Brian Elliott Signs with the Flyers

[scoopyten]

5 hours ago, jammer2 said:

 

 Welcome, great to have you!   Nice post also. You don't post like a rookie, so I'm assuming you came from another site?

 

 I was advocating for Anders Nilsson, the former Sabre turned Canuck. He has never played more than 35 games, so some risk there, but he's big 6'6 and 220 AND is quite athletic for his size. He's 27 and spent a few years in the KHL before coming to North America. I just think there is untapped potential there, we have probably not seen the best Nilsson yet, despite his being in the late 20's. 

 

 The market at least thinks Elliott and Nilsson are close in value. Cap hits of 2.75 for Elliott (at 2 yrs) and 2.5 mill for 2 yrs for Nillson....but he's 5 years younger. We might not ever find out if Anders is legit....the Canucks....where fantasy goalie go to die!!

 

 Hey, let's make the best of the Elliott situation....a VERY positive stat I just found!!!

 

Sportsnet Stats 

 

✔@SNstats

Best Save Percentage since start of 2011-12 season

1. Cory Schneider .926
2. #Flames Brian Elliott .925

 

Yeah, Nilsson was an intriguing option, too. There were several ways they could have gone, and outside of a guy like Antti Niemi(who seems to be in rapid decline) an argument could be made for most of them.

 

Nilsson had a really solid year in Buffalo. I guess the Flyers wanted a bit more of a "known" commodity, though. Thanks for the welcome aboard

[King Knut]

13 hours ago, aziz said:

 

who and who?

 

if the flyers are really *planning* to have their next starter come up from the prospect pool, they are well and truly screwed for a long time.  1 in 10 goalie prospects are even backup quality.  may as well put all of your mortgage money on "3" and spin the wheel.

 

again, prospects and the draft should be happy and unexpected additions to the roster, not cornerstones to your team's future construction.  strict draft-based rebuilds are eternal and quixotic, saved only by the very rare franchise pick.  crosby and kane level.  if the flyers have 3 "great" goaltender prospects, they'll burn 3 kids out and sign an FA in 5 years.

 

I sympathetically think maybe you e just got your grumpy fan jets fired up and I get that because it's been a frustrating time, but just let's try to see things for what they are. 

 

First-there was NO good goalie available in free agency. 

 

Second- to get a "good goalie" like the frequently and injured Bishop, the Flyers would had to have traded an asset for him, THEN signed him to a Manmoth deal that none of us would be happy for but would commit the Flyers to that goalie  well beyond his usefulness to this team. And even those pickings were slim. 

 

Next to acquite any goalie worth worth while already under contract, the Flyers would had to have traded some even more valuable asset. 

 

So, even if we just eliminate Hart and Sandstrom from the equation, and we all decided that it's best for the Flyers to achieve a pedigree goalie from without, simply out that just wasn't happening this year. 

 

Now, Of course you're right about goalies.  Never can tell, especially with a goalie. 

 

What at I think it's safe to say however is that they need time to develop and when they're ready, opportunities to show what they've got and time to learn from mistakes.  

 

NONE of that is going to happen if you've got a 6 million dollar goalie gumming up the works.  

 

Finally, I know prospects are never a given. I happen to think that it's difficult for them to turn out worse than Neuvy was last year and frankly I think it won't be terribly challenging for even a Stolarz to rise to the level of extremely average we got from Mason. 

 

Hart and Sandstrom however have already each achieved quite a bit more than. It's goalie prospects do before coming to the pros. 

 

Expecting them both to be the next Lundvist is silly.  Expecting that they can't be a starting NHL goalie however is defeatist. 

 

Its the the kind of thinking that got a future two time Vezina winner that we all liked and who just needed some seasoning traded for cap room and a pick that became Stolarz.  

 

In the mean time if it doesn't work out, THEN the Flyers can trade away all their good kids for an ov toroced way too old goalie and sign him til he collects social security. 

 

For now however, if This team makes it to the finals and Elliot's soft goals are what keep them from winning there (deja vu) I think we will be upset, but we should probably just high five each other and weep with joy because the team is three years ahead of schedule. 

 

 

[King Knut]

On 7/3/2017 at 9:24 AM, mojo1917 said:

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/flyers/ron-hextall-says-flyers-needed-change-in-goal-20170702.html

 

Hextall got his guy.

 

Definitely seems as though Hextall has moved on to phase two of whatever his plan is. 

My big takeaway from that article is Hextall likes Elliot's compete level, work ethic, and attitude.

Those are areas where Steve Mason wasn't always the be strongest. Their numbers are a wash...

Other than Elliot's implosion in last year's playoffs I don't see his signing as a downgrade. 

Mason wouldn't nave liked having so many young guys ruining his night by being stupid and not playing hard in front of him this season.

More addition by subtraction.

 

 

I think it's telling that Mason isn't back. 

 

If if he really didn't get what the Neuvirth deal was all about, then he (and his agent) are dumber than I thought.  

 

I synoathaize and agree with him and Reese over the whole Berube incident.  They were right. chief was wrong.  And Hextall screwed up and pulled a Homer move by siding with the head coach when he was clearly in the wrong. 

 

But that hat was two and a half years ago.     And since then Mase got his chances (too many last year) and didn't put up anything show stopping enough to resign and protect him.  Big shocker that Hextall signed a guy he thought Vegas might take rather than having to trade an asset for another guy just to meet the draft requirements. 

 

Good of luck Steve.  You're welcome for taking a risk and salvaging your career.  

[musky]

it wont make a difference this team is a mess,no offence and a rookie defence means bad year ahead.

[murraycraven]

24 minutes ago, musky said:

it wont make a difference this team is a mess,no offence and a rookie defence means bad year ahead.

 

 

I expect the offence to be  better this year...  albeit, it is gonna be on the rookies assuming that Patrick and Lindblom make the lineup.   This year is not all about wins/losses....   it is about finally getting to see some of "the plan" actually take shape.   There is going to be a lot more skill in the lineup but rookies are rookies and they will make mistakes.    

[King Knut]

18 hours ago, Podein25 said:

 

Yeah for sure. In fact, I think Hexy showing restraint in the (relatively lousy) UFA market is the real story for Flyers fans this summer.

 

Absolutely.

For the price they got him and the duration of the deal, Elliot is a steal.

Two years ago he LITERALLY LEAD THE LEAGUE in save % (at least in goalies who played more than 12 games).

 

He's won the Jennings (as part of a tandem) he's a 2 time all star, a 2 time Vezina finalist and was even a Hart finalist.  

 

I'm not saying he's going to be the guy to lead this team to any promised land, I'm just saying, he's not a bum.  He had a bad playoff series for a team that Frankly wasn't very good.

 

Not that he'll be stepping into a team that is very good... but folks need to start being a little more realistic about the quality of the guy we got.   He's a good hockey player and Hextall somehow got him for 250K more than he spent on Neuvirth just to not have to expose Stolarz.  

 

This is a good signing for this team and it's needs now.  If Homer had signed Elliot instead of Mason 4 years ago, we'd have done backflips and high-fived each other.

 

 

[aziz]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

I sympathetically think maybe you e just got your grumpy fan jets fired up and I get that because it's been a frustrating time, but just let's try to see things for what they are. 

 

eh.  it isn't the goalie thing, really.  'cause you're right, there aren't good options out there, and i generally don't think goalies are good ideas to spend assets on, because they come and go from effectiveness so quickly and unpredictably.  it's that it appears the team's plan on ALL fronts is entirely prospect-driven.  given the likely failure of a good percentage of those prospects, the flyers management can't have any idea what functional parts they are going to have in 3 years.  given they can't know what functional parts they are going to have, they can't be working to any specific end-state.  they don't know what they need, because they don't know what they have, because they have decided to pursue question marks across the board.

 

each time i hear reinforcement of the concept, i cringe.  i'm concerned they are going to get to 2021, have a #1 C, a #2 RW, 3 defensemen, and whole lot of ill-fitting spare-parts with quickly diminishing trade value.  Then, they'll spend another 3 years scrambling on the FA market to sign old guys to quickly fill the now-apparent holes...and then patrick will be 25 and looking for a huge contract.  and ghost will be 31, by that point, his entire career spent waiting for the flyers to build an actual team, rather than assemble random mystery bags.  a la giroux's career.

 

i just hate the draft as the primary means of constructing a team.  i think it is a long waiting game with little chance of actually paying off, but constantly re-justifies itself as just needing to wait a little longer, just wait for the next wave.

 

so, it wasn't the goalie thing, particularly, just being reminded that all roster problems are to be solved by playing roulette.  

 

also:  have never liked elliot, he was one of those "really hope he's never on my team" guys.  and now he is.  so, triggered me.

[King Knut]

42 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

 

I expect the offence to be  better this year...  albeit, it is gonna be on the rookies assuming that Patrick and Lindblom make the lineup.   This year is not all about wins/losses....   it is about finally getting to see some of "the plan" actually take shape.   There is going to be a lot more skill in the lineup but rookies are rookies and they will make mistakes.    

 

To me the real key to the offense is the rookies on Defense.  Morin and Hagg specifically.  

If they can play a bit better brand of shutdown than MacDonald, Streit and MDZ did last year (which let's face it... shouldnt' be too damn hard) so that the offense doesn't have to start attacks pinned into their own zone and Hakstol doesn't have to be so damn restrictive of the skillsets of guys like Konecney, Weal, (and hopefully Lindblom and Patrick) I think the goals will come.

 

The goals came like water from a faucet in the early going last year... From all over the place but especially jake and simmer we moving the puck and scoring well.  But they got scored on even more because the defense and to a lesser degree the goaltending were so horrible.     So they all starting dropping back and playing a defensively "responsible" but offensively irresponsible brand of hockey.  

 

If the D can just shut things down a smidge more than NOT AT ALL, I think we'll see that this team was never that unskilled all along.  It's just really hard to score goals when three defenders are already set up in their zone by the time you even get a look at the red line.

[Podein25]

 

1 hour ago, aziz said:

it's that it appears the team's plan on ALL fronts is entirely prospect-driven.

 

That a Flyer fan is saying such a thing is the most salient measure we have that Hexy is on the right path. Hallelujah!

 

1 hour ago, aziz said:

i just hate the draft as the primary means of constructing a team.

 

Only because you have no idea of how to evaluate hockey talent. In your bizarro world, all prospects are equal I guess eh?

 

That guy over there with the nasty shot who was able to play - and excel - playing pro against men at age 17 (e.g., Laine) is just as likely to fail as, say, Wyatt Kalynuk the Flyers' 196th overall pick who, as a 17 year old had 1 goal in 56 games in Tier II Jr? In your opinion, based on your dumb roulette wheel analogy, they have exactly the same chance of failing (which you put at near certain). That's what you seem to be  are saying. 

 

Ok then.

[King Knut]

13 minutes ago, aziz said:

 

eh.  it isn't the goalie thing, really.  'cause you're right, there aren't good options out there, and i generally don't think goalies are good ideas to spend assets on, because they come and go from effectiveness so quickly and unpredictably.  it's that it appears the team's plan on ALL fronts is entirely prospect-driven.  given the likely failure of a good percentage of those prospects, the flyers management can't have any idea what functional parts they are going to have in 3 years.  given they can't know what functional parts they are going to have, they can't be working to any specific end-state.  they don't know what they need, because they don't know what they have, because they have decided to pursue question marks across the board.

 

each time i hear reinforcement of the concept, i cringe.  i'm concerned they are going to get to 2021, have a #1 C, a #2 RW, 3 defensemen, and whole lot of ill-fitting spare-parts with quickly diminishing trade value.  Then, they'll spend another 3 years scrambling on the FA market to sign old guys to quickly fill the now-apparent holes...and then patrick will be 25 and looking for a huge contract.  and ghost will be 31, by that point, his entire career spent waiting for the flyers to build an actual team, rather than assemble random mystery bags.  a la giroux's career.

 

i just hate the draft as the primary means of constructing a team.  i think it is a long waiting game with little chance of actually paying off, but constantly re-justifies itself as just needing to wait a little longer, just wait for the next wave.

 

so, it wasn't the goalie thing, particularly, just being reminded that all roster problems are to be solved by playing roulette.  

 

also:  have never liked elliot, he was one of those "really hope he's never on my team" guys.  and now he is.  so, triggered me.

 

I just don't see it like that.  And I just typed a long beat by beat explanation of why, and that's when it really came together in my head, so I'm coming back to the top.

 

You're proving my point for me.  There is NO WAY to guarantee what a prospect who is 19-21 will be when he's 24-26.  

However, you're just as likely for a guy who's great at 24-26 to be a lot less useful and twice as expensive at 30.   The rules of restricted free agency pretty much lock a guy into his current team until he's 26 or so at least.  

 

Long story short is that looking 4-5 years into the future is a crap shoot no matter which way you're building.  

 

Building from within the way Hextall is does risk the need to get luck here and there.  You need a 5th rounder like Lindblom to turn into a top 6er here and there.  You need your top D picks to pan out over time.  You need guys to stay healthy while they do that.  

 

But if you can manage to build from within that way, then when the time comes, you should have enough cap room to fill in the blanks with those guys that get you over the top when you're close.  And this team looks to be in that position.

 

I honestly see it is that at this point they have a core that's mixed of draft and acquisition assets. But if you start with the drafted guys, you'll have the cap room to fill in the other ones later.  Doing it the other way around for the past ... (well since before the cap was installed)  leaves you stuck... and then a Pronger has a career ending injury and your team is just flat out screwed.

 

Yes, you're absolutely, right they have a bunch of question marks at peripheral roles right now.  Four of those question marks have been laboriously and carefully developed from Juniors through the AHL and we're about to see what we really have, but it's not like they're complete guesses.  We've seen quite a bit of these guys for a while now at different levels of the game.  And the beauty of it is, they don't have to be amazing.  We don't have to count on them to be revolutionary game changing players.  

They just have to be an upgrade from crap. 

 

Then you have the Patricks and the Lindbloms and the Konecneys.  Toss them into the mix this year and we'll get a good idea about them too.  At the end of this season, the Flyers will have a pretty good idea of what they'll have on their hands and 8.5 million bucks in cap space.  

 

At the end of next season, they should have about 10 million more.

 

So essentially, as I see it, between summer 2018 and summer of 2019, the chances are quite good that the Flyers will have essentially the roster they're going into this season with minus Filppula and Lehtera, they will have the problem of resigning Simmonds and locking up Provorov long term if they so choose.  

 

They will also have 18-19 million bucks with which to fill in holes as they see fit.  

 

By the time we get to 2021, that's the last year of Giroux's contract.  Worse case scenario, you buy him out.  Not the end of the world.  

That's 4 seasons for Lindblom, Konecney, Patrick, Rubstov, Frost, Vecchione and next year's 2 first rounders to develop into the core and useable NHL players.  all of whom, except for Vecchione will likely still be on UFA contracts.  Maybe Patrick wants a big pay day, but if the Flyers play their cards right, they won't have to shell out until after Giroux's monster contract is over.

 

Will Simmonds still be around and a useful hockey player?  That's a big question mark.  He's motoring pretty well now and staying healthy and looking strong despite his role.  Will that hold up through the 2nd half of his 20's?  How much will other teams throw at him?  Will he be worth trying to keep up with those teams bids at that point?  Really Hard to say.

What will Voracek look like at that point?  Also very difficult to say since the team on the whole hasn't looked like itself for three years or so due to the hole Homer dug them into.  

 

I'm not worried about the defense in 2021 though.  

Ghost will only be 28, not 31.  But at 4.5million, his cap hit won't be absurd and there's 4 years for the likes of Sanheim and Myers to develop into some portion of Ghost's role and they should all be coming near the end of their bridge deals but not yet.  To boot, Even if Morin and Hagg work out perfectly, they're probably never going to be 5 million dollar type players.   And if for some reason they turn into Pronger types, then bully for us!  We'll have been a very good club for 4 years.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[aziz]

1 hour ago, Podein25 said:

That guy over there with the nasty shot who was able to play - and excel - playing pro against men at age 17 (e.g., Laine) is just as likely to fail as, say, Wyatt Kalynuk the Flyers' 196th overall pick who, as a 17 year old had 1 goal in 56 games in Tier II Jr? In your opinion, based on your dumb roulette wheel analogy, they have exactly the same chance of failing (which you put at near certain? That's what you seem to be  are saying

 

lol, where did i even once say anything vaguely resembling that?  of course a kid ranked high enough to go in the first 45 picks is more likely to be an NHL player than one rated 196.  there obviously are players on substantially smaller roulette wheels than others.  but they are all still chances.  and, with the exception of the very top of the class, not particularly good ones.  even at the top of the class, the number of misses is startling.  i mean, we've lived through JVR, pitkanen, bouche, ouelette, woywitka, downie, sbisa, laughton....but people are positive the rolls being made right now are all gonna come up 6's.  and those are just flyers picks.  start thinking about upshall and lupul and raffi torres and hugh jessiman and ty wishart...and i just can't believe that people can look at past draft results and how the majority of those drafted players worked out, and still call the draft a reliable way to build a team.

 

pedigree helps the chances, but it only helps.  many will still miss.  if your team's plan is to draw exclusively from that well, they are in trouble.  the built-in "just wait and see" with prospects means it'll be years before the misses are recognized and a new plan drawn up.  if the future flyers roster you have in your head is made up of all the prospects the flyers have added over the last few summers, you'll end up half an NHL roster short.  if they've drafted really well.

 

[Podein25]

2 minutes ago, aziz said:

people are positive the rolls being made right now are all gonna come up 6's.

 

Where did people say that they were positive?

 

We all hope and we all see potential. Me, for example, I think Carter Hart will be the Flyers starter for many years, starting in as early as 2019/20. It doesn't mean you don't draft, sign, recruit, develop, trade for, all the other options. But if you don't draft Carter Hart, that's one option you certainly don't have.

 

Anyway, I find your perspective on player development odd to say the least and we'll leave it at that. 

[OccamsRazor]

2 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

But if you don't draft Carter Hart, that's one option you certainly don't have.

 

Well you could always go the old Clarke/Homer route and throw an ass load of picks and prospect at Montreal and then try and fit Price and his 10.5 mill salary under the roof....you know skip the drafting/developing part and just try and reap the reward...also the costly part of it....

 

 

...then having to once again sign other mercs (wingers and centers) because now you don't have draft picks to restock the cupboards...

 

 

...nope i've seen that for 20+ years i like where this is going....yes it make take longer because well many want results NOW!!!

[aziz]

3 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

Me, for example, I think Carter Hart will be the Flyers starter for many years, starting in as early as 2019/20.

 

i was pretty sure maxime ouelette was going to be the same, but for ~2004/05.  ah, well.

 

5 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

Anyway, I find your perspective on player development odd to say the least and we'll leave it at that.

 

that's fair, but i don't really understand what is odd about it.  i don't think we disagree on HOW you develop players, just how much a team should lean on that development.  and the likelihood of any given prospect to develop to their perceived potential.  I'm all for the steady dripping of kids into the organization and maybe eventually the NHL roster, you just don't calibrate all team building efforts in that direction.

[Podein25]

1 hour ago, aziz said:

that's fair, but i don't really understand what is odd about it.  i don't think we disagree on HOW you develop players, just how much a team should lean on that development.  and the likelihood of any given prospect to develop to their perceived potential.  I'm all for the steady dripping of kids into the organization and maybe eventually the NHL roster, you just don't calibrate all team building efforts in that direction.

 

Well I'm not sure where the evidence is that the Flyers have done this. Where is it? Should they have traded some or all of their picks for established players? Is that your suggestion? 

 

More importantly, prospects, draft picks, players signed from France, players signed out of College, trades - wherever, players come from - they are all just assets to be used to do what you need to do.

 

The Entry Draft, which I think we are talking about, is just one source to acquire assets.  It is the best one though, the best kind of assets, in part 'cause they are cheap assets. 

 

[aziz]

34 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

Well I'm not sure where the evidence is that the Flyers have done this. Where is it? Should they have traded some or all of their picks for established players? Is that your suggestion? 

 

well, looking at the roster, it looks to me like the flyers have 2 centers, 3 or 4 wingers, 2 or 3 dmen, and zero goalies that are known quantities and worth moving forward with.  the rest of the roster are either experiments or placeholders for future experiments.  there doesn't seem to be any consideration or discussion about addressing the partial roster, the current and future experiments are everything.  the team desperately needs a top-6 LW and RW, but those spots will go to kids.  they really need a #2 center, but that'll go to a kid.  at least half of the top-6 forwards next season will have less than 100 NHL games under their belt.  that's neat, but unlikely to work out real well.

 

there is a middle ground.  an approach that keeps prospects in mind and gives them their chances without basing the team's success almost entirely on adolescents' ability to hit the ground running at a quasi-elite level.  it would spend some prospect value and/or cap space on a LW that could help next season, probably a bottom-6 RW that could spot fill in the top-6, too.  it would also fast track one of the flyers' prospect goalies into the backup spot next season, stop playing around with this elliot/neuvirth mess.  

 

what they are doing, though?  turning on-ice assets into picks, and then shoveling 8 or 9 kids onto NHL ice all at once and thinking that's going to compete?  we've seen this before, in edmonton, chicago, pittsburgh, for starts.  it took connor mcdavid, patrick kane, jonathan towes, sidney crosby, and evgeni malkin to break those endless cycles.  i dunno.  maybe patrick is the next one of those.  possible, anyway, i guess.

[mojo1917]

40 minutes ago, aziz said:

well, looking at the roster, it looks to me like the flyers have 2 centers,

2 centers ? this is the Flyers there are 8 centers... at least 

seriously, Giroux, Filpulla, Couturier, Lehtera down the middle isn't giving it up to projects or placeholders for projects.

Koneckny is a known quantity, he's a dynamic player. Lindblom is a guess sure, but he has excelled as a pro against men in the 2nd or 3rd best league in the world, so I like his chances.

There are 2 questions on defense, and some questions in the bottom 6 but I don't see where what this team doing is similar to what the Oil , Blackhawks or Hurricane fans have had to struggle through. Maybe the Giroux/Voracek Flyers resemble the Kovalev Penguins...but those Pens teams were ****** terrible, VeeGees are still above .500 and played meaningful hockey into mid-March.

Truly, are we going to miss Mark Streit and Michael DelZotto ? those guys are irreplaceable cogs ?

 I don't think they're winning the cup but, I don't see this year's team amounting to a failure pile in a bowl of sadness either.

 

[Podein25]

2 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

a failure pile in a bowl of sadness either

 

LOL

 

Is Provorov still a kid? He's our best D-man and he costs less than $1 million. Gimme more kids, I say.

[aziz]

for what its worth, i'm seeing these as the NHL players that are/should be part of the planned future (and thus, 2 C's, 3 wings, 3 dmen).  the question marks are slated to be filled with matt read/andrew macdonald types (which is how i see lehtera/filppula), or, well, different kinds of question marks.  until such time as the matt reads and andrew macdonalds can be replaced with more question marks.

 

(NOT line combos, just depth charting it)

simmonds  -  giroux       -  voracek

??               -  ??            -  konecny

??               -  couturier  -  ??

??               -  ??            -  ??

 

provorov  -  gostisbehere

gudas      -  ??

??            -  ??

 

??

??

 

that's a whole lot of "hope they work out".  on the other hand, you go out and find a top-6 LW, a reasonably skilled 3rd line RW, and a goalie you are comfortable putting a rookie behind, and you start to have something to work from.  still plenty of space for kids to cut their teeth, but an effective and experienced core that can carry as those kids prove themselves one way or the other.

 

is how i would do it, anyway.

 

[King Knut]

21 hours ago, aziz said:

 

i was pretty sure maxime ouelette was going to be the same, but for ~2004/05.  ah, well.

 

 

that's fair, but i don't really understand what is odd about it.  i don't think we disagree on HOW you develop players, just how much a team should lean on that development.  and the likelihood of any given prospect to develop to their perceived potential.  I'm all for the steady dripping of kids into the organization and maybe eventually the NHL roster, you just don't calibrate all team building efforts in that direction.

 

Being reminded of Oullet brings me to several thoughts:

 

First off To my knowledge Maxime Oulette never won back to back goalie of the year.

Second, damn 1999 was an amazing draft year for the Flyers and the EFFING BLEW IT ALL except for Gagne.

Third... My god how was Clarke not drawn and quartered when he sent Oullet, A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD ROUND PICKs for a three month rental of an unmotivated and tiresome Adam Oates.  What in god's name was going on?  No wonder they could never get it together.  

 

And lastly, looking at his draft year and the year he was traded is a reminder that building through the draft, the Flyers had Simon Gagne, Justin Williams, Ruslan Fedotenko, Patrick Sharp, Mike Richards and Jeff Carter all playing in the system from 2000-2006.

 

Essentially that's the same basic timeline as between the Richards and Carter "it's not a rebuild" debacle and now.  That would have been one HELL of a top 6 and it doesn't even address acquisitions like Hartnell and Briere who could still easily have been a part of things.

 

The problem to me isn't building through the draft.  The problem is impatience with that path and not committing to it.  

 

[King Knut]

18 hours ago, aziz said:

for what its worth, i'm seeing these as the NHL players that are/should be part of the planned future (and thus, 2 C's, 3 wings, 3 dmen).  the question marks are slated to be filled with matt read/andrew macdonald types (which is how i see lehtera/filppula), or, well, different kinds of question marks.  until such time as the matt reads and andrew macdonalds can be replaced with more question marks.

 

(NOT line combos, just depth charting it)

simmonds  -  giroux       -  voracek

??               -  ??            -  konecny

??               -  couturier  -  ??

??               -  ??            -  ??

 

provorov  -  gostisbehere

gudas      -  ??

??            -  ??

 

??

??

 

that's a whole lot of "hope they work out".  on the other hand, you go out and find a top-6 LW, a reasonably skilled 3rd line RW, and a goalie you are comfortable putting a rookie behind, and you start to have something to work from.  still plenty of space for kids to cut their teeth, but an effective and experienced core that can carry as those kids prove themselves one way or the other.

 

is how i would do it, anyway.

 

 

in a perfect world, that's not bad, but it's a little idealistic.  This isn't EA spots NHL'17.  You can't force trades or signings.  

 

I just don't see how a bunch of ??'s that look really good as youngsters are any worse if not clearly better than a bunch of definites that you know are going to be too old to skate toward the end of the 5 year window you're talking about.

 

How is KNOWING you're going to have a crappy ineffective player better than believing you could have an effective kid entering is prime?

 

I think most teams ahve this many question marks.  It's just a matter of whether those question marks are "Will they be good and reliable?" or if they're "Will they be able to keep up?"  

 

Oh yeah, the former costs about half as much as the latter and we are living in a cap era.

[Podein25]

41 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I just don't see how a bunch of ??'s that look really good as youngsters are any worse if not clearly better than a bunch of definites that you know are going to be too old to skate toward the end of the 5 year window you're talking about

 

Exactly.

 

Besides, Filppula and Lehtera are not the equivalent of Read and MacDonald, as suggested. Lehtera, while expensive, is a perfect 4th line center who could move up in the lineup if need be in case of injury. And Filppula, at 33, has some left in the tank and is versatile and smart in ways Read could only hope to be. 

[murraycraven]

Screw the draft....

 

signing savy veterans like Oates, Matt Walker (traded for Gagne), trading a first for Emenger, signing Bryz.... now that is how you build a Team!!!!  McDdonald!   

 

We got CARBOMB for just Upshall and a 2nd rounder!  Winning!!!!

 

Markov for Justin Wiliams!   

 

The list goes on and on...

 

I can't believe how many Cups we have through FA signings and trades!   

 

 

 

 

This club has tried the same BS for decades and IT HAS NOT WORKED.   What haven't we tried?   Building through the draft!!!  Something other Teams have been successful with in recent years including Hextall and the Kings.   It might not guarantee a Cup but it sure as hell is going to be a lot better than signing a bunch of FA has-beens to ridiculous contracts.  Patience...   Hextall is nowhere near done and when the time is right he will get into the FA market.  The market this year was garbage anyway....   

[murraycraven]

maybe it is a good thing Hextall is not trading and signing guys....  thought this was interesting from BM this morning about McDud via the HB comments:

 

I wonder if Hexy breaks Holmgrens balls about that AMac contract when they are drinking Mooseheads at the Skatezone.
- MBFlyerfan

Nope, because it was actually the first big-club contract that Hexy was involved in directly negotiating in the weeks leading up to him being named the new GM to replace Homer. Hexy was fully on board with the deal.

 

[pilldoc]

50 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

maybe it is a good thing Hextall is not trading and signing guys....  thought this was interesting from BM this morning about McDud via the HB comments:

 

I wonder if Hexy breaks Holmgrens balls about that AMac contract when they are drinking Mooseheads at the Skatezone.
- MBFlyerfan

Nope, because it was actually the first big-club contract that Hexy was involved in directly negotiating in the weeks leading up to him being named the new GM to replace Homer. Hexy was fully on board with the deal.

 

 

well isn't that just an interesting revelation ......