Post-Game Talk: #69 | Leafs at Flyers | March 19, 2024 | Flyers win 4-3

[JojoTheWhale]

Because Laughton is a reliable bottom six guy on a reaosnable contract. Sanheim is an up and down player on a 100 year contract over $6 million. One of those is a risk and the other isn't. One of those is a known commodity that is always in demand. Sanheim there's a lot of differing opinions on his skill and value throughout his career who is signed through I think 2031 or 2032. If Sanheim was on another team I can't imagine posters here would be happy paying out the ass for a 28 year old on a big contract who has had an up and down career (I know, I know, it is only because the Flyers forced him to not play well that he didn't play well, it has nothing to do with him).

Brother, if you want to throw tantrums about people not agreeing with your player evaluations, that's fine. I just don't care to be a part of it.

I don't think handwaving quality of play in favor of a metronome as you've done here is a path to upping your chances of long-term success. But it doesn't set it to zero either. That's how probability works. We're all making guesses.

 

[dragonoffrost]

Were they really outplayed? From inside the building, it felt like we were thoroughly outplaying Toronto for the bulk of the first 2 periods. A brutal penalty call followed by a powerplay goal and “playing the score” (read as “Tortleshell”) turned the tide in the 3rd, but I think they deserved that win.

While Nylander was probably the most dangerous individual player, I thought Tippett-Frost-Konecny was probably the most dominant line from either team and inexplicably, Torts refused to play them as we were trying to “hang on” down the stretch, electing to go with his “forechecking” (read as “lose a faceoff then shell up and block shots”) lines instead.

Playing any shell game against a team like Toronto is a fools errand. You need to keep the pressure on and not sit back and wait for them to come to you.

 

[renberg]

While Torts absolutely deserves consideration for the Adams, I wouldn't go so far as to say shoo-in; Rick Tocchet says hi.

So does Knoblach in Edmonton. Torts isn’t getting this award

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Brother, if you want to throw tantrums about people not agreeing with your player evaluations, that's fine. I just don't care to be a part of it.

I don't think handwaving quality of play in favor of a metronome as you've done here is a path to upping your chances of long-term success. But it doesn't set it to zero either. That's how probability works. We're all making guesses.

I'm not throwing tantrums about anyone's player evaluations. I'm saying trading Sanheim in the off-season in the rumored Krug deal would have been a better rebuilding move than not trading him. We'd have an additional first and probably be a worse team overall. I have said multiple teams that trade would not have been a great return for Sanheim, but if we're rebuilding having an additional first and a worst record is better than having Sanheim, fighting for the playoffs, and not as many 1sts.

This is where my original post came in with my confusion. We want to tank and get draft capital but not at the expense of Travis Sanheim, who I don't think anyone will argue is going to be a key piece in the rebuild moving forward. He's 28 and signed I think until he is 35. By the team the team is really where they need to be he'll be 33is? Maybe 32? Unless you're telling me you think he'll either still be a valuable piece at that time or that we'll be ready before then, I think the preferable move is to have traded Sanheim (or trade him ASAP). This isn't a knock on Sanheim or anyone's evaluation of him, just in terms of rebuild he doesn't fit the needs.

 

[VladDrag]

They absolutely were. It’s just that the bulk of those grade A chances occurred in the 3rd after the game was 3-0 Flyers. We were the clearly better team through 2.

We self-neutered our offense to crater up and protect our lead and in so doing, we allowed Toronto a lot of possession, which players like Nylander and Matthews feast on.

If we entered the period up 3-2 and it was 3-3 after that powerplay goal, our play style would’ve been completely different. The 6 on 5 situation where they piled on a lot of grade A chances also would’ve never occurred if not for the scoreline.

Again, I would’ve much preferred to not see us Tortshell up, but we deserved that game. We played better, built a big lead and then took the foot off the gas. Did we deserve to have such a big lead to piss away? Probably not. Should’ve been a 1 goal lead (2 at ) entering the 3rd. But you can’t say they were “outplayed” when it was a deliberate tactical switch by both teams in response to the score.

No matter how much you say that, doesn't make it true. They were not clearly the better team throughout two periods.

Thru two periods at ES: Toronto led shot attempts 51-33, scoring chances 29-16, expected goals 2.13 xGF/60 to 1.98 xGF/60. The only reason the xGF numbers are remotely close are the Flyers blocked a lot of shots in the second period (blocked shots are not accounted for in xG models). Blocking a lot of shots means the puck is in your end for most of the game.

The Flyers had two breakaways in the second period (one by Farabee and one by Tippett), so they had a few decent chances (and they had a really effective powerplay), but Toronto controlled the second period in terms of time of possession and overall shot pressure. Flyers got lucky to score three long range goals.

 

[freakydallas13]

The reason I push back against the notion of "well I disagree with the way this team is run but they are making to playoffs no matter what I think so I might as well in enjoy it", is because the logical conclusion of that line of thinking is to stop caring about this team entirely.

I think the team is being run with poor processes? There is nothing I can do about that, just accept it. But I also think it means they are going to be a middle ground mediocre disaster, so really why do I care at all. Just accept this team will stink and do something else with my life. Apathy is all consuming, I'm sorry I can't put the horse blinders on and just be happy for wins in the now, I care about decisions that affect if there are sustainable wins in the future. That's all I want. That's all anyone wants.

Maybe I can actually care about their decisions, maybe I can care about the reasons they make their decisions. Because if they actually start operating with sound foundations backing up with decisions, then I can actually be happy about this team moving forward.

 

[FLYguy3911]

Sanheim is flirting with a 50 point season without being on the PP in months.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I mean I guess. The other side of that is that Sanheim is going to be on the downside of his career when things turn around here (assuming they ever turn around) and getting a first for him while also bringing a worse player in would have been better for the tank, no? This is where I don't understand the complaints a lot of the time. Scott Laughton everyone is pissed they didn't get a first for him and he is still here and useless for the rebuild. Travis Sanheim everyone is happy we didn't get a first for him in a move that would have accelerated the rebuild. This is where the confusion stems from. I would 100% have preferred to trade Sanheim and get that first along with Krug. That is a rebuilding move. I'm not going to pretend it is a great trade by any means, but getting that first PLUS having Krug instead of Sanheim in the lineup now puts us in a worse position in the standings with now three first round picks, plus a contract that ends sooner which will provide more flexibility at a time when we may be able to sign a big name UFA or even use Krug as a trade chip if he plays well. IDK about you but I prefer that scenario to having Sanheim on this team right now. A team that we all know needs a lot more work than what's been done.

Not a knock at Sanheim but just the reality that if we want to do a real rebuild that would have been a great start to it. Yes, trading Laughton and others would have been good for that too if the rumors were true about him, but that doesn't have any bearing on the trade they tried to make involving Sanheim.

I'm willing to trade everyone. The purpose of everyone right now is to set the table for Michkov, and for the vast majority of players they best way they can do that is in a trade at some point. But for this to work, they need to be able to get good value. They aren't going to be getting good value if they're missing on evaluating their own players so badly.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Simple answer here is that a first for the player Laughton is would be a solid return. Accepting a deal of that nature is good process; rejecting it is not. A first and a severe cap dump for the player Sanheim is falls short of what he should be worth. Accepting a deal of that nature is not good process; letting Sanheim prove he's worth more, then getting more, is good process.

What's most important, beyond any amount of signaling that they're ready for a rebuild, is signaling that they understand our players' value, and skill sets, and how to maximize both. The team hasn't displayed a good process yet, so of course they'll get criticized for decisions that don't make sense holistically.

As they eternally shuffle through dmen lesser than Ghost in their quest to replace Ghost, you'd think sometime they would stop and re-evaluate their values. So much effort could have been saved by just keeping that guy. So many assets retained. I wonder if they've reflected on how that's all unfolded at all?

 

[Beef Invictus]

They absolutely were. It’s just that the bulk of those grade A chances occurred in the 3rd after the game was 3-0 Flyers. We were the clearly better team through 2.

We self-neutered our offense to crater up and protect our lead and in so doing, we allowed Toronto a lot of possession, which players like Nylander and Matthews feast on.

If we entered the period up 3-2 and it was 3-3 after that powerplay goal, our play style would’ve been completely different. The 6 on 5 situation where they piled on a lot of grade A chances also would’ve never occurred if not for the scoreline.

Again, I would’ve much preferred to not see us Tortshell up, but we deserved that game. We played better, built a big lead and then took the foot off the gas. Did we deserve to have such a big lead to piss away? Probably not. Should’ve been a 1 goal lead (2 at ) entering the 3rd. But you can’t say they were “outplayed” when it was a deliberate tactical switch by both teams in response to the score.

The Flyers should have been losing after 1. And after 2. Many chances happened in the 3rd. A ton happened earlier than that. This is not a game I'd crow about.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

I'm willing to trade everyone. The purpose of everyone right now is to set the table for Michkov, and for the vast majority of players they best way they can do that is in a trade at some point. But for this to work, they need to be able to get good value. They aren't going to be getting good value if they're missing on evaluating their own players so badly.

I agree in general. That being said if the plan is to build around Michkov (which it should be), holding out for top dollar doesn't help. Especially with what we are seeing right now in a team that should be a lock to be a lottery pick just isn't. Yes, taking back Krug and getting a first for Sanheim is not top dollar. I wholeheartedly agree. BUT, getting that first and taking back Krug does position us better for the future. Ideally you get more for him and don't have to take back a bad contract. But if that's the market you take it.

What's a better outcome for the team? 1st + Krug for Sanheim (ignoring the Hayes-related part of the deal for the purpose of this) and less likely to be in a playoff AND potentially be able to flip Krug at some point for something else, even if it is a late round pick, or Sanheim and we make the playoffs and get nothing for him and just keep him here? Unless we think or want them to trade him at the draft or some other time down the road? It would seem his value will never be higher so the draft would be ideal. Not sure the FO's plan for him but other than the Krug debacle I don't think I have really heard him mentioned as a trade bait.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

As they eternally shuffle through dmen lesser than Ghost in their quest to replace Ghost, you'd think sometime they would stop and re-evaluate their values. So much effort could have been saved by just keeping that guy. So many assets retained. I wonder if they've reflected on how that's all unfolded at all?

not a chance...

they are sittin around smelling Risto farts..

 

[FromOyVey2Matvei]

The Flyers should have been losing after 1. And after 2. Many chances happened in the 3rd. A ton happened earlier than that. This is not a game I'd crow about.

The all situations xGoals + the eye test disagree with that assessment. Not to the degree the scoreboard did, and it was far from the dominating effort we had against the stars for example, but it was a quality win against a team that absolutely dragged us 2 games ago. Probably the best effort they’ve put together since the TDL.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

wait.. i thought all players loved Torts...

 

[Beef Invictus]

The all situations xGoals + the eye test disagree with that assessment. Not to the degree the scoreboard did, and it was far from the dominating effort we had against the stars for example, but it was a quality win against a team that absolutely dragged us 2 games ago. Probably the best effort they’ve put together since the TDL.

As has been explained, xG doesn't account for blocked shots. The Flyers had to block a lot of attempts, because the Leafs had the puck and were generating tries a lot.

 

[GrkFlyersFan]

Given the state of our defense, even lucky wins like this are to be celebrated. I thought this would be another top 10 pick season, I even thought we overachieved last year. This roster is horrible, and yet here we are with a very good chance to make the playoffs. If you can't give Torts credit for that, you've probably never liked Torts and are determined to keep it that way. Can't ask a coach and players to tank.

We're in too deep, folks. We're down to two options, give or take. We can pick 14th, no playoffs. Or 17th and make the playoffs. Once you get to that part of the draft, it's all a crapshoot anyway, so I pick playoffs. I'm here for the absurd. Because I know we're not actually this good. I don't like what Torts did with Couts either. It could lead to a better, more motivated Couts, or it could be the end of him here like Hayes. Too early to say. I don't think our surprise success this year kills the rebuild, but we're a long way off from where we truly want to be. Michkov needs to be supplemented, and we need to hit on one of our goalie prospects. I definitely prefer Hilferty/Jonesy/Danny to Scott/Valerie/Chuck.

 

[FromOyVey2Matvei]

As has been explained, xG doesn't account for blocked shots. The Flyers had to block a lot of attempts, because the Leafs had the puck and were generating tries a lot.

xG is a useful tool, but it does certainly have its deficiencies., like not accounting for shot attempts / blocked shots.

It also doesn’t account for shot attempts that never were, like Sanheim trying to pass back across goal when he had a half empty net. And it thoroughly underweights something like Konecny missing a totally empty net on a 2 on 0 (8.3% chance at a goal? I’ll bet TK converts the next 5 of those chances he’s gifted).

I’ll say it again, the Flyers deserved to be leading after 1 and after 2. They were the better team through those periods and had a chance to turn it into a blowout. The third period was a different story. Totally dominated by the Leafs. But that dominance was fueled by the game situation.

I don’t feel that was a “lucky” win at all. They deserved that W with how they played. Didn’t see a single Leafs fan feeling like they were robbed or deserved better. Most were pissed that the lowly flyers outplayed their team. We’ve certainly had better and more dominant wins this season, but not since the TDL and not with this D Corps and Coots sitting. I think that’s a win fans should be proud of.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Given the state of our defense, even lucky wins like this are to be celebrated. I thought this would be another top 10 pick season, I even thought we overachieved last year. This roster is horrible, and yet here we are with a very good chance to make the playoffs. If you can't give Torts credit for that, you've probably never liked Torts and are determined to keep it that way. Can't ask a coach and players to tank.

We're in too deep, folks. We're down to two options, give or take. We can pick 14th, no playoffs. Or 17th and make the playoffs. Once you get to that part of the draft, it's all a crapshoot anyway, so I pick playoffs. I'm here for the absurd. Because I know we're not actually this good. I don't like what Torts did with Couts either. It could lead to a better, more motivated Couts, or it could be the end of him here like Hayes. Too early to say. I don't think our surprise success this year kills the rebuild, but we're a long way off from where we truly want to be. Michkov needs to be supplemented, and we need to hit on one of our goalie prospects. I definitely prefer Hilferty/Jonesy/Danny to Scott/Valerie/Chuck.

so just more of the sameolsameol..

got it..



ps 50 years of doing the above is why this Org. can never win or change

 

[GrkFlyersFan]

so just more of the sameolsameol..

got it..



ps 50 years of doing the above is why this Org. can never win or change

I don't think what this regime is doing has anything to do with previous regimes. Different time, different NHL, different problems. Like Homer would definitely not have traded Walker, and probably would have done some buying to make sure we hung on to our playoff spot(probably giving away picks to do it). Hard to say what Clarke would've done because he mostly operated before the cap.

 

[BritainStix]

I don't think what this regime is doing has anything to do with previous regimes. Different time, different NHL, different problems. Like Homer would definitely not have traded Walker, and probably would have done some buying to make sure we hung on to our playoff spot(probably giving away picks to do it). Hard to say what Clarke would've done because he mostly operated before the cap.

The current setup is a stark contrast to Fletcher and Holmgren. You're right, they would 100% have gone all in to make the playoffs. Hextall never had the balls to make a trade that wasn't a dead cert. So we just acquired and wasted multiple high end draft picks without targeting any sort of younger talent to supplement Giroux and Voracek. Not to mention being a middling team for most of his tenure.

There's differences with how Briere is running things. He's not perfect, the EJ trade was stupid. But he's also been dealt a rather shit hand. I'm just happy we did sell high on Walker.

 

[Appleyard]

As they eternally shuffle through dmen lesser than Ghost in their quest to replace Ghost, you'd think sometime they would stop and re-evaluate their values. So much effort could have been saved by just keeping that guy. So many assets retained. I wonder if they've reflected on how that's all unfolded at all?

It is insane when you look at the contortions the Flyers did and the assets they spent to effectively swap Ghost for Risto... and now pat themselves on the back that Shaw has moulded him into a passable #4-5 over the last 2 seasons... when Ghost is a good #4 at worst.

#14 pick 2021 (Rosen, Othmann, Bolduc, Lucius, Svechkov, Lysell, Thompson)
#36 pick 2022 (Duda, Chesley, Minten, Ludwinski, James, Warren, Lutz)
#39 pick 2023 (Cristall, Wahlberg, Gibson, Nilsson, Kantserov, Strbak, Lind)
Hägg (#187 2022)
#216 pick 2022

Those picks? Combined?

Their value are somewhere between a#3 and #4 pick...

10-11 GSVA if looking at it that way. (#3 pick)
Trade value wise basically pick #4.

Not guaranteed... but those picks would have probably given the Flyers at least 1 extra ~65+ point forward or #3-4 Dmen between them even if they drafted averagely.

And that cost was for, well, even if looking at it with Orange tinted glasses? Just changing defenses make-up stylistically... because very hard to argue that at most Risto and Ghost are not basically a wash value wise in what they bring, even if were on same salary.

 

[Curufinwe]

The current setup is a stark contrast to Fletcher and Holmgren. You're right, they would 100% have gone all in to make the playoffs. Hextall never had the balls to make a trade that wasn't a dead cert.

How is trading a 26 year old top 6 forward for draft picks a dead cert? There's no guarantee what those picks will turn into.

 

[nacc BLOCC]

I agree in general. That being said if the plan is to build around Michkov (which it should be), holding out for top dollar doesn't help. Especially with what we are seeing right now in a team that should be a lock to be a lottery pick just isn't. Yes, taking back Krug and getting a first for Sanheim is not top dollar. I wholeheartedly agree. BUT, getting that first and taking back Krug does position us better for the future. Ideally you get more for him and don't have to take back a bad contract. But if that's the market you take it.

What's a better outcome for the team? 1st + Krug for Sanheim (ignoring the Hayes-related part of the deal for the purpose of this) and less likely to be in a playoff AND potentially be able to flip Krug at some point for something else, even if it is a late round pick, or Sanheim and we make the playoffs and get nothing for him and just keep him here? Unless we think or want them to trade him at the draft or some other time down the road? It would seem his value will never be higher so the draft would be ideal. Not sure the FO's plan for him but other than the Krug debacle I don't think I have really heard him mentioned as a trade bait.

making the bad sanheim trade would have added draft capital, and could have worsened on ice results. but it would not have been better for the rebuild because:

that trade would firmly be in squirrel and nut territory. it would be indicative of no over-arching vision and also of objectively poor valuation. without those things you can not execute a rebuild with any degree of competency. so to say that trade would have been in furtherance of a rebuild while making those assumptions is incorrect.

adding draft capital, potentially worse on-ice results? no argument. better for rebuild, no.

 

[Appleyard]

xG is a useful tool, but it does certainly have its deficiencies., like not accounting for shot attempts / blocked shots.

It also doesn’t account for shot attempts that never were, like Sanheim trying to pass back across goal when he had a half empty net. And it thoroughly underweights something like Konecny missing a totally empty net on a 2 on 0 (8.3% chance at a goal? I’ll bet TK converts the next 5 of those chances he’s gifted).

I’ll say it again, the Flyers deserved to be leading after 1 and after 2. They were the better team through those periods and had a chance to turn it into a blowout. The third period was a different story. Totally dominated by the Leafs. But that dominance was fueled by the game situation.

I don’t feel that was a “lucky” win at all. They deserved that W with how they played. Didn’t see a single Leafs fan feeling like they were robbed or deserved better. Most were pissed that the lowly flyers outplayed their team. We’ve certainly had better and more dominant wins this season, but not since the TDL and not with this D Corps and Coots sitting. I think that’s a win fans should be proud of.

Pretty much every xG model actually take into account shot attempts.

Blocked shots is an issue, albeit minor, people want to account for it but is just waaay too much work as shot block locations are where the shot was blocked and not where taken... so makes it impossible to scrape really.

I do think that it is up amongst the very best "basic" stats though. I mean, it predicts future goals better than actual golas as well as corsi. To such a close level once account for PDO fluctuation that is damn reliable in most cases.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

making the bad sanheim trade would have added draft capital, and could have worsened on ice results. but it would not have been better for the rebuild because:

that trade would firmly be in squirrel and nut territory. it would be indicative of no over-arching vision and also of objectively poor valuation. without those things you can not execute a rebuild with any degree of competency. so to say that trade would have been in furtherance of a rebuild while making those assumptions is incorrect.

adding draft capital, potentially worse on-ice results? no argument. better for rebuild, no.

How? That's basically the definition of a re-build. We aren't getting a lottery pick for Sanheim. Could we get more than the Blues offered, yeah probably especially now. Last summer I don't think we could have gotten too much more. Sanheim has been up and down his whole career and depending who you speak to he is overrated or underrated (both here and other fanbases/pundits). At 28 and on a long, albeit not terrible contract, his value isn't going to be through the roof. Look at Noah Hanifin (who was a rental so it isn't 1:1 but this is the closest analogue I could think of). He got a first and third and mid twenties defender who bounces between AHL and NHL.

How much more than that do you think Sanheim would return on his BEST day? You think he would get two firsts? More? Top tier prospect? I doubt it. More than a 1st and Krug, absolutely. More than Hanifin? Probably not much more