Bring Tavares to Philly

[OccamsRazor]

7 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

 

He played RW for TC at the WJs...phenomenally. 

 

As mentioned though...he doesn't play goal. Or defence. And those are the areas that need fixing. And we already have one extremely high priced winger. 

 

 

Well they will have plenty of money so i don't think i seen anyone here say "Oh no Ron we are good on defense and goal just get us Tavares are the Cup is ours!!!!!!!!!"

 

News flash other moves are allowed...........more news at 11!

[ruxpin]

3 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

Paul Stastny  or ugh, that's not a lot of great options. I don't know what I'd think about bringing Maroon back, would he be interested ? how would his game fit ?

 

I think SJ will try to lock Kane down because he's been excellent for them and is doing all the right things to repair his image. His image suffered because he was bored in winterpeg? I don't get the surly Buffalo business, he could have been a leader there,...anyway he's in a honeymoon phase with the Sharks. I think he may now be "woke" in regards to how his behavior affects his fortunes.

 

Agreed.  I actually don't have much interest in Maroon.   He's been better than I ever imagined he'd be when he was here before, but he's kind of "meh" to me.   I don't like Stastny.   I think Armstrong is an idiot, but it still says something to me that Stastny was movable at the deadline in a playoff run.  The guy has talent, but both Colorado and St. Louis gave up on him.   I think I pass.

 

Neal was on that list.   Skillset-wise, he might be a decent option, but I think I'd puke.   Moreso than Kane, who I also don't like.   Kane would be an obvious improvement but I think you're right that SJ tries to resign.   And I don't know that I actually want him or that he fits into whatever idea Hextall has about the kind of people he wants on his team.

 

Bozak might be a 3C option, if unexciting.  I don't know what Toronto wants to do there, and I'm not sure they do yet either.

 

The rest is "Why?"

[elmatus]

Just now, ruxpin said:

 

I'm not sure that's the case.  Because you have to add in what production is diminished by moving another center down roster.

 

For example, assume you're slotting Tavares in at 1C and that necessitates putting Couturier back at 3C.   Does Couturier still get 75 points?   Hard to say with certainty, but I would argue no.   And someone has to play RW.   Who plays that gets close to Voracek's production -- enough that it compensates for the reduction of Couturier?    Maybe Coots goes to 2C and Patrick goes to 3C.   I don't think Patrick is a good fit there, but at the very least his potential production is reduced.

 

Tavares has played RW and has done very well there, albeit on a limited basis.   So maybe you slot in Tavares in the spot that Voracek was in and that solves the issue at C (although still needing a 3C).    But then, what was the point of that switch?   Tavares scores more, but the points are a dead heat.    So, you've exchanged an $8.25M contract with 6 years for probably a $10M+ contract for 8 years or whatever the limit is for one point?

 

Again, if my need is a range and a dishwasher, I'm not going out and getting a new fridge but still not being able to cook my food or wash my dishes.   It's fun to think about in a fantasy way, but realistically it's a really bad move.

 

I started out saying I wouldn't be upset if they did this but think it's a bad idea.   The more I'm thinking about it, the more I think I'd really be irritated if they did this.  I think it Holmgrenesque kills their chances in the next 5 years.

 

I get what you're saying, but this seems to be assuming only two lines can contribute at a high level. I don't believe that's the case at all. I think if we ever have the luxury of a JT/Couts/Patrick down the middle, it comes down to finding six wingers who can play with those guys and create. Suddenly we then go from a one line team -- as we largely were this year -- to a three line team. Split their time more evenly based on how their playing. If anything, it would make us even more difficult to play against.

 

Sure, at the end of the day, our best line will get more ice time, but in this scenario it likely wouldn't be a huge gap between the top three lines. That's an advantage.

 

Honestly, I do get the money issue, and I can agree with that. Signing JT would give us substantially less wiggle room down the line, which is a problem when you have so many highly talented youngsters. We don't know which or how many might explode and be very deserving of a nice contract down the line. Having cap space to work with is clearly a great thing in this case.

 

Aside from that though, I would see nothing but tremendous positives in signing a player of JT's caliber. At worst, it gives us a second Giroux. At best, it gives us a player who is even better than Giroux, and who is hungry to play for a team that actually has a chance to make some noise. He's never had that, and yet he's still considered one of the very best players on the planet. Give him teammates the likes of which he would have here, and I do think the sky's the limit for the guy.

 

So, do I want JT on the team? Who wouldn't? Do I want to be on the hook for the next seven years with so much talent coming up? Well, maybe not. I do think it's worth a solid conversation on possibilities though, which is what we're doing. I hope Hexy is doing the same.

[ruxpin]

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

Well they will have plenty of money

 

If we're talking just next year and maybe the year following, we do.   Going forward, I'm not so sure.  I think  that thought runs the risk of our being Chicago.  And I don't think a Tavares move gets us the Cups that make Chicago currently a little more easy to stomach.

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

You say that like the Isles have much of a say in the matter at this point.

 

 

Well they could just give him a blank check in a desperate attempt.

 

They if he still won't sign they could always trade his rights for something so that team has exclusive rights till July 1st.

 

It's about all they can do...he still is free to do what he wants.

[ruxpin]

13 minutes ago, elmatus said:

I get what you're saying, but this seems to be assuming only two lines can contribute at a high level. I don't believe that's the case at all. I think if we ever have the luxury of a JT/Couts/Patrick down the middle, it comes down to finding six wingers who can play with those guys and create. Suddenly we then go from a one line team -- as we largely were this year -- to a three line team.

 

Where are the wingers coming from to make the 3 lines if we're paying that kind of money?   The window would be next year and maybe the year after, but after that you'll have to pay Konecny, Provorov, Patrick and possibly others.   I think both near term and long term we can more wisely accomplish the 3-line thing.   EDIT:  You covered this later in your post. Sorry about that.

 

13 minutes ago, elmatus said:

Who wouldn't?

The more I'm thinking about it, I think me.

 

13 minutes ago, elmatus said:

I do think it's worth a solid conversation on possibilities though, which is what we're doing.

 

Absolutely.  It's what a forum is for.  Besides, it's fun.   And for me, the conversation has actually helped me go from on the fence and leaning toward "yeah, why not?" to "yeah, I really think this is a counterproductive idea."

 

You do write a helluva well-thought out post, though (in arguing the merits).

 

I don't think I've seen this stated elsewhere as an ingredient to the thought process, but I don't know whether my algebra changes if signing him clearly prevents some other Metro team from getting him.   There's obviously some benefit in signing him for our own purposes, but if faced with signing him or he goes to NYR or New Jersey or Columbus or Washington or somewhere, maybe that changes things.  Ultimately, I don't think it does what we think near-term, and I think it's likely a bad thing the second half of the term.

 

[ruxpin]

7 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Well they could just give him a blank check in a desperate attempt.

 

They if he still won't sign they could always trade his rights for something so that team has exclusive rights till July 1st.

 

It's about all they can do...he still is free to do what he wants.

 

Great points.   You almost have to think that if they were going to get something done that they would have already.   It's still possible, of course, but it seems from afar that he wants to go.  The arena issues there and team build, etc., can't be fun for him.

 

The trading his rights is definitely a wrinkle.   If they can't sign him, you have to think they'd be foolish to not do this, right?

[elmatus]

1 minute ago, ruxpin said:

Where are the wingers coming from to make the 3 lines if we're paying that kind of money? 

 

It's not like we don't have a good bunch already. Giroux, TK, Voracek, and Simmonds are four. Lindblom may surprise next year, and Raffl can fill one of those spots without trouble. That's six without even considering anyone from LHV.

 

4 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

The window would be next year and maybe the year after, but after that you'll have to pay Konecny, Provorov, Patrick and possibly others. 

 

Yes, absolutely. This is what I mean when I mention that I do understand the money issue.

 

Again, from a standpoint of would Tavares make this team better, the answer for me is very clearly a yes. Would it be prudent given the money? Possibly not.

 

13 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I don't think a Tavares move gets us the Cups that make Chicago currently a little more easy to stomach.

 

I think Tavares is better than Toews. He may also very well be better than Kane. Chicago's rosters in those cup years were stacked. The Islanders have never even come close to that level. I absolutely think Tavares brings us closer to a cup run. I think it brings us much closer.

[ruxpin]

3 minutes ago, elmatus said:

This is what I mean when I mention that I do understand the money issue

 

Yeah, you did.   I missed it the first time around.   Sorry about that.

[OccamsRazor]

12 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

but it seems from afar that he wants to go. 

 

 

And who could blame him with Garth running that dumpster fire. Get out while you can AND get paid?? Sign me up!!!

[OccamsRazor]

13 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

If they can't sign him, you have to think they'd be foolish to not do this, right?

 

 

Absolutely....just so they have anything to show for his time there...his rights would goto the highest bidder....that could get you would think at minimum a 3rd rounder....right??

[OccamsRazor]

11 minutes ago, elmatus said:

It's not like we don't have a good bunch already. Giroux, TK, Voracek, and Simmonds are four. Lindblom may surprise next year, and Raffl can fill one of those spots without trouble.

 

 

Yes i think they have plenty really.

 

I will say if he isn't resigned i would make a run at Micheal Grabner the Flyers could use his speed and his scoring touch...and he can play either wing.

 

I don't think there will be much cap issues either the only kid who will be up for a huge deal will be Ivan.

 

The other will get nice bridge deals which will be very affordable.

 

They have some nice space banked and the cap is going up a good bit.

 

Ron has done a good job clearing crap...still a few pieces left but it is manageable...i wonder if Lehterable is bought out this year too.

[ruxpin]

7 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Absolutely....just so they have anything to show for his time there...his rights would goto the highest bidder....that could get you would think at minimum a 3rd rounder....right??

 

Yeah, I would think so.  "At minimum" if there's reasonable assurance that he'll sign with the receiving team.

[OccamsRazor]

@ruxpin

 

Honestly wouldn't it piss Coots off after doing so well to demote him for an outsider even if it is Tavares???

 

I think it would be here goes....

 

So what about this.

 

Traded Simmer and Weal.

 

Bought out Lehtera.

 

Some much added the 3 S's: size, skill and speed added!!!!!!!

 

Along with some new added youth!!!!!!! Me like it.

 

28 Claude Giroux - 14 Sean Couturier - 91 John Tarares
54 Oskar Lindblom - 19 Nolan Patrick - 93 Jakub Voracek
40 Michael Grabner - 24 Misha Vorobyev - 11 Travis Konecny
21 Scott Laughton - 20 Mike Vecchione - 12 Michael Raffl

[pilldoc]

1 hour ago, ruxpin said:

1 hour ago, elmatus said:

Who wouldn't?

The more I'm thinking about it, I think me.

 

Add me to that list as well.    However @elmatus I think hits the crux of the matter  with the following quote of his.

 

1 hour ago, elmatus said:

Again, from a standpoint of would Tavares make this team better, the answer for me is very clearly a yes. Would it be prudent given the money? Possibly not.

 

I totally agree!

 

[brelic]

1 hour ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Absolutely....just so they have anything to show for his time there...his rights would goto the highest bidder....that could get you would think at minimum a 3rd rounder....right??

 

Shot blocker EXTRAordinaire MacDonald fetched a 2nd rounder and a minor leaguer just for the right to talk to him.

 

Tavares would fetch CONSIDERABLY more. He's an elite talent, and for a team to have an exclusive negotiating window, I would start with a 1st rounder at minimum if I'm the Isles. 

 

 

[brelic]

1 hour ago, OccamsRazor said:

@ruxpin

 

Honestly wouldn't it piss Coots off after doing so well to demote him for an outsider even if it is Tavares???

 

I think it would be here goes....

 

So what about this.

 

Traded Simmer and Weal.

 

Bought out Lehtera.

 

Some much added the 3 S's: size, skill and speed added!!!!!!!

 

Along with some new added youth!!!!!!! Me like it.

 

28 Claude Giroux - 14 Sean Couturier - 91 John Tarares
54 Oskar Lindblom - 19 Nolan Patrick - 93 Jakub Voracek
40 Michael Grabner - 24 Misha Vorobyev - 11 Travis Konecny
21 Scott Laughton - 20 Mike Vecchione - 12 Michael Raffl

 

Out of all the contracts we currently have and the ones for players we'd love to have (Tavares), I am convinced that Voracek is the only one we will truly hate. 

 

JT will be a very productive player until his early 30s, especially if flanked with talented linemates, so what's a few mediocre years? And by mediocre, I mean 55+ points. I can't see him dipping below that unless he's hurt. 

 

For me, I think Tavares only makes sense if you can move Voracek either now or after next year - at the very least, no longer than 2 more years here. 

 

If you don't move Voracek, and add Tavares, that's when we will run into contract problems in 3 years.

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

4 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

Shot blocker EXTRAordinaire MacDonald fetched a 2nd rounder and a minor leaguer just for the right to talk to him.

 

Tavares would fetch CONSIDERABLY more. He's an elite talent, and for a team to have an exclusive negotiating window, I would start with a 1st rounder at minimum if I'm the Isles. 

 

 

 

Wait the Flyers actually traded for Mcdud and he played for them before getting a new contract.

[brelic]

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Wait the Flyers actually traded for Mcdud and he played for them before getting a new contract.

 

Right. 17 games or something. 

 

But the point remains... I think they traded a 3rd to talk to Hamhuis. They traded a 3rd rounder, another conditional pick (upon signing), and a minor leaguer for the rights to Bryzgalov.

 

Maybe that's just Drunken Homer betting against his own imaginary market, but I just cannot imagine any scenario where the Isles take a 3rd rounder for negotiating rights to 1st overall Tavares. 

 

Someone will pay a LOT to have an exclusive window, if it comes to that.

[OccamsRazor]

2 minutes ago, brelic said:

I am convinced that Voracek is the only one we will truly hate.

 

 

I wouldn't hate his contract so much if he would eliminate his head up his ass plays were he tries to weave through so many folks only to cough it up or were he just turns it over WITH NO ONE even around him. If he eliminates those bone head plays i would be ok with him.

 

4 minutes ago, brelic said:

For me, I think Tavares only makes sense if you can move Voracek either now or after next year

 

Yeah i would be ok i have stated before i would rather trade him than Simmer. And the Flyers are stacked at RW.

 

Sure no one yet who has proven the can put up the numbers he has yet....but if given the chance i think TK could have a nice year.

 

If you want to move him this would be good too...

 

 

28 Claude Giroux - 14 Sean Couturier - 91 John Tarares
54 Oskar Lindblom - 19 Nolan Patrick - 11 Travis Konecny
40 Michael Grabner - 24 Misha Vorobyev - 17 Wayne Simmonds
21 Scott Laughton - 20 Mike Vecchione - 12 Michael Raffl

 

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[OccamsRazor]

1 minute ago, brelic said:

 

Right. 17 games or something. 

 

But the point remains... I think they traded a 3rd to talk to Hamhuis. They traded a 3rd rounder, another conditional pick (upon signing), and a minor leaguer for the rights to Bryzgalov.

 

Maybe that's just Drunken Homer betting against his own imaginary market, but I just cannot imagine any scenario where the Isles take a 3rd rounder for negotiating rights to 1st overall Tavares. 

 

Someone will pay a LOT to have an exclusive window, if it comes to that.

 

Sure i'm not capping at a 3rd like i said he will go to the highest bidder and that bidder you would think would have to have some inside knowledge they know they can sign him....so that is basically all the Isles will get for his legacy!!!!!!!!

 

So have just moved him at this past trade deadline for a king's ransom maybe!!!!!

 

#hindsightandall

[brelic]

33 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

I wouldn't hate his contract so much if he would eliminate his head up his ass plays were he tries to weave through so many folks only to cough it up or were he just turns it over WITH NO ONE even around him. If he eliminates those bone head plays i would be ok with him

 

I don't think that will change, though. It's who he is. It's like saying we'd love it if Giroux would stop gaining entry into the zone and stopping short along the half wall to look at options. He's not going to stop that - it's who he's become as a player. 

 

With Voracek - and any player, really - you take the good with the bad. It doesn't mean they don't develop into better players, but I'm not sure he would completely eliminate such an ingrained behaviour that is part of his game. 

 

The best way to control that, from a coaching perspective, is to control his usage. 

[ruxpin]

48 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

I don't think that will change, though. It's who he is. It's like saying we'd love it if Giroux would stop gaining entry into the zone and stopping short along the half wall to look at options. He's not going to stop that - it's who he's become as a player. 

 

With Voracek - and any player, really - you take the good with the bad. It doesn't mean they don't develop into better players, but I'm not sure he would completely eliminate such an ingrained behaviour that is part of his game. 

 

The best way to control that, from a coaching perspective, is to control his usage. 

He's not going to change that, I agree. Stupid is as stupid does. 

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, brelic said:

It's like saying we'd love it if Giroux would stop gaining entry into the zone and stopping short along the half wall to look at options.

 

 

This is where we disagree....not the same thing in anyway. Forget we are talking about Jake pretend we are talking about TK.

 

No way you don't pull him aside and TELL him to stop as someone said trying to stick handle through a small village you're killing your team...you need to make smarter decisions especially, ESPECIALLY with the damn puck after you fought so hard to GET IT...you can't keep turning the damn puck over with stupid mistakes.....now i know turnovers will happen all the players will have them...but you must make smarter decision when you have the puck. And if he doesn't show improvement bench his ass till he does.

 

I'm not buying this can't teach an old dog new tricks....it would be no different than if an older player come in from another team and started do that you have to nip it in the bud and that sends a message even to the kids that hey if they are going to hold the vets accoutbalbe then the same goes for everyone.

 

Sure easier said than done but i don't think anyone has told his dumb ass and that is one Hak.

 

Ship up or ship out...that simple!

[ruxpin]

9 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

This is where we disagree....not the same thing in anyway. Forget we are talking about Jake pretend we are talking about TK.

 

No way you don't pull him aside and TELL him to stop as someone said trying to stick handle through a small village you're killing you're team you need to make smarter decisions especially ESPECIALLY with the damn puck after you fought so hard to GET IT...you can't keep turning the damn puck over with stupid mistakes.....now i know turnovers will happen all the players will have them...but you must make smarter decision when you have the puck. And if he doesn't show improvement bench his ass till he does.

 

I'm not buying this can't teach an old dog new tricks....it would be no different than if an older player come in from another team and started do that you have to nip it in the bud and that sends a message even to the kids that hey if they are going to hold the vets accoutbalbe then the same goes for everyone.

 

Sure easier said than done but i don't think anyone has told his dumb ass and that is one Hak.

 

Ship up or ship out...that simple!

Stupid is as stupid does. Lol

 

I got to the point when Rod Brind'amour was a Flyer that he similarly drove me nuts with the blind passes to the middle that would go the other way. They seemingly couldn't get him to stop it. But it didn't seem to follow him to Carolina. So these things are fixable. 

 

I'm not sure Voracek isn't too stupid.