Post-Game Talk: PO #1 | FLYERS 0 at Penguins 7 | Wed., April 11, 2018, 7:00 pm ET

[Striiker]

I dislike folks just crapping on Kane just because, but I don't recall saying they should've traded for Kane to help save the season. So, that's a bit of hyperbolic tangent Beef had mentioned just to say so.

We knew from preseason that there were deficient players on the roster, guessing Hextall knew as well. If he did nothing to resolve that during the season, then that's a fault. He doesn't have to wait till the TDL to make a trade. NJ and Ana swapped a C for a D early in the year, in a pure hockey trade, and both found better success for it.

Niemi, Osgood, Thomas, JS Gigeuere goalies who were good, not great, (maybe caught lightning in a bottle for a season or two) won the Cup. Special recognition for the Hurricanes, the exception to the rule.

Trades that mortgaged the future for a u>5% increase in current season success are rightfully eschewed. I'm unsure where that means any hockey trades will be eschewed.

The Kane comment is making fun of a specific poster.

And yeah, obviously everyone knew there were some bad players on the roster, but this wasn't the season to worry about that. If he got rid of all of them he'd either need to a) acquire replacements, b) promote replacements from the Phantoms, which is probably no upgrade, or c) rush a prospect he didn't think was ready.

They suck to watch, but they're not going to be here when it matters. This year didn't matter.


Now speaking of a specific poster...

he gave up assets for a goalie that is a waste.

If these years are not intended to be competitive cup years why even keep your aging veterans?
Wouldn't it be much smarter to sell off all our veterans, ensuring us of an even greater prospect pool , more roster spots available for prospects, and ensuring us another high draft pick?

Giving up a single pick for Mrazek was a low risk, potentially high reward move if he just needed a change of scenery. Plus we needed an emergency goalie replacement. It was a good move that just didn't end well. Mrazek just sucks and it had nothing to do with a horrible Detroit team. If he could have bounced back to his previous play it would've been a steal and a potential valuable player for many years.

And we keep the vets because, although this year was never about competing, the near future could be. Depending on how players look and what's available in the offseason, next years team could be significantly better than this years, so the vets would obviously be smart to keep.

Good try Jtown. I look forward to a few days from now where I'll need to explain the exact same thing to you.

 

[Tripod]

he gave up assets for a goalie that is a waste.

If these years are not intended to be competitive cup years why even keep your aging veterans?
Wouldn't it be much smarter to sell off all our veterans, ensuring us of an even greater prospect pool , more roster spots available for prospects, and ensuring us another high draft pick?

Maybe that will happen. But it also doesn't need to happen since the 3 top vets all have 4 or more years left on their deals so can also be part of winning when it matters. And it would shock no one if Couts and G are re-signed in an attempt to win a cup. I know you hate hearing that.

Oh but wait, 2 of these guys were cap dumps last summer, so who knows.

 

[Striiker]

Problem being, I didn't expect Neuvirth to shatter like a Faberge egg dropped off the Empire State Building. I suppose they didn't either though. That's fair.

If Neuvirth could have stayed healthy, like his first year here, we'd be in FAR better shape than we currently are and maybe even have a chance in the playoffs this year.

When he played, he was good. Definitely worth the risk to re-sign him, but unfortunately he really can't be relied upon.

 

[deadhead]

I think the Pens are the better team. But they are not unbeatable. They are not a powerhouse that simply overwhelms everyone else by sheer talent. Their 4th line is as bad as ours. Their D is arguably worse than ours. Our stars match up with theirs. The major difference is they have an All-Star on the third line and a Hall of Famer on the 2nd line instead of a precocious rookie.

But forget about quibbling about the talent differences. This is the SCP and lesser teams win series all the freaking time. At a minimum, they show up and compete hard and don't get laughed out of the building.

What?????
They have three solid forwards on their 3rd line, and two HOF centers on their first two lines.
That gives them options we don't have, like plugging in Guenztel and Rust on the 1st line, and putting Brassard and Kessel on the 3rd line, then having all your best offensive players together on the PP.
The first and fourth lines might be a push, the second and third lines are a big edge to Pittsburgh

On defense, 1st pair is a wash, 2nd pair goes to Pittsburgh, no one wants either team's third pair.
PP definitely goes to Pittsburgh, PK is more of a push.
And if Murray is playoff Murray, he's heads and shoulders above any goalie we can throw out there.

The only reason Pittsburgh didn't get 110+ points in the regular season is the coach couldn't motivate them and Murray had a snake bit season.

Devils and BJs wanted no part of the Penguins.

 

[Tripod]

Problem being, I didn't expect Neuvirth to shatter like a Faberge egg dropped off the Empire State Building. I suppose they didn't either though. That's fair.

yeah...when you look at it HONESTLY....have Neuvirth as a backup was fine since he USUALLY is steady and him missing games meant Stolie would get starts most likely. But Stolie getting hurt really shook things. Then Elliott too....all at the same time. No one could have predicted that.

 

[Jtown]

Maybe that will happen. But it also doesn't need to happen since the 3 top vets all have 4 or more years left on their deals so can also be part of winning when it matters. And it would shock no one if Couts and G are re-signed in an attempt to win a cup. I know you hate hearing that.

Oh but wait, 2 of these guys were cap dumps last summer, so who knows.

no one called them cap dumps, and no i don't hate that. and 3rd coots is young enough and plays a style of game that it would be stupid to trade him. We have a top line center making peanuts, not trying to trade that guy.

 

[BernieParent]

You all have to stop having in-depth conversations during my work hours.

The point about FA: if every GM is coming to the realization that signing UFAs is too expensive for an unimpressive return, that is the right time to get interested in FA. As long as you don't offer a ridiculous salary / term, you won't get burned. So keep talking with FAs of interest and offer a fair amount. If the market balances itself, you can fill a roster hole once in awhile at a reasonable price. What a GM can't do is run into FA like a kid in a candy store, dead set on spending allowance on fast fixes.

Conversely, if GMs are souring on the FA route, they still will want to change their rosters. Hextall has many young talented pieces and can be the deal driver.

So it isn't just building from within, although that should be – and is – the central strategy.

Also, as for placeholders, Striiker, I read this all very quickly so please excuse me if I am oversimplifying what I think I saw your position as. A placeholder isn't necessarily an in the roster / off the roster binary decision. Bringing up NAK doesn't necessarily mean Read is waived, but it can kick him down a line, as an example. While they are here, the placeholders should hold intrinsic value to support the team's competitiveness while allowing the prospects to thrive and get better at their jobs. This is the central point of my stance on finding the goaltender for next season while Hart adapts to the AHL.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I assume this part of the conversation is narrowed down to goalies? I'm always on Team Asset Hoarding. But I see the reality of this team being ready before Carter Hart, or at the least not being content to twiddle thumbs waiting for him to blossom into an above-average NHL starter. I'm confident he will, as confident as you can be for a goalie prospect, but we will be twiddling for a few years at least.

Holtby is a name, along with Grubauer. Crawford, if the Blackhawks decide to rebuild for a couple years, health permitted. Varlamov perhaps. There aren't many. Then you start going the less proven route: Hutton is a more low-risk, low-reward option. There is a sea of mid-late 20s backups who might be able to make good stopgap starters, but they might be worse than Elliott. Bargain bin shopping for premium positions has a way of not working out. Most of these goalies have issues, one way or another. And we haven't even gotten into cost. By nature, I don't like spending premium capital in a desperate move -- because this is desperation -- for stopgaps. And I see a couple even more desperate teams who will create a bidding war.

So much has been posted today that it's impossible to know the limits of everything that was being discussed, so I left the question open-ended.

It sounds like you end up where I am, which may or may not be right, but at least it's specific and consistent. I can't criticize Hextall for not trading a high 2nd for Raanta because he's the one that worked out. If we limit the scope to those that did, we're just stuck in a loop of meaningless confirmation.

If a Holtby or Crawford hits the market, we can have a completely different discussion than we had previously. Fleury was the available name and they weren't trading him here.

But as I said above, I don't even think a goalie fixes what's rotten in the handling of this team. Better, yes. But deeper issues are at hand. I think this team needs a goalie, but while we also need a 3C, the chance of Vorobyev or Frost filling that role presents in-house options. Same with a 4D. I'm not worried about a bottom 6 winger; that we can fill with high certainty. Trading premium assets for those seems flawed, unless it's a specific player with long-term ambitions. But a goalie? In a vacuum, I can understand trading something of value, within reason and with assets recouped elsewhere (like trading Simmonds, which is a necessity at this stage anyway). But in this fart vacuum organization, I also understand why some would view it as a sunk cost for a team that can't get out of its own way. It can't be an isolated step forward. It likely will be. What a terrible situation this team willfully puts itself in.

Those deeper issues are more philosophical to me and they help solve the personnel issues without giving up assets.

Let's say the absolute pie in the sky situation happens and they acquire Hoffman and Grubauer. Only picks and prospects that have no NHL impact next year are traded. Does anything really change? If Hakstol is behind the bench and the organization thinks they can win every game 2-1, it doesn't matter what the team is. There is no reasonable talent level where anything meaningful happens.

I completely understand people being frustrated with watching this slop. I think we all are. I just don't think acquiring a player or two can move the needle.

 

[deadhead]

So missing the Playoffs in Year 5 under Hextall is acceptable and your also non-commital on the team being at a point where they should be able to win a playoff series in Year 6.

Im convinced that like Hextall, you'll never turn the page and start to think the present is important.

View attachment 113017

We're not going to miss the playoffs next year, in fact, I expect 100+ points if they just get mediocre (.910) goaltending.
How far they goes depends on the matchup.

But they won't be an elite team until 2020-21 or so, top ten is good enough to make the playoffs, but to get to the SC finals, you really need to be a top five team (the teams that "surprise" are usually top teams that underachieve due to injuries or chemistry during the regular season, then everything starts to click going into the playoffs).

You need 3 solid lines and 2 solid pairs of defensemen, and your 4th line has to at least hold their own and supply minutes to the PK, same with your third pair of defensemen.
Next year we'll have 2 solid lines as Lindblom and Patrick grow up, a shot at a better 3rd line, and more respectable talent on the fourth line. If Sanheim takes a step up, we just have to find a RHD to pair with him, and with Morin, Hagg, and ??? we should be able to field a decent 3rd pair.

 

[Magua]

And I'm sorry but not making the playoffs next year, barring some drastic occurrence (giving myself wiggle room!), is a step back. I don't know how else it can be put. If you want to spin it as 1 step back, 2 steps forward with the possible firing of Dave Hakstol and another drastic decision or two (which may or may not even be good), perhaps. God only knows how I'd like to see that happen. Though pressure from Hextall's bosses or even his own self-doubts might increase, which could lead to precipitous decisions.

But in terms of where this team is at, with their star talent and top prospects bubbling to the surface or, hell, already building prime real estate on the surface, this team should be entering the linear stage of progression, if all their ducks were in a row. Doesn't have to mean a Conference Final tomorrow. But the feeling of progression beyond individual players.

 

[Jtown]

The Kane comment is making fun of a specific poster.

And yeah, obviously everyone knew there were some bad players on the roster, but this wasn't the season to worry about that. If he got rid of all of them he'd either need to a) acquire replacements, b) promote replacements from the Phantoms, which is probably no upgrade, or c) rush a prospect he didn't think was ready.

They suck to watch, but they're not going to be here when it matters. This year didn't matter.


Now speaking of a specific poster...


Giving up a single pick for Mrazek was a low risk, potentially high reward move if he just needed a change of scenery. Plus we needed an emergency goalie replacement. It was a good move that just didn't end well. Mrazek just sucks and it had nothing to do with a horrible Detroit team. If he could have bounced back to his previous play it would've been a steal and a potential valuable player for many years.

And we keep the vets because, although this year was never about competing, the near future could be. Depending on how players look and what's available in the offseason, next years team could be significantly better than this years, so the vets would obviously be smart to keep.

Good try Jtown. I look forward to a few days from now where I'll need to explain the exact same thing to you.

next years team should be better than this team , but again in your words " we won't contend if we don't have a goalie.

giving up a pick for kane was a low risk, potentially high reward move.

 

[Tripod]

no one called them cap dumps, and no i don't hate that. and 3rd coots is young enough and plays a style of game that it would be stupid to trade him. We have a top line center making peanuts, not trying to trade that guy.

do re-look. There were plenty of Flyers fans calling Giroux and Voracek cap dumps and untradable this past summer.

 

[Tripod]

Side note....I did no work at all today...lol.

 

[Jtown]

And I'm sorry but not making the playoffs next year, barring some drastic occurrence, is a step back. I don't know how else it can be put. If you want to spin it as 1 step back, 2 steps forward with the possible firing of Dave Hakstol and another drastic decision or two (which may or may not even be good), perhaps. God only knows how I'd like to see that happen. Though pressure from Hextall's bosses might increase, which could lead to precipitous decisions.

But in terms of where this team is at, with their star talent and top prospects bubbling to the surface or, hell, already building prime real estate on the surface, we should be entering the linear stage of progression.

hak and talent is holding this team back. However the conundrum is how much is hak holding back our talent. For instance Sanheim, i think we can all agree since he was recently recalled he has been a possession monster. During the middle of the year when manning was logging 23 minutes a game , having Sanheim in the AHL held us back.

Coaching is so huge in the NHL , Sullivan basically saved the career legacies of Malking and Crossby and Kessel.

 

[Jtown]

do re-look. There were plenty of Flyers fans calling Giroux and Voracek cap dumps and untradable this past summer.

relax, giroux warranted every single one of his criticisms last year, he was awful even by his own admission.

 

[Striiker]

You all have to stop having in-depth conversations during my work hours.

The point about FA: if every GM is coming to the realization that signing UFAs is too expensive for an unimpressive return, that is the right time to get interested in FA. As long as you don't offer a ridiculous salary / term, you won't get burned. So keep talking with FAs of interest and offer a fair amount. If the market balances itself, you can fill a roster hole once in awhile at a reasonable price. What a GM can't do is run into FA like a kid in a candy store, dead set on spending allowance on fast fixes.

Conversely, if GMs are souring on the FA route, they still will want to change their rosters. Hextall has many young talented pieces and can be the deal driver.

So it isn't just building from within, although that should be – and is – the central strategy.

Also, as for placeholders, Striiker, I read this all very quickly so please excuse me if I am oversimplifying what I think I saw your position as. A placeholder isn't necessarily an in the roster / off the roster binary decision. Bringing up NAK doesn't necessarily mean Read is waived, but it can kick him down a line, as an example. While they are here, the placeholders should hold intrinsic value to support the team's competitiveness while allowing the prospects to thrive and get better at their jobs. This is the central point of my stance on finding the goaltender for next season while Hart adapts to the AHL.

The problem with FAs is usually if a player is worth a damn they're not making it to FA. That's why typically I hate the idea of signing one as a semi-significant piece of the team going forward and risking another Lecavalier-type situation.

As for what you said about placeholders, yeah I basically agree with most of that.

For example, a guy like Filppula was just added as a placeholder until there'was a better option at 3C, since Hextall wasn't happy with Schenn or Cousins there last year. So this year, the proper way to use him would have been starting off as 3C and then, if a better option presented itself, adjust and slide him down to 4C or to the wing. Laughton could have easily replaced him and been a better 3C... but Hakstol.

The placeholder is just here to save space so we don't need to invest in someone else (whether it be by making a trade or risking a bad FA signing) to take the space until a better option is found.

Ideally, they're someone like Read who can fill in and not be a horrible detriment at all times, but we're not always that lucky. If Filppula could have been Read-like, not a great player but also not a horrific player, then I'd have been perfectly happy... but instead he got severely overused by the coach, exposing his every flaw. The same kind of problem we had with Bellemare... the player being mediocre but the usage causing them to have a bigger negative impact than necessary.

 

[Striiker]

next years team should be better than this team , but again in your words " we won't contend if we don't have a goalie.

giving up a pick for kane was a low risk, potentially high reward move.

No, it would have been a completely pointless move because we don't have that goalie this year. Giving up a 1st round pick for him would have been idiotic.

And yeah, the team has no real chance without a legit starting goalie, but it's possible to have a better goalie situation next year. Options are extremely limited mid-season.

 

[achdumeingute]

Why not the '18-'19 roster? We should be able to compete next season if Hextall has the spine to acquire an impact player.

you cant fix 8 players in one year. Bottom 4 d have issues (Sanheim is fine...just not polished)

Bottom 6 have issues, Raffl is ok. Laughton isnt a good C option right now...I thought read was ok...but everyone else blew.

These guys have replacements in the pipe 2-3 years out...but that requires the patience.

 

[Rebels57]

And I'm sorry but not making the playoffs next year, barring some drastic occurrence (giving myself wiggle room!), is a step back. I don't know how else it can be put. If you want to spin it as 1 step back, 2 steps forward with the possible firing of Dave Hakstol and another drastic decision or two (which may or may not even be good), perhaps. God only knows how I'd like to see that happen. Though pressure from Hextall's bosses or even his own self-doubts might increase, which could lead to precipitous decisions.

But in terms of where this team is at, with their star talent and top prospects bubbling to the surface or, hell, already building prime real estate on the surface, this team should be entering the linear stage of progression, if all their ducks were in a row. Doesn't have to mean a Conference Final tomorrow. But the feeling of progression beyond individual players.

Goaltending aside, I feel as though next season we should be where the Jets are this season. Bonafide playoff team with hopes of making noise.

 

[deadhead]

And let's get over the myth that other teams rush young players:
Winnipeg hasn't done so:

Laine #2 - sure, but he's like Patrick but healthy, a premier talent
Ehlers #9, came up at 19 after 1 PD junior year
Trouba #9, came up at 19
Scheifele #7, spent two PD years in junior
Connor #17, one year at Michigan, one year in the AHL before he was brought up at the end of last season
Armia #17 (Buf), brought up at age 22 after they traded for him
Morrisey #13, two PD years in Jr, one year in the AHL
Roslovic, #25, 1 year AHL
Copp, 2 years at Michigan, came up at 21
Lowry, started 17 games in AHl, then brought up at 21

What distinguishes Winnipeg is they collected a lot of top 1st rd picks, and eventually they bloomed together.
Byfuglien (32) led defensemen in minutes, Myers (27) was 3rd
Wheeler (31), Stastny (32), Little (30), were 2nd to 4th in forward minutes.

We have 5 players 21 or under starting, 4 of whom were 1st rd picks.
The next couple seasons we'll add a lot of 21-22 year olds (next year NAK, Vorobyev?)
But the guys who come up fast will be high picks like Frost, and maybe this years' 1st rd picks.
So it takes a combination of a bunch of 1st rd picks and time for later round picks to mature.

The most frustrating time for fans is when the team is just good enough to lose (in the playoffs).
Because "if only" . . .

 

[achdumeingute]

he gave up assets for a goalie that is a waste.

If these years are not intended to be competitive cup years why even keep your aging veterans?
Wouldn't it be much smarter to sell off all our veterans, ensuring us of an even greater prospect pool , more roster spots available for prospects, and ensuring us another high draft pick?

take Voracek for example. Hes not too old for the window, you are less likely to get a better player than Voracek in a deal for him.

Just keep him and hope he's still productive in a few years is the more pragmatic option.

I dont think hex thought schenn would be here after his current deal...and he was second tier here...so it made sense for him to be dealable.

 

[deadhead]

The draft position for the younger guys reflect their possible upside.
Vegas was taking 30 players, they added a mix of solid veterans, underachievers and longshots.
They missed on a few, but you can only dress 20.

 

[mize370]

Why is everyone here saying Hart needs to be in the AHL next season. If he is our best goalie in camp then you start him! Enough of the tire fires we throw out game in and game out. Also I thought we should have rode on Lyons back until neuvy was back . I don't see any confidence in the body language of the players when we let in softy after softy. Least with Lyons they seemed to play with a bit more care in their own end . To me anyways

 

[baudib1]

So much has been posted today that it's impossible to know the limits of everything that was being discussed, so I left the question open-ended.

It sounds like you end up where I am, which may or may not be right, but at least it's specific and consistent. I can't criticize Hextall for not trading a high 2nd for Raanta because he's the one that worked out. If we limit the scope to those that did, we're just stuck in a loop of meaningless confirmation.

If a Holtby or Crawford hits the market, we can have a completely different discussion than we had previously. Fleury was the available name and they weren't trading him here.



Those deeper issues are more philosophical to me and they help solve the personnel issues without giving up assets.

Let's say the absolute pie in the sky situation happens and they acquire Hoffman and Grubauer. Only picks and prospects that have no NHL impact next year are traded. Does anything really change? If Hakstol is behind the bench and the organization thinks they can win every game 2-1, it doesn't matter what the team is. There is no reasonable talent level where anything meaningful happens.

I completely understand people being frustrated with watching this slop. I think we all are. I just don't think acquiring a player or two can move the needle.

I think it moves the needle if Hextall feels like he has made real moves and sacrificed future VALUE to make the team competitive and they still get embarrassed in the first round.

"Dave, you've done a great job getting the kids through the growing up process, but you've been here 4 years, I've given you good players, and the team isn't showing any progress."

It kinda depends on how Hextall sees Hakstol. Most coaches, even great ones, are not right for every team in every phase of the winning cycle. If he understands that Hakstol isn't the right guy to get them over the top, he might be gone this season. If he thinks Hakstol is the second coming of Fred Shero and he wants him here to partner with him for his 11-year rebuild, then we're in trouble.

 

[deadhead]

Weird how their coach has managed to make use of PEB when Hakstol couldn't.

He's playing the same minutes in the same role, just has better talent on his line.