Flyers' 2017-18 roster discussion, part 2

[deadhead]

PS: Toughness is more about 'tude than size.

Gudas is not the biggest defenseman out there, but he gives and expects no quarter.
Couts certainly isn't the biggest center.
Konency is a smurf, yet he doesn't back down from contact (gets overwhelmed a lot, but that's a different matter, just needs more sand in his pants).
I've seen Provorov get hit again and again, but you don't see him flinch or panic in the corner, he anticipates the hit, gets the puck out of there most of the time, and manages to avoid the worst of it.

 

[Striiker]

So, according to the Hockey School of Deadhead.

The leadership of this team, from most leadery to least leaderish...

Gudas
Schenn
Del Zotto
Simmonds
Weise
Manning
Vandevelde
Provorov
Read
Konecny
Raffl
Bellemare
Giroux ("Captain")
Cousins
Schultz
Gostisbehere
Couturier
MacDonald
Voracek


And don't forget leadership = toughness and toughness = hits.
So since Voracek does't hit, he's a soft player. Since Voracek is a soft player, Voracek isn't a leader.

This is the logic we're dealing with.

 

[deadhead]

Just an FYI, Schenn and Weise are absolutely not slow, but they're big and hit so they can't be good skaters.

Weise has good but not great speed, Schenn's lack of speed was exposed when he played center, he's not slow but I wouldn't call him much above average.

 

[FatTugboatFlahr]

Weise has good but not great speed, Schenn's lack of speed was exposed when he played center, he's not slow but I wouldn't call him much above average.

Schenn can't play center because his brain lacks speed, not his legs.

 

[deadhead]

So, according to the Hockey School of Deadhead.

The leadership of this team, from most leadery to least leaderish...

Simmonds - intense competitor
Gudas - plays with a mean streak, but smart enough to stay out of trouble
Couturier - has always played a solid two way game
Provorov - no panic in him

Konecny - lot's of heart, fun to watch him bounce of guys 60 lbs heavier
Read, Raffl, Weise - the dirty work bunch, which is why they consistently post good CorsiRel numbers.

Schenn - only at RW, tentative at center, plays with real aggression as Cout's RW

Manning - willing to play physical on the road where you pay a price, too bad his courage exceeds his talent
Bellemare - willing checker, if only he had a modicum of offensive skills
Cousins - he's a dirty little so and so, draws a lot of penalties and doesn't back down

Vandevelde - does his job but no snarl there, not good for a checker
Del Zotto - he hits, but puts his stats ahead of the team, tough isn't the same as physical, it's physicality with a purpose - winning games
Giroux ("Captain") - he's soft and he's become sloppy defensively
Schultz - responsible defenseman who lacks any physical presence
Gostisbehere - offensive defenseman who prefers to stick check on defense and lets forwards ride him toward the net
MacDonald - skates backward very well, clearing the crease doesn't seem to be in his job description
Voracek - plays like a fast 180 lb forward at both ends, his best trait is puck management, his worst trait is anything to do with defense

Toughness is the will to dominate, to do what it takes to win.
It's why Michael Jordan is still the GOAT.
It's why Bobby Clarke is the Flyers' GOAT.

Yes, you need some skill players, but if the core of your team doesn't have that "will to win," you won't.

 

[Flyotes]

Depends on your model of leadership. Deadhead has a point if you look at it from that view.

For instance, I agree that Simmonds strikes me as the leader of the club this year. He checks more leadership boxes. Vocal, heart, example.

Sometimes, I think you guys get wrapped up in a username over the point username is making -- and you certainly aren't charitable about it.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Meh when it comes to off the ice unless a notable incident that makes the news it's pointless discussing these things as we're not there every day in the locker room to truly gauge. It's not like many NHLer's open up much to the public so even interviews are often pointless.

 

[Striiker]

Toughness is the will to dominate, to do what it takes to win.
It's why Michael Jordan is still the GOAT.
It's why Bobby Clarke is the Flyers' GOAT.

Yes, you need some skill players, but if the core of your team doesn't have that "will to win," you won't.

So by toughness are you really meaning something more like competitiveness? Like busting their ass?

Because the way you were saying it it seemed like you meant toughness in the form of hitting/strength/fighting..

If you're saying competitiveness/motivation/aggressiveness then sure, I'll agree with that. But if you're saying Giroux doesn't display that the I'll go ahead and disagree 100%. That guy plays tougher then half the bigger guys on the team. He's not afraid of contact at all and he wins board battles by shiftiness, smarts, and skill instead of brute strength.

 

[YEM]

Depends on your model of leadership. Deadhead has a point if you look at it from that view.

For instance, I agree that Simmonds strikes me as the leader of the club this year. He checks more leadership boxes. Vocal, heart, example.

Sometimes, I think you guys get wrapped up in a username over the point username is making -- and you certainly aren't charitable about it.

spot on with all point here, well said

 

[deadhead]

So by toughness are you really meaning something more like competitiveness? Like busting their ass?

Because the way you were saying it it seemed like you meant toughness in the form of hitting/strength/fighting..

If you're saying competitiveness/motivation/aggressiveness then sure, I'll agree with that. But if you're saying Giroux doesn't display that the I'll go ahead and disagree 100%. That guy plays tougher then half the bigger guys on the team. He's not afraid of contact at all and he wins board battles by shiftiness, smarts, and skill instead of brute strength.

Giroux wasn't the same player this year, I think you see him with nostalgic glasses, maybe it was the injury, or just getting older and with a lot of money in the bank, lacking some hunger. It happens. But he was avoiding contact.

If you read what I wrote, fighting had nothing to do with it (well, almost nothing, there are times in hockey when your more physical guys have to protect your smaller, skill players from abuse, which is why pairing Ghost with Morin or Gudas will work wonders!).

A lot of toughness is the willingness to receive pain to make a play, that's not as obvious as fighting, but more impressive - and where it stands out to me is along the boards, in the corners and the crease, it's scary to get the puck when you know you have a bullseye on your uniform, it's not just taking the hit, it's keeping your cool and making a play when you know you're gonna get hit.

When the Flyers played their best, they were flying, not like prime time Chicago burning up the ice, but playing with passion, going after the puck like a pack of rabid, underfed wolves, crashing the net, taking on bodies at the blue line, going into the corners and winning those battles, etc. Now that's tough to sustain when you lack talent, but it's also a mindset, and the more players who bring the fire every night, the more the other players pick up on it and the team as a whole plays with passion.

I just felt the last few years that this team doesn't have enough players with that kind of fire.

 

[Striiker]

Giroux wasn't the same player this year, I think you see him with nostalgic glasses, maybe it was the injury, or just getting older and with a lot of money in the bank, lacking some hunger. It happens. But he was avoiding contact.

If you read what I wrote, fighting had nothing to do with it (well, almost nothing, there are times in hockey when your more physical guys have to protect your smaller, skill players from abuse, which is why pairing Ghost with Morin or Gudas will work wonders!).

A lot of toughness is the willingness to receive pain to make a play, that's not as obvious as fighting, but more impressive - and where it stands out to me is along the boards, in the corners and the crease, it's scary to get the puck when you know you have a bullseye on your uniform, it's not just taking the hit, it's keeping your cool and making a play when you know you're gonna get hit.

When the Flyers played their best, they were flying, not like prime time Chicago burning up the ice, but playing with passion, going after the puck like a pack of rabid, underfed wolves, crashing the net, taking on bodies at the blue line, going into the corners and winning those battles, etc. Now that's tough to sustain when you lack talent, but it's also a mindset, and the more players who bring the fire every night, the more the other players pick up on it and the team as a whole plays with passion.

I just felt the last few years that this team doesn't have enough players with that kind of fire.

I don't think it's that they don't have enough players who play with fire or that the players have changed or lost their fire. It just seems like this team is heavily reliant on momentum and confidence.

When things go right they go really really right. They can dominate top teams and make you wonder why they don't do it more often. But then when something goes bad it's the opposite extreme where everything seems to go wrong. I don't see it as a leadership issue at all, whether we're talking about Giroux or any of the other vets/core. It's a subconscious thing where they just need something to go right and they snap out of it.

As for Giroux specifically, he has his flaws, I know that and have no issue seeing/admitting that. But playing with fire or, whatever you want to call it, isn't one of them. He wasn't avoiding contact and he wasn't struggling on the boards. He doesn't use brute strength to win board battles but he doesn't need to because he's so smart about it by using positioning and skill to make up for physical limitations. Did he lose board battles this year? Of course, but everyone does and if you only focus on the lost battles and ignore the won battles then you're just as incorrect as if you pretended he never lost them. He wasn't the same player this year, but it wasn't a physical issue, it was a bad slump and outside of that two month period of time he looked like normal. He's one of those guys that has trouble breaking out of slumps because when's things go wrong he puts it all in his shoulders and gets too frustrated with himself. The harder he tries to break out of it the harder it is to do so. I mean he's even had coaches tell him not to try so hard. It's both one of his best and worst qualities.

 

[Tripod]

Something that has not been mentioned much is Giroux's goal totals.

We all saw how G was not shooting nearly as much as he used to early in the season. Then as the season went on, he started shooting more but couldn't hit the net. Hopefully both were due to his hip.

8 of his 9 drop in points last year came from his goal decrease.
11 of his 15 drop in points over 2 years came from his goal decrease.

He needs to become a scoring threat again especially on the PP. Of course having Voracek being able to convert more on his scoring chances would open up more ice for G on his side of the ice. Ying and Yang.

 

[Rebels57]

Something that has not been mentioned much is Giroux's goal totals.

We all saw how G was not shooting nearly as much as he used to early in the season. Then as the season went on, he started shooting more but couldn't hit the net. Hopefully both were due to his hip.

8 of his 9 drop in points last year came from his goal decrease.
11 of his 15 drop in points over 2 years came from his goal decrease.

He needs to become a scoring threat again especially on the PP. Of course having Voracek being able to convert more on his scoring chances would open up more ice for G on his side of the ice. Ying and Yang.

Good observation. There are definitely more goals in his stick but its not a coincidence that his goal scoring really dried up once Hakstol changed their system and turned the Centers into a 3rd defensemen. I want to see the Centers more involved below the circles where the majority of goals come from. G has the hands and finish to score 25 no problem.

 

[deadhead]

It had nothing to do with the centers being the "3rd defenseman," when the Couts lined jelled Couts was in on plenty of offensive plays.

All the forwards have to be aware of the defenseman attacking and cycling to protect against the breakaway - the point is to have an aggressive system which doesn't give up easy scoring chances - but that requires forwards to have good hockey IQ and be aware of what's going on.

Next year do you really want to take Ghost, Provorov and Sanheim out of the offense just so Giroux can hang out hoping someone gets him the puck?

Giroux had plenty of opportunities to score 25 goals - it would help if his wide open shots from the lower face off circles actually were on the goal instead of wide by three feet.

 

[KrazyKat]

A couple moves I think we could benefit from.

TRADING for G Raanta NYR (1 Year Left)
SIGNING D Michael Stone CGY (2-3 Year Deal)
-
Bury of Trade D Macdonald
-

KONECNY-GIROUX-VORACEK
WEAL-FILLPULA-SIMMONDS
LINDBLOM-COUTURIER-SCHENN
RAFFL-LAUGHTON-BELLEMARE

PROVOROV-STONE
HAGG-GOSTISBEHERE
MORIN-GUDAS

RAANTA
NUEVIRTH

** again id prefer Mason, but Raanta is available and is a short term option. Stone is a pending UFA who is physical and can be a net front presence

 

[Tripod]

Vegas should be grabbing Raanta as 1 of their 2 NHL goalies....Grubauer the other...if I was them.

That's 2 steady goalies to start the franchise off.

 

[BernieParent]

Discussing a trade of Simmonds is one of those classic Head vs. Heart debates. Simmonds exemplifies the Flyer ideal like few other players. I want to cheer for him as a member of this team, yet I know that the long-term gain trumps a shorter-term perspective.

But ... what sort of realistic winning trade can be made? There has to be an impeccable alignment of factors, as were alluded to. The target team is realistically a Cup contender who would covet a player of Simmonds' skill set and who have high-end assets (prospects and picks) that they are willing to deal and that fit with the Flyers' needs. I'd also delete any Metro team because it would kill me to watch Simmonds in a fierce rival's uniform battling the Flyers in the near future.

 

[Flyerfan13]

Discussing a trade of Simmonds is one of those classic Head vs. Heart debates. Simmonds exemplifies the Flyer ideal like few other players. I want to cheer for him as a member of this team, yet I know that the long-term gain trumps a shorter-term perspective.

But ... what sort of realistic winning trade can be made? There has to be an impeccable alignment of factors, as were alluded to. The target team is realistically a Cup contender who would covet a player of Simmonds' skill set and who have high-end assets (prospects and picks) that they are willing to deal and that fit with the Flyers' needs. I'd also delete any Metro team because it would kill me to watch Simmonds in a fierce rival's uniform battling the Flyers in the near future.

Well said bp great post

 

[deadhead]

The window has closed on a player for prospects trade, trading someone who can help this team become a contender for players who may not contribute for 3-4 years doesn't make sense, and no one is going to give you a 22 year old performing at near the same level as the 27-29 year old player you're trading.

So the only trades that make sense are for fit, trading a playmaker for a more physical shooter (i.e. a more offensively talented Couts, more polished Simmonds or a faster Schenn). This team has too many passers, not enough scorers, too many smurfs and not enough fast physical forwards. So trading for balance makes sense, trading for assets that won't help until we face a roster logjam with all the young talent arriving the next three years doesn't.

 

[pinedak]

Discussing a trade of Simmonds is one of those classic Head vs. Heart debates. Simmonds exemplifies the Flyer ideal like few other players. I want to cheer for him as a member of this team, yet I know that the long-term gain trumps a shorter-term perspective.

But ... what sort of realistic winning trade can be made? There has to be an impeccable alignment of factors, as were alluded to. The target team is realistically a Cup contender who would covet a player of Simmonds' skill set and who have high-end assets (prospects and picks) that they are willing to deal and that fit with the Flyers' needs. I'd also delete any Metro team because it would kill me to watch Simmonds in a fierce rival's uniform battling the Flyers in the near future.

Appleyard and I were discussing this and the consensus seems to be a Lucic deal at minimum e.g. 2 1st rounds (13-16 or equivalent value) and a B+ prospect. But ideally Simmer would fetch essentially the deal Carter did. 1 top 10 pick (or equivalent value), young middle six forward, and a later pick ~4th rd.

He's the kind of player teams would bid for. The 2 years are so cheap it doesn't really affect the cap in any significant way and you have 2 years to figure out what's next. He's the sort of player you figure things out for. Every team wants a Simmonds. Unless you're the Caps or Pens "need" or "fit" isn't really a deterrent

That said it's tough either way but a list of say 5 teams? CGY, TOR, EDM, DAL, and WPG all have the ability to make that trade.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Discussing a trade of Simmonds is one of those classic Head vs. Heart debates. Simmonds exemplifies the Flyer ideal like few other players. I want to cheer for him as a member of this team, yet I know that the long-term gain trumps a shorter-term perspective.

But ... what sort of realistic winning trade can be made? There has to be an impeccable alignment of factors, as were alluded to. The target team is realistically a Cup contender who would covet a player of Simmonds' skill set and who have high-end assets (prospects and picks) that they are willing to deal and that fit with the Flyers' needs. I'd also delete any Metro team because it would kill me to watch Simmonds in a fierce rival's uniform battling the Flyers in the near future.

I've proposed this before, but for me the perfect move is Simmer to EDM for Pulju plus their first this season. It gives us a dynamic scoring winger who will be ready for the NHL next season, plus another lottery pick so we can either grab two guys in the first, or move up. Perfectly suits our timeline and that is not only exactly the kind of guy we should be targeting, but exactly the guy we should be targeting. By all rights, he shouldn't be available - but I wouldn't be surprised if Simmer could get it done. Provided he doesn't come up and light it up and the Oilers don't advance too far with him, these next few months are probably going to be the last time he is available at all IMO, because I could see him take the league by storm next season, especially if they put him with McJesus.

 

[pinedak]

I've proposed this before, but for me the perfect move is Simmer to EDM for Pulju plus their first this season. It gives us a dynamic scoring winger who will be ready for the NHL next season, plus another lottery pick so we can either grab two guys in the first, or move up. Perfectly suits our timeline and that is not only exactly the kind of guy we should be targeting, but exactly the guy we should be targeting. By all rights, he shouldn't be available - but I wouldn't be surprised if Simmer could get it done. Provided he doesn't come up and light it up and the Oilers don't advance too far with him, these next few months are probably going to be the last time he is available at all IMO, because I could see him take the league by storm next season, especially if they put him with McJesus.

I like the idea I just don't see EDM making this deal. Pulju is likely to be a 25-30 goal scorer by the time Simmer is a UFA. They are young enough to be able to wait on Pulju but I like where you're head is at.

 

[Psuhockey]

I like the idea I just don't see EDM making this deal. Pulju is likely to be a 25-30 goal scorer by the time Simmer is a UFA. They are young enough to be able to wait on Pulju but I like where you're head is at.

I agree it would have to be a team in a win now mode. I also don't think Simmonds would return a team's only top prospect so it would have to be someone who has multiple highlevel guys. Minnesota seems to be the perfect fit since they are close and have 3 very good prospects in Kaprizov, Ericsson Ek, and Kunin. Losing one wouldn't kill their system.

 

[TCTC]

Edmonton also is the last team that really needs Simmonds. They have like 2 or 3 inferior versions of him, so adding Simmonds would make players like Lucic or Maroon more or less redundant.

But I guess with Chiarelli making those decisions you never know.

 

[TCTC]

I agree it would have to be a team in a win now mode. I also don't think Simmonds would return a team's only top prospect so it would have to be someone who has multiple highlevel guys. Minnesota seems to be the perfect fit since they are close and have 3 very good prospects in Kaprizov, Ericsson Ek, and Kunin. Losing one wouldn't kill their system.

They also should be able to afford Simmer's next contract because Koivu and Pomminville should be off the books by then.