - $9,538,462  5. Evgeni Malkin - $9,500,000  6. P.K. Subban - $9,000,000  7. Sidney Crosby - $8,700,000  8. Corey Perry - $8,625,000  9. Steven Stamkos - $8,500,000 10. Henrik Lundqvist - $8,500,000   Giroux is not on the level of any of those players.  Not even close.  You're simply not getting value out of his contract.   Also, to be clear, my desire to trade Giroux is primarily based on the fact that he'll be long past his prime by the time this team is ready to compete.  He's an "old" 29.  I rather try to trade him now, while he has some value, in the hopes of getting some assets back that can be used to build.

[jammer2]

3 hours ago, elmatus said:

Brelic brought up a good point in that Giroux was a 22nd overall pick. He's become far better than that over the years, and as such can definitely be regarded as a great find -- if not a rather accidental one -- but he doesn't have the ability to conjure up an offensive drive from nothing with a bunch of inferior NHL talents on his wings. He needs someone playing shotgun.

 

 

 Drafting G was no accident. It was the product of good ol' fashioned solid scouting. They are more proficient than most teams at uncovering gems late in the 1st. Gagne, Giroux, Konecny are all prime examples. Those 3 in the latter half of the 1st is way more than many teams hit on that late.

 

 Totally agree with you elm....Giroux is not one of those 8 million dollar guys who can turn a Kunitz into a sniping star. Usually, you don't invest that much without having that innate quality of making average players into point producing machines. It usually just comes with the territory. For instance, Patrick Kane, Towes, Crosby, Malkin etc etc. Claude needs his linemates to be considerably better than average to pile up the points. Put it this way, if he had two Raffl's on his right and left wing, he would be a 35-40 point guy.

. 

[jammer2]

2 hours ago, vis said:

Also, to be clear, my desire to trade Giroux is primarily based on the fact that he'll be long past his prime by the time this team is ready to compete.  He's an "old" 29.  I rather try to trade him now, while he has some value, in the hopes of getting some assets back that can be used to build.  

 

 

 

 This has been my theme for the past year or so. Our window opens when the young d-men are playing at an elite level. By the time that happens, G's usefulness will have either expired or become significantly compromised. When he loses a step, (and that will happen) he will become an albatross. You can't legitimately compete for the cup with a 8 mill a year 2nd line center. 

 

 Just for shits and giggles, imagine if the Vegas Knights decided that they need a legitimate star(s) as drawing cards lure the Vegas public out to the rink. I think the Knights will pick 4th in the upcoming draft. Would you move Giroux for the 4th pick overall? Suppose the pick turns into Gabriel Valardi (from my hometown Spits btw). I don't think Valardi will be an outright star, but he has an awesome release and is an accomplished skater. Some view him as a 2C, I think he has the upside to be a 1C.

 

 The Flyers dump G and his declining stats, acquire a young stud forward who will probably get more goals than assists in the NHL (something they have been missing, a true trigger man). A whopping 8 mill cap hit is gone and a promising player on a ELC, that can grow with the d-men AND Rubstov....this looks like a win-win. Maybe not this specific deal, but something along those lines would work. G's horrid 5 on 5 play then becomes somebody else's problem. 

 

 .  Vegas gets a captain and a huge draw, both on the road and at home. They gain instant credibility on their top line, thier power play is instantly respectable.

 

 The one drawback, I don't think George McPhee, the Knights GM is quite this daft....HOWEVER, in a draft where most experts agree there is no generational talents (some say maybe one or two top line players) maybe this is the draft to consider using your 4th overall asset in such a manner. After all, if you miss on this first pick in the Knights first draft, it's almost a ticket out of town real quick, why *not* turn it into something guaranteed, something tangible.

[brelic]

18 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

@brelic

 

I appreciate your contrarian position on this topic.

The yearly howling for Giroux's head gets a little played out for me. 

When he's playing well, he's a legitimate top 15 player in the league. He has elevated the play of everyone he plays with. He has never been a shoot first guy, he has always been a play-maker.  I remember when the howling was for dealing the good Schenn because he was inconsistent, one of the points I made for keeping him around was he was the true representation of scoring depth for the team because he never saw 5 on 5 time with G. -Now that has changed but it wasn't more than 2 years ago, that G was driving the bus for the entire team when it came to scoring. Now that he's slumping or injured or "done" we're seeing that it is still the case. 

I don't think we need to strip him of the C, I don't think we should trade him, it is my hope he is still on the roster and contributing when the team is "built" and ready to contend. I don't want to see him shipped off for 3 quarters for a dollar and have him win on another team, the Richards and Carter situations are ongoing and I don't relish the thought of a new name to run down while touting our "trades won".  

 

I agree, @mojo1917. I like Giroux and he's become the glue for this team. He's not elite, but just a notch below. While his game seems to have narrowed into PP specialist, he can still be a game-changer, and I *know* he has that extra gear in the playoffs. He's a better playoff performer than regular season guy, and that's the kind of player I want leading my team. 

 

 

[brelic]

18 hours ago, vis said:

Some of G's woes are in part related to the lack of talent on the team.  I'll give you that.  But shouldn't "star" players be able to succeed, to a degree, in spite of their linemates?  Or perhaps even elevate the play of their linemates?  I don't really see that being the case with G, at least 5v5.  Even when paired with Voracek, the other best offensive weapon on the team, his 5v5 production is scary bad.  

 

When watching him, it's clear he isn't the same dynamic player he once was.  Maybe it is injuries, but that has to be a concern going forward.  When will he return to being injury-free?  Seems this is a question every year.

 

I appreciate that he was developed here.  And I appreciate continuity of personnel to maintain some sense of "identity" for the franchise.  I also appreciate that perhaps he might bring other, intangible assets as a veteran when this team is in better position to compete.  I am tired of the roster turnover.  All that considered, in the context of rebuilding this team, his contract is problematic and I'm not sure any of the foregoing is worth that cap hit.

 

I'm not sure if his "value" ever increases from here.

 

Yes they should. And Giroux certainly can and has done that - but to a different degree than a Crosby, of course. I can't explain the 5v5 performance - that is definitely a HUGE concern. 

 

I think Giroux makes *certain* players around him better, so it has to be the right mix of players with him. He's a star-light: same great flavour, but less (net) filling. Lol. Ok, I'll let myself out

 

I guess in the end, I'm not concerned about carrying his $8.3M cap hit as a 2C if it's only a few years, you know? I'm just tired of trading our captains because it means so much more than just a hockey trade. It's an identity trade.

 

But, as you've brought up before, this team's "identity" is murky at best. They are a very soft team with not much skill - which is a terrible combination. A tough team is at least tough if still an anachronism in today's NHL. We need much more explosive skill and some overall grit. 

 

 

[brelic]

16 hours ago, radoran said:

 

And that includes that his actual salary drops precipitously in the last two years of the deal making him more tradeable based on the Hartnell "thanks for being in the family, now get out of here" principle.

 

I think Giroux will benefit from playing a 2C role, as will the Flyers. With talented scoring wingers he can still IMO be very effective. Putting him with two young guys (like, say, Konecny, Lindblom and/or Rubtsov) could benefit everyone (much as it has Mikko Koivu in Minnesota). Yes, it's a $8.3M 2nd line center. Yes, like Voracek, it's about $2M too much.

 

It is what it is. Make the best of it. A very good argument can be made that when the contract was signed it made sense. He was in the middle of his "most points from time A to time B" - the Jagr year, the 48-game season and then the 13-14 year. We need that guy who was scoring 25-30.

 

Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before, but making Giroux #2 does leave open the questions of who is the #1C... And where to find one...

 

 

Maybe that's where a trade-from-a-position-of-strength comes in. 

 

I would trade Ghost in a package to get a #1C or top prospect or top 3 draft pick. Ghost is awesome to watch, but I think he ends up being a 3rd pairing PP specialist when all is said and done. That's a great weapon to have in your arsenal, but I do think we have enough up and coming pieces to make Ghost expendable in the right scenario. 

 

EDIT: I would also trade Couturier in the right scenario. I think we have enough pieces in the org to fill that 3C role, whether it be Rubtsov, Cousins, Laughton, Vorobyov, Marody, maybe even Fazleev, Dove-McFalls or Kase. Bottom line, I think we can definitely find a solid 3C from within.

 

EDIT EDIT: Imagine what you could get by packaging Couturier and Ghost. I reckon you could get a top flight haul. Maybe Landeskog+swapping 1st rounders, or Arizona's 1st+.... could you get Dylan Strome? I think those two types of trades make us better now and for the future.