Jump to content

Wayne Simmonds traded for Ryan Hartman


OccamsRazor

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

 

I didn't realize it was Wpg that he blocked. I thought it was Calgary 😜

 

Didn't you know? Everything north of the 49th is a frozen wasteland!

 

Thank god 54:40 never came to pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are basically two ways this can go.

 

Wayne goes to Nashville lights it up and earns a chance to be resigned to a 5 year deal in Nashville or somewhere else willing to give him the 5 year deal.

 

Or he goes there and looks like he has all season a shell of his former self Nashville let's him walk and he is shown no team is willing to give him the money let alone the term in which he seeks and he decides to accept the contract the Flyers offered and returns.

 

This is how I see it going down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Wayne Train will be back in Philly next season as a Flyer, whether Nashville wins the Cup or not. I think the main reason he didn't accept the trade to Calgary is the taxes, but I could be wrong. I'm really curious, though, as to what Calgary was offering for Simmonds. My guess is it was better than what Nashville gave up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LIttle disappointed, but I think it's to be expected.  Certainly wanted more, but looking at the deals around the league, GMs simply weren't willing to part with major assets.  I kind of think this deal slots in with what Stone (who resigned) and Hayes returned, particularly if Simmonds blocked a trade to Winnipeg.  When you look at Simmonds rationally, this is probably about market for him in light of the other deals around the league.  I'm not all that happy about it, but it is what it is.  I'll say this, given the timing of when the trade was made, either Poile or Fletcher finally caved.  I think I know which one did.

 

Not sure what to make of Hartman.  This is his third team in his young career, which is rarely a good sign in my opinion.  Moreover, his rookie year was his best season statistically.  Of course, he was playing on a loaded Hawks team back then (Q was his coach).  But he did play on a pretty good Nashville team as well.  Given the teams he's played on, it's not surprising to me that his 5v5 numbers look good.  Curious to see what the eye test reveals.  He wasn't a prolific scorer in juniors or the minors.  Do like that he has an edge, which should endear him to Flyers fans (but certainly not to the same extent as Simmonds).  Seems like a serviceable 3rd/4th liner who maybe can take a shift in the top 6.  Let's hope he's given an appropriate role in which he can perform to the fullest.  I'm sure this spells the end for someone in the bottom 6. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, vis said:

LIttle disappointed, but I think it's to be expected.  Certainly wanted more, but looking at the deals around the league, GMs simply weren't willing to part with major assets.  I kind of think this deal slots in with what Stone (who resigned) and Hayes returned, particularly if Simmonds blocked a trade to Winnipeg.  When you look at Simmonds rationally, this is probably about market for him in light of the other deals around the league.  I'm not all that happy about it, but it is what it is.  I'll say this, given the timing of when the trade was made, either Poile or Fletcher finally caved.  I think I know which one did.

 

Not sure what to make of Hartman.  This is his third team in his young career, which is rarely a good sign in my opinion.  Moreover, his rookie year was his best season statistically.  Of course, he was playing on a loaded Hawks team back then (Q was his coach).  But he did play on a pretty good Nashville team as well.  Given the teams he's played on, it's not surprising to me that his 5v5 numbers look good.  Curious to see what the eye test reveals.  He wasn't a prolific scorer in juniors or the minors.  Do like that he has an edge, which should endear him to Flyers fans (but certainly not to the same extent as Simmonds).  Seems like a serviceable 3rd/4th liner who maybe can take a shift in the top 6.  Let's hope he's given an appropriate role in which he can perform to the fullest.  I'm sure this spells the end for someone in the bottom 6. 

Much like brelic, I didn't realize Winnipeg was the team he blocked the trade to, but my same thoughts and logic apply to him not going there, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its what you have to do. You got the bargain years out of him for a good price, now let someone else overpay for the decline years.

 Thats how the game has become now, you stay away from the big last contract of someones career like the JVR signing which pretty much put the nail in the coffin of simmonds leaving after setting the price high.

 The way I see it is you keep guys like simmonds, schenn while they are in the cheap contract, play them out and let them walk or trade them when the time comes. If you overpay for someone like JVR how do you ever expect to resign simmonds anyway?

 No long-term deals to anyone pushing 30, especially a physical guy. Let your mid contract guys play out the cheap contracts then cut bait if they want too much for too long, let someone else pay for the decline.

 

 Simmonds to me was what a football player would be called a drive killer. His knack for horrible passes messing up odd man rushes, pp and all around lack of any decent possession game or passing at all made him a liability. It's a possession game now and he has become a turnover machine.

 

 I was kinda hoping flyers would have parted with some prospects and gotten stone, kept simmonds to play out the year and see what happens. Then sign stone and let simmonds walk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, FD19372 said:

I think the Wayne Train will be back in Philly next season as a Flyer, whether Nashville wins the Cup or not. I think the main reason he didn't accept the trade to Calgary is the taxes, but I could be wrong. I'm really curious, though, as to what Calgary was offering for Simmonds. My guess is it was better than what Nashville gave up.

 

It's true, we do have taxes in Canada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@FD19372

@vis

Reports are the deal was with Calgary.

I think brelic and pods were being funny. But they're Canadian so we probably wouldn't understand... plus i'm sure they're very sorry for the confusion.

 

 

So, so sorry. You have no idea how sorry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, yave1964 said:

A third and Hartman is really not a horrible return.

 

 Sure...and if I'm happy that my gm gets "really not a horrible return" when he makes a trade then I'd be happy. 

 

 Hopefully he steps up his game from really not a horrible return. But that's what he's shown as an NHL gm. I expect better from the Flyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FD19372 said:

OK .... VERY HIGH taxes, income taxes. FIxed. Thanks, Captain Obvious.:bigteeth:

 

Lol, no problem. 

 

In truth, I'm not sure it would have been an issue, unless he intended to re-sign in CGY. But as a rental, we're talking about taxes for like 6 weeks of "work."  Also, there's no provincial sales tax in Alberta. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@FD19372

@vis

Reports are the deal was with Calgary.

I think brelic and pods were being funny. But they're Canadian so we probably wouldn't understand... plus i'm sure they're very sorry for the confusion.

Well, that changes things slightly if it was Calgary and not Winnipeg.  Wonder what Fletcher wanted out of Winnipeg.  They gave up a pretty good package for Hayes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

 

 Sure...and if I'm happy that my gm gets "really not a horrible return" when he makes a trade then I'd be happy. 

 

 Hopefully he steps up his game from really not a horrible return. But that's what he's shown as an NHL gm. I expect better from the Flyers.

Given what Stone, Hayes, Zuccarello, Nyquist and Dzingel returned, what should Simmonds have returned?  Not praising Fletcher, but it seems like the return is within the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, flyercanuck said:

 

 Sure...and if I'm happy that my gm gets "really not a horrible return" when he makes a trade then I'd be happy. 

 

 Hopefully he steps up his game from really not a horrible return. But that's what he's shown as an NHL gm. I expect better from the Flyers.

I get it, as a Wings fan I was hoping for a first for Gus and instead 'settling' for what is at best two second rounders is acceptable but I wanted more. I would still rather have 90 cents on the dollar now than lose him at years end for nothing which is the same position the Flyers ended up in with Simmonds. IMHO specifically to Simmonds the contracts of Neal and Lucic in recent years probably scared a lot of folks off, which is why the Flyers were willing to deal him away rather than give him a four or five year deal in the first place. I thought they could have gotten more but a decent roster player in Hartman who is a third line winger who plays a heavy game and can bump up a line in a pinch and a third for a player that every team in the league knew you weren't going to resign really is not the worst trade of the day yesterday by a long shot. It was a buyers market which was painfully obvious to the sellers, too many teams had thrown in the towel and too few teams were going for it making it difficult to maximize the return. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What blasphemy....Hextall and Chuck similar...but one time in Minnesota...

 

Without knowing the picks (but obviously non-1st rd) or prospects (likely decent B-level guys in D+1 or D+2 or, at max, AHL rookie) offered for Simmonds, I think Hextall may also have opted for a youngish NHLer like Hartman in this case, as Fletcher did
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play a hard style. I like to hit and get into the dirty areas, get in the corners. I remember a picture playing in Nashville when we were playing the Flyers. I think it was five guys laying out in front of the net trying to block a shot. When I picture the Flyers uniform, I always picture that photo, so that’s the type of hockey I like — dedication to blocking shots and doing the little things right and playing the hard-nosed game like Flyers hockey is.

- Ryan Hartman

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

I play a hard style. I like to hit and get into the dirty areas, get in the corners. I remember a picture playing in Nashville when we were playing the Flyers. I think it was five guys laying out in front of the net trying to block a shot. When I picture the Flyers uniform, I always picture that photo, so that’s the type of hockey I like — dedication to blocking shots and doing the little things right and playing the hard-nosed game like Flyers hockey is.

- Ryan Hartman

 

 

Like I said, he's got a Flyer persona about him and I think fans will come to like him as a 3rd/4th liner.  I am not expecting much from him offensively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, vis said:

Like I said, he's got a Flyer persona about him and I think fans will come to like him as a 3rd/4th liner.  I am not expecting much from him offensively.

 

Yeah I am not going to put any limits or expectations on him right now till I see him play and then who he is skating with.

 

All he has to do right now is plug Wayne's hole for now. I think he can handle that.

 

Then go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, vis said:

Given what Stone, Hayes, Zuccarello, Nyquist and Dzingel returned, what should Simmonds have returned?  Not praising Fletcher, but it seems like the return is within the market.

 

I thought he'd get a prospect/player like the one he got, and a 2nd. Again, it's not a big deal...just like overpaying someone by, say, half a million isn't. But when you keep doing that over and over, it becomes a bigger deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last 3 yrs 5v5: Simmonds: 48.2 CF%, -1.9 CF Rel, 0.59 G/60, 1.18 P/60 Hartman: 53.0 CF%, +1.1 CF Rel, 0.76 G/60, 1.63 P/60 Losing Simmonds hurts, he was an amazing

who will always be adored. But the team very arguably just got better, younger, cheaper. #Flyers

 

 

 

.
 

5v5/60 G+P over last 3 yrs:

G: 0.75, 2.06

JvR: 1.15, 2.02

Couturier: 0.9, 2.01

TK: 0.89, 1.98

Jake: 0.53, 1.73

Hartman: 0.76, 1.63

Lindblom: 0.63, 1.56

Patrick: 0.62, 1.52

Laughton: 0.51, 1.32

Raffl: 0.64, 1.17

 

1st line: 1.9+

2nd line: 1.6+

3rd line: 1.3+

#Flyers

 
 
1
 
14
 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

 

I thought he'd get a prospect/player like the one he got, and a 2nd. Again, it's not a big deal...just like overpaying someone by, say, half a million isn't. But when you keep doing that over and over, it becomes a bigger deal.

 

Yeah, that's my feeling.There's a real good chance it's a 3rd not a 4th so it's no biggie to me. Simmonds' declining game, especially his speed hurt his value. I don't think there's any denying that. Maybe Fletch would have gotten more in the months or weeks prior to deadline day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...