2019/20 Roster Thread XXXIV

[JojoTheWhale]

No, I'm not suggesting Hagg is good, I'm suggesting that when you get down to #175 or so out of 200, everyone is pretty bad.
The objective in roster building isn't to replace one marginal player with another, it's to find someone better.
If you find someone better, that solves the problem.
Until then, make sure you're not forced to play someone worse (Prosser et al).

Setting aside the specificities at play here, this is an argument that has an expiration date in a hard cap league. As soon as you get much over vet min, the standard has to change.

Now the slider for "much" can be argued, but its existence can't.

 

[Beef Invictus]

What do you think the bottom roster players are on almost any team?

The distribution is fat tailed, there are few stars and they're on the "long tail" of the distribution.

The average is in the fat part of the tail, but below average players are bunched to the left of average near replacement level, which is why they normally have short professional lives, any slippage and there's plenty of potential replacement players.

So if you have 155 D-men starting in the top 5, the #6 defensemen are 156-187, but actually out to 200, because a number of better defensemen will get injured each year.

Which means you'd expect Hagg to be around the 175th defenseman if he's a typical #6 D-man.
The median will be 100, but the average will be the 80-90th player (because the above average players are more above average than the below average players are below average).

You're still describing Hagg as bad

 

[Magua]

Not to repeat myself but the argument needs to be contextualized in a world where a player needs a new and likely multi-year raise of a contract. The economics of that looms large — larger than a simple player evaluation, which is well trodden ground. If you’re not acknowledging contract status, you’re being purposefully evasive.

You can replace “Hagg” with “Laughton” or whoever. You can even LIKE a player and still very much understand when to cut bait.

 

[Adtar02]

Keeping hagg would be doing the same thing we did for years. Effectively holding back d prospects to over ripen. We kept league marginal players on the roster in stead of giving more opportunities to players the org heavily invested in. Players can only get up to nhl speed playing in the nhl. Yes some needed time to fill out a bit more but most just needed to play a bit more.

He isn’t a need and is easily replaceable. And he will cost more than he is worth

 

[Curufinwe]

Myers is the top 4 dman, not Hagg. We should worry about his RFA contract first.

 

[Starat327]

If you're still pretending the difference between Hagg's upcoming RFA deal (lets assume 2M) and Friedman's ELC isnt significant for a team thats is up against the cap, ill kindly ask you to reference earlier this season when we had to send people down to the AHL in favor of keeping Chris Stewart because he was the cheaper option.

Yes, ideally you always upgrade your roster with skill. But if you can cut a mil+ off your cap, and not lose any skill (i wont even go as far as say upgrade, even though I thinnk Friedman would be an upgrade on Hagg), that's absolutely a move you make. And that's before even considering that you probably end up with some sort of dracft capital from subsequently trading Hagg.

Its such a no-brainer move, I really dont understand how this is a discussion anymore. Take Hagg's name out of it. Replace it with Smith, or Jones, or literally any other name you want. His Skill:pay ratio isnt a positive ratio in comparison to other replacements - that's all there is to it.

 

[captainpaxil]

Hagg morin and Friedman can duke it out for the 6 spot. They shouldn't come much over 2.5 for the 3 of them.

I wouldn't be opposed to grant pitlick or Thompson being re signed. As Stewart proved this year lack of talented depth can hurt and they've shown to be nhl players.

I don't what to do with Patrick whether a morin type deal or a one year offer.

What I'd love to see is a good faith offer to lindblom. 4.5x5. If things turn for the better it's still a good deal and if not his family is taken care of

 

[Striiker]

If Hagg is on the roster next season then Fletcher has failed.

End of story. No exceptions.

 

[Striiker]

Oh, and one last thing...

You can pick one or the other, not both.

"It's OK that Hagg sucks because he's just the #6"
or
"Friedman can't be the #6 because he might suck"

The fact that we have multiple people who are attempting both of these arguments is just hilarious.
This is the kind of contradiction that truly exposes people.

 

[orangey]

If you're still pretending the difference between Hagg's upcoming RFA deal (lets assume 2M) and Friedman's ELC isnt significant for a team thats is up against the cap, ill kindly ask you to reference earlier this season when we had to send people down to the AHL in favor of keeping Chris Stewart because he was the cheaper option.

Yes, ideally you always upgrade your roster with skill. But if you can cut a mil+ off your cap, and not lose any skill (i wont even go as far as say upgrade, even though I thinnk Friedman would be an upgrade on Hagg), that's absolutely a move you make. And that's before even considering that you probably end up with some sort of dracft capital from subsequently trading Hagg.

Its such a no-brainer move, I really dont understand how this is a discussion anymore. Take Hagg's name out of it. Replace it with Smith, or Jones, or literally any other name you want. His Skill:pay ratio isnt a positive ratio in comparison to other replacements - that's all there is to it.

The context is more like losing Braun to save money, which they already likely are, but also Hagg for a draft pick or something and replacing with Friedman and... who exactly?

More likely they just replace Braun with Friedman and hedge their bets/keep NHL experienced depth for another season which is still fairly inexpensive in Hagg. Hagg isn't fantastic but he is a NHL depth player that can serve a purpose in front of the net for 1-2 years if the contract isn't excessive. Just like Laughton or any other unexciting depth player. Yet message boards always obsess over these role players to a ridiculous degree.

 

[DancingPanther]

The context is more like losing Braun to save money, which they already likely are, but also Hagg for a draft pick or something and replacing with Friedman and... who exactly?

More likely they just replace Braun with Friedman and hedge their bets/keep NHL experienced depth for another season which is still fairly inexpensive in Hagg. Hagg isn't fantastic but he is a NHL depth player that can serve a purpose in front of the net for 1-2 years if the contract isn't excessive. Just like Laughton or any other unexciting depth player. Yet message boards always obsess over these role players to a ridiculous degree.

Hagg isn't a role player. Hagg is a detriment.

Raffl is a role player. Laughton is a role player. Braun is a role player.

All have their faults to some magnitude. All are useful to some magnitude

Hagg is not useful in any magnitude whatsoever. People obsses over Hagg because he makes the 4 other guys that he's out there with worse every time he tumbles over the boards. That's pretty clearly something to obsess over: an indefensible shart of a hockey player actually playing every single night for my favorite team

 

[orangey]

It was just posted that he is good in front of the net. That's a role.

I dont really care much about it other than to note they won't ditch both braun and hagg in the off-season to replace them w Friedman and ??? While trying to win stuff. It's not likely happening because it's not helpful at this time. Maybe when there is someone else ready to go than ???

 

[DancingPanther]

It was just posted that he is good in front of the net. That's a role.

I dont really care much about it other than to note they won't ditch both braun and hagg in the off-season to replace them w Friedman and ??? While trying to win stuff. It's not likely happening because it's not helpful at this time. Maybe when there is someone else ready to go than ???

Good around the net for the other team? Good at losing coverages around the net?

The fact is if he gets a raise, it will be- and I use this word literally- indefensible

 

[Starat327]

The context is more like losing Braun to save money, which they already likely are, but also Hagg for a draft pick or something and replacing with Friedman and... who exactly?

More likely they just replace Braun with Friedman and hedge their bets/keep NHL experienced depth for another season which is still fairly inexpensive in Hagg. Hagg isn't fantastic but he is a NHL depth player that can serve a purpose in front of the net for 1-2 years if the contract isn't excessive. Just like Laughton or any other unexciting depth player. Yet message boards always obsess over these role players to a ridiculous degree.

No one is obsessing over Hagg. What we're obsessing over is maximizing your cap space and roster utility as it pertains to skill. Hagg is an extremely poor NHL player by any measure. Where and how much he's playing doesnt matter - he's just not good. It's silly to think that because "hes on the bottom pair" or "hes a number 7, or my favorite "he only plays 1/4 of the game, it doesnt matter!" doesnt mean we shouldnt optimize that role that he's playing. He's going to ask for too much money for the role he's going to play, and more importantly, for his on ice impact and therefore isn't worth the cap:roster spot ratio he provides.

As for how to line them up?

Provy - Niskanen
Sanheim - Myers
Ghost - Friedman
Morin

all done.

 

[Appleyard]

One interesting area I think for the Flyers will be cheap depth.

I imagine Pitlick, Grant and Thompson might ALL be gone.
And they basically have 12-13 fwds who have a great chance to be in the NHL next year, as well as 6 Dmen who seem very likely to be on roster.

But I guess they will want to have some insurance that can be sent to the AHL if needed, or be a extra fwd or Dman.

My preferences for such players:

Colin Blackwell: RW/LW/C
Stefan Noesen: RW/LW
Daniel Carr: LW/RW
Tomas Jurco: RW/LW
Nick Shore: C/RW
Kevin Rooney: C/LW

All can slot in and do a good job... but all can also pass through waivers and probably wont get more than ~$750k. Pretty much perfect #13-14 fwds.

In terms of D there are FAR less options who can actually play decently in NHL. But the three that stand out:

Joakim Ryan: LHD
Brandon Davidson: LHD
Cody Goloubef: RHD

 

[Striiker]

Giroux, Voracek, Couturier, Konecny, Hayes, JVR, Laughton, Raffl, NAK, Farabee

There’s 10 forwards you can bet on being in the lineup next season.

Then we have Frost who 100% needs a spot, Patrick will too if he’s able to play, Laczynski should have one as well, and maybe Allison too. Then there’s guys like Bunnaman, Kase, and Rubtsov who could/should get chances in case of injury.

So the idea of adding outside bottom 6 players doesn’t sound too good. All it’ll do is give our staff opportunities to make mistakes and block more deserving people, like we saw this year.

 

[Appleyard]

Giroux, Voracek, Couturier, Konecny, Hayes, JVR, Laughton, Raffl, NAK, Farabee

There’s 10 forwards you can bet on being in the lineup next season.

Then we have Frost who 100% needs a spot, Patrick will too if he’s able to play, Laczynski should have one as well, and maybe Allison too. Then there’s guys like Bunnaman, Kase, and Rubtsov who could/should get chances in case of injury.

So the idea of adding outside bottom 6 players doesn’t sound too good. All it’ll do is give our staff opportunities to make mistakes and block more deserving people, like we saw this year.

The reason I bring it up is:

Giroux-Couturier-Voracek
Farabee-Hayes-Konecny
JvR-Frost-Aube-Kubel
Laughton-Patrick-Raffl

That is 12 guys. Unless say Laczynski, Allison or Sandin WIN a role from Laughton or Raffl I dont want any kids sitting as #13-14 fwd. And the Flyers wont either.

A guy like Blackwell as the #13 fwd who can be sent to AHL and:

Plays ~10 games a year.
Sits around on road-trips for ~40 games a year as insurance.
Plays ~20 AHL games a year.

And IF a kid wins a spot from Raffl or Laughton... then Blackwell goes to the AHL right away, and one of those guys sits at #13-14.

I imagine the Flyers might well do that. And would rather it be an actual good player than not.


Plus those guys are not Stewart, VandeVelde, Weise, Lehtera, Thompson etc... they will be on $700-750k and are actually pretty solid players.

 

[Striiker]

The reason I bring it up is:

Giroux-Couturier-Voracek
Farabee-Hayes-Konecny
JvR-Frost-Aube-Kubel
Laughton-Patrick-Raffl

That is 12 guys. Unless say Laczynski, Allison or Sandin WIN a role from Laughton or Raffl I dont want any kids sitting as #13-14 fwd. And the Flyers wont either.

A guy like Blackwell as the #13 fwd who can be sent to AHL and:

Plays ~10 games a year.
Sits around on road-trips for ~40 games a year as insurance.
Plays ~20 AHL games a year.

And IF a kid wins a spot from Raffl or Laughton... then Blackwell goes to the AHL right away, and one of those guys sits at #13-14.

I imagine the Flyers might well do that. And would rather it be an actual good player than not.


Plus those guys are not Stewart, VandeVelde, Weise, Lehtera, Thompson etc... they will be on $700-750k and are actually pretty solid players.

I get what you're saying about the 13th forward - and in a world where one of us is in control and can make sure things actually happen as you said, then I'd agree - but I don't think it would realistically work out that way. Not with these coaches and this GM.

I can far too easily imagine one of these 13th-forward/AHLers undeservedly stealing a spot from someone like Frost or Laczynski and becoming a problem. Frost won a role and look where he is. Look at how long it took for NAK to come up. Look at how Farabee got sent down. Look at how Stewart played at all. Don't get me started on the defense. Point being, quality of play doesn't get rewarded.

 

[Appleyard]

I get what you're saying about the 13th forward - and in a world where one of us is in control and can make sure things actually happen as you said, then I'd agree - but I don't think it would realistically work out that way. Not with these coaches and this GM.

I can far too easily imagine one of these 13th-forward/AHLers undeservedly stealing a spot from someone like Frost or Laczynski and becoming a problem. Frost won a role and look where he is. Look at how long it took for NAK to come up. Look at how Farabee got sent down. Look at how Stewart played at all. Don't get me started on the defense. Point being, quality of play doesn't get rewarded.

I mean... if Stewart was Colin Blackwell or Daniel Carr it would not have been a real issue! As both legit good bottom sixers. I mean, if guys like Twarynski and Bunnaman end up as good as Blackwell, Noesen, Carr and Jurco especially in the next few years then they have really "hit".

I would avoid a centre generally as that would lead to more chance to block a guy. And Laughton can play C as can Raffl.

 

[Striiker]

I mean... if Stewart was Colin Blackwell or Daniel Carr it would not have been a real issue! As both legit good bottom sixers. I mean, if guys like Twarynski and Bunnaman end up as good as Blackwell, Noesen, Carr and Jurco especially in the next few years then they have really "hit".

I would avoid a centre generally as that would lead to more chance to block a guy. And Laughton can play C as can Raffl.

Of course, there's only one Chris Stewart!

I know they're not as bad, I'm just saying I don't want to get into a similar situation where inferior blocks superior, even if it's not as drastic as we saw this season.

 

[Appleyard]

Of course, there's only one Chris Stewart!

I know they're not as bad, I'm just saying I don't want to get into a similar situation where inferior blocks superior, even if it's not as drastic as we saw this season.

Yeh, same here.

But I would be very surprised if most of those guys are inferior to say... Twarynski and Bunnaman right now. Or Rubtsov. Or Vorobyev. Or Sushko. Going off their time in NHL and AHL so far.

Not to say they "cant" be better in the very near future. Especially in say Rubtsov, Kase, Allison and Laczynki's cases.

But in an ideal world they would not block anyone... and only really play if say on a road trip and someone goes down. Or if a guy goes down and they try say Kase for 5-10 games and he looks like he still needs more AHL time.

 

[Appleyard]

Same on D... would rather let Hagg walk and sign Joakim Ryan (who sure would be up for coming back close to "home") for half the price to be the #6-7... and better and more mobile. (assuming might not be able to afford Braun)

Provorov-Niskanen
Sanheim-Myers
Gostisbehere-Friedman/Ryan
Ryan/Friedman

 

[Appleyard]

As even if the cap just stays the same Flyers will be at ~$2.5m space with a 21 man roster once Patrick, Friedman, Myers, NAK and a back-up goalie signed. And that is including Morin and only 12 forwards.

And dont really want Hagg back, Braun is very likely to demand $2m+...

 

[Curufinwe]

The Flyers cap situation is complicated by having two players with very unclear medical situations.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

It was just posted that he is good in front of the net. That's a role.

Decidedly not a role. It's a skill. Conflating the two illustrates the problem succinctly. Unless rosters expand, hockey does not lend itself to narrow specialists the way baseball can.