OccamsRazor Posted June 28, 2018 Author Share Posted June 28, 2018 18 minutes ago, ruxpin said: Yeah, we're both pretty much throwing stuff out there at this point. I don't know about you, but from my end it's mostly because I'm bored. You know, since we're being crazy. If the Sharks sign Tavares (I know, but stay with me), they're okay for the moment, but they're going to have a cap issue. They have $18M in space right now and not a lot of people signed. Both Pavelski and Couture are UFAs next season and I'm wondering about their ability to sign both. I guess you could actually overpay Thornton for two years and have him be at 3C. That gets him to 40. I don't know what he looks like for the next two years, but maybe. Or, under the thought that Simmonds would be cheaper (maybe Simmonds +), would some sort of deal involving Couture work? Pavelski would be 3 years older than Simmonds, would that work from their end? It creates a hole for them at center, but they'd have just signed Tavares. If needed, Couture can swing left and Pavelski can swing right. Both Couture and Pavelski are each $6M cap hits that expire next June. Yes. Bored as hell. Waiting on something to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted June 28, 2018 Share Posted June 28, 2018 I think a lot of people around here are going to be greatly underwhelmed when FA starts and Ron signs some plodding role players. I really don't see much going on this off season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 28, 2018 Share Posted June 28, 2018 16 minutes ago, murraycraven said: I think a lot of people around here are going to be greatly underwhelmed when FA starts and Ron signs some plodding role players. I really don't see much going on this off season... Honestly, I see a repeat of Boyd Gordon, Dale Weise, Nick Schultz. The type of stuff that will truly get the party started. If there ends up being anything above that level I'll be pleasantly surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 17 hours ago, ruxpin said: Honestly, I see a repeat of Boyd Gordon, Dale Weise, Nick Schultz. The type of stuff that will truly get the party started. If there ends up being anything above that level I'll be pleasantly surprised. totally agree rux... I would like to be wrong but I think this will be another boring year where Ron doesn't really do much to help the team move forward. If they somehow managed to get Statsny I would be good. And I want no parts of Bozak... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 29, 2018 Author Share Posted June 29, 2018 11 minutes ago, murraycraven said: totally agree rux... I would like to be wrong but I think this will be another boring year where Ron doesn't really do much to help the team move forward. If they somehow managed to get Statsny I would be good. And I want no parts of Bozak... I see them making some decent moves....they just have to much money to spend to not....they may save about 2 mill for a cushion for cap reasons...but the money they have...can't be rolled over....so they will use it this year. And the only way to spend it is by signing guys....and i would expect them to trade for some contracts of guys they covet who are already on short deals with two to three years left... ...they have 21.7 mill to spend...so 2 mill cushion will leave 19.7 mill to spend. Minus i say 5 mill for the guys they are reupping 14.7 mill to spend in free agency and contract acquisitions... ...so i say 2-3 new bodys in the lineup...4 tops...now with that i expect maybe one or two out in those deals... ...so yeah i am on the other end of the spectrum of what you expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, murraycraven said: totally agree rux... I would like to be wrong but I think this will be another boring year where Ron doesn't really do much to help the team move forward. If they somehow managed to get Statsny I would be good. And I want no parts of Bozak... Hextall may be entering a dangerous situation where he's married to development at the expense of building or at least augmenting in other ways. But if he's following the LA Kings' model/recipe, Lombardi became GM in April 2006. Their major trades (for Richards & Carters) didn't really happen until June 2011. They won their first cup the following year. So, the major stuff didn't happen until the summer following Lombardi's 5th year. Now, I don't imagine there's anything magical about "after the 5th season," but it may be the time frame needed for this build if all goes as plan until then. If we're on the same path, the big signings/trades aren't happening until after next season. And I don't see why we're not, actually. The ping pong ball helped us quite a bit, but by end of next season Lehtera, Weal, and Raffl are off the books. MacDonald will have only one year left. Honestly, if he has another year like he did this past season (and even much of last season) he will actually have decent trade value with only one year left. So, ridiculous cap space even with having to sign Provorov, Konecny, Patrick, and Sanheim. If they choose to extend Laughton -- I think they trade him -- I don't think it costs all that much. I could see next summer being the time to pull the trigger on something. But now makes sense, too. And that's where I opened with this. If he's following the LA Kings' recipe, then next summer is it, or the year after if he thinks we're not as far and need another year (largely due to goalie). But what if he's not? What if the other message he learned from the Kings is that the huge contracts of Richards and Carter and Brown (among others) made it difficult to extend the Cup window? I mean, the Kings haven't been passed the first round since winning the Cup in 2014. So 6 years until a Cup, 2 in four years, and the run is over and the general manager fired. So, if he has fantasies of a long run of contention and some wins, he may be all-in on building largely from within and supplementing with rentals until the roster is almost entirely draft picks with controlled salaries. When faced with pricey extentions, move and replace with more kids. By next summer, we should know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 6 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: I see them making some decent moves....they just have to much money to spend to not....they may save about 2 mill for a cushion for cap reasons...but the money they have...can't be rolled over....so they will use it this year. And the only way to spend it is by signing guys....and i would expect them to trade for some contracts of guys they covet who are already on short deals with two to three years left... ...they have 21.7 mill to spend...so 2 mill cushion will leave 19.7 mill to spend. Minus i say 5 mill for the guys they are reupping 14.7 mill to spend in free agency and contract acquisitions... ...so i say 2-3 new bodys in the lineup...4 tops...now with that i expect maybe one or two out in those deals... ...so yeah i am on the other end of the spectrum of what you expect. I think you're going to be disappointed, but here's to hoping you're right. Because, without some help, we're largely looking at a repeat of the results this year. This year's results were surprising (as in unexpected) and I'm fine with it. But there are already pitchforks being lit up in Philly. Can you imagine us going through next season with a flawed lineup and nearly $15M in cap money just sitting there? That didn't play well this past year in Montreal. Philly fans will be at least as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 29, 2018 Author Share Posted June 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, ruxpin said: I think you're going to be disappointed, but here's to hoping you're right So you are thinking they are going to sit on close to 20 million dollars??? Like i said you must use it or lose it...and losing it ain't the Flyer way. Ron has worked to get this space...so now he is going to do his homework and go shopping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 10 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: So you are thinking they are going to sit on close to 20 million dollars??? Like i said you must use it or lose it...and losing it ain't the Flyer way. Ron has worked to get this space...so now he is going to do his homework and go shopping. I dont think the argument is if they are going to use the cap space but *how* they use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: So you are thinking they are going to sit on close to 20 million dollars??? Like i said you must use it or lose it...and losing it ain't the Flyer way. Ron has worked to get this space...so now he is going to do his homework and go shopping. The "use it or lose it" really isn't a compelling argument to me, to be honest. But the sitting on $15 million (I'm subtracting for the kids they need to sign) is. Like I said, I can't fathom the message it would send to both the players and the fan base for Hextall to sit on $15 million. He may ultimately be locked out from the big tickets (ie., outbid, etc) and we may never know given the tight lips this organization has. But I can't see his not making the attempt. Because I do think there will be pitchforks at the gates if he doesn't. The drums are already beating among a large portion of what's left of the fan base that's still paying attention. The other thing is that Holmgren's comments right after we lost to Pittsburgh really sounded like a mandate to me. I know the wording was something along the lines of "Hextall can spend the money," but for him to say even that sounded like growing impatience and directive. Would you agree? I think he certainly has to try. Spending it just to spend it doesn't seem wise (like $7M for 2 years for Bozak seems like "we have it, so whatever" rather than prudent spending). But he has to make the effort. The other thing is that he has to start seriously considering moving some prospects/kids he might be married to -- and some we may not want to see go. The Kings had to move out Schenn and Simmonds and a pick and took on cap. I'm not sure in our system what the equivalent would be, but it would be names we're not really excited to see go. But if we want to go prime time, that's what it will take. The difference, of course, between the Kings' experience and the situation in Philly (among others) is that Jonathan Quick was already in place and finishing his 3rd year when they pulled their triggers. We'd be doing it with fricken Elliott and whatever and with our Quick equivalent (Hart) not quite ready. I don't know. I think they should go for some help. But I'll be utterly stunned if it's not the equivalent of Gordon, Weise, and Schultz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, murraycraven said: I dont think the argument is if they are going to use the cap space but *how* they use it. I agree. Because we do have it this year and possibly next, but if Hextall is not interested in causing a Cap dilemma for himself 3 years from now, he's got to try to keep his signings to 2-3 years. If he's out there bidding against teams offering 5-7 years, he's coming into this handicapped. I think on the names we'd like to see the Flyers go get, that handicap will prove eliminating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, ruxpin said: I agree. Because we do have it this year and possibly next, but if Hextall is not interested in causing a Cap dilemma for himself 3 years from now, he's got to try to keep his signings to 2-3 years. If he's out there bidding against teams offering 5-7 years, he's coming into this handicapped. I think on the names we'd like to see the Flyers go get, that handicap will prove eliminating. agree... Everything Ron says always comes with the stipulation of "term." Any of the decent FAs out there are going to be looking for term and rightfully so. I would be shocked if he went out and gave a term to anyone that is not currently a Flyer. He could shock us and I think we will find out shortly enough.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmatus Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 8 minutes ago, ruxpin said: The other thing is that he has to start seriously considering moving some prospects/kids he might be married to -- and some we may not want to see go. The Kings had to move out Schenn and Simmonds and a pick and took on cap. I'm not sure in our system what the equivalent would be, but it would be names we're not really excited to see go. But if we want to go prime time, that's what it will take. The difference, of course, between the Kings' experience and the situation in Philly (among others) is that Jonathan Quick was already in place and finishing his 3rd year when they pulled their triggers. We'd be doing it with fricken Elliott and whatever and with our Quick equivalent (Hart) not quite ready. This is pretty clearly the major difference. We can't win with Elliott. It's nonsensical to think otherwise at this point. Given that, I would have a hard time seeing Hex move any of our top future pieces in a trade that doesn't include an upgrade in net. It makes very little sense to lose a Sanheim or Myers for just another forward. That forward is unlikely to wear pads. As such, he's unlikely to make such a big diff on our successes next season. Besides, our forward corps is really quite good. We could use another volume shooter or two, but we nonetheless have a very strong top six, and Simmonds sitting in the third RW slot is as good as a top six on most NHL teams. Obviously, it would make no sense to trade one of our prospect dmen for another dman. That's a lateral move. And as mentioned above, our forwards are not the reason for our losses. If Hex is to make any move that includes a high potential u24 guy, it better involve a goalie coming back. I said as much for Simmonds in recent weeks, and the same is true for any valuable piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, elmatus said: This is pretty clearly the major difference. We can't win with Elliott. It's nonsensical to think otherwise at this point. Given that, I would have a hard time seeing Hex move any of our top future pieces in a trade that doesn't include an upgrade in net. It makes very little sense to lose a Sanheim or Myers for just another forward. That forward is unlikely to wear pads. As such, he's unlikely to make such a big diff on our successes next season. Besides, our forward corps is really quite good. We could use another volume shooter or two, but we nonetheless have a very strong top six, and Simmonds sitting in the third RW slot is as good as a top six on most NHL teams. Obviously, it would make no sense to trade one of our prospect dmen for another dman. That's a lateral move. And as mentioned above, our forwards are not the reason for our losses. If Hex is to make any move that includes a high potential u24 guy, it better involve a goalie coming back. Completely agree. I don't think moving our assets right now makes any sense--unlike, as you say, it's for a goalie. And at that point, it really needs to be for a top-end goalie. They're few and far between at the level we're talking about and would take significant assets. So barring that -- and I think that's safe to assume -- we're back to being in the "fill some holes with short term mid-level" for at least another year. I could see them leaving $5-$7M on the table and going for someone at the trade deadline this time around. Especially if that someone were a rental from a lottery team looking to clear cap. Even someone with one extra year. Because at that point you'd be filling for glaring need to make the playoffs or to fight for positioning. So I don't see them spending near to the cap in the offseason. It's not warranted with the Keystone Kops situation we have in net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 9 minutes ago, ruxpin said: I agree. Because we do have it this year and possibly next, but if Hextall is not interested in causing a Cap dilemma for himself 3 years from now, he's got to try to keep his signings to 2-3 years. If he's out there bidding against teams offering 5-7 years, he's coming into this handicapped. I think on the names we'd like to see the Flyers go get, that handicap will prove eliminating. This is the biggest obstacle. It's not that Hextall doesn't *want* to improve the team, it's just that he's not willing to go full Holmgren and sign players to contracts that hamper his ability to shape the roster in the future. Bozak and JVR would help for two years. Even if you don't like those players, 30 goals from JVR is a HUGE help, floater or not. That's probably 3-4 more Ws during the season. Enough for 1st in the Metro this year. But I can't imagine a scenario where either is ok with a 2 year deal. So Hextall will be left with bottom of the pile players that can't find jobs elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, brelic said: This is the biggest obstacle. It's not that Hextall doesn't *want* to improve the team, it's just that he's not willing to go full Holmgren and sign players to contracts that hamper his ability to shape the roster in the future. Bozak and JVR would help for two years. Even if you don't like those players, 30 goals from JVR is a HUGE help, floater or not. That's probably 3-4 more Ws during the season. Enough for 1st in the Metro this year. But I can't imagine a scenario where either is ok with a 2 year deal. So Hextall will be left with bottom of the pile players that can't find jobs elsewhere. Yeah, I think that's on point. I'm aware I'm a little all over the place in my last few posts. Kind of a stream of consciousness thing. But through all this, I'm pretty much resigned to the idea that he'll try for a Stastny or Neal type and fail due to term. He'll plug in with "bottom of the pile" players or maybe mid-level. With my more recent post, keeping money back for the deadline idea has merit to me, so I'm starting to think that might actually be a plausible plan. I just don't see much happening with free agents this offseason, but I do see him at least doing some shopping but coming away empty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmatus Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 1 minute ago, brelic said: But I can't imagine a scenario where either is ok with a 2 year deal. So Hextall will be left with bottom of the pile players that can't find jobs elsewhere. Maybe not two year, but I could see Bozak going for four or something. I really don't think he's going to get a bunch of top end offers. He's just not that kind of guy. I can see a team overpaying for JVR, but not Bozak. Sure, two years may not be his thing, but he may be good with a four year term. I'm not sure I want him around for four years mind you. He's really not much (if any) of an improvement over Filppula. Why sign Bozak to four if Fil will sign for two? I'm not saying I like Fil, but the difference in performance would likely be minimal to none. Why overpay for that kind of guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Just now, elmatus said: Maybe not two year, but I could see Bozak going for four or something. I really don't think he's going to get a bunch of top end offers. He's just not that kind of guy. I can see a team overpaying for JVR, but not Bozak. Sure, two years may not be his thing, but he may be good with a four year term. I'm not sure I want him around for four years mind you. He's really not much (if any) of an improvement over Filppula. Why sign Bozak to four if Fil will sign for two? I'm not saying I like Fil, but the difference in performance would likely be minimal to none. Why overpay for that kind of guy? Yeah, i agree with this too. I really could see us ending up with Filppula for one or two years. My problem with overpaying and overextending a Bozak-type is we really should be ready with Frost and/or Rubtsov in 2 years. And where do you put them? Then again, Rubtsov may end up being the LA Schenn we're trading to someone at that point. I don't know, but the 2-3 year term seems like what we should be going for at this point. I really don't want Filppula back, but I bet that's what ends up happening. If that's the case, our PK (among other things) will still suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 O'Brien seems like he'll be a 3-4 year project. How far out do we think Farabee is? 2? 3? 4? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 11 minutes ago, brelic said: This is the biggest obstacle. It's not that Hextall doesn't *want* to improve the team, it's just that he's not willing to go full Holmgren and sign players to contracts that hamper his ability to shape the roster in the future. Bozak and JVR would help for two years. Even if you don't like those players, 30 goals from JVR is a HUGE help, floater or not. That's probably 3-4 more Ws during the season. Enough for 1st in the Metro this year. But I can't imagine a scenario where either is ok with a 2 year deal. So Hextall will be left with bottom of the pile players that can't find jobs elsewhere. Well stated @brelic I think this perfectly sums it up... At some point in this "plan" Hextall is going to have to get aggressive. I just really dont see it being this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 29, 2018 Author Share Posted June 29, 2018 Ron isn't going to lock anyone in for 5 years or greater....it will be 3 years tops so that alone will knock them out of going for guys. And I'm fine with that especially with the stable full and guys coming in every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 9 minutes ago, elmatus said: Maybe not two year, but I could see Bozak going for four or something. I really don't think he's going to get a bunch of top end offers. He's just not that kind of guy. I can see a team overpaying for JVR, but not Bozak. Sure, two years may not be his thing, but he may be good with a four year term. I'm not sure I want him around for four years mind you. He's really not much (if any) of an improvement over Filppula. Why sign Bozak to four if Fil will sign for two? I'm not saying I like Fil, but the difference in performance would likely be minimal to none. Why overpay for that kind of guy? Honestly, I think Bozak is another Filp waiting to happen. He is not very fast to begin with and has lost a bit of step. I want no parts of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 If the Flyers don't make the playoffs this season or get eliminated in similar fashion in the first round, does Hextall survive? Or is he the Flyers' version of Ed Wade (Phillies) who drafted a bunch of terrific players who got to watch from another city while someone else came in and made some moves to augment and win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FD19372 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 I am hearing about Stastny and Bozak, but why isn't Hextall looking more for guys who can put the puck in the net, especially on the wing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilldoc Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 8 minutes ago, ruxpin said: O'Brien seems like he'll be a 3-4 year project. How far out do we think Farabee is? 2? 3? 4? I've read (and I should have bookmarked my sources ...errr) about 2-3 years. Give him some time to bulk up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.