Jump to content

Hextall's Offseason Moves


JJMason33

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JJMason33 said:

I don't understand what the gamble is?  Are we going to all of a sudden become Stanley Cup contenders with Budaj or Elliot?  Are we at risk of missing the playoffs for the first time in 25 years?  There is nothing on the line for next season.  There is no window closing that suggests we need to get a goalie now or else...  Heck I would rather stay with Nuevirth even if he gets injured and plays only 1 game and Stolarz and Lyons have to play...  I'm just fine being patient 1 more year then getting a log jam at goalie and possibly having to deal with a bad contract.  That is the bigger gamble.

 

 

The gamble is that you have Neuvy go down with an injury and Stolarz has to carry the load.  He is coming off a bad injury and I am still not old on him being an everyday type goalie in the NHL.  I am all for being patient as well but until those goalie prospects prove they are legit we won't know what we will have.   Nobody wants Hextall to sign a goalie to a long term deal - and as I referred to in the post it should be a stopgap and nothing more.   If Mason ends up coming back I have no problem with that whatsoever as long it is nothing more than a 2 year deal.   

 

Having a goalie with experience will only help the young d-men IMO.   This Team could not score goals last year during 5 vs 5 play and I rather have a "decent" goalie in the short term than rely on the oft-injured Neuvy and unknown Stolarz.   If Neuvy is taken in the expansion Hextall is going to need to find a veteran replacement.   As Hextall always likes to point out:   he thinks the Flyers are a playoff Team now.    Going into the season with 2 rookie goalies is not trying to win.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 431
  • Created
  • Last Reply
27 minutes ago, radoran said:

I'm not kidding at all. I don't dispute your points - and in large part agree with a lot of it - but the window on the VeeGees/Won The Trades core isn't going to stay open forever 

 

Aw man...  I don't know how to tell you this, but the VeeGees didn't win the trades.  If there was a loser in those trades it was the Flyers.  Clearly.  It was complicated by the loss of Pronger and the subsequent mental breakdown (I still think a stroke post concussion syndrome are possible explanations) for the moves Homer then made, but long and short is that the Blue Jackets are a first place team and the Kings won two cups and Jeff Carter is still their best player.  Those two teams won.  The Flyers lost.  Miserably.  

 

And I say that with the full admission that Simmonds and Couturier are maybe my two favorite Flyers (though Provo and Ghost are climbing strong).

 

Their window for Jake and G as the "core" to compete for a cup is probably closed now IMHO. 

However on the bright side, their window as veteran leadership that could have some key moments and put up big numbers in support of competing for a cup is just opening.  

 

Like I said, the good news is that we'll have 5 more years of the VeeGees to transition those guys into a cohesive core on which to hang future rosters.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

I'm not kidding at all. I don't dispute your points - and in large part agree with a lot of it - but the window on the VeeGees/Won The Trades core isn't going to stay open forever and the view outside is Pittsburgh. The Pens were 23 points better than the Flyers this past season and are actually competing for a second consecutive Cup. In fact, over the past two seasons the Pens' existing core has more playoff rounds than the Flyers do in the past seven.

 

And the facts are that Crosby and Malkin and Kessel aren't going anywhere for the next five years and they also have Letang (pending injury) and Maataa sewn up for that duration, too. Those guys are at the same career point as the Flyers' top players.

 

And they look like they have a legit, #1 franchise goalie in the making in Murray - not a bunch of Highly Touted Prospects (only one of whom has actually seen any NHL time).

 

Those are the guys that the Flyers are going to have to compete with. And they also have some talented young players who are getting at least Eastern Conference Final experience this year while the Flyers are honing their golf games. Competing for back-to-back Cups also makes them an attractive place for potential free agents.

 

The Pens have some possible cap trouble on the near horizon but if they can move Fleury that gives them some significant relief - and they're out from under him in two seasons anyway.

 

The general theme on this thread has been that the Flyers aren't "really" going to be in position to compete for the next few, if not 3-5, seasons as defence and goalies develop (presuming, of course, that significant portions of them pan out). Over that time period - whether two, three, four or five - it's the Pens that will still be sitting there.

 

Essentially, I'm in "show me" mode at this point and my orange-and-black glasses* don't have rose colored lenses.

 

I'm happy to be wrong and I'm clearly going to be watching as this all plays out.

 

 

 

* I wear the pair in my avatar every day with my Flyers hat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

Aw man...  I don't know how to tell you this, but the VeeGees didn't win the trades.  If there was a loser in those trades it was the Flyers.  Clearly.  It was complicated by the loss of Pronger and the subsequent mental breakdown (I still think a stroke post concussion syndrome are possible explanations) for the moves Homer then made, but long and short is that the Blue Jackets are a first place team and the Kings won two cups and Jeff Carter is still their best player.  Those two teams won.  The Flyers lost.  Miserably. 

 

Just so you know, I've been against the "Won The Trades" concept from the day the trades happened.

 

And I own a Simmonds jersey :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

 

The gamble is that you have Neuvy go down with an injury and Stolarz has to carry the load.  He is coming off a bad injury and I am still not old on him being an everyday type goalie in the NHL.  I am all for being patient as well but until those goalie prospects prove they are legit we won't know what we will have.   Nobody wants Hextall to sign a goalie to a long term deal - and as I referred to in the post it should be a stopgap and nothing more.   If Mason ends up coming back I have no problem with that whatsoever as long it is nothing more than a 2 year deal.   

 

Having a goalie with experience will only help the young d-men IMO.   This Team could not score goals last year during 5 vs 5 play and I rather have a "decent" goalie in the short term than rely on the oft-injured Neuvy and unknown Stolarz.   If Neuvy is taken in the expansion Hextall is going to need to find a veteran replacement.   As Hextall always likes to point out:   he thinks the Flyers are a playoff Team now.    Going into the season with 2 rookie goalies is not trying to win.   

And I don't think they should go into it with 2 rookie goalies.  If Nuevy gets selected by all means go after someone for 2 years.  I just dont believe in trading Nuevy just to sign another slightly better player or signing another slightly better player and using Nuevy as a back-up.

 

At some point these goalies have to be moved up.  If Stolarz or Lyons have no NHL experience next year what is going to happen next year when Hart, Sandstrom, Stolarz, Lyons, and Madsen need AHL playing time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, radoran said:

 

McPhee drafted Neuvirth and Grubauer. Wouldn't at all surprise me to see him snag both for Vegas and run that as a tandem next season.

 

It's circumstantial, to be sure, but not an outlandish idea by any stretch.

 

And the timing of the Neuvirth deal keeps the window open for Mason - pending cost and term, yadda yadda.

 

That's the other part of it.  If they had signed Mason, they'd be leaving him exposed and Mason would have no choice but to go to Vegas.  As it is, Vegas would have to negotiate with him same as the rest of the league.  

 

Not getting signed yet was a favor to Mason as much as to the Flyers.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's nothing stopping Vegas from taking 7 goalies in the expansion draft, either, if they felt there were that many that were the best options off of various teams. So they could draft Grubbauer, Neuvirth, Subban, Jarry, and Raanta (for examples) if they so choose.

 

It will be interesting to see what they do and who they target.They don't really have to go too crazy on salaries to hit 43.8 million, so there's a good chance they target younger players with upside with the majority of their picks and then leverage some of those players to acquire established players whom their teams wouldn't let go for free, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

There's nothing stopping Vegas from taking 7 goalies in the expansion draft, either, if they felt there were that many that were the best options off of various teams.

 

Not really.

 

They must select 14 forwards.

 

9 defensemen and 3 goalies.

 

For a total of 30 players after all is said and done. They MUST select a player from each team.

 

And a minimum of 20 players who are under contract for next season.

 

So yeah i guess they COULD take goalies with the other available spots.

 

And then trade them for something of use.

 

I don't think it would be very smart but yeah they could do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OccamsRazor said:

 

Not really.

 

They must select 14 forwards.

 

9 defensemen and 3 goalies.

 

For a total of 30 players after all is said and done. They MUST select a player from each team.

 

 

14+9+3=26. Leaving 4 players at unspecified positions. So yes indeed, they could select 7 goalies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

 

14+9+3=26. Leaving 4 players at unspecified positions. So yes indeed, they could select 7 goalies.

 

I stated that. It just wouldn't be smart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Goalies are notoriously difficult to predict, even after they hit the AHL. I doubt they'd go with the exact five I mentioned, but they could certainly pick three prospect goalies and go with a total of five to increase their likelihood of hitting. Add to that the potential to trade some of the pieces they acquire, and who knows. 

 

Let's take Raanta for example. The Rangers would most likely want to get something for him, but the market for a goalie is somewhat slim this year. Now let's say the Flyers have interest, but the Rangers won't trade him within the division. There's nothing preventing Las Vegas from selecting Grubbauer and Neuvirth to play for them now, Jarry and Subban to play in Chicago, and then picking Raanta and immediately flipping him to the Flyers for someone they want more. 

 

McPhee's going to have a lot of options due to the large pool of expansion candidates. He'll pick a player from each of 30 teams, but I doubt that all 30 of those players will still be in the organization within a couple of weeks. There's likely to be a lot of dealing both leading up to and following the expansion draft. So picking extra goalies or defensemen could be very smart, as long as there's a plan for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

Not really. Goalies are notoriously difficult to predict, even after they hit the AHL. I doubt they'd go with the exact five I mentioned, but they could certainly pick three prospect goalies and go with a total of five to increase their likelihood of hitting. Add to that the potential to trade some of the pieces they acquire, and who knows. 

 

Let's take Raanta for example. The Rangers would most likely want to get something for him, but the market for a goalie is somewhat slim this year. Now let's say the Flyers have interest, but the Rangers won't trade him within the division. There's nothing preventing Las Vegas from selecting Grubbauer and Neuvirth to play for them now, Jarry and Subban to play in Chicago, and then picking Raanta and immediately flipping him to the Flyers for someone they want more. 

 

McPhee's going to have a lot of options due to the large pool of expansion candidates. He'll pick a player from each of 30 teams, but I doubt that all 30 of those players will still be in the organization within a couple of weeks. There's likely to be a lot of dealing both leading up to and following the expansion draft. So picking extra goalies or defensemen could be very smart, as long as there's a plan for them.

 

 

Well they won't have a AHL club till the following year.

 

So they will have to put the guys they select with i forget which club they will keep their prospects with but the other team will also want to play their prospects in net as well so there wouldn't be really nowhere to play all the guys.

 

So then when another club knows you need to move the goalies you wouldn't have any leverage. So as i said it wouldn't be a smart strategic move on Mcphee's part. You never want to lose leverage in a deal you don't have to. He won't be GM long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Well they won't have a AHL club till the following year.

They just signed a five-year agreement with the Chicago Wolves, starting this coming season. St. Louis will keep some players on the team, but Vegas is their primary talent provider now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/22/2017 at 0:01 PM, King Knut said:

 

I believe Hischeir said that in the press but  soon had hims of corrected.  He was mistaken. He was not "on loan". 

Not beating a dead horse but I want to bring this up again.  

 

Can anyone confirm if this correct or not?

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.broadstreethockey.com/platform/amp/flyers-draft-nhl/2017/5/3/15529960/nhl-draft-2017-nico-hischier-vs-nolan-patrick-ahl-loophole

 

http://thehockeywriters.com/nico-hischier-2017-nhl-draft-prospect-profile/

 

So which is it?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DaGreatGazoo said:

 

And on the 3rd page of google results, I found this. 

 

https://www.hockeyfeed.com/nhl-news/report-top-nhl-prospect-not-eligible-for-ahl-next-season#

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, DaGreatGazoo said:

As per Bill Meltzer who did his homework Hischier is not on loan from his overseas contract.  He had his contract written with an "out clause" that let him end the contract overseas.  That means he is NOT eligible for AHL as he is on a junior contract just like Patrick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, AJgoal said:

There's nothing stopping Vegas from taking 7 goalies in the expansion draft, either, if they felt there were that many that were the best options off of various teams. So they could draft Grubbauer, Neuvirth, Subban, Jarry, and Raanta (for examples) if they so choose.

 

It will be interesting to see what they do and who they target.They don't really have to go too crazy on salaries to hit 43.8 million, so there's a good chance they target younger players with upside with the majority of their picks and then leverage some of those players to acquire established players whom their teams wouldn't let go for free, 

McFee has stated that he will be looking for young forwards with potential and veteran defenseman. 

**crosses fingers** AMAC.  Not going to happen but I would totally trade Laughton and Nuevirth to have them select MacDonald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JJMason33 said:

As per Bill Meltzer who did his homework Hischier is not on loan from his overseas contract.  He had his contract written with an "out clause" that let him end the contract overseas.  That means he is NOT eligible for AHL as he is on a junior contract just like Patrick.

Thanks, dude.  I went back thru some old Meltzer blogs, but couldn't find anything.  Appreciate the update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JJMason33 said:

McFee has stated that he will be looking for young forwards with potential and veteran defenseman. 

**crosses fingers** AMAC.  Not going to happen but I would totally trade Laughton and Nuevirth to have them select MacDonald.

Why? We don't need the cap space right now and no matter what fans say, Hextall and Hakstol see MacDonald as a top-6 blueliner on this team. By all means, it would be great if Vegas took him, but there's no point in giving up assets like Laughton in order to get Vegas to take MacDonald off this team 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, JJMason33 said:

And I don't think they should go into it with 2 rookie goalies.  If Nuevy gets selected by all means go after someone for 2 years.  I just dont believe in trading Nuevy just to sign another slightly better player or signing another slightly better player and using Nuevy as a back-up.

 

At some point these goalies have to be moved up.  If Stolarz or Lyons have no NHL experience next year what is going to happen next year when Hart, Sandstrom, Stolarz, Lyons, and Madsen need AHL playing time?

 

To boot, I'm also not that worried about Stolarz not being able to carry the load.  Think about 2010 when Emery and then his backup Boucher both went down.  That team was relying on Michael Leighton.  Boosh came back and got them into the playoffs with a good stretch and the Shootout win against the Rangers.  But the long story short, That team would have played an Anthony Stolarz in a heartbeat and it would had to have been just fine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, RJ8812 said:

Why? We don't need the cap space right now and no matter what fans say, Hextall and Hakstol see MacDonald as a top-6 blueliner on this team. By all means, it would be great if Vegas took him, but there's no point in giving up assets like Laughton in order to get Vegas to take MacDonald off this team 

 

I'm with you.  Laughton isn't signed.  He could get traded to Vegas anyway (or anyone else).  There is legitimately no room for him here anymore and if another team thinks he can be an NHL player for them, he should have that shot.  

 

YOu're right.  They don't need the cap space and there really aren't any Free Agents that fill their needs that they could use extra cap space for.  

 

But there are Flyers fans so blinded by his salary, that they would still scream bloody murder about MacDonald if he never played another game for the Flyers and finished out his contract on the Phantoms.  If it doesn't hurt the team, who cares?  

 

They're already so blinded by things that they didn't notice he was perhaps the 2nd most reliable D man for the Flyers last year.  

THat's not to say he should be on the team or the first pairing, but he was actually OK last year.  People will say, "but he blew this coverage and that goal and blah blah blach" and they're right, but I'd tell them that D men from Manning to Burns make the same mistakes all the time.  Because playing Defense in the NHL is hard.   AMac is not terrible.  He's meh to above average meh.  

People just can't get over the bad contract.  It blinds them to what's going on on the ice.  And on the ice, you can do a lot better, but you can also do a lot worse.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JJMason33 said:

McFee has stated that he will be looking for young forwards with potential and veteran defenseman. 

**crosses fingers** AMAC.  Not going to happen but I would totally trade Laughton and Nuevirth to have them select MacDonald.

 

It's unnecessary, and frankly I wouldn't do it simply because we would then be left with 1 veteran Defenseman this year.  Well 2 if you count Manning.  

 

I'd trade them Laughton and Neuvirth just to give those guys a place to play hockey and get them out of our hair.  

 

Like it or not (and his contract no longer hurts the Flyers) MacDonald is actually a semi useful player at this point.  Next year he can be bought out or traded to the Coyotes to help them hit the cap floor again.  Right now, having a D man (even if he should be a #6) whose played more than 100 NHL games is a good thing for this team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, King Knut said:

But there are Flyers fans so blinded by his salary, that they would still scream bloody murder about MacDonald if he never played another game for the Flyers and finished out his contract on the Phantoms.  If it doesn't hurt the team, who cares? 

 

You are absolutely correct that keeping him at this point "doesn't" hurt the team, but I don't necessarily agree that having that salary hasn't hurt the team.

 

Were there no better FA options available over the past three years that that money could have been assigned to? Matt Niskanen in 2014 (signed for two years longer and $750K more but who had more NHL points last season than MacDonald has had in the past three years) for example?

 

The fact is that the contract has handcuffed the team - to the extent that they even had to bury him in the AHL.

 

It doesn't necessarily hurt the team rightnow but it does mean that the team effectively can't pursue the likes of Shattenkirk, Kulikov or Stone in the FA market this season. We can debate whether or not any of those guys - or Niskanen - would be a good "fit" for the Flyers, but IMO they're better than the $5M 5/6 defenceman they have. And having that 5/6 guy making a Top 4 salary means there isn't a spot for a better FA even if they wanted to get him.

 

YMMV.

 

To be clear, MacDonald is "an NHL player" - it's just that he's a Kris Russell and not a Kevin Shattenkirk. He's never been the guy he was touted to be and he never will be.

 

That said, I don't advocate for buying him out at this point but when they're looking for the money to re-sign Simmonds it wouldn't surprise me to see them do it in June of 2019.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, King Knut said:

They're already so blinded by things that they didn't notice he was perhaps the 2nd most reliable D man for the Flyers last year.  

While I agree with your points about his salary blinding people, this is also more of an indictment of last years D corps, than a reflection of his strong play.  On the Flyers he's a top 4 defenseman, on most playoff teams he's not.  Hell, Streit was top 4 for Philly, got traded to Pitt, and even with all their playoff injuries, was still the LAST defenseman they went with to fill in.  

 

He's not that good...his contract just magnifies that fact.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

 

It doesn't necessarily hurt the team rightnow but it does mean that the team effectively can't pursue the likes of Shattenkirk, Kulikov or Stone in the FA market this season. We can debate whether or not any of those guys - or Niskanen - would be a good "fit" for the Flyers, but IMO they're better than the $5M 5/6 defenceman they have. And having that 5/6 guy making a Top 4 salary means there isn't a spot for a better FA even if they wanted to get him.

 

 

Hextall wouldn't be going after those guys in free agency anyways. That's not how he's building this team. That's not how any team build a team anymore (over paying free agents). This team isn't just one top-4 defenseman away from being Cup contenders.

 

You build your core through the draft and when you feel like your team is close, then you may look at spending more money in free agency to help put your team over the top.

 

Right now, this team is not close to that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RJ8812 said:

Hextall wouldn't be going after those guys in free agency anyways. That's not how he's building this team. That's not how any team build a team anymore (over paying free agents). This team isn't just one top-4 defenseman away from being Cup contenders.

 

You build your core through the draft and when you feel like your team is close, then you may look at spending more money in free agency to help put your team over the top.

 

Right now, this team is not even close to that

 

Right, so that takes care of this season (which we're already in agreement that AMac doesn't affect) but it doesn't really address the past three does it?

 

You can believe that a player taking up 7% of the cap doesn't have any affect on the decisions that the team makes - and that's fine - I just disagree.

 

Signing MacDonald to that deal was a mistake, pure and simple. It was when it happened and it remains so now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...