Jump to content

Game 78: Flyers at Hurricanes: 3/30/19 @ 1:30


Howie58

Recommended Posts

@brelic @OccamsRazor

I would say that if the directive is to "win now", trading 80 pts away better bring back 80 pts in some form or another.

I don't see too many scenarios where Jake Voracek isn't the best player in a trade, now I don't care about winning trades, but I don't want to blow that hole in the roster and not have equal production available. 

I have zero faith that NAK is going to do much in the NHL beyond  responsible two way play and chipping in 15-to 25 points. 

 

Why not take a run at Kevin Hayes? I hated him as a Ranger, he's got some grit, size and skill, I don't think Wpg has extended him. I also think like @King Knut says there are some trading synergies with Toronto, try to pry a Marner (pipe dream) or Kaepanen out of them for some defensive magic beans, if that doesn't work f -it try an offer sheet.  

 

I can't help but think this team is a full off-season of a legitimately good NHL coach away from being very competitive. I don't know who that guy is; but the culture change that seems necessary should be coming from the new guy behind the bench.  

I think there are guys to be added that can make a difference, I don't know what an orgy of spending and trading does to speed up the "win-now" directive. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@brelic @OccamsRazor

I would say that if the directive is to "win now", trading 80 pts away better bring back 80 pts in some form or another.

I don't see too many scenarios where Jake Voracek isn't the best player in a trade, now I don't care about winning trades, but I don't want to blow that hole in the roster and not have equal production available. 

I have zero faith that NAK is going to do much in the NHL beyond  responsible two way play and chipping in 15-to 25 points. 

 

Why not take a run at Kevin Hayes? I hated him as a Ranger, he's got some grit, size and skill, I don't think Wpg has extended him. I also think like @King Knut says there are some trading synergies with Toronto, try to pry a Marner (pipe dream) or Kaepanen out of them for some defensive magic beans, if that doesn't work f -it try an offer sheet.  

 

I can't help but think this team is a full off-season of a legitimately good NHL coach away from being very competitive. I don't know who that guy is; but the culture change that seems necessary should be coming from the new guy behind the bench.  

I think there are guys to be added that can make a difference, I don't know what an orgy of spending and trading does to speed up the "win-now" directive. 

 

 

Absolutely agree. Bottom line is that Jake produces, and given that half the top 6 is still working towards its prime - TK, Patrick, Lindblom - and Couturier is in his prime now, it's a safe bet that Jake's production won't decline for a few more years. 

 

If you move Jake, it's hard to imagine he won't be the best player in the trade. And then what? More missed playoffs and banter about how we need to add offense to make the playoffs?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

trading 80 pts away better bring back 80 pts in some form or another.

37 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

Absolutely agree. Bottom line is that Jake produces, and given that half the top 6 is still working towards its prime - TK, Patrick, Lindblom - and Couturier is in his prime now, it's a safe bet that Jake's production won't decline for a few more years. 

 

If you move Jake, it's hard to imagine he won't be the best player in the trade. And then what? More missed playoffs and banter about how we need to add offense to make the playoffs?

 

I get the theory, but the practice has been something of a "something else" variety.

 

Voracek is not a consistent 80+-point player. We know this because he's done it twice in his career (not counting the 48-game season). He's far more often a 60+-point player (which is, again, where he is this year). Even taking his career PPG over the course of a season gets him to 68. And his best goal scoring year (23) was six years ago.

 

His PPG Y2Y as a Flyer:

.62

.95

.76

.99

.73

.75

1.04

.85

 

That's three seasons of "80+" production, four of "60+" point production and one "50+" with three of the past four being "60+" and just one "80+".  And that "one" was a tremendous turnaround , career year for Claude Giroux and breakout for Sean Couturier.

 

He'd be a "value for contract" player if he was hitting 80+ regularly. The only other forwards under 30 making $8.25M a year in cap hit that are scoring at less than a 1 PPG pace are Jamie Benn and William Nylander. Benn at least has scored 25+ in each year since 11-12 (with this season being a real outlyer in his history) and the Nylander deal turns into a $7M cap hit next season.

 

I'm not shipping him out of town for a skate sharpener, but as a 30-year-old Top Six forward without a NMC  if he can bring back a valuable piece - even if it doesn't entirely "replace" his production - you have to seriously consider it.

 

What that "valuable piece" is? That just might be a conversation to have. But first we have to start looking at Jake for what he is not what he "did twice" or "might do."

Edited by radoran
  • Like 2
  • Good Post 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@brelic @OccamsRazor

I would say that if the directive is to "win now", trading 80 pts away better bring back 80 pts in some form or another.

I don't see too many scenarios where Jake Voracek isn't the best player in a trade, now I don't care about winning trades, but I don't want to blow that hole in the roster and not have equal production available. 

I have zero faith that NAK is going to do much in the NHL beyond  responsible two way play and chipping in 15-to 25 points. 

 

Why not take a run at Kevin Hayes? I hated him as a Ranger, he's got some grit, size and skill, I don't think Wpg has extended him. I also think like @King Knut says there are some trading synergies with Toronto, try to pry a Marner (pipe dream) or Kaepanen out of them for some defensive magic beans, if that doesn't work f -it try an offer sheet.  

 

I can't help but think this team is a full off-season of a legitimately good NHL coach away from being very competitive. I don't know who that guy is; but the culture change that seems necessary should be coming from the new guy behind the bench.  

I think there are guys to be added that can make a difference, I don't know what an orgy of spending and trading does to speed up the "win-now" directive. 

 

 

Trading Jake is just... well it seems crazy pants to me.  Just silly and not even worth addressing.  He got hurt and they got their but kicked, he got suspended and they got their butt kicked again.  He was clutch, often putting in or setting up the late goal to tie or win it.  

 

I understand people want a 200ft back checking game out of him, but not every player on the ice can do that and Jake is a puck moving play maker.  I understand people are mad because he loses pucks that go the other way, but play makers try to make plays and it doesn't always work out.  Every team has this issue.  I'm not going to try to convince anyone, I just don't get it.  

 

I like the Hayes idea, but only if we're all thinking trying Frost out at wing makes sense for his rookie campaign.  The TO thing is tricky.  Is Marner the real deal and we're seeing him come into his own, or are we seeing a really good 60-70pt guy benefitting from playing on Tavares' wing for a year?    I just don't watch them enough to have an opinion on this.  He's definitely worth having, and TO is definitely going to go through fits trying to squeeze him in under their cap...  but they're not giving him on for a song.  

 

I agree that they are a good coach away from being extremely competitive.  Their PP needs to be good.  It's gone from atrocious to meh and that's a big step.  IF it can jump back up to "Good" then that'll help.

 

Their biggest weakness is in the neutral zone right now.  That's a coach's deal, that's not a "we need to bring in a guy" kind of thing.  

 

I'd like a Tyler Myers type Vet on D, but that means moving 2 guys (Hagg and Mac hopefully)  just to have Morin as the 7.  That's my idea for next year.  Can that happen and a Panarin signing?  MAAAAAYBE.


Can those two plus a trade for a RW?  Probably not.  

 

My other issue right now is backup G.  I'm going to sound like crazypants to some of you, but I friggin' hate what's happened.  I am NOT a fan of Talbot.  I know I've only seen him once and I may have even suggested signing him in the off season last summer sometime, but I really hate the way Fletcher traded for him when Stolarz was looking so good and I really haven't liked seeing Talbot's game.  

 

He repeatedly gives up monster rebounds and that's a serious problem for this team.  Every goalie's going to give up rebounds, and you can't direct them all to the corners, and GRANTED, it's hard to be sharp when you've had a long time off, but but Hart and Stolarz played very similar games in net and both were very good at keeping the rebounds soft and putting them where their defense could do something with them and I believe this defense would have greatly benefitted from two goalies that play similar games.  

 

Maybe Talbot will calm his game down if he gets more regular starts, but it seems the intention is that he won't play more than 30 games anyway.  i.e. he's not a backup.  He's also going to make more money than I'd want to spend on a backup goalie right now.

 

I understand the history and I understand that Stolarz has injury history and I also understand that it's all too late.  I'm just not thrilled about Talbot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, King Knut said:

He got hurt and they got their but kicked, he got suspended and they got their butt kicked again.

 

He was healthy and they just got shutout by the lowly Rangers he was with them and playing for their playoff lives and they got their buts kicked.

 

And don't forget the last time they were in the playoffs when they needed goals badly he scored as many as you did in 6 games and finished -3.

 

So let's paint the whole picture.

 

He is waaaay over paid. Ask Coots.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

I get the theory, but the practice has been something of a "something else" variety.

 

Voracek is not a consistent 80+-point player. We know this because he's done it twice in his career (not counting the 48-game season). He's far more often a 60+-point player (which is, again, where he is this year). Even taking his career PPG over the course of a season gets him to 68. And his best goal scoring year (23) was six years ago.

 

His PPG Y2Y as a Flyer:

.62

.95

.76

.99

.73

.75

1.04

.85

 

That's three seasons of "80+" production, four of "60+" point production and one "50+" with three of the past four being "60+" and just one "80+".  And that "one" was a tremendous turnaround , career year for Claude Giroux and breakout for Sean Couturier.

 

He'd be a "value for contract" player if he was hitting 80+ regularly. The only other forwards under 30 making $8.25M a year in cap hit that are scoring at less than a 1 PPG pace are Jamie Benn and William Nylander. Benn at least has scored 25+ in each year since 11-12 (with this season being a real outlyer in his history) and the Nylander deal turns into a $7M cap hit next season.

 

I'm not shipping him out of town for a skate sharpener, but as a 30-year-old Top Six forward without a NMC  if he can bring back a valuable piece - even if it doesn't entirely "replace" his production - you have to seriously consider it.

 

What that "valuable piece" is? That just might be a conversation to have. But first we have to start looking at Jake for what he is not what he "did twice" or "might do."

 

All fair points. I didn't specifically state 80 points, but just a general feeling that you need to replace his production. And the way trades typically work, I would be surprised if it's some kind of 1 for 1 swap where we're getting a player with similar production to Jake. What would be the point of the trade in that case for the other team? I'm guessing it would be Jake for multiple pieces, which will dilute the value of any one piece.

 

Edited to add that the part you bolded from my post - that it's a safe bet Jake's production won't decline for a few more years - is something I stand by. I think it's fair to expect somewhere between .73 and 1.04 PPG from Jake over that span. 

 

 

Edited by brelic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, King Knut said:

He repeatedly gives up monster rebounds and that's a serious problem for this team

 

Give the guy some slack he has played one game between the other day and February 16th.

 

I would say he was a little rusty and I think only practicing will do that.

 

I'm not sure if he is the answer but until I hear another option he is just as good as Elliott and one thing he has going for himself is he has been rather healthy in his career...that is until the Flyer's trainers get ahold of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, King Knut said:

He was clutch, often putting in or setting up the late goal to tie or win it.  

 

He has two (2) GWG this season. His career high is three (3).

 

He has 44 assists this season and the Flyers only have 37 wins. How many is "often"?

 

Honestly, this is making me recall the Keith Primeau "third assist" theory that was popular backinnaday.

 

19 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I'm not going to try to convince anyone, I just don't get it.  

 

I get what you are saying. I'm saying if they can land a significant piece, especially with some of the young guns in the pipeline, Jake is expendable in my book. YMMV.

 

Not "Hartman and a 4th" value.  Not "JVR for Luke Schenn".

 

Value. And that value need not be "60+" points.

 

I do not have a specific deal in mind.

 

25 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I'd like a Tyler Myers type Vet on D, but that means moving 2 guys (Hagg and Mac hopefully)

 

I kinda like Myers, but he's in the "definition of meh" area for me at this point. I don't know what he specifically brings other than size. It's not like there's a "winning pedigree" with him. And I don't know that I "$5.5M" like him. At less than that, we're having a conversation.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, brelic said:

I didn't specifically state 80 points


I did include mojo's post as a "reply to" as well.

 

10 minutes ago, brelic said:

I would be surprised if it's some kind of 1 for 1 swap where we're getting a player with similar production to Jake. What would be the point of the trade in that case for the other team? I'm guessing it would be Jake for multiple pieces, which will dilute the value of any one piece.

 

I have more in mind for a "successful vet D with track record" without a name to put to it.

 

I'm also looking at a Konecny (who has posted Voracek-career-high-or-better in goals the past two seasons) and a Frost on the way to make up the difference (at much less than $8.25M per).

 

And maybe putting JVR somewhere other than the third line...?

 

That said, FWIW, I'd put "trade JVR" on the same level as "trade Voracek". If either of them gets you a piece you need, you have to consider it IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

He was healthy and they just got shutout by the lowly Rangers he was with them and playing for their playoff lives and they got their buts kicked.

 

 

By that logic the entire team is poop.  

And I'm sorry, but their playoff lives were over when they lost to the Habs and Caps.  They all knew it.  If you want to point to him not showing up, point to that weekend.  

 

26 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

And don't forget the last time they were in the playoffs when they needed goals badly he scored as many as you did in 6 games and finished -3.

 

 

This is why good teams have depth and Stanley Cups are won by 3rd and 4th liners, because top lines often just get shut down.  Giroux sucked against the penguins too.  But they moved Coots on the 3rd and he scored 5 points and a hat trick on one leg.  It's not a coincidence.  

 

26 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

So let's paint the whole picture.

 

Yes, let's.  

 

26 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

And don't forget the last time they were in the playoffs when they needed goals badly he scored as many as you did in 6 games and finished -3.

 

So let's paint the whole picture.

 

He is waaaay over paid. Ask Coots.

 

Actually he's paid just about right if you look around the league.  Coots however happens to be wildly underpaid.  

...and some people are happy Hextall's gone ;)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

I have more in mind for a "successful vet D with track record" without a name to put to it.

 

Ah, gotcha. I'd be fine with that. I don't know, it was pretty clear this year that Provorov struggled mightily as the #1 guy. Even the past few games, the announcers were kind of struggling for words on more than a few plays where Provy just gave it away and was making poor decisions at both ends of the ice. Growing pains? Bad coaching? Not sure what's going on, but a solid veteran to take some of that pressure off of him would not be wasted.

 

3 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

I'm also looking at a Konecny (who has posted Voracek-career-high-or-better in goals the past two seasons) and a Frost on the way to make up the difference (at much less than $8.25M per).

 

And maybe putting JVR somewhere other than the third line...?

 

That said, FWIW, I'd put "trade JVR" on the same level as "trade Voracek". If either of them gets you a piece you need, you have to consider it IMO.

 

 

TK, I can see adding another 5-7 goals next year. Right now, his production is identical to last year with the major difference being that he was not primarily playing with Coots and G - he was forced to carry his own line and create his own chances more often this year, and he rose to the challenge. That's a good sign. 

 

For JVR, it depends on who your 3C is. Patrick, to me, is not a #1-2C right now. 1 goal in the past 20 games playing with Giroux and JVR / TK / Voracek just isn't good enough. If he were pushed to 3C with, say, JVR or Lindblom, that might give him time to grow as well. 

 

G / Coots / Voracek

JVR / [Duchene / Hayes] / TK

Lindblom / Patrick / UFA or Farabee or Frost?

 

Not sold on the young guys at 3 RW, and unfortunately, Fletch kind of needs to make a move before we find out in camp. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Give the guy some slack he has played one game between the other day and February 16th.

 

 

This IS me giving him some slack.  I'm really not thrilled with that move.  It handcuffs you with a player who wasn't playing as well.  Believe me, I'm not letting Gordon and Fletcher off the hook either.  I've gone on pretty long diatribes about making that trade WHEN they did, ensuring that they'd have no backup forcing Hart to play 4 games in 6 nights, making sure he was good and burned out (and probably hurt) by the time they played the Habs and Bolts and he had to get pulled both games.  Those two games might have been pretty useful down this stretch run.  

 

I'm willing to give him a chance but I'm still going to complain about the logic of acquiring a soon to be UFA at all for a guy who was playing pretty darn well at the time.... to be your backup goalie... who will cost 2-3 times as much.  But whatever.  

 

25 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

I'm not sure if he is the answer but until I hear another option he is just as good as Elliott and one thing he has going for himself is he has been rather healthy in his career...that is until the Flyer's trainers get ahold of him.

 

There is that.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, brelic said:

I didn't specifically state 80 points,

well I did, Jake hit it last year and has 65 this year, maybe he hits 70...? 65 would have been more accurate and perhaps within an acceptable margin for error. 

rad's point is accurate, even if it feels a little pedantic.  

My take is Jake is play driver and volume point producer, so, even if he only hit 80 a couple of times,   we should be getting  a similar player in return. or as he rightly says a vet d with winning track record. 

He also goes on to say not a JvR for Luke Schenn deal which I appreciate as that is a recent deal that wasn't a good value.

Edited by mojo1917
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Value. And that value need not be "60+" points.

 

I do not have a specific deal in mind.

 

 

I hear what you're saying and if someone wanted to send a Tyler Myers type D man our way for him, I'd take that.  

I just don't want to do what you're saying and trade a better player for a worse one.  

60+ points is a worse player for Jake most seasons since he's been a Flyer.  

 

Keep in mind that the PP sucking has been a BIG deal for Jakes production.  he had 30 PP assists last year and only 12 this year.  That 18 Assists would put him over 80 points and likely has the Flyers still in contention.

 

22 minutes ago, radoran said:

I kinda like Myers, but he's in the "definition of meh" area for me at this point. I don't know what he specifically brings other than size. It's not like there's a "winning pedigree" with him. And I don't know that I "$5.5M" like him. At less than that, we're having a conversation.

 

 

I totally $5.5 million like him.   I'm not sure I $7million like him.  

 

I'll take a guy like him for 4.5-5.5 though.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

And by your the whole team is fine.

 

Touche 

 

Well, not exactly, but I do think they're closer.   I think the 4th line blows and I think the 3rd line would be pretty good if it was a 4th line, but rather than upgrading the 3rd line, I'd upgrade the top 6 so the likes of Lindy and Patty can skate on the third and benefit from weaker matchups.

 

the PP is still pretty terrible and as I pointed out earlier, the neutral zone is still their biggest weakness that gets exploited by good teams.  They're much much better in their own zone, but they cede the neutral zone very easily right now. 

 

Long story short, if they can improve the top 6, and thus improve the bottom 6 by dropping Raffl, Laughton & Hartman to the 4th(maybe Lindblom depending on what happens) 

 

Ghost needs to get his head examined so he can put it back in the game.

P. Myers and Morin need minutes. 

 

Aside from that, I really do think it's coaching.  Which isn't to say I think Gordon is bad, just that Hakstol was REALLY bad.  

 

You Add Panarin if you can, a 2C or 3C if you can (likely via trade) and a top 4 D man.

 

All that said, a full off season and full season being coached by a good one and the roster they have looks worlds better.  

 

I just wishI thought that was Q, but that's a different thread.  

 

 

 

 

Edited by King Knut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think just about anyone other than Giroux, Couturier and Hart and probably Provorov can be had for the right price on this team.  I really think some of the young guys will be traded.  Do folks think, with the apparent desire to win now, that management will roll into next season with a defense that includes Provorov, Sanheim, Ghost, Hagg and Myers?  While maybe some of those names might mean something more in the future, I highly doubt this regime is going to wait long to find out.  As much as I love TK, I think he stands a good chance at getting dealt.  LIndblom as well.  I'm not faulting Fletcher for that philosophy.  I am faulting Dave Scott for that strategy.

 

I don't know what to make of Voracek.  I would probably trade him, but you can't let his production go without replacing it.  if you don't have a plan for replacing it, you may as well keep him.  However, as we saw with Simmonds, I'd prefer not to hang on to an asset too long.  Not saying Voracek's production will slip like Simmonds' did.  But, if you have an opportunity to make a decent trade, it may be worthwhile to take it.  "Bird in hand," and all that...

 

My predictions (not what I want to happen): 

  • Gordon relieved and Quenneville signed ASAP.  No way they have anyone else higher on their candidate list.  I would be SHOCKED if Quenneville is not given a mint to coach here.  If he's not the coach, it's not because the Flyers didn't want him or were outbid.  It's because he didn't want to come.  That would speak volumes.
  • Ghost traded and probably another young dman traded.  Either Duncan Keith or Brent Seabrooke will be a Flyer.
  • Contentious negotiations with Konecny.  Possibly traded.
  • Frost and Farabee will have no shot at a roster spot next year.
  • Lots of wheeling and dealing at the draft.  Flyers walk away with fewer picks than they came with.  Debatable whether they will leave a better team.

 

As you can see, I'm bracing myself for total chaos.

 

If Quenneville is hired, he should put the players on blast immediately about coming into camp ready to play.  No slow starts.

Edited by vis
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, King Knut said:

60+ points is a worse player for Jake most seasons since he's been a Flyer.  

 

No, it's not. He's 3 80+ points, 4 60+ points, and one (first year) 50+ points.

 

Even the last four years, he's 3 60+ and 1 80+ - unless he goes on some sort of tear while the team coasts through the next three games on autopilot.

 

12 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Keep in mind that the PP sucking has been a BIG deal for Jakes production.  he had 30 PP assists last year and only 12 this year.  That 18 Assists would put him over 80 points and likely has the Flyers still in contention.

 

Yeah, I see that. But the point is he didn't produce on the power play consistently. That's where I am - consistency.

 

He had 35 PPP last season. He has 23 the year before - then 23, 33, 23, 23, 11 in the seasons before that (omitting the half season).

 

I see a guy who's consistently a 20-25 point guy on the power play - because that's what he generally is. 35 and 33 are clear outliers just like his two 80+ point seasons.

 

12 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I just don't want to do what you're saying and trade a better player for a worse one.  

 

I'm going to presume you mean "do what I'm saying" (trade him) and wind up with a "worse one" because I'm not at all advocating to trade him for a "worse" player. Just maybe a "different" one as I outlined later on.

 

12 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I totally $5.5 million like him.   I'm not sure I $7million like him.  

 

I'll take a guy like him for 4.5-5.5 though.  

 

That's about the range I'm thinking. I wouldn't go to $6M, for example. And the good thing is you can add him - if he hits FA - without losing anything. Except MacDonald. Please?

 

Edited by radoran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, vis said:

Gordon relieved and Quenneville signed ASAP.  No way they have anyone else higher on their candidate list.  I would be SHOCKED if Quenneville is not given a mint to coach here.  If he's not the coach, it's not because the Flyers didn't want him or were outbid.  It's because he didn't want to come.  That would speak volumes.

 

Teh Fanatic was speculating on coaching replacements:

Quenneville (by a mile)
Boudreau (once canned in Minny)

Vignault

Gordon

 

I'm all in on Quenneville, but might settle for either of the other two over Gordon.

 

Just now, vis said:

Contentious negotiations with Konecny.  Possibly traded.

 

Maybe for a Danny Markov type? What? Too Soon?

 

2 minutes ago, vis said:

Frost and Farabee will have no shot at a roster spot next year.

 

I'd actually be happy with them both starting their pro careers in Allentown. Unless they really blow the doors off, and not in a "Nolan Patrick" or "Mikhail Vorobyev" type of way, but actually blowing the damn doors off.

 

3 minutes ago, vis said:

If Quenneville is hired, he should put the players on blast immediately about coming into camp ready to play.  No slow starts.

 

If they bring in Q and have the same sort of start they've had for the past seven years? Blow. It. Up.

 

It's distressing in the extreme that after the past seven years, the players would need to be "on blast" but that's where we are...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, vis said:

As much as I love TK, I think he stands a good chance at getting dealt. 

 

Out of curiosity, why? I notice you mentioned contentious negotiations later in your post... is that the reason?

 

It would be a huge mistake for Fletch to trade TK. Already a two-time 20 goal scorer at 21 years old.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

No, it's not. He's 3 80+ points, 4 60+ points, and one (first year) 50+ points.

 

 

 

Do I need to paste in definitions of "Most" and "Greater Than"?  He has been > 60 points in 7 of 8 years with the Flyers.  

 

William Nylander makes $7million per year and has never crested 62 points.  This is the state of the league we're watching.  

 

6 minutes ago, radoran said:

Even the last four years, he's 3 60+ and 1 80+ - unless he goes on some sort of tear while the team coasts through the next three games on autopilot.

 

 

If that includes this year, he's going to be pushing 70pts this year if we're fair.  If it doesn't include this year, then there are 2 80+pt seasons in the last 4 years.  

 

Going on a tear for a few games, then getting shut down for a few games is kinda how it goes for a lot of stars in this league.  It's not uncommon.  The good news is that when he's being shut down, if you have depth, that means that your depth guys can step in and won't be as covered.  Problem is, the Flyers don't really have depth.  Which is why I want them to upgrade the top 6 (they will) and thus make their 3rd and 4th lines better.  

 

6 minutes ago, radoran said:

Yeah, I see that. But the point is he didn't produce on the power play consistently. That's where I am - consistency.

 

 

80+ points and consistency is $9.5-10 million per in the league these days.  

 

6 minutes ago, radoran said:

I'm going to presume you mean "do what I'm saying" (trade him) and wind up with a "worse one" because I'm not at all advocating to trade him for a "worse" player. Just maybe a "different" one as I outlined later on.

 

 

I did mean that and I did mean to acknowledge that you already poo poo'd that... I guess my point i that I don't think you're likely to get "samey" or even "samey but different" let alone "better".   Teams like keeping those guys.  

 

I mean... if you have a John LeClair waiting for the right team to explode, let's do it... but I don't want to trade him for a guy just because that guy has a better 200ft game.  

 

6 minutes ago, radoran said:

That's about the range I'm thinking. I wouldn't go to $6M, for example. And the good thing is you can add him - if he hits FA - without losing anything. Except MacDonald. Please?

 

 

I think MacDonald is likely gone next year no matter what. Not even because he sucks (he does have moderate value that isn't immediately apparent, just nowhere near what we're paying for and not that anyone else is going to pay that amount for either) but mostly just because Fletcher is ready to move on with the youth.  The future is now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

Out of curiosity, why? I notice you mentioned contentious negotiations later in your post... is that the reason?

 

It would be a huge mistake for Fletch to trade TK. Already a two-time 20 goal scorer at 21 years old.

 

 

 

TK ain't going anywhere he is just the guy to help replace Jake's production.

 

Then go sign a Gustav Nyquist (mostly for example it could be Eberle if it floats ya boat) and help plug the RW hole created by Jake's departure.

 

But as @radoran said don't do it just to move him we don't need a JVR for Luke Schenn part 2.

 

But go get a defenseman who is going to maybe not put up the points that Jake did but if he can help reduce the goals against total and therefore add to the win column I would be good with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Do I need to paste in definitions of "Most" and "Greater Than"?  He has been > 60 points in 7 of 8 years with the Flyers.  

 

No, you don't. This is why I have a "+" after "60". Most of the time he is 60-70 points.

 

21 minutes ago, King Knut said:

William Nylander makes $7million per year and has never crested 62 points. 

 

Made this point earlier.

 

21 minutes ago, King Knut said:

If that includes this year, he's going to be pushing 70pts this year if we're fair. 

 

I am being fair. It's true he's on pace for just under 70 points this season (69.97 over 82 at .85 ppg). But unless he actually gets six points in the last three games, he's not going to hit 70. And if he 0-fers he drops to .82 ppg, on pace for 67.

 

21 minutes ago, King Knut said:

80+ points and consistency is $9.5-10 million per in the league these days.  

 

This one, too. Except, you're a tad high on your scale. Tarasenko is right around Jake's production at 66 points this season after three 70+ in a row and he's at $7M. For example.

 

21 minutes ago, King Knut said:

if you have a John LeClair waiting for the right team to explode, let's do it...  I don't want to trade him for a guy just because that guy has a better 200ft game.   

 

I don't think it needs to be a forward. I think they have some nice forward pieces in house and there might be some available in trade. JLC was a throw-in to the Desjardins-Recchi trade and no one expected him to score 50 multiple times.

 

I'm not one that's on about his defence - or lack thereof. I'm more looking at a "core" that has achieved virtually nothing over seven years. Some believe they're "a coach away" from "being competitive" and that's a fair point with something to back it up.

 

I'm just not holding my breath. And I'm not holding onto players who haven't achieved as damn thing just because they've produced inconsistently on a bad team.

 

I am saying if they can land a serious vet D guy who's achieved something, I'm listening. I really don't see the point in not being at least open to the conversation.

 

Again, the same thing with JVR. I'm looking at assets with value that can land assets with value.

 

I'm not blowing it up for the sake of blowing it up. Yet.

 

Come out flat in October again - no matter who the coach is - and we're having a different conversation.

 

21 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I think MacDonald is likely gone next year no matter what. Not even because he sucks (he does have moderate value that isn't immediately apparent, just nowhere near what we're paying for and not that anyone else is going to pay that amount for either)

 

I've been saying it for six years - he's Kris Russell. He's not who they thought he was.

 

He's a run of the mill, adequate NHL blueliner.

Edited by radoran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brelic said:

For JVR, it depends on who your 3C is. Patrick, to me, is not a #1-2C right now. 1 goal in the past 20 games playing with Giroux and JVR / TK / Voracek just isn't good enough. If he were pushed to 3C with, say, JVR or Lindblom, that might give him time to grow as well. 

 

I just think JVR is wasted on the third line and doesn't have the defensive chops to play it.

 

If they want to put Patrick on a Couturier-development path, I'm not at all against it.

 

But they clearly want Patrick to be more than he is at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, radoran said:

I'm all in on Quenneville, but might settle for either of the other two over Gordon.

Think I'd prefer Vigneult over Boudreau, but I would prefer either over Gordon.

 

2 hours ago, radoran said:

Maybe for a Danny Markov type? What? Too Soon?

Exactly.

 

2 hours ago, radoran said:

I'd actually be happy with them both starting their pro careers in Allentown. Unless they really blow the doors off, and not in a "Nolan Patrick" or "Mikhail Vorobyev" type of way, but actually blowing the damn doors off.

My comment was more about how I think the org is going to load up on vets, basically shutting them out of available roster spots on the big club.  Though, I agree with your comment above.

 

2 hours ago, radoran said:

If they bring in Q and have the same sort of start they've had for the past seven years? Blow. It. Up.

For sure.  It's pretty clear it's a personnel issue to begin with.  Not listening to a guy like Q would be absolutely the last straw.

 

2 hours ago, radoran said:

It's distressing in the extreme that after the past seven years, the players would need to be "on blast" but that's where we are...

I don't get this team.  They go away every year saying the same things, as you pointed out to my dismay in another thread, but little change.  I'm just hopeful Q can break that cycle.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...