Hiesenberg
Registered User
- Jul 2, 2013
- 15,576
- 1,875
Proposal: Dahlin to Philly
- Thread starter BrindamoursNose
- Start date
- Sep 28, 2014
- 76,697
- 123,241
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
BillDineen
Former Flyer / Extinct Dinosaur Advisor
- Aug 9, 2009
- 9,375
- 8,101
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
He’s pretty damn good. I don’t like using the term generational though. It’s a used way too liberally these days when describing players overall effectiveness in sports.
But yeah they’re not trading the pick nor is any other team that lands it. People theorize this every year & even in lighter draft year’s at the top like last year & it still never gets moved.
Hiesenberg
Registered User
- Jul 2, 2013
- 15,576
- 1,875
Ah. But yea, the #1 overall pick doesn't get traded often. The Flyers would have to obtain it organically, which they could.
Tripod
I hate this team
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2008
- 20,136
- 14,255
Not the point. The prompt is: If ARI offers this to you, do you take it?
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2008
- 20,136
- 14,255
How come?
I don't disagree necessarily, I'm just curious why. Do you have that much faith in Sanheim? Think it's just TOO many assets for 1 major asset? Lemme pick your brain.
- Sep 28, 2014
- 76,697
- 123,241
Heres whats gonna happen:
Edmonton wins lottery for 2nd pick and a Draft Day deal will send Wayne Simmonds and STLs 1st to Edmonton for the pick. We select Andrei Svechnikov and win 3 of the next 8 Cups with Iron Mike Keenan and his understanding of Russian players (Svech, Ruby, Provy, Pimp) behind the bench
Edmonton wins lottery for 2nd pick and a Draft Day deal will send Wayne Simmonds and STLs 1st to Edmonton for the pick. We select Andrei Svechnikov and win 3 of the next 8 Cups with Iron Mike Keenan and his understanding of Russian players (Svech, Ruby, Provy, Pimp) behind the bench
Tripod
I hate this team
Simmonds is worth 2 1st himself...look at Schenn and Lucic returns.
I don't believe the difference between Sanheim and Dahlin will be 4 1st rounders.
When you watch Dahlin, you see an extremely talented kid who is ALLOWED to lead rushes, take chances, etc... Sanheim was like that in Jr too. Now yes Dahlin is doing it in a men's league, but it's also on a much bigger ice surface too which matters.
We have seen some flashes of Sanheim when it's late in games and we are trailing and the leash is let off him. Under the right system and coach, I believe he can be something we would hate trading away.
Trade Simmonds for those 2 1st rounders and I would be happy.
- Sep 28, 2014
- 76,697
- 123,241
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2008
- 20,136
- 14,255
Excellent answer.
I actually believe Sanheim and Dahlin can be just as good as each other, but since he's going to be a #1 I thought that was more realistic. If I made it Morin instead of Sanehim, I have a feeling it wouldn't be as difficult of a choice.
tymed
Registered User
I don't see how trading Sanheim plus a pile of high value assets for another d-prospect of any caliber makes sense for us.
Sanheim being severely underrated here and that's not to imply anything about Dahlin.
I wouldn't even begin to consider this as a Flyers fan.
Sanheim being severely underrated here and that's not to imply anything about Dahlin.
I wouldn't even begin to consider this as a Flyers fan.
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2008
- 20,136
- 14,255
I'm not saying I'd do it, but it makes sense because Dahlin is rated to be a potential generational player (key word: potential). You can see why you'd give up a lot for him, but I'm not saying I'd do it. I'm making this offer because I know it'll hurt both ways.
Sanheim may be even better than Dahlin, but he's certainly a top rated guy. Arguably best Swedish D prospect ever.
tymed
Registered User
Fair enough, I don't mean to ridicule the suggestion at all because I enjoy any thought out material on the board regardless of my own opinion. I still see Sanheim's potential being at least as high as any of our blueliners. After the Pronger trade, it would feel foolish to put so many eggs in a single basket again, especially when as you highlight, "potential", is still even at the forefront of such a young player's descriptors. The eggs seem either too shiny or too many to me here, though.
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2008
- 20,136
- 14,255
Can't disagree. Now here's the big question:
If the #1 pick was projected to be a #1 stud forward, would you do it?
Sawdalite
SelectLouNolan4PFHoF
I believe if we are talking 'generational' stud Forward... above and beyond the potential we have with Patrick... we would have to seriously consider moving a high ended potential at D plus for him.
We are certain that barring injury, we have our long-term #1 D-man of the next decade or so... and a stockpile of talented D Prospects progressing in the pipeline... but, while Patrick is a potential #1 of the next decade, he is not over the top #1... when a 'generalization' Forward I available to lead over the potential Forward Prospects, you have to seriously go after him... and Sanheim and multiple Numbers Ones... or one #1 and Simmonds' final Contract Season... plus... is not out of the question... think of the Rights to Lindros back when... and the potential of Forsberg, without foreknowledge of what he was to become and what Eric was to be be hampered with.
So... to answer your question directly... YES... yes I certainly would. ... But only if Stud=Projected 'Generational '.
wouldnt do the deal from OP...too much for one guy we don't really "need".
depends on the forward. Last draft class, no. McJesus/Matthews...sure.
Nolan Patrick looks like a solid player when on the ice so far, but our 2 years of top picks netted us a middling forward and a solid looking guy...not generational talents.
