A Bit Underwhelmed (and Concerned)

[OccamsRazor]

26 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Mark Stone's  a 73 point guy.

 

Wait so finally he scores 70 points.

 

So when Hayes finally scores 50+ yall bitch about him only doing it once but Stone finally scores 70 it's all good.

 

And you want to pay 2.5 mill for a winger for 18 more points?

 

Yeah ok I'm done with this.

 

No reason to go on with this conversation anymore.

 

I'm bowing out this arguement.

 

 

 

 

[Podein25]

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

Yeah ok I'm done with this.

 

No reason to go on with this conversation anymore.

 

I'm bowing out this arguement

 

You don't sound convinced.

[brelic]

3 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

So you were on board with the strategy, but you're criticizing it anyway because the product wasn't enjoyable in the time that the strategy you admit to being on board with required the product on the ice to be less enjoyable?

 

(sigh)

 

I have a feeling it would have been even less enjoyable without the sellable pieces.  But that's just me.  

 

 

 

Yes I was on-board with the strategy. I’m not criticizing it, just saying that for me, the team wasn’t very fun to watch during his time here. I believed in his plan and that it would get better. 

 

At at the same time, I can understand ownership’s desire to move things along faster. It wouldn’t have been my choice, but no one called me. 

 

Again, they’re running a business, and it seems they no longer believed in Hextall. 

[Podein25]

48 minutes ago, brelic said:

no one called me

 

What would you like to be called?

 

A cab?

[OccamsRazor]

4 hours ago, Podein25 said:

 

You don't sound convinced.

 

Edited July 31, 2019 by OccamsRazor

[radoran]

20 hours ago, vis said:

Didn't they go into the season with a ton of cap room?  I think that irked the upper management folks.  

 

I don't see the signing he "should have made."

 

Happy to learn.

Edited July 31, 2019 by radoran

[brelic]

12 hours ago, Podein25 said:

 

What would you like to be called?

 

A cab?

 

Anything as long as it's not a sheep.

[OccamsRazor]

The open spot will have a few gunning for it...

 

USA head coach Scott Sandelin has some high praise for Joel Farabee (PHI), who will be gunning for NHL spot in fall. “He’s been one of the hardest workers every day and one of our best players. That’s a credit to him. He’s focused on what he’s doing here.”

 

#gogetit

[vis]

19 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

I think that irked Scott because he's the one who mentioned spending to the cap in the presser.  Even Homer was likely intelligent enough to know that if you spend that cap room last year, you can't spend it THIS year when the better options are available.  Why spend to the cap on inferior players and not be able to afford the good ones the following season?

Yeah, I definitely think it irked Scott.  I remember thinking there were some signings they could have made (maybe I'm wrong) that wouldn't have jeopardized the re-signing of the RFAs.  And plus, no one likely expected at the time to need to sign a 2C in the future, on the basis that Patrick would ascend to that role.  

 

Quote

That was more or less known to be the case for a few years now once you understand when contracts were ending.  Hextall did the right thing in not spending it last year.  Spending it on JVR last year was debatable but only in the sense that he might have been able to get more with it this year.  GOing all in for JVR last year was likely his acquiescence to Scott and Homer. 

I don't know if I am fully on-board with the "wait to see who's available next year" approach.  A lot could happen and you may lose out on players you may have had an opportunity to sign (I'm not saying that had been the case; just speaking generally).   It works in some circumstances, like when a team is truly rebuilding and gutting its roster, but not sure about the Flyers'.  

Edited July 31, 2019 by vis

[radoran]

20 hours ago, vis said:

Didn't they go into the season with a ton of cap room?  I think that irked the upper management folks.  

 

Last season they finished with $8.6M in cap room. The year before that $1.3M. The year before that, $51K. And in 15-16 it was $961K.

 

What is so much better the three years prior to that when they didn't have a lot of cap room? I think this is a silly metric to gauge success.

 

I still don't see the signing Hextall "should have made" last offseason. Aside from Tavares, who was the guy they "didn't get"?

 

Here's a list: https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/the-top-30-unrestricted-free-agents-of-2018

 

"The remaining UFA class in 2018 offers a handful of high-impact players, but there's a rapid dropoff. It's an extremely shallow group this summer. "

 

If it "irked" Scott that they didn't go out and spend a lot of money on a "shallow group" of free agents, I don't particularly care what Scott thinks and my ambivalence about the future under his "leadership" isn't assuaged.

 

20 hours ago, King Knut said:

but let's face it... this year's crop of UFAs was much better.  

 

Was it? I mean, you've got a barely 20/50 guy who was one of the "top gets"? It might have been slightly deeper than 2018, but not by much.

 

https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/the-top-30-unrestricted-free-agents-of-2019

 

And they didn't get any of those guys...

 

[JR Ewing]

21 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

That and everyone losing their shiit about a 55 point guy getting 7 mill per year and then fine with a 65 point guy getting 9.5 mill per year just doesn't seem right.

 

But whatever I guess it's the grass is always greener type around here.

 

I'm sure someone will chime with an excuse for Stone in 3, 2, 1...

 

That's a bit like including the garden shed to bump up the square footage of the house.

 

-Hayes has peaked to achieve a 55-point season after years of 45, 36, 49, and 44 points. I'll not take that away from him.

-Stone has peaked to achieve a 73-point season after years of 64, 61, 54,  and 62 points.

 

Hayes is a good hockey player. When he was on the ice last year, his team's goal share was 52.33, up from 47.55%.

When Stone was on the ice, the team's goal share was 58.33%, up from 44.79%. That's an impact player. Hell, Stone even found a way to go +10 on a team which was a collective -268.

 

I'm not crapping on Hayes. He IS a good player, but the grass IS greener. It requires glasses with the deepest shade of orange you can find to see it any other way.

 

 

[King Knut]

17 hours ago, brelic said:

 

Yes I was on-board with the strategy. I’m not criticizing it, just saying that for me, the team wasn’t very fun to watch during his time here. I believed in his plan and that it would get better. 

 

At at the same time, I can understand ownership’s desire to move things along faster. It wouldn’t have been my choice, but no one called me. 

 

Again, they’re running a business, and it seems they no longer believed in Hextall. 

 

Part of it might have had to do with the fact that Snider died and the actual control of the ownership changed hands.  

 

I get the feeling that Hextall probably ran his mouth at Scott in a way that he might not have to Snider.  I also get the feeling that the culture on the whole was much different under Snider who probably ran his mouth at everyone.  

 

So Hextall's 5 year plan with Snider and Holmgren may have been one thing, but that likely wasn't flying with Scott who just saw empty seats on National TV (even though those seats had been paid for) and knew he had a winter classic coming up.  

 

Scott also has bosses to answer to.  Technically Snider did too, but I don't think it ever amounted to much under him.  I think that was part of the deal with spectator... "leave me and my team alone and we'll make money for you".  

 

I can see the strategy both ways (tank vs. what hextall did) and the tanking thing just doesn't seem to be part of the organization's DNA-for good or for ill.  Must have been a Snider thing because we know full well that Comcast supported the tank it philosophy with the 76ers.   But I also think the antsiness is a Scott thing because the 76ers sucked for way longer than the FLyers have.  

 

[King Knut]

1 hour ago, radoran said:

 

 

Was it? I mean, you've got a barely 20/50 guy who was one of the "top gets"? It might have been slightly deeper than 2018, but not by much.

 

https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/the-top-30-unrestricted-free-agents-of-2019

 

And they didn't get any of those guys...

 

 

Yes it was.  Tavares was never going anywhere but Toronto, but he's an amazing UFA.  JVR was a pretty good UFA.  After that?  Who was anywhere close to the Tier of people that got signed this year...  

 

Karlsson, Panarin, Bobrovsky, Stone, Duchene, Myers, Stralman... It's a much much deeper pool.  

 

In addition, cap issues around the league put an almost unprecedented number of RFA's on the trading block.  

 

And you're right.  The Flyers just got Kevin Hayes. Not amazing. They didn't get any of the top tier guys.

The difference is the Flyers also changed GM's between last UFA season and this UFA season.  Fletcher added two vet D men via trade and Hayes.  We'll never know what Hextall wanted to do.  I think it is safe to deduce he'd been eyeing this off season for a long time.  

 

 

[brelic]

14 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Karlsson, Panarin, Bobrovsky, Stone, Duchene, Myers, Stralman... It's a much much deeper pool.  

 

From the sounds of it before they signed, and looking at the aftermath, it seems like only Myers and Stralman may have realistically been available to the Flyers regardless of who was GM.

 

And Hayes, which required a draft pick to get that negotiation window. He said it himself that Philly was not his top destination of choice. 

 

So, it's a much deeper pool, but the Flyers are cordoned off in the shallow end.

 

[brelic]

29 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I can see the strategy both ways (tank vs. what hextall did) and the tanking thing just doesn't seem to be part of the organization's DNA-for good or for ill. 

 

I don't know how the organization feels about a tank, but Hextall abhors it. He used very strong language against the idea of tanking. I feel like there are ways to do it that are more 'honourable' or at least not as shady. I see it as a bloated team deciding to really lean things out, reassess, and build a new foundation. Honestly, all this contract swapping to help out teams in a cap crunch feels shadier and more of a circumvention - collusion at its best. 

 

Interesting read here on the bogusness of offer sheets https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Tybr-Anderson/Offer-sheets-are-fake-I-refuse-to-believe-otherwis8230/141/100750

 

 

I just want them to drop the puck already. This 42 degree weather (something like 106 for you south of the border) is making me loopy. I've been at the beach almost every day.

[King Knut]

39 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

From the sounds of it before they signed, and looking at the aftermath, it seems like only Myers and Stralman may have realistically been available to the Flyers regardless of who was GM.

 

And Hayes, which required a draft pick to get that negotiation window. He said it himself that Philly was not his top destination of choice. 

 

So, it's a much deeper pool, but the Flyers are cordoned off in the shallow end.

 

 

Again... not sure it's the same set of circumstances if some of choices of the last year were made differently.  

 

[King Knut]

33 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

I don't know how the organization feels about a tank, but Hextall abhors it. He used very strong language against the idea of tanking. I feel like there are ways to do it that are more 'honourable' or at least not as shady.

 

Hextall's a competitor to be sure and I could see with the way he played the game in mind that would be his point of view.  I think a lot of that comes from Snider too though.  He's had the chance to tank and rebuild through the draft many times.

 

The Flyers of the early 90's could very easily have competed with the Nordiques for Sakic, Sundin, Nolan and Lindros.  They didn't.  They went all in to trade for Lindros when he refused to play for the organization that tanked like that so many years in a row.  

 

33 minutes ago, brelic said:

I see it as a bloated team deciding to really lean things out, reassess, and build a new foundation. Honestly, all this contract swapping to help out teams in a cap crunch feels shadier and more of a circumvention - collusion at its best. 

 

 

I'm not really sure about the first thing.  I think it's a case by case basis.  The problem I have is when you're so bad so many years in a row and at a certain point you really just should be better and you're not.  Feels like throwing games to get picks and that's just not okay.  For instance, no one will ever convince me that the Devils didn't intentionally throw last season hoping for a top pick (AGAIN) and they were summarily rewarded with Hughes.  NOT OKAY.

 

Contract swapping to help out teams in a cap crunch is at least interesting to follow.  But in every case, both teams get something out of it.  The Canes saved the Leafs bacon with Marleau, but at the same time, they got a good pick.  The Coyotes took on Pronger's bum contract, but it was the end of his top loaded contract so they weren't paying much out of pocked and his cap hit got them to the league floor.  It was a win/win.    

 

I'm having trouble thinking of an instance that didn't help both teams in some way... except some of the expansion draft deals that the GK used to absolutely fleece a few teams... but that was just those teams being kinda dim if you ask me.  

 

Tanking just flies in the face of the idea of competitive sport.  It's generally agreed upon that you try to do well.  If teams can get away with trying to lose just to try to get more talent the easy way, then that's a deep deep scar on the entire idea of sports.  

 

33 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

Interesting read here on the bogusness of offer sheets https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Tybr-Anderson/Offer-sheets-are-fake-I-refuse-to-believe-otherwis8230/141/100750

 

 

I will be eager to read this!

 

33 minutes ago, brelic said:

I just want them to drop the puck already. This 42 degree weather (something like 106 for you south of the border) is making me loopy. I've been at the beach almost every day.

 

I'm sweating out the wait for camp too.  I'm really eager to see what Vigneault gets up to and how this team responds.

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, JR Ewing said:

I'm not crapping on Hayes. He IS a good player, but the grass IS greener. 

 

Sure and waaaay more expensive....good luck with that.

[King Knut]

3 hours ago, vis said:

Yeah, I definitely think it irked Scott.  I remember thinking there were some signings they could have made (maybe I'm wrong) that wouldn't have jeopardized the re-signing of the RFAs.  

 

 

Looking at the guys available at the time and the guys available this year and next year, I automatically assumed it was holding back for the sake of trying to get someone this summer or next with the same money.  That said, I do agree that there was probably a hope that Patrick could develop into a full fledged 2C over last year.  

 

If Hextall would have asked me (surprise surprise, he did not) I would have told him that a better coach would give that a better shot of happening.  Hakstol WAS A PROBLEM.  

 

3 hours ago, vis said:

I don't know if I am fully on-board with the "wait to see who's available next year" approach.  A lot could happen and you may lose out on players you may have had an opportunity to sign (I'm not saying that had been the case; just speaking generally).   It works in some circumstances, like when a team is truly rebuilding and gutting its roster, but not sure about the Flyers'.  

 

A lot could happen, but there are plenty of ways to talk to guys throughout the year and let them know that you are interested and that you will make it worth their while.  All without guarantees of course, but if a GM is proactive, it can be made to happen.  Do we really think Panarin decided on July 1st out of the blue looking at the offer that day that the Rangers were his team?  He had a good idea what was coming.  

 

It wouldn't all have to be UFA signings either.  

 

Marleau is a good example.  Why not trade a 6th rounder for Marleau to be the 2C for a year and get a first in return?

Give Patrick and Frost a year to develop and see where you are next year, slot them up in the roster when they improve or Marleau proves that he's 40.  

 

If They're not ready in a year, you can go for Nugent-Hopkins, Bakstrom, Schenn, Hanzal or any number of other guys in 2020.  

 

Marleau's older than the hills, but his team mates love him and he can still produce on a team where he's not relegated to bum details.

 

As it is, would you rather have Hayes or Anders Lee?  They got the same money only Hayes got an NMC instead of a NTC.  

 

Everything Fletcher did was pretty old school.  There wasn't any creativity or deep analysis or outside the box thinking.

 

One of the things I really enjoyed about Hextall was that he was always looking around the league at situations he could exploit and other GMs did the same thing with him.  Sometimes he went a little too far maybe... I guess the Jury's still out on the Brayden Schenn trade, but any time a team offers you two first rounders for a guy, you almost always have to take it.   

 

It at least gave me something interesting to watch at a time when the Hockey wasn't going to be interesting for a while.  Pronger and Grossman for Gagner?  Pretty cool idea.  MDZ? Pretty cool idea. Will it work? Who knows, it'll work better than doing nothing would have.   Not earth shattering moves to get you a cup to be sure, but the kind of moves that made the team deeper and more competitive than it would have been otherwise during this stretch.  

 

 

 

 

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

2 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

 

That's a bit like including the garden shed to bump up the square footage of the house.

 

-Hayes has peaked to achieve a 55-point season after years of 45, 36, 49, and 44 points. I'll not take that away from him.

-Stone has peaked to achieve a 73-point season after years of 64, 61, 54,  and 62 points.

 

Hayes is a good hockey player. When he was on the ice last year, his team's goal share was 52.33, up from 47.55%.

When Stone was on the ice, the team's goal share was 58.33%, up from 44.79%. That's an impact player. Hell, Stone even found a way to go +10 on a team which was a collective -268.

 

I'm not crapping on Hayes. He IS a good player, but the grass IS greener. It requires glasses with the deepest shade of orange you can find to see it any other way.

 

 

 

I'd have to agree. I wouldn't "crap" on Hayes either (and BOTH players are pricey), but the numbers AND the eye test say Stone is quite a bit above Hayes.

Stone also seems to have this ridiculous propensity to relieve an opposing player of the puck. Seems almost like a wizard doing that.
That alone could account for his MUCH better possession numbers.
Plus Stone is more physical than Hayes.

The way I see it, Hayes is a good player, like you said.... Stone is a great player. And I think Stone hangs around the 60-65 pt mark at LEAST, yearly for the next few years. Hayes, IMO, would have to play over his head to be that.
 

[brelic]

1 hour ago, King Knut said:

 

Hextall's a competitor to be sure and I could see with the way he played the game in mind that would be his point of view.  I think a lot of that comes from Snider too though.  He's had the chance to tank and rebuild through the draft many times.

 

In 2014 then again in 2015 Hextall took jabs at teams that tank (he was jabbing the Oilers in particular).

 

At the time of the 2015 comments, in January, the Flyers were 17-21-7, near the bottom of the league and 11 points out of a playoff spot. 

 

Here's what he said. 

 

Quote

 

Flyers General Manager Ron Hextall said over the weekend that despite his team's poor play this season, he has no intentions of tanking. The team, currently 11 points out of playoff spot after Monday's 7-4 loss to the Islanders, needs to go on quite a run if they hope to make a playoff spot.

 

"If 23 guys can't do it, we're gonna hold," Hextall said. "If we can do something between now and the deadline that makes sense for the future if in fact we're in a bad position, we'll do it."

 

"There's not going to be a firesale here," Hextall said. "We don't have the so-called UFAs. If something makes sense for us to do, long-term and this year, we won't hesitate to do it."

 

 

 

 

Flyers finished 6th in the Metro, 24th overall, with a 33-31-18 record. Missed the playoffs. 

 

McDavid was the top pick that year. 

 

In retrospect, how would you feel about Hextall realizing, "ok, this isn't happening, and finishing in the middle of the pack just out of the playoffs is not ideal either. We have a real opportunity to draft a generational talent. Let's look real hard at our team and decide who is and who is not in the long term plans among our top level players."

 

Is that tanking? Is that being proactive and seizing an opportunity? Is that being disingenuous? I don't know. I don't like the idea of 'tanking' either, but it really depends how it's approached and the long-term plan behind it. 

No guarantee of getting that 1st overall, of course. 

 

 

Edited July 31, 2019 by brelic

[radoran]

2 hours ago, King Knut said:

I think it is safe to deduce he'd been eyeing this off season for a long time.  

 

I completely agree with you. This was the offseason that was going to be the inflection point for a team that he hoped was at least a regular playoff team by this point.

 

*Insert rant about Hakstol here*

 

Would not have surprised me to see him deal a few of the younger pieces for established players (a la "The Trades") either.

 

I'm still in wait-and-see on whether the team was "Hayes at 2C" away from being competitive. I remain skeptical.

[King Knut]

24 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Sure and waaaay more expensive....good luck with that.

 

They're both overpaid by about $1.5 - $2million and the duration of each deal combined with the NMC's are the killer.  

 

Having either is going to strap your cap situation for a while and having either is likely mean giving up someone (either next year or in three years) that we won't want to.  

 

We got Hayes.  He'll help a great deal for the next two years I think.

 

If truly effective, however he'll ironically enable the sort of development in Patrick and Lindblom that will make his contract the obstacle to resigning them at their newly advanced value.  

 

 

 

 

[King Knut]

52 minutes ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

The way I see it, Hayes is a good player, like you said.... Stone is a great player. And I think Stone hangs around the 60-65 pt mark at LEAST, yearly for the next few years. Hayes, IMO, would have to play over his head to be that.
 

 

One upside to Hayes for us is that he's going to have better line mates than he's had in almost his entire career.  So that might help him produce.  But your points about Stone's possession and physicality (could also be why he loses more games each year) are important.

[OccamsRazor]

2 minutes ago, King Knut said:

They're both overpaid by about $1.5 - $2million and the duration of each deal combined with the NMC's are the killer.  

 

Sure.

 

And the Flyers needed a 2nd line center.

 

They got one.

 

Was it longer and more than I would have liked? 

 

Sure.

 

And after looking at all the crazy contracts being handed out he just joined the crowd.

 

Hey the CBA expires after 2020 maybe Fletcher was hoping that if the deal goes south they get a buyout window like they did last time with no cap implications.

 

But hey maybe it works out.