Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 45 of 45 FirstFirst ... 35434445
Results 661 to 669 of 669
  1. #661
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    55,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatch View Post
    Agreed. I don't think some big name trade is a wise idea right now where we give away young guys for salary. We aren't at the point where we are the 'all important' one piece away from serious contention. I'm more along the lines of complementing the young nucleus with better fringe deals. It's speculation...but you could argue we could have done better than getting tied to Dale Weiss, perhaps getting a different return for Schenn, perhaps pulling the plug on the Vandevelde experiment earlier and finding a better piece there (ok minor but the point is a few other areas of even slightly better decisions can collectively make a difference) , etc...etc..etc......my logic is more along the lines of saying if you have 7 good solid prospects with a solid chance to be decent NHL players really there want be room for all 7 at the same time and then the odds that all 7 will pan out. A shrewd GM is going to try to take a prospect or two and turn them into a missing piece at the NHL level. We have a very credible core, but my point being even finding a way to turn a prospect who has some cache but we don't value as a great fit for us gets traded in a deal that lands us a better complementary player at the NHL level.
    While I don't disagree that we could have maybe pulled the plug on VV earlier or done better than Weise, I think we did just fine in the Schenn deal (who was glorified PP player here and provided little in terms of adding on 5v5 for years) to get a player like Frost and a second 1st round pick. Secondly, I don't think that secondary and complementary players are what's holding us back. They would probably help to a degree, but I think coaching, goaltending, and just general young, inconsistent play are our biggest hindrence right now. An upgrade on Dale Weise may be nice, but I don't think the team lost 10 games running because of a slightly worse player on our 3rd line than we could have.

    I also don't think the Flyers are at a place where we should be trading an excess of young players. Until we know what we have in some of them, keeping them is prudent. All you need is to move a Frost-type and watch him blow up while keeping a Rubustov and watching him struggle and fail (not to say that that's going to happen, just making a point). That's dangerous. Find out what you have, and then when you know where your excess is, move from there. We're not there yet. And you mention that later in your post, too. Again, I agree with the premise that at some point you go from asset collection to asset management but we're still in asset collection phase.

    For example......if we get to a certain point in the season then maybe package a guy like Gudas and Weal together to see what you can get. Won't be a big block buster deal, but if we catch the right team with the right need at the right time we might get a specific player that could be solid with some track record of steady play at the NHL level or even some useful draft picks. Let Morin play and someone else in Weal's spot and see what happens. It's not a cap killing move, not a core shaking move, not something is going to kill the franchise if it doesn't work out great.....but could be a fringe deal to provide better support for the core. Let's see where we are at year end before we worry about that though...by year end, I mean the end of December not next spring. If we are still tanking bad or if we look like we are developing better as a team
    I don't disagree that the team shouldn't look into moving those guys. I'm sure Hextall is not sitting there refusing to move a Gudas or a Weal. But whether they package them, or don't, I don't believe there's a single team out there who's going to get overly excited about a Gudas or a Weal. And it's even more unlikely you'll get immediate NHL help for them, as teams at the deadline/during the season rarely trade an NHL asset in those moves (they're selling off non-NHL assets usually).

    So again, I don't disagree that some complementary players are necessary, but the Flyers really need to have these players develop some consistency at the NHL level, and fix the coaching first. I'm convinced that Hakstol is in "save my ***" mode where he's going to play whomever he feels gives him a better chance to win tonight (and there's an argument that can be made that guys like MacDonald, or Weise or Lehtera are more consistent/stable than young players who are prone to mistakes at times. Not one I'm excited to make, but it is possible) and he doesn't care about what next year looks like or down the road. Which isn't where this franchise needs to be. So I think you start with moving on from Hakstol, implement a coach who's willing to put young players in positions to succeed (while giving him assurances that his performance will not be graded simply on W-L record but on player growth) and go from there.

  2. #662
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,137
    For the record I"m not for trading Sanheim, Provy, Ghost or Myers at this point. But let's say they decide Myers could be the real deal then we'd have to gamble perhaps on packing Hagg in a deal to upgrade somewhere else.
    if we're concerned about future cap issues, hagg is an important part of the solution. he can eat top 4 minutes, play on the left or the right side and because he isn't flashy, his salary will never be a cap killer.

    But the trouble with that right now is that all these players are so new they probably don't have a good enough handle on which guys are gonna truly separate themselves.
    provorov and ghost have separated themselves. hagg is a solid complement. if we can add a #1/#2 Dman who's still in his mid-20s (ekman larsson, carlson, edmundson) we're set on the blueline for at least 5 years.
    Last edited by steagles; 12-06-2017 at 01:58 PM.

  3. #663
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,848
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    if we're concerned about future cap issues, hagg is an important part of the solution. he can eat top 4 minutes, play on the left or the right side and because he isn't flashy, his salary will never be a cap killer.


    provorov and ghost have separated themselves. hagg is a solid complement. if we can add a #1/#2 Dman who's still in his mid-20s (ekman larsson, carlson, edmundson) we're set on the blueline for at least 5 years.
    Isn't that #1/#2 defenseman exactly what we hope we have in Sanheim & Myers?

  4. #664
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,137
    Isn't that #1/#2 defenseman exactly what we hope we have in Sanheim & Myers?
    yup.
    player A: 26 GP, 13 G, 22 P, -14
    player B: 35 GP, 14 G, 40 P, -5
    player C: 59 GP, 21 G, 71 P, +24
    player D: 67 GP, 28 G, 54 P, -2
    BTW:
    A: isaiah ratcliffe, age 19
    B: logan brown, age 19
    C: logan brown, age 18
    D: isaiah ratcliffe, age 18

  5. #665
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    if we're concerned about future cap issues, hagg is an important part of the solution. he can eat top 4 minutes, play on the left or the right side and because he isn't flashy, his salary will never be a cap killer.


    provorov and ghost have separated themselves. hagg is a solid complement. if we can add a #1/#2 Dman who's still in his mid-20s (ekman larsson, carlson, edmundson) we're set on the blueline for at least 5 years.
    Because Myers and Sanheim offer the bigger upside from a raw talent perspective. Not saying that's a lock they will both be better than Hagg in 2 years. Hence the comment that once they decide which of the two they want to commit to that the third becomes an asset that they can use to get better somewhere else.

  6. #666
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    8,259
    Hearing flyers interested in lehner ... Shawn Simpson from TSN tweeted it

  7. #667
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    7,970
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    yup.
    BTW:
    A: isaiah ratcliffe, age 19
    B: logan brown, age 19
    C: logan brown, age 18
    D: isaiah ratcliffe, age 18
    It's a short sighted way of determining who is a better prospect. And Ratcliffe is still 18 and a full year younger btw.

  8. #668
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    7,970
    And I'm guessing you've never seen Ratcliffe play considering you can't get his name right. Doubt you've seen Brown either.

  9. #669
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by 1908_Cubs View Post
    While I don't disagree that we could have maybe pulled the plug on VV earlier or done better than Weise, I think we did just fine in the Schenn deal (who was glorified PP player here and provided little in terms of adding on 5v5 for years) to get a player like Frost and a second 1st round pick. Secondly, I don't think that secondary and complementary players are what's holding us back. They would probably help to a degree, but I think coaching, goaltending, and just general young, inconsistent play are our biggest hindrence right now. An upgrade on Dale Weise may be nice, but I don't think the team lost 10 games running because of a slightly worse player on our 3rd line than we could have.

    I also don't think the Flyers are at a place where we should be trading an excess of young players. Until we know what we have in some of them, keeping them is prudent. All you need is to move a Frost-type and watch him blow up while keeping a Rubustov and watching him struggle and fail (not to say that that's going to happen, just making a point). That's dangerous. Find out what you have, and then when you know where your excess is, move from there. We're not there yet. And you mention that later in your post, too. Again, I agree with the premise that at some point you go from asset collection to asset management but we're still in asset collection phase.



    I don't disagree that the team shouldn't look into moving those guys. I'm sure Hextall is not sitting there refusing to move a Gudas or a Weal. But whether they package them, or don't, I don't believe there's a single team out there who's going to get overly excited about a Gudas or a Weal. And it's even more unlikely you'll get immediate NHL help for them, as teams at the deadline/during the season rarely trade an NHL asset in those moves (they're selling off non-NHL assets usually).

    So again, I don't disagree that some complementary players are necessary, but the Flyers really need to have these players develop some consistency at the NHL level, and fix the coaching first. I'm convinced that Hakstol is in "save my ***" mode where he's going to play whomever he feels gives him a better chance to win tonight (and there's an argument that can be made that guys like MacDonald, or Weise or Lehtera are more consistent/stable than young players who are prone to mistakes at times. Not one I'm excited to make, but it is possible) and he doesn't care about what next year looks like or down the road. Which isn't where this franchise needs to be. So I think you start with moving on from Hakstol, implement a coach who's willing to put young players in positions to succeed (while giving him assurances that his performance will not be graded simply on W-L record but on player growth) and go from there.

    Pretty well agree with all that. Just to clarify, I'm not disappointed with the Schenn trade. I was coming from an angle where there is more than one way to skin the cat. I'm coming at it from the perspective that 'What If' ...we never signed Weiss to a dumb contract and let Schenn just walk his FA year. Now this off season we are looking at 7 million in cap space to sign a legit All Star caliber guy instead of a big cap hit with Lehtera back....yes Morgan Frost is in the equation, but you see my point.....you need to forget the notion that we weren't ready to sign a guy like that, but shape the roster with a legit scorer on the second line right now takes big pressure off the young guys and makes Simmonds expendable if his contract is going to put us in a bad spot in another year or two. While the Vandevelde situation is essentially not a sticking point....where I'm going is 'what if' we had chosen to run with Jordan Weal for example instead of VV.....VV had no real upside and Weal is clearly a better skater and more talented. What if we had thrown him in there sooner and now he has another year under his belt of experience...might be the difference in him either taking another step forward or us realizing he's not a long term guy here......so my point of view is that while you can say that we're not losing solely because we have Dale Weiss and Jori Lehtera and a couple others....but those fringe deals can have a bigger impact once the dominos start falling. Well talk about hypotheticals all season long on would have , could have, should haves.....eventually here the pressure will fall more on Hextall because at a certain point it's just results that matter and he's probably only having this year with a free pass on missing the playoffs. If we miss then the pressure will ratchet up for him next season and rightfully so....year 5 you need to start seeing some fruits of the labor or you have to start questioning the farmer.

    All that said I also agree on the coaching side.....it's not just a matter of being young. When I see a team playing sloppy like that it's bigger than youth and inexperience. I didn't see the slides as a scourge of rookie mistakes.....I think there is a bigger problem behind the bench...but from the sounds of it he's not going anywhere for the rest of this season so I guess we'll see how we end up at the end of the year..

Page 45 of 45 FirstFirst ... 35434445

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •