Amazing Wayne Simmonds article

[jammer2]

  Just found this little gem on Wayne Simmonds. A great in-depth article written in May of this year by Charlie O'Connor. The guy did a great job. Lot's of info here, power play net presence, 5 on 5 play. Graphs, comparisons to similar players league wide and on and on. You can make some very accurate assumptions based on the info provided here. Also keys in on Wayne's stats with and without certain members of the top pp....some interesting stuff. 

 

https://www.broadstreethockey.com/2017/5/8/15573504/wayne-simmonds-season-review-grade-profile-flyers-2016-2017

[OccamsRazor]

Great read thanks for sharing.

 

I really think he and the Flyer's workout a nice 3 or 4 year deal when it comes to deciding his future...

[jammer2]

1 hour ago, OccamsRazor said:

Great read thanks for sharing.

 

I really think he and the Flyer's workout a nice 3 or 4 year deal when it comes to deciding his future...

 

 If you subscribe to the whole "when the window opens" thing....Simmonds is right on the cusp of being useful if the window opens 2 or 3 years from now. He just turned 29 in August, and if he signed a 3 or 4 year deal, you could argue he will be on the downswing when the Flyers start to become legit contenders. He would, however, add a nice veteran presence and somebody to show the kids what being a Flyer is all about.

 

I guess it comes down to the kind of money he would want, keeping in mind he should regress during the life of this next deal. It's a real tough call. One thing I know from experience, it's TOUGH to add grit an scoring, so when you have one of those rare combo's, the smart move is to tie them up...assuming he is part of the long term plan that Hexy seems to be sticking to (thank God for that!)

[radoran]

3 hours ago, jammer2 said:

If you subscribe to the whole "when the window opens" thing....Simmonds is right on the cusp of being useful if the window opens 2 or 3 years from now. He just turned 29 in August, and if he signed a 3 or 4 year deal, you could argue he will be on the downswing when the Flyers start to become legit contenders. He would, however, add a nice veteran presence and somebody to show the kids what being a Flyer is all about.

 

You realize, of course, that by this logic you're looking at Giroux and Voracek also being on a "downswing" (assuming they're not already there) "when the window opens." That 20% of the cap is going to need to be part of any "window" for at least the next five years.

 

"The window" for better or for worse for the current "core" of the team is essentially "open" now.

[Jam1986]

G Jake and Simmer then will be sports old! Trade 1 of them or all go with youth with sprinkling of season vets who have won and likes teaching young guys.

 

[OccamsRazor]

14 minutes ago, Jam1986 said:

G Jake and Simmer then will be sports old! Trade 1 of them or all go with youth with sprinkling of season vets who have won and likes teaching young guys.

 

 

 

Well if I had to trade one of those 3 it would be bye bye Jake!

[jammer2]

14 hours ago, radoran said:

 

You realize, of course, that by this logic you're looking at Giroux and Voracek also being on a "downswing" (assuming they're not already there) "when the window opens." That 20% of the cap is going to need to be part of any "window" for at least the next five years.

 

"The window" for better or for worse for the current "core" of the team is essentially "open" now.

 

 I have said a few times, the fact that G and V will be on the downswing (in what we hope is a window opening scenario) is troubling. For me, a window opens when the Flyers show they can win playoff rounds. From winning playoff rounds, to Conference Final happens quite a lot in recent history. I'm a firm believer in the process of learning how to win. It usually takes a similar trajectory. Get your toes wet, make the playoffs, win a few rounds, Conf Final and then Cup. A lot of teams have done that little dance. 

 

 One giant variable is Elliott. If the Flyers play well in front of him, he has the skill to go on some nice rolls.....now, would that translate to playoff victories,? I dunno. 

[jammer2]

12 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Well if I had to trade one of those 3 it would be bye bye Jake!

 

 I still hold out hopes that Jake can somehow return to his 81 pts in 82 games in 14-15. The one part that does reinforce your wanting to trade him, that god-forsaken " -24".....holy crap, I know the Flyers were ca ca last year, but MINUS 24???  I find that G and V don't bring a lot of positive traits 5 on 5. With their skill level, they should be controlling the play a LOT more than we saw last year. 

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=93546

 

 I would trade G if I had my pick of those 3. I worry he will lose another step, and become a glacially slow suburb stickhandler/power play specialist kind of thing. He already is most of those things, except the glacially slow part, but that is showing signs of coming, only question is, how quick?  There is a good chance G may never see 70 pts again, which is sad. I also worry about G's body breaking down like Richards did. G plays a fairly physical game when he is in the right groove, and another case of a small body not being able to handle the rigors of NHL hits on a regular basis. 

[OccamsRazor]

11 minutes ago, jammer2 said:

 

 I still hold out hopes that Jake can somehow return to his 81 pts in 82 games in 14-15. The one part that does reinforce your wanting to trade him, that god-forsaken " -24".....holy crap, I know the Flyers were ca ca last year, but MINUS 24???  I find that G and V don't bring a lot of positive traits 5 on 5. With their skill level, they should be controlling the play a LOT more than we saw last year. 

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=93546

 

 I would trade G if I had my pick of those 3. I worry he will lose another step, and become a glacially slow suburb stickhandler/power play specialist kind of thing. He already is most of those things, except the glacially slow part, but that is showing signs of coming, only question is, how quick?  There is a good chance G may never see 70 pts again, which is sad. I also worry about G's body breaking down like Richards did. G plays a fairly physical game when he is in the right groove, and another case of a small body not being able to handle the rigors of NHL hits on a regular basis. 

 

Well i think G has looked reborn for lack of a better word he looks healthy and fast again and his passing is crisp. He is never going to be a goal scorer he is a set up guy.

 

However Jake unfortunately looks like the same plodding puck fumbling forward from last i hate to say it.

 

So i have to go with moving Jake.

[jammer2]

30 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Well i think G has looked reborn for lack of a better word he looks healthy and fast again and his passing is crisp. He is never going to be a goal scorer he is a set up guy.

 

However Jake unfortunately looks like the same plodding puck fumbling forward from last i hate to say it.

 

So i have to go with moving Jake.

 

 G has always been the more skilled than V. He's far more creative, has a far better understanding of time and space, stickhandles better. So far, V has turned into a very expensive 20 goal scorer who is on the ice for goals against way more than pts for. Like I said, I think there is 80 pts hidden in that frame, just have to find a way to pry it out of him. Realistically though, he would be tough to move due to his salary (which is WAY out of whack for pts scored) and the disgusting length left on the deal. You would never get fair value for him because of teams wanting a discount to take on "your problem". 

 

 At least G is a center, and even older ones are valued for cup runs. Stick G on a 3rd line on an outstanding team and you have a virtual mismatch every time he hits the ice. He would have value that way. G can play special teams all day long wins faceoffs ....I believe his intangibles would make him much easier to trade than V. ....and yeah, he does look plodding at times. You can tell when he has no jump in his step, you're in for a long boring night of watching him. 

 

edit....I know G is to expensive to be a 3rd line center, nobody has that kind of cap space, but in a few years, his number may not look all that mind dumbing. I believe we are in for some huge cap raises in the near future....making G's contract barely digestible. 

[brelic]

On 9/29/2017 at 8:14 AM, jammer2 said:

 

 I still hold out hopes that Jake can somehow return to his 81 pts in 82 games in 14-15. The one part that does reinforce your wanting to trade him, that god-forsaken " -24".....holy crap, I know the Flyers were ca ca last year, but MINUS 24???  I find that G and V don't bring a lot of positive traits 5 on 5. With their skill level, they should be controlling the play a LOT more than we saw last year. 

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=93546

 

Well, wishes do come true!

 

Quote

 I would trade G if I had my pick of those 3. I worry he will lose another step, and become a glacially slow suburb stickhandler/power play specialist kind of thing. He already is most of those things, except the glacially slow part, but that is showing signs of coming, only question is, how quick?  There is a good chance G may never see 70 pts again, which is sad. I also worry about G's body breaking down like Richards did. G plays a fairly physical game when he is in the right groove, and another case of a small body not being able to handle the rigors of NHL hits on a regular basis. 

 

Not so good on this one lol. 

 

I didn't dig up this thread for this @jammer2, I promise! Haha, I was looking for a Simmonds thread and this is the one that came up. 

 

It's nice to see players surprise us, isn't it? 

 

 

Anyway, the point I wanted to bring up is Simmonds and his next contract. 

 

Hornqvist just got 5 years at $5.3M. Similar age Simmer will be when his deal expires. Similar production. Kind of similar roles. 

 

I love Simmer and would want nothing more than to see him hoist a Cup in Philly and retire here... I just don't know if it's the smartest move. Would you resign him at Hornqvist's value? 

 

There are a few options.

 

1. Trade him at the draft. Include a 1st rounder (ours or StL) and move up to the top 5, draft a guy like Tkachuk or Zadina.

 

2. Trade him at the deadline to fill a need, depending on how the team is doing. Picks, prospects, for sure, but primarily for a young, proven, roster player. Mid-20s.

 

3. Do nothing. Try and resign him for 4 years. This option has the biggest risk, I'd say. You could end up overpaying / overcommitting, or having diminished trade value depending on how his season goes, and the fact that he is a pending UFA.

 

A potential 'loophole' in Option #3 is that you sign him, fully accepting that you will expose him in the expansion draft. Kind of a better option than buying out.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

[Pucked in the head]

G knows how to pass and when , instead of puckhogging and coughing it upor try to force it thru 2,3,4 guys! 

[Digityman]

20 hours ago, brelic said:

 

There are a few options.

1. Trade him at the draft. Include a 1st rounder (ours or StL) and move up to the top 5, draft a guy like Tkachuk or Zadina.

 

2. Trade him at the deadline to fill a need, depending on how the team is doing. Picks, prospects, for sure, but primarily for a young, proven, roster player. Mid-20s.

 

3. Do nothing. Try and resign him for 4 years. This option has the biggest risk, I'd say. You could end up overpaying / overcommitting, or having diminished trade value depending on how his season goes, and the fact that he is a pending UFA.

 

A potential 'loophole' in Option #3 is that you sign him, fully accepting that you will expose him in the expansion draft. Kind of a better option than buying out.

Thoughts?

 

 

I like Simmonds but I've never had the man crush on him that others have had.  His skill-set is definitely a proven commodity and those types of players don't come around that often.  My issue is that when this team is ready to go for the cup (2 years?), Simmonds will be on the way down and not be able to provide what the team will need.  

 

If he was 5 years younger, I'd say you give him the contract he wants.  But he's not.  He's worth more in a trade then he will be to the team moving forward.   So I vote for #1 or #2 with preference for #2.   I said it in another thread, players in the 22-25 range is what Hexy should be aiming for if possible.  Players in the draft is fine if they can get a pick that would land a player that is as sure-thing as is possible in any draft.   A player that is thought to be able to jump in and play the next season (Patrick like).

 

Giroux I'm not as worried about.  I think he can provider leadership and points in a difference capacity.  Power play / 3rd line type.   Jake, I don't know what to think about him from game to game.

 

[elmatus]

15 minutes ago, Digityman said:

My issue is that when this team is ready to go for the cup (2 years?)

 

The way the team is firing now, I'm not sure we're looking at two years anymore.

 

I mean, I don't think anyone should be planning any parades, but if we keep this level of play into the playoffs this year, there's a solid argument to be made that this group is a dark horse contender. Hell, I don't even know if they'd be considered a dark horse at this point. They're playing better than most other teams in the league right now after all, and have been for some time.

 

At the very least, if we had prevent a slow start next season, I think we'll see this team in the contender conversation in 2018-19.

[OccamsRazor]

5 minutes ago, elmatus said:

 

The way the team is firing now, I'm not sure we're looking at two years anymore.

 

I mean, I don't think anyone should be planning any parades, but if we keep this level of play into the playoffs this year, there's a solid argument to be made that this group is a dark horse contender. Hell, I don't even know if they'd be considered a dark horse at this point. They're playing better than most other teams in the league right now after all, and have been for some time.

 

At the very least, if we had prevent a slow start next season, I think we'll see this team in the contender conversation in 2018-19.

 

 

I agree i hope and pray by the start of next year when Filppula and maybe just maybe one of either Wiese or Lehtera is gone and you add some more hungry kids to the team like Sanheim, Morin, Vecchione and maybe Vorobyev and maybe even a Aube Kubel this team skill level should be even better.

 

Now i know there may not be room for all of those guys to start but during the season trade some guys out to make room for them.

[radoran]

24 minutes ago, Digityman said:

 

 

I like Simmonds but I've never had the man crush on him that others have had.  His skill-set is definitely a proven commodity and those types of players don't come around that often.  My issue is that when this team is ready to go for the cup (2 years?), Simmonds will be on the way down and not be able to provide what the team will need.  

 

If he was 5 years younger, I'd say you give him the contract he wants.  But he's not.  He's worth more in a trade then he will be to the team moving forward.   So I vote for #1 or #2 with preference for #2.   I said it in another thread, players in the 22-25 range is what Hexy should be aiming for if possible.  Players in the draft is fine if they can get a pick that would land a player that is as sure-thing as is possible in any draft.   A player that is thought to be able to jump in and play the next season (Patrick like).

 

Giroux I'm not as worried about.  I think he can provider leadership and points in a difference capacity.  Power play / 3rd line type.   Jake, I don't know what to think about him from game to game.

 

 

A reasonable question is what contract does Simmonds "want"? I haven't heard/seen anything specific from him.

 

If they can get him for Hornqvist $$ I think that's reasonable, pending term (no 6-8 year deals).

 

He's my favorite current Flyer, but if the team gets a good deal for him, they should seriously consider it.

[elmatus]

38 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

A reasonable question is what contract does Simmonds "want"? I haven't heard/seen anything specific from him.

 

If they can get him for Hornqvist $$ I think that's reasonable, pending term (no 6-8 year deals).

 

He's my favorite current Flyer, but if the team gets a good deal for him, they should seriously consider it.

 

An interesting point to note is that his play this season has lessened compared to the last few. That may make it easier for Hextall to negotiate a reasonable contract that doesn't hamper future signings.

 

That said, Simmer has been a true soldier for us, and it's entirely possible this year is an anomaly. He's also been given a lesser role this year, which is normal when all these talented kids come in to shake things up. And it's not like he's been bad by any stretch, he just hasn't been the dominant presence we've come to expect.

 

The bottom line for me is that Simmonds is a well above average third line RW, and I expect he's quite respected in the locker room as well. As long as the salary isn't foolish, there are a lot of reasons we should be hoping for a resign.

[Digityman]

3 hours ago, radoran said:

 

A reasonable question is what contract does Simmonds "want"? I haven't heard/seen anything specific from him.

 

If they can get him for Hornqvist $$ I think that's reasonable, pending term (no 6-8 year deals).

 

He's my favorite current Flyer, but if the team gets a good deal for him, they should seriously consider it.

 

$5m @ 5 years.  I still think that's too long and by year 3 they will be regretting it.   Especially when the young kids are going to be needing contracts.    Definitely not saying don't do it, I'm just saying he should be shopped quietly to see if the doors get blown off.   

[OccamsRazor]

26 minutes ago, Digityman said:

 

$5m @ 5 years.  I still think that's too long and by year 3 they will be regretting it.   Especially when the young kids are going to be needing contracts.    Definitely not saying don't do it, I'm just saying he should be shopped quietly to see if the doors get blown off.   

 

I would do 3 years. 

[flyercanuck]

47 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

I would do 3 years. 

 

If you were 29 year old Wayne Simmonds agent would you?

[Digityman]

50 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

I would do 3 years. 

 

1 minute ago, flyercanuck said:

 

If you were 29 year old Wayne Simmonds agent would you?

 

What FC said.  This is the sliding into retirement contract.   I can't see him taking anything less that 5 yrs.

[OccamsRazor]

26 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

 

If you were 29 year old Wayne Simmonds agent would you?

 

Well he still has one more year left on his contract and he will be 30 to start it and the 1st year of the new deal he will 31 so yeah the 3 year deal would carry him to 33.

 

And if he wants to play for the Flyers then he better accept it or hit the road.

[OccamsRazor]

28 minutes ago, Digityman said:

 

 

What FC said.  This is the sliding into retirement contract.   I can't see him taking anything less that 5 yrs.

 

So you want Simmer at 35???

[flyercanuck]

41 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

So you want Simmer at 35???

 

I don't think it's a case of wanting him that far down the line...it's a matter of how far past his best before date are the Flyers willing to go to keep him here. He's likely going to want his payday...most pro athletes do.

[OccamsRazor]

2 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

 

I don't think it's a case of wanting him that far down the line...it's a matter of how far past his best before date are the Flyers willing to go to keep him here. He's likely going to want his payday...most pro athletes do.

 

And i can't blame him after his last deal.

 

Well depending on his wants he could be shipped out for a nice haul.

 

I hate for him to go but it is part of the business.