The Tim Thomas trade that never happened

[brelic]

Read this today on Meltzer’s blog. 

 

4) Today in Flyers History: On July 19, 2010, the Flyers made a salary cap-space driven trade that did not pan out well. The team sent veteran left winger Simon Gagne to the Tampa Bay Lightning for oft-injured depth defenseman Matt Walker and a 2011 4th-round pick (German forward Marcel Noebels). The reason why Philly got so little in return for a veteran star such as Gagne is that Tampa was the only team for whom Gagne and agent Bob Sauve were willing to waive his no-movement clause. 

Early in the summer of 2010, as recounted in Jay Greenberg's Flyers at 50, the Boston Bruins offered goaltender Tim Thomas to the Flyers in exchange for Gagne. Thomas had (temporarily as it turned out) lost his starting job to the much younger Tuukka Rask, and Boston wanted to unload the rest of Thomas' multi-year contract. Thomas was willing to waive his own no-trade clause to come to Philadelphia. However, the Flyers were not in position to make the trade.

First of all, Thomas and Gagne had comparable salaries at the time -- and Thomas had one more season left on his deal than Gagne had on his -- and the Flyers weren't in position to make a money-for-money swap. Secondly, Gagne was hurt and upset when the Flyers asked him to waive his NMC and initially refused to do so.

Eventually, after much not-so-amicable discussion, the Gagne camp agreed on the condition that they would pick their destination (ala an unrestricted free agent). Things had also soured with Gagne to the point where bringing him back to play out his contract had become a non-option. Thus, the Flyers had almost no leverage in the subsequent trade to Tampa, since there were no other teams to whom Philly could deal Gagne.

In hindsight, the trade really didn't work out for either side. Certainly not the Flyers' side: due to injury, Walker barely played and, the little he did play, he was ineffective. Even if 100 percent, he was a third-pair defenseman. Noebels fizzled out on the minor leagues. In his own right, Gagne was never again a healthy player. The 2010 playoffs were the last time he looked like the player who had been a star for much of the first decade of the 2000s. However, he did play a bit part in LA winning the Stanley Cup in 2011-12. Gagne also had a brief, and ultimately ill-fated, return to the Flyers during the lockout-shortened 2012-13 season. 

Thomas re-took the starting job from Rask in 2010-11, won his second Vezina Trophy and won the Stanley Cup (with Conn Smythe Trophy honors as playoff MVP) with the Bruins. That was his next-to-last season of being in peak form, however.

 

 

 

What do you think? Would Thomas have changed the fate of the Flyers post-Cup run?

[elmatus]

26 minutes ago, brelic said:

What do you think? Would Thomas have changed the fate of the Flyers post-Cup run?

 

Circumstances being different, it's of course impossible to say for sure.

 

That said, his was one of the most dominant performances ever. Loose cannon or not, it felt like he was going to win the cup even if he had to start pumping out hat tricks each game to get there. He didn't just win the Conn Smythe that year, he demolished the field. Folks can talk about Chara all they want, that cup was won in the net more than any other cup I've ever seen.

 

Again, no one can say for sure. But if we had gotten the same performance from him that year the Bs did, it's really hard to say no...

[yave1964]

  Thomas, wow that woulda made a big difference with the Cup Finals possibly, but almost certainly the Canucks would have beaten the Bruins without Thomas there. So one move coulda made the difference in not one but two SCFs. 

[OccamsRazor]

9 hours ago, brelic said:

What do you think? Would Thomas have changed the fate of the Flyers post-Cup run?

 

Well it certainly would have effected the Bruins fate.

 

They wouldn't have had Timmy when they squared off vs Bruins in the Semis.

 

Not sure if they would have won but with Timmy in net you'd have to think the Flyers have a better chance.

 

Especially if Tim doesn't give up the 20 goals the Flyers did in their 4-0 series.

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

It would not have affected the Flyers cup run in 2010. The cup run it ended in June and Gagne was traded in July.  As @brelicnoted, The *post* cup run would have been interesting.  At least more interesting than what it was.  Would having Tim Thomas changed The attitude of the flyers management? Would that have negated the Bryz trade?

[AJgoal]

3 hours ago, AlaskaFlyerFan said:

It would not have affected the Flyers cup run in 2010. The cup run it ended in June and Gagne was traded in July.  Interesting, none the less.

 

No, but it would have had a significant effect in the following season, which happens to be the one that the Bruins swept the Flyers in en-route to Thomas winning them a Cup.

[blocker]

That's very interesting.  I'm not much of a believer in  the stories of drama surrounding teams.  But, I do know that there was some animosity toward Timmy Thomas in Boston.  Never could understand it, but it was certainly there.

[King Knut]

On 7/19/2018 at 8:56 PM, elmatus said:

 

Circumstances being different, it's of course impossible to say for sure.

 

That said, his was one of the most dominant performances ever. Loose cannon or not, it felt like he was going to win the cup even if he had to start pumping out hat tricks each game to get there. He didn't just win the Conn Smythe that year, he demolished the field. Folks can talk about Chara all they want, that cup was won in the net more than any other cup I've ever seen.

 

Again, no one can say for sure. But if we had gotten the same performance from him that year the Bs did, it's really hard to say no...

 

I have a pretty strong feeling that Homer wouldn't have traded Richards and Carter to make cap space for Bryz... but I might be wrong about that.  I don't think I am.  But I might be.  

[brelic]

32 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

I have a pretty strong feeling that Homer wouldn't have traded Richards and Carter to make cap space for Bryz... but I might be wrong about that.  I don't think I am.  But I might be.  

 

I think you're right. Thomas would have become the new problem child

[ruxpin]

It only makes a difference if Thomas could have prevented Pronger being injured.

 

If not, the difference is negligible and it's Thomas that the Flyers are buying out following the lockout.

[King Knut]

19 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

I think you're right. Thomas would have become the new problem child

 

They probably would have had a much more stable few years, but who knows where they'd be right now.  

How well they might have done is a bit up in the air.  There's no way to tell if Pronger still gets sticked in the eye if Richards and Carter are still around and Thomas is the goalie.  

 

[King Knut]

15 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

It only makes a difference if Thomas could have prevented Pronger being injured.

 

If not, the difference is negligible and it's Thomas that the Flyers are buying out following the lockout.

 

Did the Bruins buy him out?  He only signed for like 4 or 5 years I thought?  

 

Granted, he hadn't won a cup yet, but think about it... he could have been the one to set the precedent of Philly Athletes refusing white house ceremonies. 

[brelic]

19 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

They probably would have had a much more stable few years, but who knows where they'd be right now.  

How well they might have done is a bit up in the air.  There's no way to tell if Pronger still gets sticked in the eye if Richards and Carter are still around and Thomas is the goalie.  

 

 

I'd bet my house that he doesn't. Thomas creates a new parallel universe. Now maybe something else happens to Pronger or another player, but not the stick in the eye. 

[King Knut]

13 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

I'd bet my house that he doesn't. Thomas creates a new parallel universe. Now maybe something else happens to Pronger or another player, but not the stick in the eye. 

 

Yeah... I'm a big believer in that kind of thing.  Like I feel like if Morin made the team out of camp like me and many others expected, he would have been shut down for his abdominal injury a lot sooner and not needed to lose quite so much time.  WIthout losing so much time, rushing him  back for the AHL playoffs wouldn't have seemed so desperate and I bet he doesn't get hurt again like that so soon.

 

Which isn't to say something else doesn't happen to him somewhere else along the line... just that 

 

Make sure to post a link to that other thread

[OccamsRazor]

28 minutes ago, brelic said:

I'd bet my house that he doesn't

 

I bet your house he doesn't either.

 

29 minutes ago, brelic said:

Thomas creates a new parallel universe.

 

 

Thomas on the Flyers would change that series a lot Gagne on the Bruins would too....not sure who would win it but i pretty sure the Flyers don't get swept.

[King Knut]

3 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

I bet your house he doesn't either.

 

 

 

Thomas on the Flyers would change that series a lot Gagne on the Bruins would too....not sure who would win it but i pretty sure the Flyers don't get swept.

 

Thomas posted a .940 save % that playoffs. They ain’t winning the cup without that because Rask was not in that ball park. 

 

The Flyers trio of goalies however managed only a combined .894.

 

Gagne or not, that increases the Flyers’ chances exponentially. 

 

It it was a good team too.  The Bruins weren’t really “better” anywhere but net.  

They also had a pretty good chip on their shoulder after the previous year.  You don’t have history made against you like that and take it lightly. 

 

I also love Lavvy and wish he was still coach, but he handled goalies for crap.  Hak ain’t much better, but Lavvy really screwed the organization by playing Bob at all in those playoffs.  Homer still could have fixed it, but As bad as the goalies were, they weren’t the problem in the first round and playing Bob wasn’t going to change anything. Playing him accomplished nothing other than putting the Flyers over the cap the next season. 

[AJgoal]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

Playing him accomplished nothing other than putting the Flyers over the cap the next season. 

 

Why would he not play his starting goalie from that season in the playoffs?

[ruxpin]

6 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

Did the Bruins buy him out?  He only signed for like 4 or 5 years I thought?  

 

Granted, he hadn't won a cup yet, but think about it... he could have been the one to set the precedent of Philly Athletes refusing white house ceremonies. 

No, the Bruins didn't buy him out (actually, I only don't think they did. I don't remember). 

 

But I don't think that's relevant in our little "what if" story because in our alternate reality he's not in Boston and subject to their reality or decisions or winning the Cup. He's subject to the Flyers.'. Bear with me. 

 

What I'm saying is that pretend that trade happens. Pronger still gets hurt, which means we still don't win the Cup, we still trade Bobrovsky because we have Thomas, our stroke victim GM still over-reacts and makes stupid moves, and Thomas starts declining just as he did.  So, we use one of our two buyouts on Thomas so we have money for a new, stupid contract. 

 

What was changed?  Nothing. 

[AJgoal]

1 hour ago, ruxpin said:

No, the Bruins didn't buy him out (actually, I only don't think they did. I don't remember). 

 

Thomas retired at the conclusion of his contract. He was not bought out. He did, however, take the 2012-2013 season off and was traded to the Isles mid-season. He then ended up in Florida and Dallas in 2014.

 

1 hour ago, ruxpin said:

 

But I don't think that's relevant in our little "what if" story because in our alternate reality he's not in Boston and subject to their reality or decisions or winning the Cup. He's subject to the Flyers.'. Bear with me. 

 

What I'm saying is that pretend that trade happens. Pronger still gets hurt, which means we still don't win the Cup,

 

You're conflating two separate seasons. Pronger got hurt in what would have been the following year. If they get past the Bruins that year with Thomas, they may have won the Cup.

 

1 hour ago, ruxpin said:

 

 

we still trade Bobrovsky because we have Thomas,

 

Less likely. Thomas only had three years left (ended following the lockout year) at a lower hit than Bryzgalov. He could have been a bridge to Bob, which wasn't offered by Bryz's 90-year contract. Bob might not have been happy being the backup for one or two seasons, but there would have been a clear path to the starter's role.

 

1 hour ago, ruxpin said:

our stroke victim GM still over-reacts and makes stupid moves, and Thomas starts declining just as he did.  So, we use one of our two buyouts on Thomas so we have money for a new, stupid contract. 

 

Also unnecessary, as Thomas' contract was over at the end of that season anyway. If things play out as they did in Boston, he is traded for a second before the lockout even happens. Though with Holmgren's track record, he would have been traded WITH a second.

 

1 hour ago, ruxpin said:

 

What was changed?  Nothing. 

 

Quite a bit might have, given the hypothetical.

[ruxpin]

2 hours ago, AJgoal said:

 

Thomas retired at the conclusion of his contract. He was not bought out. He did, however, take the 2012-2013 season off and was traded to the Isles mid-season. He then ended up in Florida and Dallas in 2014.

Yeah, I didn't think he was.  Thanks for the info though (no sarcasm).

 

You're conflating two separate seasons. Pronger got hurt in what would have been the following year. If they get past the Bruins that year with Thomas, they may have won the Cup.

Not really, I'd just jumped passed it.  I don't believe they win in 2011 even with Thomas on the opposite team.  I'm positive Holmgren and Company finds a way to screw this up.  Plus, while they had horrific goaltending in that series, they also couldn't score worth a damn.  Thomas doesn't change that (well, maybe his not being in the Boston net does. eh, who the hell knows?),

 

Less likely. Thomas only had three years left (ended following the lockout year) at a lower hit than Bryzgalov. He could have been a bridge to Bob, which wasn't offered by Bryz's 90-year contract. Bob might not have been happy being the backup for one or two seasons, but there would have been a clear path to the starter's role.

None of that changes my assertion they trade Bob because Thomas.  Nothing in Holmgren's history or DNA indicates he'd have been at all patient with Bob if he has what he thinks is a starter.  There is zero reason for me to believe this given his track record.

 

Also unnecessary, as Thomas' contract was over at the end of that season anyway. If things play out as they did in Boston, he is traded for a second before the lockout even happens. Though with Holmgren's track record, he would have been traded WITH a second.

See above.  The caveat is they may not buy him out with only one year left because at that point they don't have viable options (unless they still go and trade for Mason or Mason-type).

 

 

Quite a bit might have, given the hypothetical.

I can't argue against "might have," especially given that this is a hypothetical.  But, again, there is nothing in Holmgren's behavior to indicate differently.  The man lost his fricken mind when Kane's shot went in.

 

.

 

 

[AJgoal]

6 hours ago, ruxpin said:

 

.

 

 

 

If Thomas took off 12-13 like he had with the Bruins, no way Bob gets traded in that offseason. Remember, the driving factor was Bob threatening to leave if he wasn't going to start. Thomas made it clear he was sitting out 12-13 early in the offseason, so there'd have been no reason for Bob to feel like he wouldn't be a starter in Philly, and certainly no reason for Holmgren to trade away the only other NHL goalie he had. Of course that might change if Thomas stays to play with the Flyers. But then, the guy approaching 40 is not a long-term solution whichever way you slice it, it should be easy for everyone involved to see the writing on that wall.

 

But, all hypothetical. We'll never know what may or may not have happened.

[King Knut]

19 hours ago, AJgoal said:

 

Why would he not play his starting goalie from that season in the playoffs?

 

Because I forget the specifics of his contract, who has those details?  There was a thing about the number of games he played and playoff appearances that screwed them a bit for the next season (couldn't go in the AHL or at least his cap hit remained if he did or something, I can't remember)  and for his next contract.  

 

Playing him achieved nothing for the team and was the major factor in him needing to be traded the following season.

 

Of course all Homer really had to do was not go out and bet the effing farm on Bryzgalov the immediately afterwards, but let's not get into my theory on how Homer had a stroke when the Flyers lost this playoff series, because very little he did after this made any damn sense.  

[King Knut]

19 hours ago, ruxpin said:

No, the Bruins didn't buy him out (actually, I only don't think they did. I don't remember). 

 

But I don't think that's relevant in our little "what if" story because in our alternate reality he's not in Boston and subject to their reality or decisions or winning the Cup. He's subject to the Flyers.'. Bear with me. 

 

What I'm saying is that pretend that trade happens. Pronger still gets hurt, which means we still don't win the Cup, we still trade Bobrovsky because we have Thomas, our stroke victim GM still over-reacts and makes stupid moves, and Thomas starts declining just as he did.  So, we use one of our two buyouts on Thomas so we have money for a new, stupid contract. 

 

What was changed?  Nothing. 

 

Pronger didn't get hurt until the following season.  If we assume he still gets hurt, there's still the playoffs in which Thomas DID win a cup with Boston (to do which they had to eliminate a goalie-less Flyers).

 

Also, According to Cap Friendly, Thomas was in the middle of a 4 year contract at the time.  He could have played 2 more years with Bob as the backup.  With him under contract there would have been no reason to sign Bryzgalov and the Flyers could have sent Thomas off to pasture any time before the 2013 deadline, gotten a few good assets for him and Bob could have inherited the spot.  

 

Honestly, there's nothing about this that doesn't still say Homer and Snider get sick of Richards and Carter, side with Pronger and make all those trades anyway, 2011 cup or not.  

 

The Pronger situation has almost nothing to do with why this would have been a far superior situation for the Flyers in hindsight.  

 

if they're any better, maybe JVR doesn't even get traded.

 

What's not to love?  

 

EDIT:  OH I see... you mean that Pronger's still hurt for the playoffs...  I honestly don't care.  Cup or no cup in 2011, getting Thomas in 2010 would have made the last 8 years of this team so much better.

[AJgoal]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

 

Because I forget the specifics of his contract, who has those details?  There was a thing about the number of games he played and playoff appearances that screwed them a bit for the next season (couldn't go in the AHL or at least his cap hit remained if he did or something, I can't remember)  and for his next contract.  

 

He lost his waiver exemption. Which wasn't a problem until Homgren (and Snider) went Holmgren and went after Bryzgalov. The revolving door of goalies in those playoffs wasn't ideal, but not one of the three could perform consistently. If Holmgren was worried about his waiver exemption he either had to remove Bobrovsky to the AHL, or at the very least, specifically tell Laviolette not to play him. It's Laviolette's job to try to win games with what he has at hand. If he has three goalies with consistency problems, you can't expect him not to switch to a new one when the last one falters. And as far as Laviolette knew at the time, Bobrovsky was likely to be his starter going into the next season - the same as he'd been that year. I personally would have preferred Laviolette going back to Bobrovsky more, instead of running mostly with Boucher after pulling Bob in game 2 against Buffalo.

 

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

 

Playing him achieved nothing for the team and was the major factor in him needing to be traded the following season.

 

No, Bryzgalov was. They didn't need to trade Bobrovsky until there was no path to a starting role for the younger Russian. 

 

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

 

Of course all Homer really had to do was not go out and bet the effing farm on Bryzgalov the immediately afterwards, but let's not get into my theory on how Homer had a stroke when the Flyers lost this playoff series, because very little he did after this made any damn sense.  

 

Exactly. The issue with Bob's waiver exemption wasn't a problem until Holmgren made it a problem.

[ruxpin]

Just so we stop crying about Bob:  what has he EVER done in the playoffs?  Our clown car this year got the Flyers exactly as far as Bob got. 

 

I know, it's not all about the goalie, especially in Columbus, but it's not like he's carried anyone.  And even allowing the alternate universe where we keep Bob (and trade or don't for Thomas) there hasn't been a team here that Roy or Brodeur could carry. 

 

It does suck, though, that Aneurysmgren didn't get more for Bob in the trade. Idiot.