2017-18 Roster Talk: Part Ten

[The Madrigal]

The quality of the product isn’t defined by just Wins and Losses for everyone. As a night out or even a night in, I get precious little entertainment from them anymore. They largely favor an overly conservative style on the ice I find mind-numbing. There are huge swaths of time in games where they default to passivity by design. The commentary is the worst it’s been in my lifetime. The decisions the coaching staff makes actively mutes the excitement you naturally build for the potential stars coming up through the ranks. I’ll defend the recent drafting to the ends of the earth because it’s been phenomenal, but the handling of those kids once they turn pro has largely been abominable. It’s tough for me to get beyond that.

I started going to games in 85-86 as a small kid, so yes, I do remember those lean years. I would cut them off a year earlier, as Lindros’ rookie season was enough for that team to be fun, but that doesn’t change your point. Until recently, the only time I went a full season without getting to a game was the year I spent overseas. Other than attending the Lindros ceremony on a free ticket (and leaving before the game started), I attended zero this year. I stopped watching the Pittsburgh series after Game 4. I don’t even plan to watch on tv next year without changes. I can’t believe I’m saying it, but it’s true. I had tons of fun watching good, aggressive hockey from other teams, so it’s not anything against hockey as a sport. It’s this team putting out a subpar product.

 

[renberg]

The biggest disappointment that I have with the Hextall years has been his inability to get a good goalie.
Elliott is a C minus at best.
Neuvirth has talent but can't stay healthy so it doesn't matter what he could do because he can't.
I'm not going over my skis with Lyon despite his good PO showing this year. He had some significant holes in his game when played this year in Philly. Maybe he can fix some of this but, at best, he's a back up.
Hart or Sandstrom may be starter quality goalies but that will be two years or so from now. So what do we do until then? Going with meh goalies isn't the answer

 

[Ruck Over]

The whole point was that you understood what Hextall is doing last summer....and nothing has changed. He stayed with that same vision all year. It's why he didn't waste a bunch of assets on rentals like Grabner, Kane, etc... He did on Mrazek only because we were on our 4th best goalie entering the season and everyone was out long term.

I have no issue if you say you want us now to add for TODAY. As do I. But supporting Hextall for the Schenn trade, then 1 year later criticize it because you think it was just a trade to do a trade, is a contradiction. You know WHY he did the trade. Nothing has changed.

We fundamentally disagree on has anything changed. Had Giroux, Voracek, Coots, Ghost, and Provy not had the successful statistical seasons they had, (TK for about half the season) I'd agree nothing had changed from the previous year they missed the playoffs. However, those players showed they could still compete and play well among the NHL leaders. Hextall did nothing to give them a chance, except what I consider a BS trade for Mzarek.

I wanted Hextall to make a change leading up to the TDL, and like you, want him to make a change this off-season. My criticism has become more pronounced as I retrospectively review the moves Hextall has made, and then wonder if he's really up to snuff to make a move so desired now. While many say he hasn't tried to do a move like the desired previously (that's reasonable speculation), it is a FACT he has not made such a trade (so reasonable speculation is met by reasonable doubt).

I wasn't looking for over-priced rentals, but adding Petr Mzarek, another undesirable, is a lame addition at the TDL necessitated by injuries to the first and second goalie (which is likely a situation brought upon by coaching error, compiled on the GM to put his faith in injury prone goalies).

tl,dr; we disagree about when things did or did not change, and continue to talk past each other, but we agree there's no issue in adding for TODAY!

 

[Tripod]

I'm sure you, or anyone who cares to, can find another post(s) of mine where I state that's fine Hextall has a plan. And what he says has largely followed what he's done. And in addition to that, Hextall has said this wasn't a rebuild, the Flyers would remain competitive, this wouldn't take 5 years, and other etc. along similar lines. That's where all my ciriticism stems from. The proof is not in the pudding, and if Hextall were to be more open with his plan (like the Rags, the Canucks, Hinkie/Brett Brown Sixers) the expectations would change, and the criticism would change(disappear) as well.

If you note he had little failures (Gordon, Medvedev, etc), and there's a failure with the coaching staff (Lappy), I'd say Hextall is not infallible. If we both agree he isn't perfect, we're just arguing semantics about how imperfect he may or may not be.

I have criticized Hextall. No issue with that at all. I have said Lappy should be long gone. I have also said Hextall is a liar. Anyone who says Hextall has not made mistakes are wrong.

My issue comes when people get upset saying he has no plan. Or criticize a move he made in retrospect, when they supported it when it happened.

He has yet to make that bigger move to be better today by trade or a signing. But that has been by design. And that is lost on some people. He PURPOSELY went after cheap, free placeholders. And he had as many misses as fails.

And I have said that the NEXT step will be the hardest. The adding of legit guys. Making a good trade/ signing to fill a need. Not just a Gordon type, but a legit good player. To throw out a name....like a JT Miller type. The good news is that 5/6 of our top 6 appear to be 50 point guys and above soon. Lindblom is the only question mark but he is still just entering his 2nd year.

He has a plan. It just does not match others timelines. But the real work begins now.

 

[Tripod]

We fundamentally disagree on has anything changed. Had Giroux, Voracek, Coots, Ghost, and Provy not had the successful statistical seasons they had, (TK for about half the season) I'd agree nothing had changed from the previous year they missed the playoffs. However, those players showed they could still compete and play well among the NHL leaders. Hextall did nothing to give them a chance, except what I consider a BS trade for Mzarek.

I wanted Hextall to make a change leading up to the TDL, and like you, want him to make a change this off-season. My criticism has become more pronounced as I retrospectively review the moves Hextall has made, and then wonder if he's really up to snuff to make a move so desired now. While many say he hasn't tried to do a move like the desired previously (that's reasonable speculation), it is a FACT he has not made such a trade (so reasonable speculation is met by reasonable doubt).

I wasn't looking for over-priced rentals, but adding Petr Mzarek, another undesirable, is a lame addition at the TDL necessitated by injuries to the first and second goalie (which is likely a situation brought upon by coaching error, compiled on the GM to put his faith in injury prone goalies).

tl,dr; we disagree about when things did or did not change, and continue to talk past each other, but we agree there's no issue in adding for TODAY!

See, I agree...We disagree...lol.

To me, making moves at the deadline only made sense if it was for help then AND the future.

Example: Hartman was rumoured to be available that day. I was all for U.S. trading for him because he he was cost controlled, young, and could slot into the 3rd line. But then I saw what he was traded for and I was happy as hell it was not us that traded for him. Maybe Hextall inquired as well then bailed at the cost.

And that is why I said the next step will be tough...making a good trade/signing for a legit guy.

Let's agree...hopefully we add this summer!

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

... But the real work begins now.

I'm completely with you except for this last part, because, 1) While our pipeline is "full," we still don't know what we have in them, and moving them now, before we have dipped them in the icing of NHL experience, would mean we are trading them at a potential fraction of their ultimate value - I would be OK with that on an intellectual (but not emotional) level (because I want them to play for us rather than guys from other organizations), but, 2) Are any moves we make going to make us a contender this season, with our goaltending and defense as presently constituted? I have long argued that this is a house of cards - if you are going to make these moves to speed up the timeline, it is quickly going to avalanche, and you are going to have to make other moves to compensate - you sign a (relatively) older forward to cash in on G/V's prime years, and suddenly you look at the defense and need to shore that up, then you look at the goaltending and puke blood before you realize you need to make a serious move there, etc. - it is the most slippery of slopes.

I understand that you are advocating for smart hockey moves that would benefit us now and in the long term, and I don't necessarily have a problem with that - I have been waiting longer for our third Cup than a huge number of posters on here have even been alive - but I just don't think it is time for that. Very minor moves, sure. Massive changes in coaching personnel, definitely. But I'd rather wait until we Brandon Carlo a handful more of our prospects to give us that trade value boost, let Hart percolate in the pro game (if you can call it that under Gordo), and reassess again next summer. I was hoping we would have blooded more of our guys in the NHL this past season, but Jeff is going to Jeff.

 

[Striiker]

I'd call all of them that I listed as neutral but you listed them as a positive. If you want to give others grief for being too negative on Hextall the least you can do is be fair and impartial about it. While the four I listed ended up being a neutral result it does show a bit of err in talent judging.

Edit : I like to think I've been fair to Hextall. I like his desire to build for future success, cap management, amateur scouting but he also deserves negative marks (loyalty, coaching staff, and pro scouting).

As usual, someone wants to argue without actually reading what I said. I never listed them as a positive. If you want to give others grief for being too positive on Hextall the least you can do is read the posts.
No wonder you think I'm not fair and impartial... you don't even know what I've said.

In the original post I said that green meant it was worth a try.

Green - worth it
Red - not worth it

Then you responded without reading what I said, so I corrected you and pointed out that it didn't mean positive, it meant worth a try. Aka, not a negative.

Worth a try, not necessarily a great positive result. Just not a negative.

Let's see if the third times the charm.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

I have criticized Hextall. No issue with that at all. I have said Lappy should be long gone. I have also said Hextall is a liar. Anyone who says Hextall has not made mistakes are wrong.

My issue comes when people get upset saying he has no plan. Or criticize a move he made in retrospect, when they supported it when it happened.

He has yet to make that bigger move to be better today by trade or a signing. But that has been by design. And that is lost on some people. He PURPOSELY went after cheap, free placeholders. And he had as many misses as fails.

And I have said that the NEXT step will be the hardest. The adding of legit guys. Making a good trade/ signing to fill a need. Not just a Gordon type, but a legit good player. To throw out a name....like a JT Miller type. The good news is that 5/6 of our top 6 appear to be 50 point guys and above soon. Lindblom is the only question mark but he is still just entering his 2nd year.

He has a plan. It just does not match others timelines. But the real work begins now.

All this, especially the bolded.

 

[Ruck Over]

I have criticized Hextall. No issue with that at all. I have said Lappy should be long gone. I have also said Hextall is a liar. Anyone who says Hextall has not made mistakes are wrong.

My issue comes when people get upset saying he has no plan. Or criticize a move he made in retrospect, when they supported it when it happened.

He has yet to make that bigger move to be better today by trade or a signing. But that has been by design. And that is lost on some people. He PURPOSELY went after cheap, free placeholders. And he had as many misses as fails.

And I have said that the NEXT step will be the hardest. The adding of legit guys. Making a good trade/ signing to fill a need. Not just a Gordon type, but a legit good player. To throw out a name....like a JT Miller type. The good news is that 5/6 of our top 6 appear to be 50 point guys and above soon. Lindblom is the only question mark but he is still just entering his 2nd year.

He has a plan. It just does not match others timelines. But the real work begins now.

So we're really not disagreeing about much. I never said he had no plan, I've said he's stuck to it facetiously. I also agree that Hextall is a liar. I've decided to die on the hill that I take him for what he's actually said and do not decide to parse this statement as true, that statement as false. So if I go by what he's said, he's not kept the team competitive, it's taking presumably longer than his 5 year window (which he errated* to 2 years). The bringing in those purposefully cheap, free placeholders does not coincide with competitive, ergo, criticism.

In regards to the JT Miller proposal, interesting. I'm curious about the remaining years he has an an RFA, what it would cost to sign him into a number of his UFA years, which is an additional cost ontop of the traded 1st. It's a move I likely approve of if it's part of a string of positive moves. As a lone move, trading a first for the likely Raffl do-it-all replacement seems kinda m'eh. If it's part of a series of moves, to improve the floor of the talent level on the Flyers, yes, I go for this.
tl,dr; I'm more in favor of this move (#19) than I am against it. Unfairly it puts more pressure on the #14 selection, and adds intrigue to any moves with Simmonds.


*not a real word except to MtG players

 

[Striiker]

Nobody is or has been disputing that Hextall and the scouts have done a really good of drafting players. The problem is with free agency moves and to a lesser degree trades, where he has been below average AT BEST. A more accurate description would probably be bad. This ties back into the point that so many fail or refuse to grasp, you can't build a cup contender on the draft alone. You need to be able to sign the right free agents and make good trades here and there. In the cap era, it is extremely helpful to hit on some of those cheaper FA options whether they be veterans who end up carving out a role on the team or hit it big on a young guy who flew under the radar. Hextall has done the opposite of that with people like Medvedev, Lyubimov, Gordon, Weise, Gagner, Neuvirth, Elliott, etc etc.

He hasn't made a bad trade yet and he hasn't made a bad signing yet. He's made one trade that ended up bad (Mrazek) and made one signing that ended up bad (Weise), but that isn't the same thing as targeting the wrong types of players.

If anyone wants to complain that he hasn't signed any great players then that would mean they don't understand that he hasn't been trying to make an impact signing, he's been going after low/zero risk, possible reward guys or settling for cheap and/or short-term placeholders.

"Bad" would be an inaccurate description for his pro acquisitions. "Passive" would probably be a better description because he hasn't aggressively went after any players, but instead gone after guys who could have ended up as minor steals (Gudas, Del Zotto, Neuvrith, Gagner, etc) with varying success. We don't know what kind of job he'd do if he was actually aggressive in FA because such a thing hasn't happened yet.

So, until it does and he messes up, all these complaints are weak and exposing people as being impatient and short-sighted.

There's nothing wrong with FA signings or trades when it's an appropriate time to do so, but these past years haven't been the time. We didn't have the rest of the team set up for a move like that and it would have just been a waste of assets and time. Now we have enough of the roster set so that we can make moves to fill holes and/or make upgrades, but that wasn't the case in previous years.

 

[Tripod]

I'm completely with you except for this last part, because, 1) While our pipeline is "full," we still don't know what we have in them, and moving them now, before we have dipped them in the icing of NHL experience, would mean we are trading them at a potential fraction of their ultimate value - I would be OK with that on an intellectual (but not emotional) level (because I want them to play for us rather than guys from other organizations), but, 2) Are any moves we make going to make us a contender this season, with our goaltending and defense as presently constituted? I have long argued that this is a house of cards - if you are going to make these moves to speed up the timeline, it is quickly going to avalanche, and you are going to have to make other moves to compensate - you sign a (relatively) older forward to cash in on G/V's prime years, and suddenly you look at the defense and need to shore that up, then you look at the goaltending and puke blood before you realize you need to make a serious move there, etc. - it is the most slippery of slopes.

I understand that you are advocating for smart hockey moves that would benefit us now and in the long term, and I don't necessarily have a problem with that - I have been waiting longer for our third Cup than a huge number of posters on here have even been alive - but I just don't think it is time for that. Very minor moves, sure. Massive changes in coaching personnel, definitely. But I'd rather wait until we Brandon Carlo a handful more of our prospects to give us that trade value boost, let Hart percolate in the pro game (if you can call it that under Gordo), and reassess again next summer. I was hoping we would have blooded more of our guys in the NHL this past season, but Jeff is going to Jeff.

Maybe you misunderstood. I too don't think a big move is in the cards yet because we have too many holes. But moves CAN be made to start filling those holes WHILE those young kids develop more. And when they are ready, they can push others out.

As an example, Ratcliffe is likely Jr bound then AHL bound for a year. So if we can make a good trade for a 3rd liner for a few years, then we can recoup that asset when we trade that guy and replace them with Ratcliffe. I have no desire to trade the kids in the pipeline. I would however be willing to trade #19 and any of the other later picks if the deal made sense. NO RENTALS!

Example....if we traded #19 for JT Miller then sign him for 5 years. That gives us a few years of a 50 point LWer while Ratcliffe hopefully developed into his replacement in a few years. Then Miller is traded to hopefully recoup that 1st and the 1st turns into another cheap prospect for the pipeline to keep it stocked.

That's the kind of moves I am referring to.

Then, once we have taken that next step and are actually a contender, the final step is to make that big move to try and push you over the edge. But that move is still a few years away....unless it is to sign UFA Doughty!

And like you, I too have been waiting a long time. It's why I get upset when people say Hextall is no different than past GM's in Philly. He is building a completely different way.

 

[Ruck Over]

...To me, making moves at the deadline only made sense if it was for help then AND the future. ...

I was in favor of the low-cost moves like Vanek, or ideally, a make-pretend move that would help then and in the future.

 

[MiamiScreamingEagles]

CLOSED.

Move the conversation to this thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/2018-19-roster-talk-part-one.2497373/