Flyers' 2017-18 roster discussion, part 2

[pinedak]

Teams are reluctant to give up their top prospect these days even for someone like Simmonds. Maybe in a crazed bidding war some GM loses their mind but I doubt it.

I agree the Flyers have Kunin level guys already in the system and are likely to take another with this year's first. Add Minnesota's first and it could possibly be two in this draft. But I still think the deal would be worth it. IMO, the Flyers are either going to have to draft their elite first line forwards or trade a young defenseman for one. So add a one Kunin level guy, maybe even two, to say Ghost in 2-3 years for the next elite young forwards who's relationship sours with his current club (Eichel?), and that's an overpayment package no GM could say no to.

And Philly would have the assets to cover the loss. I think your point about top prospects is important though. The fan base should about what it would take for Philly to move Provy for example.

If he was the price for say Subban you'd decline. But Karlsson is a different matter. Subban is a great dynamic player and then you have the tier above in Karlsson. That's what it takes, and Simmer isn't a Karlsson-level at forward.

Because the above is true, you have to compile enough 1st and 2nd pair assets to make the acquisition of the elite player possible without compromising a growing roster. Moves like Simmer for Kunin, a 1st, & 3rd-5th meet that goal in a way attempting to trade for an Eichel at present simply cannot. The former is good asset management. The latter is the mentality that put Philly in it's current position.

It's not as if Philly is taking those 1st rounders and drafting more Scott Laughton's. Those days are dead and gone.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I wouldn't complain if Philly acquires Kaprizov+ for Simmer, necessarily. I just think Fletcher would need to lose his mind to do so, plus the package would be smaller given his potential. Even if i'm not sold on it, it's there and Fletcher knows.

Unless you're acquiring a true dynamo and Simmonds isn't, the team giving up youth almost always comes out on the losing end. LA is a great example. The Richards trade is meh and largely bad for them across the board. It was the Carter move, an emergent Taffoli, and nabbing Gaborik that won them their cups.

In regard to the package being smaller, would you take Kaprizov over Kunin and a Minnesota 1st? I know I would without thinking twice. You can add on whatever middling assets you want to the Kunin package. That will not change my mind.

Richards was pretty damn good for the first Cup run and the year after as well before the wheels started falling off in '13-'14. For a guy who was asked to do defensive heavy lifting against very difficult QualComp in that system, 27 points in 35 playoff games over 2 years is impressive.

wow, I can't agree with you on this one. Bennett has actually done something in the league. He's our 2nd line C for the next 5 years...and possibly a 1c when G ages more.

This off-season, I think max Simmonds gets 2 firsts from a condtender. CGY is a builder like us...

Yes, he absolutely did score 18 goals last year. But he did it by shooting a pretty good clip and barely being possession positive while also being fairly sheltered in QualComp and zone starts. It's not like he did that without PP time, either. Then you have factor in a major shoulder injury to the same shoulder that gave him problems the year before. Then add on this god-awful year.

He's a fine young player with quite a bit of potential, but I want a guy I think can hit top line status if I'm moving Simmonds now. I'm usually all about the systemic depth, but you don't often have the leverage to ask for a true top end return. Given Simmonds' contract, this is one of those rare occasions.

To be fair, I wasn't exactly a fan (on that level, at least) coming out either. I know plenty of knowledgeable people who had him at 1 over Ekblad. If you're one of those, you're going to be all over him.

 

[Curufinwe]

It's not as if Philly is taking those 1st rounders and drafting more Scott Laughton's. Those days are dead and gone.

Rubtsov (22nd in 2016) is a pretty similar pick to Laughton (20th in 2012). A two-way center with decent size and good skating ability. Whether he will turn out to be a better player than Laughton in the NHL remains to be seen.

 

[SanBlom]

Rubtsov (22nd in 2016) is a pretty similar pick to Laughton (20th in 2012). A two-way center with decent size and good skating ability. Whether he will turn out to be a better player than Laughton in the NHL remains to be seen.

Agreed. Richards was similar too. When you are drafting around 20, this is the kind of pick you get. You just never know if they will end up an AHL guy or a gritty NHL guy. Sometimes you even get lucky and find a star. Konecny was another that could have been a Laughton. I really think the concussion that Laughton faced in his first year really stunted his development and caused major psychological damage.

 

[renberg]

Does Calgary getting blown out by Anaheim impact any moves that they might make this season? Some might say that they should let the youth mature and ride it out in order to be a serious SC competitor. Others might say that they're this close but could use some veteran leadership to get there sooner; make a move for a guy like Simmonds and pay what it takes to get him-like what Edmonton did in order to get Lucic. Its a tough call. Personally, I'd wait out the lack of experience and keep the talent.

 

[Curufinwe]

I find it hard to attribute his defensive struggles in 15-16 to the previous season's concussion when his offensive production increased massively. That's uneven development, not stunted development. Players suffering from major damage don't usually quintuple their rate of 5 on 5 scoring.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

As time goes on that 2012 draft just comes off as an average one as far as the first round goes anyway. Two guys selected not too long after Laughton in the first round have had their teams move them already as NHL future doesn't appear to be in the mix in Henrik Samuelsson & Stefan Matteau.

It what it is. You win some, you lose some. That's the nature of the draft.

 

[SanBlom]

I find it hard to attribute his defensive struggles in 15-16 to the previous season's concussion when his offensive production increased massively. That's uneven development, not stunted development. Players suffering from major damage don't usually quintuple their rate of 5 on 5 scoring.

Was referring to his NHL development. He looked scared when playing with the big boys. Afraid to do too much in fear of getting his clock cleaned again. I like Laughton and hope he is building his confidence back up down there. If he shows that he deserves a spot out of camp, I'm all for it.

 

[Curufinwe]

It's hard to put up points they way he did in the NHL in 15-16 if you're playing scared.

 

[SanBlom]

It's hard to put up points they way he did in the NHL in 15-16 if you're playing scared.

We are talking about Scott Laughton and his 21 points (pre-concussion) right? I'm not sure what point you are trying to make? He was rocked at the end of the 2016 season, wasn't he?

As stated before, I like Laughton and root for him to make his way back up. With confidence he would be a nice piece to have.

 

[1865]

Laughton's development defensively means I'd much rather have him learning the ropes on the 4th between Leier and someone else than i would having the chromosome twins bumble about all year again. We don't have to ice a checking line.

 

[achdumeingute]

He's a fine young player with quite a bit of potential, but I want a guy I think can hit top line status if I'm moving Simmonds now. I'm usually all about the systemic depth, but you don't often have the leverage to ask for a true top end return. Given Simmonds' contract, this is one of those rare occasions.

you won't get a top line young player (24 or less) currently in the NHL. Nobody is trading that.

Simmonds contract isn't a real asset anymore term wise. A rising team wants more than 2 years (look at us...dont we wish he had 2 more years on his deal). Part of the reason Richards and Carter got what they did was they had good caphits at great term.

 

[achdumeingute]

Does Calgary getting blown out by Anaheim impact any moves that they might make this season? Some might say that they should let the youth mature and ride it out in order to be a serious SC competitor. Others might say that they're this close but could use some veteran leadership to get there sooner; make a move for a guy like Simmonds and pay what it takes to get him-like what Edmonton did in order to get Lucic. Its a tough call. Personally, I'd wait out the lack of experience and keep the talent.

edm paid nothing organizationally for Lucic. Just money. If CGY wants to spend $$ there are options this year besides Simmonds.

 

[Lindberg]

Some of you guys are insane if you don't think Simmonds contract doesn't hold value and even more so if it was at 50%. Almost every GM wants a player like Simmonds on their team.

 

[renberg]

edm paid nothing organizationally for Lucic. Just money. If CGY wants to spend $$ there are options this year besides Simmonds.

Granted it didn't cost players or draft choices but Edmonton paid money, cap space and time for Lucic. Lets see where Lucic is after two seasons with all of the years left on that deal. Could very well be Hartnell-esque. The Oilers don't have cap issues now but in two more years, its going to get tight for them.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

you won't get a top line young player (24 or less) currently in the NHL. Nobody is trading that.

Simmonds contract isn't a real asset anymore term wise. A rising team wants more than 2 years (look at us...dont we wish he had 2 more years on his deal). Part of the reason Richards and Carter got what they did was they had good caphits at great term.

Every word of that is incorrect. In my opinion.

 

[Larry44]

Granted it didn't cost players or draft choices but Edmonton paid money, cap space and time for Lucic. Lets see where Lucic is after two seasons with all of the years left on that deal. Could very well be Hartnell-esque. The Oilers don't have cap issues now but in two more years, its going to get tight for them.

And Lucic was signed to ride shotgun for McDavid, but lost that job to Maroon. They didn't sign him to all that cash to play with RNH.

 

[achdumeingute]

Some of you guys are insane if you don't think Simmonds contract doesn't hold value and even more so if it was at 50%. Almost every GM wants a player like Simmonds on their team.

31 teams would love to have him. His cap hit is great. The return is the question.

 

[achdumeingute]

Granted it didn't cost players or draft choices but Edmonton paid money, cap space and time for Lucic. Lets see where Lucic is after two seasons with all of the years left on that deal. Could very well be Hartnell-esque. The Oilers don't have cap issues now but in two more years, its going to get tight for them.

I don't disagree, IMO, it will be worse than Hartnell, who is still producing.

 

[Lindberg]

31 teams would love to have him. His cap hit is great. The return is the question.

And he would return a good bit more than Lucic got.

 

[pinedak]

In regard to the package being smaller, would you take Kaprizov over Kunin and a Minnesota 1st? I know I would without thinking twice. You can add on whatever middling assets you want to the Kunin package. That will not change my mind.

I would walk from the 1st deal. Kaprizov for Simmer straight up is far too risky for me. And if he becomes a player worth trading for VS risk Minny won't move him anyway. That being said, both packages you formulated are too small. IMO Simmer isn't enough value to move Kaprizov if the Wild see him as the same player you do and Kunin + a 1st is too small for Philly. But to answer your question anyway:

Let's assume Philly take the 2nd deal but add a 3rd of middle value. And let's assume for the sake of argument that Kaprizov has 6th overall draft pedigree. According to TSN's expected value charts for 2015 we have the following:

We can expect Kaprizov placing him on avg a 1st line scorer. His pick rating on avg is 5.24. Kunin was drafted 15th which means on avg his score is 3.1. Now add to that another 1st rounder say after an early 2nd rd exit so the pick is 22 the score of that pick is 3.81. a 3rd in the 61-70 rage would be 2.45. Essentially what this means is the Kaprizov is better than the avg of those 3 assets which is what you're saying and I don't disagree.

But lets assume say that instead of avg Kaprizov is instead elite and instead of avg for 15th Kunin pans out as an avg 1st rd'er.

Kunin turns to be a 50 pt player the other 1st turns to be a 25-30 point guy and the 3rd at that spot has a 6% chance of being a top guy.

That's the formula i'm banking on and the reason I want assets over the single guy.

I value effective top-9 depth over star power. Which is to say if I could have a regular 1C and another 30-35 pt wing for G at ~70 pts i'd take it.

Richards was pretty damn good for the first Cup run and the year after as well before the wheels started falling off in '13-'14. For a guy who was asked to do defensive heavy lifting against very difficult QualComp in that system, 27 points in 35 playoff games over 2 years is impressive.

All i'm saying is if I had to remove 1 of Richards, Carter, or Gaborik from that squad i'm keeping the latter two

 

[Curufinwe]

I don't disagree, IMO, it will be worse than Hartnell, who is still producing.

I've seen CBJ fans say he might be getting bought out before the ED so they can protect Josh Anderson.

 

[pinedak]

As time goes on that 2012 draft just comes off as an average one as far as the first round goes anyway. Two guys selected not too long after Laughton in the first round have had their teams move them already as NHL future doesn't appear to be in the mix in Henrik Samuelsson & Stefan Matteau.

It what it is. You win some, you lose some. That's the nature of the draft.

And yet Maatta is a better selection. As are Subban, and Pearson. Talent was their Philly missed. I know it happens all i'm saying is you had legit talent on board still with needs at D, wing and tender.

 

[achdumeingute]

Every word of that is incorrect. In my opinion.

Sadly....we don't have a comparable forward prospect to use...but would you trade Sanheim (who is worse centerpiece than what we are asking for IMO) a first and Hagg for Simmonds just on "prospect value" alone.

There is zero chance I would do that deal today as a non contender.

Also, suggest an under 24 TOP line NHL guy to be moved.

 

[Curufinwe]

We are talking about Scott Laughton and his 21 points (pre-concussion) right? I'm not sure what point you are trying to make? He was rocked at the end of the 2016 season, wasn't he?

No, the injury happened in February 2015.