How Close Are The Flyers?

[vis]

2 hours ago, ruxpin said:

So, I asked this in the draft thread, but I'll ask it here as well.

 

If you're the Flyers and you come to #50 and either or both of Jakub Skarek or Olivier Rodrigue are there (both goalies), do you use your 2nd rounder on a goalie or wait?

 

With two first rounders already in the bank (assuming we use both), I think I keep taking a goalie until someone latches on and stays.   Thoughts?

In theory, I don't select a goalie in the second round.  I say "in theory" because I don't know enough about either of the goalies you mention and whether they project as good or better than Hart.  So, my theory is this: I feel pretty good about Hart and don't see a need to spend another high round pick "in case" he doesn't pan out.  I put my trust in the scouting and development departments and hope he becomes a bona fide NHL starter.  I can't worry about potential injuries or developmental failures and hedge by spending another high pick on a goaltender.  Especially since goaltenders are tough to predict.  Now, I have no problem hunting in later rounds for more goaltenders.  But I don't see spending a high round pick on a goalie.

 

I look at the depth chart and feel they are potentially weak on the wings.  I target wingers with all three of those picks as a top priority.  I don't know enough what players will be available when they pick.  Just going on what I perceive to be "need."

[ruxpin]

3 minutes ago, vis said:

In theory, I don't select a goalie in the second round.  I say "in theory" because I don't know enough about either of the goalies you mention and whether they project as good or better than Hart.  So, my theory is this: I feel pretty good about Hart and don't see a need to spend another high round pick "in case" he doesn't pan out.  I put my trust in the scouting and development departments and hope he becomes a bona fide NHL starter.  I can't worry about potential injuries or developmental failures and hedge by spending another high pick on a goaltender.  Especially since goaltenders are tough to predict.  Now, I have no problem hunting in later rounds for more goaltenders.  But I don't see spending a high round pick on a goalie.

 

 

Yeah, typically I wouldn't do 2nd round on a goalie either.  The question arose for me because the choices don't seem very deep.

 

I like Skarek but don't know much about Rodrigue.   I don't think I've heard anything that measures either favorably against Hart.   There's the insurance policy aspect of it, but the other thing for me is pretend we hit stupid luck and Hart, Sandstrom, and Skarek (pretend it's him) prove to be good.   I wonder what kind of trade bait Skarek becomes.   On the open trade market, does he become more than what #50 would otherwise be.   I don't know the answer to that.     The names I've seen on some mock drafts in that range don't really excite me, but it's also because I know little about them other than the brief blurbs I've read.   

 

If there's a decent left winger that's only 2-3 years away or a defenseman that's worth the shot, then I go that direction.  

 

 

[King Knut]

1 hour ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Don't know there are options insert a name.

 

And more than one way to get the guy you think can do the job.

 

As i said first you have to want to go him and by that i mean not settling for an Elliott.

 

I do t think you’re really remembering the free agent goalie scenario that played out last summer.  

 

Almost alk the “good” options were traded for and resigned before 7/1. 

 

What was was left was Mason, Elliott, Bernier and  Nilsson. Of those only Elliott served as more than a backup this year.  

 

So Hextall would had to have traded an assett or picks to get. $5million+ goalie on a long term deal like Bishop or someone.  

 

I would not not have approved of that.  

 

I wantes Nilsson. But they wanted someone who’d ever started more than half a season.  So I get it.  

[ruxpin]

6 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

I do t think you’re really remembering the free agent goalie scenario that played out last summer.  

 

Almost alk the “good” options were traded for and resigned before 7/1. 

 

What was was left was Mason, Elliott, Bernier and  Nilsson. Of those only Elliott served as more than a backup this year.  

 

So Hextall would had to have traded an assett or picks to get. $5million+ goalie on a long term deal like Bishop or someone.  

 

I would not not have approved of that.  

 

I wantes Nilsson. But they wanted someone who’d ever started more than half a season.  So I get it.  

 

Yeah, quite honestly, other than trading away core or young defensemen, we weren't trading for a goalie.    I don't actually think Bernier is  better than Elliott.   If he is, I don't think there's much empirical evidence to support that.   I'm not resigning Mason.   Nilsson is a risk going into a season if he's who you're relying on.  As you said, never even half a season.  His peripheral numbers aren't horrible despite not being on really good teams (other than maybe St. Louis briefly).  His GAA in Vancouver was atrocious, though.  

 

I'm not knocking the Nilsson pick, just kind of agreeing with you that given the choices at the time and not wanting to dig into assets, Elliott was the sensible choice.

 

Our record didn't really suffer directly because of him and I can't throw him under the bus too much for the playoffs--Hakstol did that for me.   I agree the usage by Coach Imbecile was the primary factor.   We can get Lyon or Stolarz up or go get another goalie to offset Elliott, but track record says Coach Imbecile is going to misuse somebody in net.

[vis]

56 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

If there's a decent left winger that's only 2-3 years away or a defenseman that's worth the shot, then I go that direction.  

I hear you about taking a G if those options are better #50 than skaters.  I just don't think #50 is still BPA territory.  I think you're drafting for need at that point.

[ruxpin]

5 minutes ago, vis said:

I hear you about taking a G if those options are better #50 than skaters.  I just don't think #50 is still BPA territory.  I think you're drafting for need at that point.

 

Yeah, I agree.   I'd be really hesitant myself (largely for the reasons you stated), which is what inspired the question.   Typically, if I wanted a top-end goalie I'd probably wait for round 3.   From what I've read, this isn't really a bumper crop of goalies this year; those were just two of the three or four names that I've seen bantered about.

[OccamsRazor]

2 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Yeah, typically I wouldn't do 2nd round on a goalie either.

 

No.

 

Do not use your 2nd on a goalie.

 

They are deep enough at goalie for now.

 

You have Hart, Sandstrom, Tomek, Fedotov and Ustimenko already. So no way i waste another pick right now on a goalie.

[King Knut]

16 hours ago, ruxpin said:

 

Yeah, quite honestly, other than trading away core or young defensemen, we weren't trading for a goalie.    I don't actually think Bernier is  better than Elliott.   If he is, I don't think there's much empirical evidence to support that.   I'm not resigning Mason.   Nilsson is a risk going into a season if he's who you're relying on.  As you said, never even half a season.  His peripheral numbers aren't horrible despite not being on really good teams (other than maybe St. Louis briefly).  His GAA in Vancouver was atrocious, though.  

 

I'm not knocking the Nilsson pick, just kind of agreeing with you that given the choices at the time and not wanting to dig into assets, Elliott was the sensible choice.

 

Our record didn't really suffer directly because of him and I can't throw him under the bus too much for the playoffs--Hakstol did that for me.   I agree the usage by Coach Imbecile was the primary factor.   We can get Lyon or Stolarz up or go get another goalie to offset Elliott, but track record says Coach Imbecile is going to misuse somebody in net.

 

Bernier is YOUNGER than Elliott, so he has that going for him.  But when you play the same guy every night and every minute of every practice for an entire month or more, you're playing with fire no matter how old he is.  I admit that I was prejudiced.  I didn't want Bernier because it seemed like he was a real idiot off the ice and frankly Bryz left a bad enough taste in my mouth that I kinda want to make sure every one of our goalies is at least socially compatible with normal humans.  

 

Nilsson's numbers in Buffalo were actually pretty darn good.  That may have been a fluke, but the fact remains that the guy hasn't once in his career been on a half decent team (unless you count the portions of three games played for St. Louis).  I don't know why I have a bug for him, but I feel like he could be helfpul.

 

That's the thing about Hakstol right?  Doesn't seem to matter if it's Neuvy, Mason, Elliott, or whoever.  Something needs to be done about his usage.  

 

IF Hextall choses to stand pat in net, and I agree that's likely, I won't argue with it.  What I will argue with is if Hakstol is allowed to NOT HANDLE THAT SITUATION INTELLIGENTLY.  

 

You can look at Elliott and Lyon/Stolarz/Neuvy as an acceptable option for one more year if you have to, but you can't resume business as usual.  You have to have a smarter plan for their usages.  

 

 

 

 

 

[ruxpin]

6 minutes ago, King Knut said:

That's the thing about Hakstol right?  Doesn't seem to matter if it's Neuvy, Mason, Elliott, or whoever.  Something needs to be done about his usage.  

 

IF Hextall choses to stand pat in net, and I agree that's likely, I won't argue with it.  What I will argue with is if Hakstol is allowed to NOT HANDLE THAT SITUATION INTELLIGENTLY.  

 

You can look at Elliott and Lyon/Stolarz/Neuvy as an acceptable option for one more year if you have to, but you can't resume business as usual.  You have to have a smarter plan for their usages.  

 

That's what it comes down to.   His usage of Mason was equally horrible.   He just rides the goalie into the ground.  I'm a little shocked that a former goalie general manager allows it, but I guess Hextall also comes from a time period where that was done more.  Clarke was a "well, we did it back when!" with forwards, so maybe Hextall is some of that with goalie.

 

But from an asset management sense, it's dumb.

 

Bernier:  I think I was actually in the "get Bernier" camp if I recall correctly.  I didn't really know about the off-ice stuff.   The experience with Bryz would probably have altered my vote if I was aware of it with Bernier.

 

I'm not really arguing against Nilsson, but I don't really have any particular reason to argue for him, either.  His save percentage hasn't really been horrible despite playing behind some horrible teams, so he has that going for him from my standpoint.  Worth a shot, but I don't know if I risk throwing all-in on starter with him.  A crease-sharer sure, why not?   But the whole "crease-sharer" concept brings us right back to Coach Imbecile again, right?

 

I'm hoping Coach Imbecile figures it out (or is gone--my vote) before he gets to personally destroy Carter Hart.

[King Knut]

14 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

No.

 

Do not use your 2nd on a goalie.

 

They are deep enough at goalie for now.

 

You have Hart, Sandstrom, Tomek, Fedotov and Ustimenko already. So no way i waste another pick right now on a goalie.

 

Any other year, I'm likely to agree, but this year in particular, I actually don't agree.  Goaltending was such an issue (AGAIN) that I think it would greatly benefit the team to have it a little more secure. 

 

And this year, not only do the Flyers have 2 first round picks, and plenty of cap space they are unlikely to use (our dreams of tavares notwithstanding) but there are some excellent goalies on short term deals that could fill our needs very nicely and help the team make an actual playoff run and keep the youth in a winning mentality.

 

Rinne, Crawford, Bob, Varlamov... I'd take any of those guys and I'd probably be willing to give up a second to do it if their team took back Neuvirth and say Lehtera or Weise.  

 

It wouldn't be a long term solution, but an Elliott/one of them combo is a lot safer for the next season than Elliott/Neuvirth/Lyon/Stolarz.

 

Hextall seems to think that maintaining a winning atmosphere and mentality is important, and I for one would love this team to have a few playoff accomplishments under their belt before the Hart/Sandstrom/Tomek era begins in earnest. Think about Crawford himself?  He came into a team that was already a winner and slid right in.   So did Murray.  

 

I like the idea of whoever it is taking over not having the pressure of turning the team around, but stepping into a situation poised to make the next big leap (and right now a Hart/Sandstrom tandem in October 2019 seems like a cool idea to me).  I want them stepping into an accomplished team.  

 

 

 

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

5 minutes ago, King Knut said:

And this year, not only do the Flyers have 2 first round picks

 

No they have one pick. And i ain't using it on a goalie.

 

If you want to use a 5th rounder on one i could live with that but i ain't using more resources than a 5th or later on a goalie.

 

Just ain't.

[King Knut]

20 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

That's what it comes down to.   His usage of Mason was equally horrible.   He just rides the goalie into the ground.  I'm a little shocked that a former goalie general manager allows it, but I guess Hextall also comes from a time period where that was done more.  Clarke was a "well, we did it back when!" with forwards, so maybe Hextall is some of that with goalie.

 

But from an asset management sense, it's dumb.

 

Bernier:  I think I was actually in the "get Bernier" camp if I recall correctly.  I didn't really know about the off-ice stuff.   The experience with Bryz would probably have altered my vote if I was aware of it with Bernier.

 

I'm not really arguing against Nilsson, but I don't really have any particular reason to argue for him, either.  His save percentage hasn't really been horrible despite playing behind some horrible teams, so he has that going for him from my standpoint.  Worth a shot, but I don't know if I risk throwing all-in on starter with him.  A crease-sharer sure, why not?   But the whole "crease-sharer" concept brings us right back to Coach Imbecile again, right?

 

I'm hoping Coach Imbecile figures it out (or is gone--my vote) before he gets to personally destroy Carter Hart.

 

Nilsson's a career backup, so expecting any more is crazy.  I just think I'd rather him be the backup than Neuvirth.  I thought he and Neuvirth could split last year because I thought Stolarz was going to be healthy and I really liked how he looked (for a backup capacity, not a starter).  

 

He doesn't really make sense now.

 

Bernier had a few cuckoo moments.  The infamous one was not knowing who nelson mandela was at an event honoring nelson mandela.  I had hoped that was a translation issue.  

 

 

[ruxpin]

4 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Bernier had a few cuckoo moments.  The infamous one was not knowing who nelson mandela was at an event honoring nelson mandela.  I had hoped that was a translation issue.  

 

Oh...dear...God.   That's painfully embarrassing.

 

5 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

Nilsson's a career backup, so expecting any more is crazy.  I just think I'd rather him be the backup than Neuvirth.

 

Oh, you're saying backup.  Yes.  Absolutely yes.  1000 times yes.

 

[OccamsRazor]

28 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I think I was actually in the "get Bernier" camp if I recall correctly. 

 

 

Nelson Mandela and all that aside after watching him in the playoffs he is just a smaller younger version of Elliott...he was not good helping keep the Avs in the playoffs.

 

For the Ducks he wasn't good before (the reason they didn't bring him back) i need more than 873%.

 

And then with the Avs 883% ain't getting it done.

 

Preds ate him alive.

 

867% 875% 906% 885% is not an improvement on Elliott.

 

Dude is just to small and gives up too much of the net especially because he goes down so easily.

 

HARD PASS!!!!

[King Knut]

10 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

No they have one pick. And i ain't using it on a goalie.

 

If you want to use a 5th rounder on one i could live with that but i ain't using more resources than a 5th or later on a goalie.

 

Just ain't.

 

Did Hextall trade one of the first round picks and I missed it?  

 

Personally I'd prefer to package our firsts to move up and get one of these hot D-men so we can replenish when Morin/Myers/Sanheim gets taken by Seattle.

 

If not that, then I'd try trading one of them for Mark Stone's rights.  

 

Those are the first things I'd do with them, but if none of that worked out and Chicago or Colorado or Nashville came calling, I'd probably get the deal done.   A draft pick is a lottery ticket, but we know what will happen if the goaltending situation isn't solidified.  Lyon's 90 save night aside, he's not good enough and everyone else is made of glass and none of us want Hart in the NHL this year.  

[King Knut]

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Nelson Mandela and all that aside after watching him in the playoffs he is just a smaller younger version of Elliott...he was not good helping keep the Avs in the playoffs.

 

For the Ducks he wasn't good before (the reason they didn't bring him back) i need more than 873%.

 

And then with the Avs 883% ain't getting it done.

 

Preds ate him alive.

 

867% 875% 906% 885% is not an improvement on Elliott.

 

Dude is just to small and gives up too much of the net especially because he goes down so easily.

 

HARD PASS!!!!

 

BUT... he was healthy.   Just kidding.  So was Lyon.  So was Mrazek.  healthy and crappy is still crappy.  

[King Knut]

5 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

Oh...dear...God.   That's painfully embarrassing.

 

 

Oh, you're saying backup.  Yes.  Absolutely yes.  1000 times yes.

 

 

Last year I was thinking that He and Neuvirth and Stolarz would probably end up splitting the time.

This year, I'd advocate for him as a more stable backup to Elliott who probably won't break after 20 minutes of play.  

 

Stolarz is technically still the better goalie than Lyon IMHO.  But we really have to see how he recovers from that last surgery long term before I can make any determination on him.  

 

Probably.  

[OccamsRazor]

3 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Did Hextall trade one of the first round picks and I missed it?  

 

My bad i thought iread 2nd round pick.

 

So you want to spend a 1st on a goalie??

 

Hell f**king no!

[OccamsRazor]

4 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Morin/Myers/Sanheim gets taken by Seattle.

 

Seattle ain't taken one of those guys Ron will trade those guys for a nice haul before he just let's them pluck them for free.

 

Please give Ron some more credit than that. Hell he just pulled a good one in only losing Bellemare.

 

So i think next time he will be even better. 

[ruxpin]

7 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

HARD PASS!!!!

 

Now?  Oh yeah, completely.  Last summer I wasn't excited about him (or any of our options, really) but probably wanted him more than Elliott.  But when they actually signed Elliott I was okay with it--again, given the options.  In retrospect, I think they did better with Elliott than Bernier.

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

6 minutes ago, King Knut said:

So was Lyon. 

 

What he never got a chance to play in the playoffs.

 

So we'll never know what he can do.

 

But i'll tell right now i would take him over Bernier.

[OccamsRazor]

Just now, ruxpin said:

In retrospect, I think they did better with Elliott than Bernier.

 

I guess slightly...but to me they just settled. It don't matter now i guess.

 

But i would love for them to make a move for someone to come in and push Elliott to the backup spot at least were i would be more comfortable with him in that role for his last year in Philly.

[King Knut]

2 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

My bad i thought iread 2nd round pick.

 

So you want to spend a 1st on a goalie??

 

Hell f**king no!

 

I guess what I was saying is that IF we had a second round pick, which we do not, but IF we did, I'd trade it for any one of those goalies.

 

I would NOT trade a first round pick for one of those goalies.

 

I would prefer to do one of the following with the 2 firsts:

 

-Package them to move up so we can get one of these highly touted D men (Dobson looks good e.g.)

-Trade one of them for the rights to someone like Mark Stone or until yesterday I'd have said Mike Hoffman, but he and his fiance are Ottawa's problem that I don't think we need to deal with.

 

Having 14 and 19 isn't a terrible thing, and Hextall and co. have done well with picks lately.  They seem to have a knack for getting the guy that is just about to get everyone talking (Konecny, Provorov, Sanheim, Frost, Hart) and 14-19 is usually where those guys live... but I think it's okay for him to pull the trigger on making the team better now too.  

 

[OccamsRazor]

10 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

I guess what I was saying is that IF we had a second round pick, which we do not, but IF we did, I'd trade it for any one of those goalies.

 

I would NOT trade a first round pick for one of those goalies.

 

I would prefer to do one of the following with the 2 firsts:

 

-Package them to move up so we can get one of these highly touted D men (Dobson looks good e.g.)

-Trade one of them for the rights to someone like Mark Stone or until yesterday I'd have said Mike Hoffman, but he and his fiance are Ottawa's problem that I don't think we need to deal with.

 

Having 14 and 19 isn't a terrible thing, and Hextall and co. have done well with picks lately.  They seem to have a knack for getting the guy that is just about to get everyone talking (Konecny, Provorov, Sanheim, Frost, Hart) and 14-19 is usually where those guys live... but I think it's okay for him to pull the trigger on making the team better now too.  

 

 

They have a 2nd round pick.

 

They don't have a 3rd round thanks to Mrazek.

 

I would however flip Gudas for a 3rd to replace it.

[King Knut]

2 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Seattle ain't taken one of those guys Ron will trade those guys for a nice haul before he just let's them pluck them for free.

 

Please give Ron some more credit than that. Hell he just pulled a good one in only losing Bellemare.

 

So i think next time he will be even better. 

 

When he lost only Bellemare, Vegas had squat and less than squat to choose from on the Flyers.  Hextall didn't have as many assets to protect.  He protected Scott Laughton for goodness sakes.  There were several players that Hextall didn't need to protect also (Konecny, Provo, Hagg, Morin)

 

I don't think he's going to trade 2 good young D men to protect one.  

 

The team will be significantly more talented in two years than last year.  They're significantly more talented now.  Seattle is going to get a VERY good player from the Flyers.  The only real question is whether Hextall will force them to take a Vet like Jake or Simmonds or if he'll leave open Myers/Sanheim/Morin.    

 

You keep saying that he'll trade them for something rather than lose them, but unless he trades them for picks, he'll be trading them for something that would also be easily taken by Seattle.  That would be a legit strategy for not giving up any Karlson's for free like last year, but only for a team still on the rebuild, not one that is presumably trying to get into at least a conference final that year.  

 

Like I said, best case scenario I can think of so far is he leaves Simmonds, Voracek and whatever forward he gets this summer open to the expansion draft, protects 4 FWD, 4 D and then trades one of Myers/Sanheim/Morin and protects the other 2.  

 

Short of an imaginary sweetheart (we'll trade you Felix Sandstrom in exchange for not drafting Sam Morin or Philippe Myers) under the table deal, that's the best I can come up with.