Sign Jagr

[vis]

13 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Who do  you put on the line with Giroux?  

Maybe Weal and Simmonds.  Weal can use speed/quickness to stretch the ice and maybe draw some space.  Simmonds play in the dirty areas and maybe create some space as well.  

 

Like you, I would like to see Konecny on the RW.  Would likely land him on the third line, though...

[elmatus]

13 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Probably not the thread for this, but @King Knut's post -- and BobbyClarke's got me thinking.

 

Who do  you put on the line with Giroux?   Would you put Jake back with him or do you split them up?  Pretend for a minute that Patrick makes the team and takes 2C (I don't know that you through a young kid in there, but I guess the option is Couturier, and I'm not thrilled with that). And I guess Konecny goes to the third line?  I'm wondering if that isn't a waste, but if he plays the right side you almost have to, unless you drop Voracek there.  I don't think I drop Simmonds to the third line when he's the one scoring consistently the past couple of years.  Right?

 

LW  -  C - RW

 

Lindblom - Giroux - Simmonds?

Filpulla - Patrick - Voracek

Lehtera - Couturier - Konecny?

Raffl -- Laughton - Weise/Weal    (I'd center Weise, play Weal on wing, and find somewhere to dump Laughton)

 

PP:   Giroux, Patrick, Simmonds, Voracek, Ghost

PP2: Filpulla, Lindblom, Konecny, Provorov, ?

 

I like the first unit, but the second is kind of meh.  I'm deliberately trying to keep Couturier off it.   But if you wanted to fill the "?" with a forward I guess you add him.  But who there has the experience and the mobility to play point?

 

I'm pretty sure I'm forgetting someone.   I didn't forget Read.  I don't ice him unless there's an injury.  I'd try to either move him or find him an apartment in Allentown.

 

Lindblom - Giroux - Voracek

Konecny - Patrick - Simmonds   (Konecny plays off-wing, but just trying to get him on the top two lines)

Filpulla - Couturier - Weal

Raffl - Lehtera - Weise

 

If Weal can play left wing, I'd be awfully tempted to flip him and Konecny just to get TK back on the right.

 

Lindblom - Giroux - Konecny

Filpulla - Patrick - Simmonds

Weal? -  Couturier - Voracek

Raffl - Lehtera - Weise

 

Between 3W and 4C, I would really rather Lehtera at 4C, but I suspect that's not the plan.

 

Like so many other things, I'm finding the line ups very difficult to figure out this year. Part of the reason of course is the team has so many unproven players who are very likely to see top minutes. Does Lindblom end up a top line LW? It's very possible. Weal? Sure, why not? Konecny? I'd prefer to see him on the right, but he may very well be better than the other two mentioned, so it's possible. A lot is up in the air.

 

But, given what this forum is for, here are some line up predictions:

 

Lindblom/Giroux/Voracek

Filppula/Patrick/Simmonds

Weal/Couts/Konecny

 

TK being a righty, it makes more sense to play him there. While I know there are players who prefer their off-wing (Voracek being one), they tend to be exceptions to the rule. Most also tend to be snipers (Voracek is an oddball here again). While it may seem low to slot a guy like him on the third, I've mentioned before how I really like the idea of teaming Couts up with a pair of speedy wingers. TK and Weal both fit that description very well.

 

I think pairing Patrick with Filppula is a smart way to introduce him to the league. The two can split faceoffs on their strong sides when they need to, and it would mean having a responsible, two-way player to help make up for any rookie mistakes. I think Simmonds makes more sense here than Voracek as well. Simmonds is more responsible, and he's got far more grit. I like that idea.

 

Lindblom has done everything he can to show he is a high level sniper. Putting him with G and V means he'll have two players who are more playmaker than shooter running the play. Hopefully he'll be able to carry over his lethal shot to the NHL and help put the puck in the net, something G and V seem largely incapable of doing in recent years. From what I understand, he's also not afraid of throwing his body around. I like that idea too, as G and V are many things but not at all that.

 

Some things to consider:

1) All of this is obviously just projection and guesswork. Much of it is necessarily based on a tremendous lack of actual information.

2) Hakstol had an awful tendency to juggle the lines last year. Regardless of what line up we may come up with here, recent history suggests no line will be set in stone for very long periods of time anyway.

[King Knut]

15 hours ago, ruxpin said:

 

Yeah, if Jagr signs anywhere, Philly included, I would have to imagine it would be this kind of situation.   

 

What do you think about Laughton?   I don't think he makes the team.   If he does, I have little confidence he stays.   I don't know what we had when we drafted him.   I think he actually had some potential.  I mean, nothing earth shattering or game-changing necessarily, but probably a solid player.    Did they guess wrong or was his career hurt by the concussions?   I don't expect anyone here to know, but just wondering what thoughts are.

 

If I'm honest, I don't want Laughton to make the team.  I don't think it's his fault necessarily, but I don't know that he has a place on this team.  I understand protecting him because it literally forced Vegas to take more cap space off our hands, but I just don't see it with Laughton. His first stint with the Flyers showed promise, but he got himself into an awful lot of trouble physically and didn't seem to understand that he's not as big as some of the other dudes out there.  Niskanen comes to mind.  

 

Maybe he made a lot of progress in the AHL last year.  I understand their goal was to work with him to get being a PEB or VandeVelde type into his head, but for my money that's completely useless for where this team needs to go.  I don't think either was as bad as we like to say they were, but they weren't helping make the team better and right now this team has an opportunity to ice 4 lines that each make it better.

 

Trying to mold Laughton into something he wasn't just doesn't seem like a great idea.  Maybe he's a good 13th man to carry.

 

My problem is (and I'm VERY alone in this) is that I actually really like Vecchione for that 4th line Center.  Most people expect Vex to be in the AHL this year, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he outplayed Laughton and Lehtera in camp.   I see the guy as becoming a serviceable 2 way 4th line and Penalty Killing Center who could be an absolute monster on faceoffs.  This could be huge as it wasn't a strong suit for the bottom 6 last year (though G was still decent and Coots was pretty darn good at them).   The problem is even though he's going to be 24 or whatever, he's still new to pro hockey and the grind of an 82 game season, so they won't trust him to sustain that level of play if he does look the best.   

 

The other problem of course is that Vex is waiver exempt and no one else on that 4th line will be.  So he'll be going back to the AHL simply for that reason alone unless he literally makes them look like idiots for not playing him in the NHL out of camp.

 

The good news is that whether it's Laughton or Vecchione, right now the 4th line  wings might probably be 2 of Read, Raffl, Weise or possibly Lehtera... which essentially gives either center guys who have been playing NHL top 6 minutes for a few years.  That's a HUGE improvement over Boyd Gordon, VDV and PEB.  Think about it... our 1LW 2RW could be the 4 line wingers this year.  That's really great.

 

A year in the AHL won't help him... I'm just not sure what Laughton's going to be able to show us instead.  

 

Lehtera is probably better than either, but he also probably doesn't have any surprises left in his game and additionally probably won't be around for more than two seasons at the maximum.   For this reason, I think he's the most likely to be moved to wing as his "development" won't be harmed.

 

We'll see what happens in camp. This is all assuming much (like Patrick and Lindblom making the team).  But if they do and they look good, and Hextall can't get a deal for Read, Raffl, Weise or Lehtera before the season starts, then if I'm Hextall, one of them is going to the AHL and the other one is the thirteenth man.

 

Laughton will most likely be the 4C, but I'm not sure he's got the role locked up long term and could be used as an attractive trade centerpiece to someone like vegas or arizona in order to encourage them to also take a Lehtera or Raffl or Weise or Read.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[King Knut]

15 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Probably not the thread for this, but @King Knut's post -- and BobbyClarke's got me thinking.

 

Who do  you put on the line with Giroux?   Would you put Jake back with him or do you split them up?  Pretend for a minute that Patrick makes the team and takes 2C (I don't know that you through a young kid in there, but I guess the option is Couturier, and I'm not thrilled with that). And I guess Konecny goes to the third line?  I'm wondering if that isn't a waste, but if he plays the right side you almost have to, unless you drop Voracek there.  I don't think I drop Simmonds to the third line when he's the one scoring consistently the past couple of years.  Right?

 

LW  -  C - RW

 

Lindblom - Giroux - Simmonds?

Filpulla - Patrick - Voracek

Lehtera - Couturier - Konecny?

Raffl -- Laughton - Weise/Weal    (I'd center Weise, play Weal on wing, and find somewhere to dump Laughton)

 

PP:   Giroux, Patrick, Simmonds, Voracek, Ghost

PP2: Filpulla, Lindblom, Konecny, Provorov, ?

 

I like the first unit, but the second is kind of meh.  I'm deliberately trying to keep Couturier off it.   But if you wanted to fill the "?" with a forward I guess you add him.  But who there has the experience and the mobility to play point?

 

I'm pretty sure I'm forgetting someone.   I didn't forget Read.  I don't ice him unless there's an injury.  I'd try to either move him or find him an apartment in Allentown.

 

Lindblom - Giroux - Voracek

Konecny - Patrick - Simmonds   (Konecny plays off-wing, but just trying to get him on the top two lines)

Filpulla - Couturier - Weal

Raffl - Lehtera - Weise

 

If Weal can play left wing, I'd be awfully tempted to flip him and Konecny just to get TK back on the right.

 

Lindblom - Giroux - Konecny

Filpulla - Patrick - Simmonds

Weal? -  Couturier - Voracek

Raffl - Lehtera - Weise

 

Between 3W and 4C, I would really rather Lehtera at 4C, but I suspect that's not the plan.

 

 

For whatever reason Giroux and Simmonds on the same line has never stuck.  I don't know why.  It seems like a no brainer.

 

Myself, as long as they both seem healthy and in shape, I keep Jake and G together. 

I'm actually wondering if you give them Weal though, not Lindblom.  This is because to me, the thing that  (even if they both look recovered and better) I don't expect out of Jake or G this year is a lot of speed or smooth skating to open up seams.  That's not G's job anyway.  Of the two, Weal is the better skater and showed potential for finishing and infusing energy into whatever line he was on. If you put Weal on the top line, he'll make LW work.  

 

I don't put two 2nd year players on Giroux's wing.  Not under Hakstol's system right now.  It will put too much back end responsibility on Giroux and slow him down. 

 

Assuming Patrick makes the team, I put Fillpula and Simmonds on his wings.  it gives him the best chance at success and gives opposing "tough guys" something to think about when they line him up.

 

The third line is the other place I'd stick Weal if not the first.  But Putting Lindblom and Konecny on Coots' wings is possibly the more balanced option overall.

 

Konecny has the speed and energy that Coots doesn't and the skating that Lindblom doesn't.  Coots and Konecny did well together last year and having a guy who can finish like Lindblom might be a difference maker.  A finisher would be a big help to jake and G too obviously, so if they put Weal with Coots and Konecny, I'd be fine with that.  He's still a LW at that point, but he's got a bit more skating ability and skill that would work with Coots skillset.  

 

I talked a lot about the 4th line above.  Like you, I think Read is traded, or in the AHL and at BEST, sitting in the press box.   I just don't know if Lehtera makes the team over Laughton.  Worse case scenario:  they waive him and someone takes him... hey look 5 million bucks in cap room.  

 

 

 

 

[King Knut]

13 hours ago, vis said:

 One of my "wishes" for the offseason mentioned in another thread was for Hextall to clear out some of the underbrush among the forwards.  None of those players are, or should be, in their long term plans.  Get rid of them and move on.

 

Totally.  The thing that strikes me about them is that they are just SO similar in style and skill sets.  Same strengths, same weaknesses.  Having one of these guys is useful to a team.  Having 4 of them is a waste of roster room that makes two full lines harder to score on, but much much weaker in ability to score which is the main area these Flyers need to improve.  Also, none of them are getting any better.  They're not "developing" they're fully developed.  As opposed to giving those minutes to Konecny or Lindblom or Laughton or Vecchione, where you might actually get more out of those players in the long term.  I say trade two of them if you can.  Still gives you plenty of security in the lineup and makes room for the team to move forward.  

 

13 hours ago, vis said:

I don't see anyone in the top 9 that Jagr should supplant.  And, the Flyers have enough PP players such that there is no need to stash a guy like Jagr on the fourth line for PP duty.  Given the dearth of PKers, I'd rather use the fourth line to stash defensively capable players who can kill a penalty and mix things up on a forecheck for the opposition.  

 

If the Flyers had enough PP players, their 2nd Unit wouldn't have been so utterly atrocious compared to their first unit last year.  They need SOMETHING on that 2nd unit.  Right now we're all hoping it's Patrick or Lindblom or Sanheim or Knoblach's coaching making a huge difference.  I don't really think the Jagr thing is a possbility, but if it were, I'd think Jagr on your 2nd Unit and 4th line (or part time 3rd liner) helps the team win more games than Lehtera, Weise, Raffl or Read in those roles.  

 

Maybe my pointing this out is really more about me pointing out how similar and unhelpful those four guys are right now than it is about bringing in Jagr... maybe it's about wishing Hextall could get creative to add some spark and guidance over the next two years because ultimately,  I'd just rather have Jagr on the bench, on the ice and in the locker room with the likes of Lindblom, Konecny, Patrick and Weal than Raffl, Weise, Read and Lehtera.  

 

The next two years should be big steps for this club and it's necessarily going to partially be about shedding those four roster spots and hopefully replaceing them with better talent.  Replacing two of those guys with Jagr NOW does more with those two years than keeping them around IMHO.  More bang and guidance and progress for your buck.  Well worth it to me.  

 

 

[vis]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

If the Flyers had enough PP players, their 2nd Unit wouldn't have been so utterly atrocious compared to their first unit last year.  They need SOMETHING on that 2nd unit.  Right now we're all hoping it's Patrick or Lindblom or Sanheim or Knoblach's coaching making a huge difference.  I don't really think the Jagr thing is a possbility, but if it were, I'd think Jagr on your 2nd Unit and 4th line (or part time 3rd liner) helps the team win more games than Lehtera, Weise, Raffl or Read in those roles.  

 

I don't think Lehtera, Weise, Raffl or Read are candidates for the second PP unit.  (At least I hope that's not the case.)  So, to me, Jagr would potentially take a spot from one of the younger kids on the second PP unit.  I would take the younger kid at this point, even though Jagr might be better in that role.

 

Also, Jagr in the lineup takes a spot away from a PKer.  PK is more of a concern to me than PP.  Plus, as I said in my original post, there are candidates to play PP.  But not as many to play PK.  So, if anything, I'd rather have someone on the fourth line to play PK than PP.  In short, I don't think improving the second unit PP should come at the expense of potentially weakening the PK units or forcing someone into that role who shouldn't be.  As much as I dislike Read, he can play the PK.

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

I actually really like Vecchione for that 4th line Center.  Most people expect Vex to be in the AHL this year, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he outplayed Laughton and Lehtera in camp.   I see the guy as becoming a serviceable 2 way 4th line and Penalty Killing Center who could be an absolute monster on faceoffs.  This could be huge as it wasn't a strong suit for the bottom 6 last year (though G was still decent and Coots was pretty darn good at them).   The problem is even though he's going to be 24 or whatever, he's still new to pro hockey and the grind of an 82 game season, so they won't trust him to sustain that level of play if he does look the best.

 

I doubt he makes the team out of camp, but I'm actually with you on the above.   I really don't know a lot about the kid, but the little I've seen and heard I really like.   I'd love it if he got the shot.   If it's him vs. Laughton, I think his chances are high.   If it comes down to him vs. Lehtera or Weise, I'm not sure.   Just based on $$$.    If they do slot Lehtera up to 3W (which I'm really not in favor of) then he has his opening.

[RJ8812]

Vecchione I think can turn into a solid 4th line centerman and that's what I think he'll be. He's great on faceoffs but will probably need some seasoning in the AHL to develop his PK abilities at the pro level 

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

 

For whatever reason Giroux and Simmonds on the same line has never stuck.  I don't know why.  It seems like a no brainer.

 

Myself, as long as they both seem healthy and in shape, I keep Jake and G together. 

I'm actually wondering if you give them Weal though, not Lindblom.  This is because to me, the thing that  (even if they both look recovered and better) I don't expect out of Jake or G this year is a lot of speed or smooth skating to open up seams.  That's not G's job anyway.  Of the two, Weal is the better skater and showed potential for finishing and infusing energy into whatever line he was on. If you put Weal on the top line, he'll make LW work.  

 

I don't put two 2nd year players on Giroux's wing.  Not under Hakstol's system right now.  It will put too much back end responsibility on Giroux and slow him down. 

 

Assuming Patrick makes the team, I put Fillpula and Simmonds on his wings.  it gives him the best chance at success and gives opposing "tough guys" something to think about when they line him up.

 

The third line is the other place I'd stick Weal if not the first.  But Putting Lindblom and Konecny on Coots' wings is possibly the more balanced option overall.

 

Konecny has the speed and energy that Coots doesn't and the skating that Lindblom doesn't.  Coots and Konecny did well together last year and having a guy who can finish like Lindblom might be a difference maker.  A finisher would be a big help to jake and G too obviously, so if they put Weal with Coots and Konecny, I'd be fine with that.  He's still a LW at that point, but he's got a bit more skating ability and skill that would work with Coots skillset.  

 

I talked a lot about the 4th line above.  Like you, I think Read is traded, or in the AHL and at BEST, sitting in the press box.   I just don't know if Lehtera makes the team over Laughton.  Worse case scenario:  they waive him and someone takes him... hey look 5 million bucks in cap room.  

 

 

 

 

 

I like all of this.   I hadn't thought long and hard about Weal up top, but I like the reasoning.   

 

And I'm okay with putting whomever on the 3rd line if they abandon the 3rd line shut-down line idea and want to go with 3 scoring lines.   In fact, I think I prefer it.

 

I just don't know with Hakstol what the philosophy will be.    Sadly, I'm also not confident that he does either.

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

If the Flyers had enough PP players, their 2nd Unit wouldn't have been so utterly atrocious compared to their first unit last year.  They need SOMETHING on that 2nd unit

 

As you may have guessed because I hinted at it, I'm against the Jagr idea.   But the above is why I'd be tempted to entertain it.  PP specialist (2nd unit) and 4th line.

[King Knut]

16 minutes ago, vis said:

 

I don't think Lehtera, Weise, Raffl or Read are candidates for the second PP unit.  (At least I hope that's not the case.)  So, to me, Jagr would potentially take a spot from one of the younger kids on the second PP unit.  I would take the younger kid at this point, even though Jagr might be better in that role.

 

 

As long as we understand this is all purely theoretical for the purposes of analysis and not really an argument for signing Jagr per se, (I don't want it to descend to a Jagr good / Jagr Bad argument that's easily dismissed as I think this is actually a really intelligent look at what's important and what the team needs) I'll bite:  

 

I don't think adding Jagr takes any PP time away from any kids that are likely to ever end up there.  

No matter what happens this season, Hakstol is not going to put out a 2nd PP Unit of Patrick, Lindblom, Konecny, Weal and Provo.  At least I really really doubt it.  Anything's "possible" but I don't see that happening.  With that in mind, I'd much rather see a player like Jagr on that unit shaping and guiding the young players than a guy who has never been on the PP (like Raffl, Reid, Weise & Lehtera) or a guy who has never been good at it (like Filppula, Couturier or Laughton).  

 

On this roster, once you take away the first unit players and the guys who have no experience or have never been good at it, you have no one left.    That's the essence of what I'm thinking.  

 

16 minutes ago, vis said:

Also, Jagr in the lineup takes a spot away from a PKer.  PK is more of a concern to me than PP.  Plus, as I said in my original post, there are candidates to play PP.  But not as many to play PK.  So, if anything, I'd rather have someone on the fourth line to play PK than PP.  In short, I don't think improving the second unit PP should come at the expense of potentially weakening the PK units or forcing someone into that role who shouldn't be.  As much as I dislike Read, he can play the PK.

 

While I agree on the significance of the PK, I don't see how adding a Jagr type damages it.  

 

There are essentially 4 forwards who play the PK units.

Coots and Simmonds are two of them.  If you get rid of 2 of Read, Raffl, Lehtera or Weise, there are still two forwards to play the PK.  The 4th line center (Laughton, Lehtera or Vecchione and LW (Raffl, Read, or Weise) would presumably be the other two PK specialists 

 

Long story short, this team is Chock Full O' Penalty Killers and needs a guiding hand with some skill up front.  That's the essence of my argument.   

 

 

[King Knut]

29 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

I doubt he makes the team out of camp, but I'm actually with you on the above.   I really don't know a lot about the kid, but the little I've seen and heard I really like.   I'd love it if he got the shot.   If it's him vs. Laughton, I think his chances are high.   If it comes down to him vs. Lehtera or Weise, I'm not sure.   Just based on $$$.    If they do slot Lehtera up to 3W (which I'm really not in favor of) then he has his opening.

 

I agree on his chances of making it out of camp. Contract and roster wise It makes too much sense for him to be in the AHL unless he is just ridiculously good.  

 

My big fear is that he won't get his shot as a result.  I don't know a ton about him either, but from what little I've seen and heard (about his college days and dev camp) he's got skills people dismiss him as not really having (skating, passing) but more importantly, strong hockey sense and a great awareness on the ice.  That plus his faceoffs potential make me put him over Laughton in the long term slot. Laughton's Waiver vulnerability and Lehtera's two remaining contract years make me concerned that vecchione won't get the chance to show everyone what he's got.  

[King Knut]

29 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

I like all of this.   I hadn't thought long and hard about Weal up top, but I like the reasoning.   

 

And I'm okay with putting whomever on the 3rd line if they abandon the 3rd line shut-down line idea and want to go with 3 scoring lines.   In fact, I think I prefer it.

 

I just don't know with Hakstol what the philosophy will be.    Sadly, I'm also not confident that he does either.

 

Ditto on the third line.  I think a big question mark on this is how well the defense can handle things on their own and if Lehtera can possibly assume more of this role.  

 

Right now Hakstol is still just utterly reliant on Couturier in these situations.  However, what we saw toward the end of last season was encouraging in this regard.  Will it stick?  who knows?

[vis]

7 hours ago, King Knut said:

I don't think adding Jagr takes any PP time away from any kids that are likely to ever end up there.  

No matter what happens this season, Hakstol is not going to put out a 2nd PP Unit of Patrick, Lindblom, Konecny, Weal and Provo.  At least I really really doubt it.  Anything's "possible" but I don't see that happening.  With that in mind, I'd much rather see a player like Jagr on that unit shaping and guiding the young players than a guy who has never been on the PP (like Raffl, Reid, Weise & Lehtera) or a guy who has never been good at it (like Filppula, Couturier or Laughton).  

Konecny played the 2nd PP unit last year (along with Provorov).  I see no reason why he shouldn't/wouldn't again.  Jagr wouldn't be replacing Patrick or Couturier or whoever else plays center.  And Lindblom is a LW, which is not Jagr's position.  (And it's possible Lindblom ends up on the top unit replacing Schenn, which would leave Weal (who did see significant PP time) or possibly Filppula to play LW on the second unit).  Imo, Jagr would likely be taking Konecny's spot.  I don't want that to happen. 

 

Quote

Coots and Simmonds are two of them.  If you get rid of 2 of Read, Raffl, Lehtera or Weise, there are still two forwards to play the PK.  The 4th line center (Laughton, Lehtera or Vecchione and LW (Raffl, Read, or Weise) would presumably be the other two PK specialists 

 

Of the group you named, only Read has played significant PK time.  Raffl, Weise and Lehtera should not be considered legitimate candidates for the PK.  The fact that they are fourth liners by default doesn't mean they are effective PKers.  Raffl and Weise didn't get any time on last year's dreadful PK.  What does that say about them?  As I have pointed out on a few occasions, Lehtera was not a regular PK player for the Blues.  The guy has been terribly slow.

 

You seem troubled by having young guys (Lindblom, Konecny, Weal) on the PP, but yet seem perfectly fine with young guys (Laughton, Vecchione) on the PK.  I don't understand that.  Especially since PK is the more challenging to play.

 

Also, I would like them to move Simmonds off the PK so he can save energy for even strength and the PP.

 

So, all things considered, the PK is more important to me than the PP.  Therefore, if the Flyers are signing a special teams specialist who won't skate in the top 9, I'd rather it be for the PK and PP.  I also think a player of that ilk would be more effective in a fourth line role at even strength than Jagr.

[AJgoal]

Filpulla plays PK. Laughton has in the past. Raffl was a good PK guy under Berube. Patrick is an option, as is Lindblom, and even Leier if he somehow cracks the lineup.

[elmatus]

I can definitely see Couts being given PK duties. It plays to his biggest strengths in his solid positioning, ability to break up passing lines, etc. He really shouldn't play the PP this year anyway, so his minutes should decrease somewhat.

 

Aside from him, I think Provo's a clear favourite as the overall best dman we've got. Third and fourth can be whoever shows an ability for it. I'm with @King Knut in that I would prefer to not see Simmonds on the PK. He showed some skill in this last season, but I'd much rather he worry about the other side of the game myself.

 

I'd probably give Raffl a shot at it, as he is a better player than the rest of the 4th line scrubs we have (aside from possibly Vech I guess). I've mentioned this around here before, but Raffl is very good at a lot of important things. Mostly, he's particularly good at battling along the boards and maintaining puck possession. Sure, that speaks more to forechecking than the PK, but I think he deserves a solid look anyway.

 

Take a solid look at whoever else you have at camp to see if someone can take the 4th PK slot. If Morin makes the team, he may be worth a look. It would likely mean some rough going at first, but being challenged is the only way he'll learn.

 

I really have nothing of worth to say about any of Lehtera, Weise, and Read. As far as I'm concerned, they may as well just ride the pine all year. I hope Laughton and Vecchione somehow shake things up and take up the bulk of 4th line minutes with upside. I'm not sure how possible that is with contracts the way they are though.

[King Knut]

52 minutes ago, elmatus said:

I can definitely see Couts being given PK duties. It plays to his biggest strengths in his solid positioning, ability to break up passing lines, etc. He really shouldn't play the PP this year anyway, so his minutes should decrease somewhat.

 

Aside from him, I think Provo's a clear favourite as the overall best dman we've got. Third and fourth can be whoever shows an ability for it. I'm with @King Knut in that I would prefer to not see Simmonds on the PK. He showed some skill in this last season, but I'd much rather he worry about the other side of the game myself.

 

I'd probably give Raffl a shot at it, as he is a better player than the rest of the 4th line scrubs we have (aside from possibly Vech I guess). I've mentioned this around here before, but Raffl is very good at a lot of important things. Mostly, he's particularly good at battling along the boards and maintaining puck possession. Sure, that speaks more to forechecking than the PK, but I think he deserves a solid look anyway.

 

Take a solid look at whoever else you have at camp to see if someone can take the 4th PK slot. If Morin makes the team, he may be worth a look. It would likely mean some rough going at first, but being challenged is the only way he'll learn.

 

I really have nothing of worth to say about any of Lehtera, Weise, and Read. As far as I'm concerned, they may as well just ride the pine all year. I hope Laughton and Vecchione somehow shake things up and take up the bulk of 4th line minutes with upside. I'm not sure how possible that is with contracts the way they are though.

 

Lehtera has played the PK but as with everything with the guy it's been with diminishing returns.  

 

I cant tell if Lehtera is going to surprise us all and be a great PK/4th liner or just get waived and fade away.  

 

Couturier will ill get the lions share of PK minutes with PEB and VDV gone.  Hopefully they'll keep him off the PK to spell him so he's still fresh for even strength.

 

i think Raff can probably be good at the PK.  I think Simmonds showed the fair point that it's part of hockey and if you're good at hockey, you can probably handle it. 

 

The only part I'd push back on in your post is the idea that the 4th line will be scrubs.  In fact the 4th line his year could be Raffl, Lehtera and Read.  Which would make it literally a line of guys that were on the first and second lines last year. 

 

Albeit, none of them belong need there, but it's definitely a step up to have them on the 4th. 

 

I dont know ehat what to make out of Weise.   They guy looked more like he was supposed to by the end of the year.  Does a full season with Couturier and Konecney  keep bringing that out in him or do they get Read and Weise calls it a day on the 4th?  Ultimately (and I know I've been saying this a lot) Raffl, Read, Lehtera and Weise are simply too similar and too mediocre to all make the team.  Skating 4 such quality and responsible but ultimately bland players will be a weakness for the Flyers and should' happen. Opposing teams can employ the same not too challenging techniques to shut down two successive lines if they all make the team.

 

Mad for laughton...just not feeling it.  

[King Knut]

10 hours ago, vis said:

Konecny played the 2nd PP unit last year (along with Provorov).  I see no reason why he shouldn't/wouldn't again.  Jagr wouldn't be replacing Patrick or Couturier or whoever else plays center.  And Lindblom is a LW, which is not Jagr's position.  (And it's possible Lindblom ends up on the top unit replacing Schenn, which would leave Weal (who did see significant PP time) or possibly Filppula to play LW on the second unit).  Imo, Jagr would likely be taking Konecny's spot.  I don't want that to happen. 

 

 

Of the group you named, only Read has played significant PK time.  Raffl, Weise and Lehtera should not be considered legitimate candidates for the PK.  The fact that they are fourth liners by default doesn't mean they are effective PKers.  Raffl and Weise didn't get any time on last year's dreadful PK.  What does that say about them?  As I have pointed out on a few occasions, Lehtera was not a regular PK player for the Blues.  The guy has been terribly slow.

 

You seem troubled by having young guys (Lindblom, Konecny, Weal) on the PP, but yet seem perfectly fine with young guys (Laughton, Vecchione) on the PK.  I don't understand that.  Especially since PK is the more challenging to play.

 

Also, I would like them to move Simmonds off the PK so he can save energy for even strength and the PP.

 

So, all things considered, the PK is more important to me than the PP.  Therefore, if the Flyers are signing a special teams specialist who won't skate in the top 9, I'd rather it be for the PK and PP.  I also think a player of that ilk would be more effective in a fourth line role at even strength than Jagr.

 

Konecny played an average of 1 second of PK time per game. I don't think that counts.  

 

Aside from that, the 2nd PP unit last year was terrible.  I don't want any of them back on it.  And if any are, the only way to help is with adding someone much better.  

 

In contrast, The penalty kill was below average but exactly on par with the Penguins, Rangers, which is to say not an insurmountably bad PK. 

 

The 2nd unit was so horrible on the PP though, If they'd been only 1/2 as good as the top unit instead of 1/5 as good and nothing else at all gets better, the Flyers probably make the playoffs in spite being an utterly atrocious even strength team. 

 

And as as you point out, there are options for the PK.  Aside from 2 rookies in Lindblom and Patrick, there are no new PP options.  In fact with Schenn gone, there are even less. 

 

Personally i want them to get to get better at even strength first and that will only pan out with time and the new defense. 

 

But it the fact of the matter is, if the 2nd unit only gets closer to average, the Flyers record gets significantly better.  

 

Meanwhile, their slightly below average PK would have to become the best in the league to make a dent in their record.  

 

If if they went from their slightly below average percentage to the best percentage, they make up 8 goals.  The 2nd unit only has to become a much more realistic below average level to make up 13 goals.  That's how bad they were.  

 

In essence if we make the 2nd pp unit only just as bad as the PK was last year, the Flyers likely make the playoffs. 

 

Assuming lindblom makes the 1st unit, there is Patrick on the 2nd and then just more of the same as last year there to make him look bad.  Best case, somehow Sanheim makes the team and he's a better shooter/passer than Provo as a rookie.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[elmatus]

34 minutes ago, King Knut said:

The only part I'd push back on in your post is the idea that the 4th line will be scrubs.  In fact the 4th line his year could be Raffl, Lehtera and Read.  Which would make it literally a line of guys that were on the first and second lines last year. 

 

Albeit, none of them belong need there, but it's definitely a step up to have them on the 4th.

 

I hear ya. You may turn out to be very right about the 4th liners we've got.

 

That said, I still place Raffl above the rest. I honestly do like Raffl a fair bit. His main failing in the past few years is that he just doesn't have enough finishing ability. Aside from that, he was really quite good in the top six. He's money at boardplay and puck possession generally, and is one of the better forecheckers we've had in recent years. He's got good footspeed and isn't afraid of getting in the muck when needed. He has no finishing ability, which reduces him to a lesser role (or should anyway). I honestly think he's a fantastic player to have on the 4th though, and he may prove to be a very capable PKer as well.

 

Read is largely washed up. There's no other way to look at it in my view. He had some good seasons, but they could easily have been flukes. That's not to say he's a bad player. He showed decent defensive ability when he was paired with Couts, but I personally think that speaks more to Couts' defensive play than Read's ability. In all, I definitely don't consider him as solid as Raffl. He can play and may manage to make some noise in a game or two, but that's about the best we can expect from him I think.

 

Lehtera will be a mystery for a while. His stat line rounds out to something pretty similar to Read really. I remember him spending time in the top six in STL, but that doesn't necessarily mean he should have been in that position. At the moment, I don't feel very giddy at the prospect of having him around. It sort of feels like this year's Weise really, or Umberger before him. As always, I'd be totally cool with him proving me wrong this year though!

 

On the subject of Weise: While he did show some flair near the end of the season, it really wasn't much at all. The vast majority of the time he was one of the least effective players on the ice. I have no reason to think that will be different this year. In fact, I really hope he gets benched a bunch, if only to give more play time to the TKs and Weals of the world, who clearly have more upside imo. Slot him on the 4th if you need to and hope he doesn't turn out to be a total flop, but that's about all I'd give him at this point. Raffl remains the only player I would see getting regular minutes. The rest should be tinkered with until someone proves their worth. At least that's my view.

[vis]

4 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

Konecny played an average of 1 second of PK time per game. I don't think that counts.

This is a bit of a non-sequitur.  I wasn't touting Konecny as a potential PKer.  I was pointing out that he was a PP player.  He averaged 1:41 of PP time per game.  It's clear he was a second unit PP player.

 

Quote

And as as you point out, there are options for the PK.  

Not really an accurate characterization of what I said.  I pointed out that there are not viable candidates for the PK.  So, no, I don't think there are realistic options for the PK.

 

Quote

But it the fact of the matter is, if the 2nd unit only gets closer to average, the Flyers record gets significantly better.

NHL PP% average was approximately 19.1%.  The Flyers were slightly above average at 19.5%.  The PP ranked 14 out of 30 teams.

 

NHL PK% was approximately 80.9%.  The Flyers were at 79.8%.  The PK ranked 21 out of 30 teams.  And they lost their top two PKers in the offseason.  Stands to reason they will have a difficult time maintaining even that level of "efficiency."  

 

Further erosion of PK "efficiency" is more problematic to me than improving a PP that, overall, performed slightly above league average and, by most accounts, should see some improvement by virtue of hiring a new coach and influx of younger players on the second unit.  Nothing has been done to realistically address the PK.

 

Quote

Assuming lindblom makes the 1st unit, there is Patrick on the 2nd and then just more of the same as last year there to make him look bad.  

Well, there would be addition by subtraction by not having Couturier on the second PP unit.  I realize that statement probably just triggered a visceral reaction, but, please, let's not go down that road...

 

Quote

Best case, somehow Sanheim makes the team and he's a better shooter/passer than Provo as a rookie.  

Agree with this.  Biggest issue for me is who QBs the other point on the PP.  It's not the forwards I worry about.  I have no problem with Provorov back there.  But the other spot is a bit of a mystery to me.  

[King Knut]

1 hour ago, elmatus said:

 

I hear ya. You may turn out to be very right about the 4th liners we've got.

 

That said, I still place Raffl above the rest. I honestly do like Raffl a fair bit. His main failing in the past few years is that he just doesn't have enough finishing ability. Aside from that, he was really quite good in the top six. He's money at boardplay and puck possession generally, and is one of the better forecheckers we've had in recent years. He's got good footspeed and isn't afraid of getting in the muck when needed. He has no finishing ability, which reduces him to a lesser role (or should anyway). I honestly think he's a fantastic player to have on the 4th though, and he may prove to be a very capable PKer as well.

 

Read is largely washed up. There's no other way to look at it in my view. He had some good seasons, but they could easily have been flukes. That's not to say he's a bad player. He showed decent defensive ability when he was paired with Couts, but I personally think that speaks more to Couts' defensive play than Read's ability. In all, I definitely don't consider him as solid as Raffl. He can play and may manage to make some noise in a game or two, but that's about the best we can expect from him I think.

 

Lehtera will be a mystery for a while. His stat line rounds out to something pretty similar to Read really. I remember him spending time in the top six in STL, but that doesn't necessarily mean he should have been in that position. At the moment, I don't feel very giddy at the prospect of having him around. It sort of feels like this year's Weise really, or Umberger before him. As always, I'd be totally cool with him proving me wrong this year though!

 

On the subject of Weise: While he did show some flair near the end of the season, it really wasn't much at all. The vast majority of the time he was one of the least effective players on the ice. I have no reason to think that will be different this year. In fact, I really hope he gets benched a bunch, if only to give more play time to the TKs and Weals of the world, who clearly have more upside imo. Slot him on the 4th if you need to and hope he doesn't turn out to be a total flop, but that's about all I'd give him at this point. Raffl remains the only player I would see getting regular minutes. The rest should be tinkered with until someone proves their worth. At least that's my view.

 

Absolutely.  Raffl does everything right but score.  He can't find the net or thread a pass to save his life, but he's really really good at almost the rest of everything in hockey.  I agree that he should probably be on the PK and he's one of the reasons I'm excited by the 4th line.  Dude was our 1LW last year.  Shouldn't have been, but he'll be great on the 4th. 

 

Read can still skate well and his defense should never be in question.  But he can't seem to find the puck anymore either.  He's got a year left, so it's not likely another team will trade for him until maybe the deadline.  He's been a penalty killer for years and if he's on the team should remain there (since we already have to replace two penalty killers).

 

That's what I mean about all these guys.  They were all playing top 6 minutes last year, but shouldn't have been.  Lehtera included.  St. Louis went as far as to put him on the 4th line and take him off the PK in the playoffs (oddly he put up an assist the night they did it).  I don't feel great about having him around either.  Having Frost around is interesting to me, but right now Lehtera is a roster spot that should probably go to Laughton or Vecchione.  God willing one of them can outplay the heck out of the guy and he can go on waivers.  Worst case scenario, he's definitely going to be an upgrade over PEB or VDV at least in on ice play.  

That said, based on his recent years, I can easily imagine him being waived.  

 

Weise is a quandry to me.  The problem is that he was abnormally bad for most of the year.  You're pointing out that the end was the aberration as far as the year goes, but the whole year was the aberration as far as his career goes.  Judging by the fact that the entire team was so horrible at even strength and given the fact that Weise played almost exclusively at even strength, 

 

What I will say about Weise and Read is that they were two of the four forwards with a positive +/-.  Likely because they spent chunks of time with Couturier.  But I don't think it benefits the team to have both of them... AND Lehtera... AND Raffl.  

 

Of the four, Raffl is definitely the best to have around,  and his year was cut short with injury.  But having all 4 is going to be a drag on the team.  at least 2 need to not be playing the same night as the other two.  

[King Knut]

51 minutes ago, vis said:

This is a bit of a non-sequitur.  I wasn't touting Konecny as a potential PKer.  I was pointing out that he was a PP player.  He averaged 1:41 of PP time per game.  It's clear he was a second unit PP player.

 

 

 

Sorry, reading on my phone (my screen is currently cracked), it looked like you said he played on the PK last year.  Which wasn't 100% incorrect.

 

51 minutes ago, vis said:

Not really an accurate characterization of what I said.  I pointed out that there are not viable candidates for the PK.  So, no, I don't think there are realistic options for the PK.

 

Sorry, it read like you were laying out the PK options.  I guess you were implying that none were good options?

 

51 minutes ago, vis said:

 

NHL PP% average was approximately 19.1%.  The Flyers were slightly above average at 19.5%.  The PP ranked 14 out of 30 teams.

 

 

Yes, the Flyers power play was slightly above average.  But the first unit scored 84% of it's goals.  That's how good they were... and the 2nd unit was so bad that they put in 1/5 as many goals as the top unit.  Imagine how much better that 19.5% power play would be if the 2nd Unit carried just a little more of their weight?  Obviously you don't expect a 2nd Unit to score as much as your first unit, but if they were to be just half as good as the top unit, it would be a vast improvement and result in 14 more PP goals.  For a team that lost so many one goal and OT games last year, that's a huge difference.

 

My point about the PK is that though they were below average, the difference between the best in the league and the Flyers totals out to about 8 goals over the season.   

 

14 is more than 8 and achieving that 14 (going from terrible to average) is probably more realistic than going from below average to the very best.    

 

Of course IMHO if they can be a good team at even strength, none of this will matter until the later rounds of the playoffs anyway.  

51 minutes ago, vis said:

NHL PK% was approximately 80.9%.  The Flyers were at 79.8%.  The PK ranked 21 out of 30 teams.  And they lost their top two PKers in the offseason.  Stands to reason they will have a difficult time maintaining even that level of "efficiency."  

 

 

Does it stand to reason? I'd argue that it doesn't.  While you're right in that PEB and VDV were their top penalty killers in terms of minutes... Do we really think of them as good players though?  Were they the best options?  Why do we assume that?  Do the numbers bear that out?  Simply put, the numbers tell a completely different story.  They were in fact horrible in comparison.

 

 They played the most minutes, but both their Corsi's on the PK were negative compared to Couturier and Simmonds whose Corsis were both positive.  And not just by a little.  In the case of Couturier, it was a swing of 20% points.  In the case of Simmonds it's a swing of 16% points. That's a MONUMENTAL difference.  That's PEB and VDV giving up a LOT MORE shot attempts against than Couturier and Simmonds.  

 

Their goals against per 60 on the PK are much closer, though Couturier and Simmonds both did better by a lesser margin.

 

The larger problem on the PK is the defense.  MacDonald and Provorov were god awful on the PK which probably just means that MacDonald was god awful on the PK and had no business being out there and Provo couldn't make up for it.  MacDonald could have been so bad that the entire PK unit was dragged down with him. His goals against per 60 were the worst on the team.  

 

The bright side is that Morin played in one game last year, had 3+mins of PK time, and gave up no goals despite having a terrible Corsi (meaning he was stuck penned in in his own zone and didn't give up anything).  

Hagg by comparison also played in only a single game, and had half the PK time that Morin did (probably just didn't have as many penalties) and while he also gave up zero goals in that limited time, his relative Corsi was a whopping 34%.  That's crazy unsustainable good, but really really a positive sign.  

 

Pair a guy like one of them with a Provo (who can move the damn puck) and Gudas (who also has a positive rel. Corsi on the PK) on the PK instead of MacDonald or Shcultz and things might get significantly better in a hurry.  

 

51 minutes ago, vis said:

Nothing has been done to realistically address the PK.

 

I think based on what I just laid out, it's safe saying that something has definitely been done about the PK.  I guess it's possible that Raffl or whoever else they put on the PK could be worse than VDV and PEB, but seeing as how PEB and VDV were actually pretty terrible on the PK, trying something new might be just fine.  

 

Add to that the fact that they might get to play Morin or Hagg, things could get crazy better on the PK... because the guys who got the lion's share of PK time last year had the worst numbers.  

 

51 minutes ago, vis said:

Well, there would be addition by subtraction by not having Couturier on the second PP unit.  I realize that statement probably just triggered a visceral reaction, but, please, let's not go down that road...

 

This is a dicey thing to say.  I'll leave the Couturier out of it though.  The entire 2nd unit was bad last year, but the best was Konecny.  Now assuming Weal or Lindblom take Schenn's spot on the first PP unit and Patrick makes the team and the 2nd Unit (those are in and of themselves not givens) That leaves Konecny and let's say Weal and Patrick as three forwards for the 2nd unit.  Now I don't know what Knoblach has in mind.  Will they continue to use 4 fowards or drop to three and another D man?  

 

If they go with 4, who is that 4th forward?   There are no good options.  Based on their overall PP numbers, the best options are Read, Couturier and Weise (in that order).  

 

This all assumes that Konecny gets better and that a PP unit with an average of 58 career NHL games played is going to be an improvement... which I mean considering how bad last year was... one would hope... but really?  Are you betting on that?  

 

51 minutes ago, vis said:

Agree with this.  Biggest issue for me is who QBs the other point on the PP.  It's not the forwards I worry about.  I have no problem with Provorov back there.  But the other spot is a bit of a mystery to me.  

 

This gets back to what Hakstol and Knoblach are going to come up with.  Will they roll 4 fwds like the first line (if so, who's that 4th guy-they have no one who is "good" and by saying who is the 4th, I'm assuming the first three will be better even though they're all unproven and relatively to completely inexperienced on an NHL PP).  If they go with 3fwds and 2D, then you kinda have to hope that it's Provo and Sanheim, otherwise there's not really another D man who would be of benefit on the PP and they might as well switch to 4 fwds even though they don't have a good option.

 

And before we go down this route, I'll reiterate that over his entire career, Filppula like Couturier is a terrible PP performer.  

 

Best case scenario for the 2nd Unit as it is= 3 ???, 1 bad option and Sanheim (who let's face it... is a pretty big ? at the pro level).  

 

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

On 7/24/2017 at 8:26 PM, ruxpin said:

Who do  you put on the line with Giroux?   Would you put Jake back with him or do you split them up?  Pretend for a minute that Patrick makes the team and takes 2C (I don't know that you through a young kid in there, but I guess the option is Couturier, and I'm not thrilled with that). And I guess Konecny goes to the third line?  I'm wondering if that isn't a waste, but if he plays the right side you almost have to, unless you drop Voracek there.  I don't think I drop Simmonds to the third line when he's the one scoring consistently the past couple of years.

 

 

What the fans voted...

 

 

 

[ruxpin]

17 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

What the fans voted...

 

 

 

Interesting.

 

I just don't like Konecny on the left side or Filpulla on the right.  I'm wondering that the majority of fans don't seem to know what positions their players actually play.

[ruxpin]

19 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

What the fans voted...

 

 

 

You know, I was focusing on the forward lines, but what do you think of the pairings on defefence?  Provorov/Gudas makes sense to me.   Ghost/Morin actually does, too.   My concern is about throwing a pair of rookies to the wolves together.  I suppose they have some protection being the third pair, but in an opposing barn, an opposing coach could take advantage.   We may regret not having one more vet back there.   We do have A.M., but I also don't like him blocking one of the kids.