brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 Good price. I like Raffl. I think he keeps the guys loose too. He's a clown apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 I like Raffl fine. Maybe he's a poor man's Ruslan Fedotenko. To be clear, I am a big Fedotenko fan. Raffl is what he is. The devil we know. Home grown free agent. One of the best players in Austria. Good deal. 25 minutes ago, brelic said: I think he keeps the guys loose too. "The guys" apparently love MacDonald. Who is the true poster child of the past seven years. And he's only been here for just over four. And they talked about a longer deal. No, really. Loose? Great. Maybe they need to be tight... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 He is good bottom 6 forward. Raffl Laughton Aube-Kubel might make a solid 4th line next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 Eh, I don't love it or hate it. Think the terms are fine for a player of Raffl's ilk. Not a lot of money, not a lot of years. Contract can be buried in the minors if need be. Don't think this takes away a potential spot for a kid to make the team. Yes, apparently Raffl is well liked in the room and sometimes you need guys for that purpose. I guess I don't see anything special about him. He's kind of like a Honda Accord - reliable and practical, but performance isn't a forte (no offense to Accord drivers). I just hope he is confined to the fourth line, absent a rash of injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Author Share Posted March 27, 2019 I think he's a smart, reliable player that helps drive play, kills penalties, and chips in on offense. Charlie O'Connor was saying that with this signing, we're basically looking at 2 open roster spots. Giroux / Couturier / Voracek JVR / ?? / Konecny Lindblom / Patrick / ?? Raffl / Laughton / Hartman You could probably fit Duchene in there as 2C but he will command a big salary. Panarin would be great, but then you have to move someone to an off wing. Anyway, gonna be an interesting season. I think Farabee and Frost will start in the AHL, and Fletch will fill those holes through free agency or trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 I like the player, I like the signing. This makes sense, he's smart- faster than you think, has a longer reach than you think, stronger on the puck than you think, he can even finish some too, not at an elite level, but he doesn't panic when the puck is on his stick and the net is open. He's a good hockey player, and by all accounts a good bloke too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 1 hour ago, brelic said: You could probably fit Duchene in there as 2C but he will command a big salary. I don't think I want him. He hasn't done much in Columbus and, in fact, they may not even make the POs. I think I'd stay away from him for the money he's likely to attract. Don't think he's a player you win with. I'd focus on Panarin and/or look for a more "traditional" third line center. Quote Panarin would be great, but then you have to move someone to an off wing. Giroux has been playing RW with JVR and Patrick. If I recall, that was his natural position in juniors. Panarin/Patrick/Giroux Lindblom/Couturier/Voracek JVR/???/Konency Raffl/Laughton/[Hartman] Could Morgan Frost slot in at 3C? Do we think Rubtsov has a chance at some point? Honestly, I'd cut Hartman loose if they think they can do better in UFA. Sucks that we would have traded Simmonds for essentially nothing, but whatever. Probably not a concern for this year, but LW is pretty crowded for a guy like Farabee to have a shot. Lindblom should be looking over his shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Author Share Posted March 27, 2019 8 minutes ago, vis said: I don't think I want him. He hasn't done much in Columbus and, in fact, they may not even make the POs. I think I'd stay away from him for the money he's likely to attract. Don't think he's a player you win with. I'd focus on Panarin and/or look for a more "traditional" third line center. Fair enough. I'm not a huge Duchene fan either, especially not if he's getting $8M+. But a JVR-type contract? 5 years at $7M per? Maybe his stretch drive (lack of) performance, and missing the playoffs hurts his value a bit. Upcoming FA centers are Spezza, Duchene, Bolland, Brassard, Thornton, Johansson, Nelson... Best of the bunch is Hayes. Fletch might be able to sway him with a guaranteed 2C spot playing with JVR and Konecny or Voracek. 8 minutes ago, vis said: Giroux has been playing RW with JVR and Patrick. If I recall, that was his natural position in juniors. Panarin/Patrick/Giroux Lindblom/Couturier/Voracek JVR/???/Konency Raffl/Laughton/[Hartman] That JVR/Patrick/Giroux line has not been good at all. 8 minutes ago, vis said: Could Morgan Frost slot in at 3C? Do we think Rubtsov has a chance at some point? I don't think Frost makes it. Maybe Rubtsov, but he's missed the entire year to injury. We don't have a great read on him. 8 minutes ago, vis said: Honestly, I'd cut Hartman loose if they think they can do better in UFA. Sucks that we would have traded Simmonds for essentially nothing, but whatever. Probably not a concern for this year, but LW is pretty crowded for a guy like Farabee to have a shot. Lindblom should be looking over his shoulder. I don't think they'll let Hartman go. Just my gut feeling. As a 4th liner, I think he's as great an option as any. Agreed re: Farabee. I think the time to pencil in teenagers is behind us. Unless either one of them absolutely blows away the competition, start them in the AHL. They're 19 years old. It's fine. We have the most under-23 players on the roster in the league. Add two more to that and we are again looking at inconsistency, growing pains, rookie mistakes, and probably missed playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmatus Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 48 minutes ago, vis said: Don't think he's a player you win with. This seems so apropos to me with where our team is currently. We need some way to find a guy that we win with. I feel like we have such a dearth of that right now. We have a bunch of good to amazing players in our core group, but they're all starting to feel like the kind of players you don't win with. Why? I don't know. But for some reason what's on paper never seems to play out on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 32 minutes ago, brelic said: Fair enough. I'm not a huge Duchene fan either, especially not if he's getting $8M+. But a JVR-type contract? 5 years at $7M per? Maybe his stretch drive (lack of) performance, and missing the playoffs hurts his value a bit. I don't know. In a different thread, I said I want winners. Duchene doesn't strike me that way. 32 minutes ago, brelic said: Upcoming FA centers are Spezza, Duchene, Bolland, Brassard, Thornton, Johansson, Nelson... Nelson might be a good 3rd liner. Granted, he hasn't won anything, but he seems more of a "meat and potatoes" player than Duchene. And will cost less and probably be happy with 3rd line duties. 32 minutes ago, brelic said: That JVR/Patrick/Giroux line has not been good at all. Fair point. Just saying that Giroux seems willing to switch to wing if they need to free up a LW spot. 32 minutes ago, brelic said: I don't think Frost makes it. Maybe Rubtsov, but he's missed the entire year to injury. We don't have a great read on him. Agree. I'd be shocked if either make it. 32 minutes ago, brelic said: I don't think they'll let Hartman go. Just my gut feeling. As a 4th liner, I think he's as great an option as any. Probably not. But I don't think he's a "must resign" either. 32 minutes ago, brelic said: We have the most under-23 players on the roster in the league. Add two more to that and we are again looking at inconsistency, growing pains, rookie mistakes, and probably missed playoffs. Agree. I'm still worried about the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Author Share Posted March 27, 2019 6 minutes ago, elmatus said: This seems so apropos to me with where our team is currently. We need some way to find a guy that we win with. I feel like we have such a dearth of that right now. We have a bunch of good to amazing players in our core group, but they're all starting to feel like the kind of players you don't win with. Why? I don't know. But for some reason what's on paper never seems to play out on the ice. I mean, I get the sentiment. But there are 30 teams every year (and 26 over the last decade) that don't have the "guys you win with." Who are those guys? Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabrook Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Fleury/Murray Doughty, Quick, Kopitar Bergeron, Chara, Rask, Marchand Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, Carlson, Holtby That's it. That's the core from the 5 teams that have won the last 10 Stanley Cups. I've said it before and I'll say it again - winning the Stanley Cup is the best case scenario. Everything goes right, and even when you face adversity, everything goes right there too. There are other cores in the NHL that can absolutely mirror those above (Colorado, TB, Nashville, Calgary, Winnipeg, SJ) but they have won exactly 0 cups. Fletch's job is to set up the team in the best possible position to take advantage of a "best case scenario" and able to deal with and overcome the inevitable "rough bumps" along the way. A solid coach is a good start... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmatus Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 2 hours ago, brelic said: That's it. That's the core from the 5 teams that have won the last 10 Stanley Cups. See but the last decade of NHL hockey suggests there may in fact be such a thing as "players you win with". It's not just some factor of luck, or at the very least, it seems entirely possible there are types of players that will help you gain in the luck department. The fact we have teams who have won several cups over the last decade, not to mention teams who have made multiple finals appearances over that same span, suggests those teams have something other teams don't. If it were all just a toss up, there should be more variety at the top, and there really hasn't been. 2 hours ago, brelic said: There are other cores in the NHL that can absolutely mirror those above (Colorado, TB, Nashville, Calgary, Winnipeg, SJ) but they have won exactly 0 cups. I would then suggest those teams you mention do not in fact mirror the teams that seem to be in the running every year like clockwork, and even less those who have won multiple cups in the last decade. At the very least, they haven't shown it yet. They check some of the boxes but not all. I think there's something clearly beyond just skill and luck that pushes a team into that next level. If it was all just skill and luck, every season would be a toss up, and it really isn't. And that's without looking at the perennial chokers like San Jose and Washington. How can a team like San Jose own the league with such ease for almost a full decade but always falter in the playoffs? On paper, they should at the very least have made deep runs those years, but they couldn't manage any playoff success despite all their talent. Were they just unlucky every season for a decade? I have a hard time believing that. Something just doesn't add up. Washington was similar up until just last season. For them, it could very well just have been luck last season. We'll have to wait and see if they can follow up on their success over the next bit to really be able to tell. I feel the most logical conclusion is there's something intangible about certain players that can push a team over the edge and beyond the muck. What is that thing? I don't think it's skill (Edmonton isn't doing so great either), and I have a very hard time thinking it's just a matter of luck (hello SJS). To me, there's something else here, and that something else seems incredibly elusive. Coaching? Leadership? Confidence? Character? Whatever it is. Our team needs more of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Author Share Posted March 27, 2019 14 minutes ago, elmatus said: I feel the most logical conclusion is there's something intangible about certain players that can push a team over the edge and beyond the muck. Beyond elite level talent, I think it basically comes down to this. Whether that's leadership, mental focus, chemistry, team composition, the type of relationship they have with the coach, the ability to capitalize on luck in both directions - good and bad - and whatever else. The point I was making about the other teams that mirror the recent Cup champions is that they have #1-2 overall picks, they have elite talent level, they have a multi-player core, they have or have had excellent coaches.... but they have zero cups. The truth is that 1 team wins, and 30 teams do not. Every. Single. Year. The danger is looking at your roster as more flawed than it really is. Sometimes all that's needed are small tweaks. Or time. Or experience. Or maturity. Or multiple players having career years at the same time. Or sometimes a major rebuild is needed. And the "best" team doesn't always win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 4 hours ago, brelic said: You could probably fit Duchene in there as 2C but he will command a big salary. Uh hell no. Don't want that guy on the team. @elmatus and i just kicked this around on another thread. A small trade for Jeff Carter. Just gauging thoughts on it. Just a pick to help the Kings out. Giroux / Couts / Carter Panarin / Patrick / TK JVR / Hayes / Voracek Lindblom/Laughton/NAK Raffl or Giroux / Couts / Voracek Panarin / Patrick / TK JVR / Hayes / Carter Lindblom/Laughton/NAK Raffl What say you?? Sure i haven't crunch the numbers it might not work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 3 hours ago, vis said: I don't think I want him. I agree...no sir. HARD pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmatus Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 10 minutes ago, brelic said: The point I was making about the other teams that mirror the recent Cup champions is that they have #1-2 overall picks, they have elite talent level, they have a multi-player core, they have or have had excellent coaches.... but they have zero cups. Yeah, I get that. So what don't they have that those teams do? That's my question. They have the 1-2 overall picks, but they can't find success despite it all. Meanwhile, some of those other teams you mention have found success multiple years in a row. To me, that speaks to something well beyond just luck and skill. So what is that other variable? Again, what did Chicago or Pittsburgh have on hand that San Jose didn't? The difference between those teams isn't just that San Jose got unlucky, while CHI and PIT managed to somehow get lucky many many times in a row. Luck doesn't generally work that way. It suggests some other variable is at play. I think summing that up as "players we can win with" is a poor descriptor for sure, but I don't think it's so off the mark. I kind of feel like there's something to that, I just don't know what it is. 10 minutes ago, brelic said: The truth is that 1 team wins, and 30 teams do not. Every. Single. Year. The danger is looking at your roster as more flawed than it really is. Sometimes all that's needed are small tweaks. Or time. Or experience. Or maturity. Or multiple players having career years at the same time. Or sometimes a major rebuild is needed. Yes, of course, but somehow certain teams manage to win far more consistently than other teams. Put another way, top 5 teams in the NHL are generally pretty equal, except some of them seem to be more equal than others. Why? Again, I ask: Is it coaching? Is it character? Is it leadership? Is it confidence? I kind of hope it is something like that, because the Flyers have been lacking in some of those (possibly even all of them). So if it is, it gives Fletch something to work with. I think we overvalue luck, and it seems entirely possible we overvalue skill as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 1 hour ago, brelic said: I mean, I get the sentiment. But there are 30 teams every year (and 26 over the last decade) that don't have the "guys you win with." Who are those guys? Don't think there is a specific list of players. Rather, I think there are certain qualities that indicate whether a player is or could be a "winner" even if they haven't won a cup. Those types of players, in my mind, have a desire to win at all costs. They are assertive and can raise their game when necessary. Winners are not passengers. They are not passive players. Of course it is unrealistic to expect a player to exhibit those qualities at all times. But those qualities should be apparent more often than not. Maybe Duchene hasn't been in position to demonstrate those things. But to date, I'm not all that impressed with the Avalanche situation, his tenure in Ottawa and his performance (or lack of) for the Blue Jackets. Actually, I think CBJ is a perfect opportunity for him to rise and show that he raise his game. Based on his stats, doesn't look that way to me. 1 hour ago, brelic said: A solid coach is a good start... This is priority #1 and I think more important than any single player acquisition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 7 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: I agree...no sir. HARD pass. Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 5 minutes ago, vis said: Yep. Sorry we have two threads going about very similar subjects so hard to keep up with which one i suggested what in so WTF why not ask the same question idea here too....so here it comes... So since we discussed a vet D man back to help the kids. I had asked this question to @ruxpin which i can't remember if he responded but instead of a Parakyo trade for Jake what about this to help the Kings out and the Flyers out. What about these moves... Jeff Carter (3 X 5.2 mill) and Alex Martinez (2 X 4 mill) who has a ton of experience playing the right side. for Justin Bailey and Robert Hagg or Radko Gudas Giroux / Couts / Carter Panarin / Patrick / TK JVR / Hayes / Voracek Lindblom/Laughton/NAK Raffl Ivan/Martinez Sanheim/Myers or Gudas Ghost/Morin or Hagg Friedman and/or Morin The blueline would depend on who you moved out Hagg or Gudas. And if you want you can flip Carter for Jake on the 1st line....just asking for a friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Author Share Posted March 27, 2019 33 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: Uh hell no. Don't want that guy on the team. @elmatus and i just kicked this around on another thread. A small trade for Jeff Carter. Just gauging thoughts on it. Just a pick to help the Kings out. Giroux / Couts / Carter Panarin / Patrick / TK JVR / Hayes / Voracek Lindblom/Laughton/NAK Raffl or Giroux / Couts / Voracek Panarin / Patrick / TK JVR / Hayes / Carter Lindblom/Laughton/NAK Raffl What say you?? Sure i haven't crunch the numbers it might not work. I don't understand why you'd trade for a 34-year old center and stick him on the top line wing. Or any wing for that matter. I'd put him as 2C and forget Hayes... or get Hayes and forget Carter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Author Share Posted March 27, 2019 1 hour ago, elmatus said: Yes, of course, but somehow certain teams manage to win far more consistently than other teams. Put another way, top 5 teams in the NHL are generally pretty equal, except some of them seem to be more equal than others. Why? I'd argue that the absence of a Stanley Cup doesn't mean that a given core group is not capable of doing it. It's a false equivalency. Ovechkin was a poor leader and would never win a Cup ... until he did. 14 years later. So why do you assume that our guys aren't capable of doing it, and never will be? Pittsburgh is in a category by themselves, I would argue. Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Letang, Kessel. That's a lot of #1-2 overall picks. We have exactly one of those and he's 20 years old. (Edited to add that I forgot about the other #2 overall we have lol). Boston is probably the exception in the recent Cup winners. No #1-2 overall picks, and their core guys were three 2nd rounders, a 3rd rounder, and a 9th rounder. Though Horton (3rd overall) was a solid contributor and won the Cup with them in his first season there. It's such a conflation of myriad factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 15 minutes ago, brelic said: It's such a conflation of myriad factors. this sentence gives me the "grammars" nice ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 39 minutes ago, brelic said: I don't understand why you'd trade for a 34-year old center and stick him on the top line wing. Or any wing for that matter. I'd put him as 2C and forget Hayes... or get Hayes and forget Carter. Sure we could put him at center but if we did that I would want it to be 3rd line center. And at the bottom of the post I said you can flip Jake and Carter. Nothing would be set it stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted March 27, 2019 Share Posted March 27, 2019 30 minutes ago, brelic said: Boston is probably the exception in the recent Cup winners. No #1-2 overall picks, I thought they traded Seguin the #2 overall after the won the Cup in 2011? Yeah just checked he was a rookie the year they won it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 27, 2019 Author Share Posted March 27, 2019 3 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: I thought they traded Seguin the #2 overall after the won the Cup in 2011? Yeah just checked he was a rookie the year they won it all. Oops, missed Seguin. After looking at his stats, I feel safe in saying his 22 regular season points and 7 playoff points were not the difference between winning a Cup and not. Hard to believe he's 27 already. Sheesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.