Flyers trade list for the deadline

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

8 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Who wouldn't be with a partner like Mcdud.

 

 

No way i would pass on one of those two over 5-10 175 pound winger...

 

...who has just barely put up a point per game in the high scoring Q.

 

The Q hasn't been the higher scoring in quite some time. The Q is actually the lowest scoring of the three. The WHL is head and shoulders above everyone in terms of scoring, followed by the OHL. 

 

As for Fortier, this is a kid blessed with very good speed, he's got very good hockey IQ, plays well in all three zones and is one of the more industrious and harder working players on the ice. He's always in the middle of things and doesn't shy away from the physical side of the game. On a side note, at his draft year, he was 175 pounds. He's actually 5'11, 190 pounds.

 

I openly admit that I like Raddysh and Katchouk. At the same time, it's going to be extremely difficult to pry Raddysh out of Tampa Bay and Katchouk might only top out to being a marginal middle six forward (who will more than likely settle into a bottom six role, which the Flyers have plenty of guys who can fill that role). 

As for Hagg, he sucks, regardless who he plays with. Hagg has dragged down every defenseman he has played with this year. Look at every one of their advanced stats playing with Hagg and you'll see he's the second coming of MacDonald in that he sucks the life right out of them. Maybe he gets it together if he moves to a new team, but I've seen enough of him for two years now at the NHL level that he is a mediocre defenseman at best that is more bad than good. If the Flyers move him and MacDonald, this could possibly be the D going forward:

 

Provorov - Myers

Sanheim - Gudas

Morin - Gostisbehere

 

That is a MUCH better defense than what we currently see. I'm perfectly content with Gudas being the veteran guy on the D going forward. 

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

If the Flyers move him and MacDonald, this could possibly be the D going forward

 

I'm afraid the Flyers are stuck with Macdonald. I think Chuck might go ahead and buy the guy out this summer. I'm cool with that just so i don't have to see him anymore...it isn't about saving money on not i don't care they have plenty of cap space...i want him gone.

 

And as far a Hagg goes i would move him for a first round pick and something else otherwise he could at least be the 7th Dman next year.

 

I think Myers with be the partner Ivan needs.

 

So yes i like the D pair.

 

So unless you can move Hagg for a 1st i keep him until at least next years trade deadline.

 

Guy has next year left of his deal at 1.15mill cap hit and will be a RFA he will be a hot commodity next deadline next year. A 1st and a prospect are easy return for his game.

 

Provorov - Myers

Sanheim - Gudas

Morin - Gostisbehere

Hagg - Friedman

 

That is a solid blueline with some solid depth for next year.

[mojo1917]

The business of hockey sucks.

Simmonds should retire a Flyer, the team should be able to thank him for out performing his contract early by overpaying him now and not be penalized.  

The NHL salary cap structure is punative towards "people"; life, business you name it, is about relationships.  The salary cap in the NHL keeps teams and players from fostering a trusting relationship.   the players are commodiities/products. I understand it, I don't like it.;

17 has been one of my favorite players since he arrived, this contract situation blows. 

I'm angered and saddened by the Simmonds situation.

 

[ruxpin]

On 2/21/2019 at 10:21 AM, elmatus said:

I feel like we need so many things at this point, it's hard for me to look at one type of player and consider them any sort of missing link

 

I actually think the opposite.   No really.  I mean I know my position is in the vast minority but...

 

I don't think we need a veteran defenseman.  For what purpose?  As discussed ad nauseum, the type of player we're thinking of doesn't exist.  So, we'd bring in someone simply because he once got a membership invite from AARP and we'd all hate him in about 20 minutes because 1) he's slow  2) his contract  3) he's either blocking one of the kids or the kid that was traded to make room is doing fantastic elsewhere.   On defense, we simply need time.

 

Wingers.  Yeah, you can always upgrade on wing.   But especially on the left side, I don't know where we're going to put someone.  There's JVR and Lindblom staying and I'm betting Giroux gets moved back to LW.   You have Farabee probably 2 years away (season after next) so I'm not signing or trading for someone long term.    Twarynski, Ratcliffe and/or Strome will be ready.

 

On the right side is where I'd be looking.  Assuming Simmonds is dealt, you have TK and Vaginorcek.  After that, a whole mess of questions. NAK is ready, I guess, and maybe could slot in 3 RW, but this is a spot I'm looking to help.  Because other than he and Allison, the RW side is lean.   If you can package something, anything, to get up to Kaapo Kakko range, that's where I'm going.    Otherwise, a Gustav Nyquist, Richard Panik, or Joonas Donskoi could be okay--if unexciting--at 3 RW.  All could be had as moderately-priced FAs.   If we're able to get a Stone or something without selling off Farabee or Frost or some other asset that would infuriate most of us, I'd consider it.

 

Center:   Patrick, Coots, Frost, maybe Giroux.  Vorobyev, Rubstov, Laberge in the wings.  I'm okay at center.  I figure O'Brien is at least 2020-21 away if not later.

 

We have Hart in goal and will probably resign Talbot.  And we have other prospect help coming there.  

 

I know all of this sounds extremely "hey, if there's any Kool Aid left, pass some over here,"  but I don't think we necessarily have the big "blow a big gaping hole in what we're doing" needs we think we do.

 

Simmonds will bring prospects/picks.

If we're moving Raffl, he *might* actually get you not a lot less than Dzingel (I think I under-value him, but put me down in the 'Jackets way overpaid' column).  

 

 

Conitnue to improve the bottom 6 if you can, but stay away from panic moves.

 

 

[ruxpin]

12 hours ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

Because he is statistically the second worst defenseman on this club and he is a mess when it comes to playing the shut down role. He's not smart enough. His IQ severely lacks.

 

Completely disagree with this.

 

Diametrically.  

[elmatus]

24 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

I know all of this sounds extremely "hey, if there's any Kool Aid left, pass some over here,"  but I don't think we necessarily have the big "blow a big gaping hole in what we're doing" needs we think we do.

 

I hear you, and I think prior to this season I probably would have agreed with you. To me though, this season was a pivotal one not only for the kids but also for the current "core" this team has built around over the last half decade. And unfortunately, the result of this very important season has been one of the worst seasons on record over that time period.

 

We were in the bottom five in the whole league for a month, and only started to show some progress when a young goalie came in and stole the show for a short period of time. That's just not what this season should have been if this team is truly "almost there". I can see them being a bubble team -- a true one, not a flukey, lucky one like what we've had these last couple weeks -- but they haven't even been that this season. 

 

So the question is, how many more 1-2 years are we talking? Why aren't we seeing more improvement? This current team is no better than last year; in fact, there's plenty of reason to believe it's worse.

 

I'm also very very reluctant to believe in this idea that our current list of prospects will somehow usher in a golden age. We so overvalue players around here as fans. That's normal of course, but it's simply not possible that all of the current prospect favs we have on offer will become NHL studs. It's far more plausible to suggest that maybe one or two will become pretty good to solid. The rest are much more likely to be somewhere in the Raffl to Varone range. That's still good to have, but that's not going to drastically alter this teams' performance.

 

I don't want to give the impression I'm giving up on the kids or anything like that. I'm not. I just think it's very fair to start questioning whether this team is as good as many of us thought they could be. Many signs point to them not being that good unfortunately. While certainly some things could change, I think it's a bad idea to brush off these last few seasons of essentially stagnation as just being "flukes" or the product of bad luck.

 

Luck happens, and players occasionally have bad years, but many of these problems have become a seasonal trend at this point. This team who should be taking at least some steps forward seems to be standing still at best.

 

It's not all bad of course. The coaching staff imo still needs a revamp, and some of that has begun. It will be interesting to see who Fletch can bring in, and what difference that could make given a full off season to work on establishing new systems and what not. Hopefully that will have a noticeable difference.

 

If it doesn't though, and the 2019-20 season turns out to be strikingly similar to these last few... I dunno man. What's that faux definition of insanity everyone seems fond of tossing around?

[ruxpin]

7 minutes ago, elmatus said:

We were in the bottom five in the whole league for a month, and only started to show some progress when a young goalie came in and stole the show for a short period of time. That's just not what this season should have been if this team is truly "almost there". I can see them being a bubble team -- a true one, not a flukey, lucky one like what we've had these last couple weeks -- but they've haven't been that this season. 

 

At the risk of a "so this year is the goalie" response from someone:  We went through 6 broken goalies in 2 1/2 months; several of whom had no business whatsoever on an NHL ice.

 

We've seen they are capable of putting some wins together with goaltending.   Yes, that goaltending was solely responsible for some of the wins but you have that with Vasy in Tampa, Bob in Columbus, etc. etc.   That's what good goaltending does.  It also allows your players to cheat forward a little.   I'm not even saying wait 1-2 years.   Just let some of these players finish their 2nd year and realize it's not anywhere near as bad as conventional opinion would have you believe.  We're there.  The roadbump this year was the complete collapse of goaltending mixed with an inexperienced defense.

 

All this to say that we're not necessarily diametric opposites in our views on this.   And I know I'm in the minority here.  But I don't believe we need to make the major changes everyone thinks and I actually think some of the perceived "needs" (sage veteran defenseman) are actually greatly counter-productive if not simply entirely unnecessary.

 

---

 

Yes on the coaching staff.  I think Gordon has actually done a tremendous job.  But I hope that doesn't derail the initial plan of his filling in for the remainder of the season and then going out and getting a new coach.   Maybe that's not even necessary, but I've seen the "interim did a good job, make him coach, fail, repeat" movie several times now.

[ruxpin]

11 minutes ago, elmatus said:

a true one, not a flukey, lucky one like what we've had these last couple weeks -- but they haven't even been that this season. 

 

Sorry, I didn't bring my post around to this. 

 

I completely agree we should be a bubble team.  Or actually a team that grabs 3 seed in the division (or higher if others stumble).  But you do the goaltending thing to said bubble team it goes down.  If you're talking a solid wildcard team, the results of wild card team + our first-half goaltending + inexperienced defense + injured/ineffectual FA signing = I think legitimately close to the results we saw the first half.

[OccamsRazor]

23 minutes ago, elmatus said:

 

I hear you, and I think prior to this season I probably would have agreed with you. To me though, this season was a pivotal one not only for the kids but also for the current "core" this team has built around over the last half decade. And unfortunately, the result of this very important season has been one of the worst seasons on record over that time period.

 

We were in the bottom five in the whole league for a month, and only started to show some progress when a young goalie came in and stole the show for a short period of time. That's just not what this season should have been if this team is truly "almost there". I can see them being a bubble team -- a true one, not a flukey, lucky one like what we've had these last couple weeks -- but they haven't even been that this season. 

 

So the question is, how many more 1-2 years are we talking? Why aren't we seeing more improvement? This current team is no better than last year; in fact, there's plenty of reason to believe it's worse.

 

I'm also very very reluctant to believe in this idea that our current list of prospects will somehow usher in a golden age. We so overvalue players around here as fans. That's normal of course, but it's simply not possible that all of the current prospect favs we have on offer will become NHL studs. It's far more plausible to suggest that maybe one or two will become pretty good to solid. The rest are much more likely to be somewhere in the Raffl to Varone range. That's still good to have, but that's not going to drastically alter this teams' performance.

 

I don't want to give the impression I'm giving up on the kids or anything like that. I'm not. I just think it's very fair to start questioning whether this team is as good as many of us thought they could be. Many signs point to them not being that good unfortunately. While certainly some things could change, I think it's a bad idea to brush off these last few seasons of essentially stagnation as just being "flukes" or the product of bad luck.

 

Luck happens, and players occasionally have bad years, but many of these problems have become a seasonal trend at this point. This team who should be taking at least some steps forward seems to be standing still at best.

 

It's not all bad of course. The coaching staff imo still needs a revamp, and some of that has begun. It will be interesting to see who Fletch can bring in, and what difference that could make given a full off season to work on establishing new systems and what not. Hopefully that will have a noticeable difference.

 

If it doesn't though, and the 2019-20 season turns out to be strikingly similar to these last few... I dunno man. What's that faux definition of insanity everyone seems fond of tossing around?

 

So what is your solution?

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

37 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

Completely disagree with this.

 

Diametrically.  

 

The numbers simply don't lie. Hagg is MacDonald 2.0 and the advanced stats prove it. The eye test also proves it. He hits and that's it. He acts like the puck is a grenade on his stick. He doesn't clear the front of the net. He's always out of position. He can't even make an exit zone pass. He's awful. I'll be glad when they ship his sorry ass elsewhere.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

2 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

So what is your solution?

 

Everything starts by hiring a competent and good head coach and allowing him to hire his coaching staff. It also goes beyond there. It also includes hiring a good and competent head coach for Lehigh Valley and once again, letting him choose his staff. Once that's in place, it's matter of implementing a system that fits the talent that's in place, not trying to fit talent into the system. 

 

As for the team prospects, there's a lot of good talent. That's one thing where I'll disagree with elmatus. Yes, there are Varones and Raffls, but there's also a lot of high end prospects. Rubtsov, Allison, Laczynski, Frost, Ratcliffe, Farabee are all top six guys. I guarantee it. Add in some of the depth like Laberge, Bunnaman (who I think has Joel Otto like upside), Twarynski, Aube-Kubel and you're on to something. Then you've got defense with guys like Hogberg, Wylie, St. Ivany, Friedman, and Myers. Then there's Samuel Ersson, the best goaltender in the Allsvenskan and will make the jump to the Swedish Elite League next year. There's Kirill Ustimov tearing it up in the MHL in Russia. He's North American bound next year. There's Felix Sandstrom in the SEL and he's North American bound. There's a lot of depth in the pipeline that Hextall built. There's a reason why the Flyers are ranked number one as it pertains to the feeder system. Hextall completely rebuilt it and there's depth and gems in there. 

 

The biggest problem right now is the main roster and making everything fit. Once again though, that's a coaching issue. The current and previous head coach have tried to implement systems that simply do not work with the talent that's in place. There's also been an inordinate amount of lack of coaching and communication with the young players (which has markedly improved under Gordon's watch, but the damage that Hakstol inflicted has been incredible). Getting a new head coach that will devise a system that fits the talent and more important, communicates with the talent will be paramount in getting the club to the next level. They desperately need a teacher and communicator. I was initially on the Quenneville bandwagon, but I think they need a guy like a Sheldon Keefe or a Benoit Groulx there and they'll need experienced assistants to help. 

 

Fletcher is going to have his hands full this summer trying to figure this out.

[brelic]

So does Hart’s injury timetable preclude Fletch trying to move Elliott? That would be a shame because surely we could get a late round pick for him, and he’d have a chance to go play some meaningful games somewhere. He’s looked very sharp since returning. 

[OccamsRazor]

25 minutes ago, brelic said:

So does Hart’s injury timetable preclude Fletch trying to move Elliott? That would be a shame because surely we could get a late round pick for him, and he’d have a chance to go play some meaningful games somewhere. He’s looked very sharp since returning. 

 

I don't think so if a deal comes along he should take it. 

 

You can call up McKenna or even Lyon if you need a backup.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

1 hour ago, brelic said:

So does Hart’s injury timetable preclude Fletch trying to move Elliott? That would be a shame because surely we could get a late round pick for him, and he’d have a chance to go play some meaningful games somewhere. He’s looked very sharp since returning. 

 

I'm with @OccamsRazor on this - Elliott should be moved if a team comes calling. Talbot is here and McKenna or Lyon can always be recalled. Fletcher said they acquired Talbot so they could get a read on how he's going to perform and then re-evaluate after that. Now is the time for the evaluation to begin. 

[hf101]

6 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

The business of hockey sucks.

Simmonds should retire a Flyer, the team should be able to thank him for out performing his contract early by overpaying him now and not be penalized.  

The NHL salary cap structure is punative towards "people"; life, business you name it, is about relationships.  The salary cap in the NHL keeps teams and players from fostering a trusting relationship.   the players are commodiities/products. I understand it, I don't like it.;

17 has been one of my favorite players since he arrived, this contract situation blows. 

I'm angered and saddened by the Simmonds situation.

 

 

 

Yep.  And frankly if Simmer were to sign a 3 year deal there would be no good reason to move him imo.

 

 

[OccamsRazor]