Proposal: Simmonds for Faulk

[Tripod]

Came up on the main boards. Would you do this deal?

Faulk
Age 22
Shoots and plays the Right side
Had 32 points last year
Makes 4.83 million for the next 6 years. Locked in long term.
Top pairing dman

He fits the bill of the only type of a Dman I would move Simmonds for. Young, RH, and cost controlled for a long time. But would hate to lose Simmonds.

Then again in 3 years:

Sanheim Faulk 2-way
Morin Ghost beast and offense
Hagg Coburn shutdown
Alt

MacD traded for F depth.

I still think I keep Simmonds, but if the deal happened, I could see why.

Click to read more...

 

[Jtown]

hell no. faulk is one of the most overrated dmen in the game

 

[ILoveStephanieBrown]

nah. rather take chances with prospects than trade Simmer.

 

[Flyerss]

i'd rather get someone who will cost less like Sekera, because down the road we will be forced to let Coburn walk or trade someone because we don't have space for everybody.

 

[Striiker]

I'd say no. I'd rather take our chances on the prospects instead of losing a player like Simmonds.

 

[RJ8812*]

i'd rather get someone who will cost less like Sekera, because down the road we will be forced to let Coburn walk or trade someone because we don't have space for everybody.

 

[flyershockey]

hell no. faulk is one of the most overrated dmen in the game

No one ever talks about him, so how is he overrated exactly? If you're moving Simmonds, Faulk is the type of quality you expect in return.

 

[Pantokrator]

I think Simmonds is unmovable. Why would you move a possible 30 goal, 30 assist power forward? I don't get to watch any games, so maybe I am missing something, but he seems to be a top rate power forward.

 

[Tripod]

hell no. faulk is one of the most overrated dmen in the game

I never watch him play, so have no idea. But he sees like the type of guy that makes you at least think about it. Many others are an obvious no.

When people did the latest polls on D, he was ranked #34. Is that accurate? Close? I see Josi is #21 but a lot of guys say he isn't a #1 due to Weber.

Or is their really only 15 #1 dmen in the league?

 

[FLYguy3911]

The term #1 D is the equivalent to #1 starter in baseball. Every team has a guy that plays the role. It doesn't mean they are worthy of the title.

 

[FlyersFan61290]

I think Simmonds is unmovable. Why would you move a possible 30 goal, 30 assist power forward? I don't get to watch any games, so maybe I am missing something, but he seems to be a top rate power forward.

Nope, you're not missing anything. I can't think of any clearly better power forwards in this league. Add to that he's a leader (got an A this season), is young and on a great contract.

I would say no to the proposal. I have loads of confidence in the d prospects the Flyers are accumulating.

 

[Flyotes]

With a little patience you keep Simmonds and prospects fill the void. Maybe you make this trade if your prospect pool is suspect.

 

[Domino666]

Simmer shouldn't ever be moved unless it's in a package for a generational talent or a clear cut #1 Dman,

 

[Prongo]

I think a better basis would be Schenn+ Schenn for Faulk. Then Carolina trades Eric Staal to Toronto because you know it's going to happen. They would have Lindholm, Schenn, and Staal as their top 3 centers then with a top draft pick. Could set themselves up well in the next 3-4 years. Just spit balling here.

 

[Garbage Goal]

Definitely no for a few reasons.

1) Simmonds' contract is absolutely freaking amazing. Arguably the best value in the league.

2) We are growing plenty of young, talented D in-house.

3) We aren't contending this season clearly so why try to? Besides, Ghost or Alt could possibly boost our D just as much as Faulk and if that happens and Coburn/Mac come back healthy then the D actually might be okay at that point.

4) Our prospect pool for scoring forwards is extremely, ridiculously weak. If we move Simmonds we can't replace him in-house as is. That goes for just about any scoring forward on the roster too. If we start shipping out forwards for D we end up having the inverse of our current situation down the line most likely with plenty of good to great D and a **** offense near bottom of the league waiting for prospects to develop. No need to go around another circus like that down the line.

 

[Jtown]

I feel like the term #1 dman is dated.

 

[Psuhockey]

Absolutely and it's not even close. Quality right handed defensemen are hard to find. He is younger than Simmonds and is nowhere close to his prime while Simmonds is right in his now. Faulk will keep getting better while Simmonds will only decline from here. Top pairing defenseman is worth way more than a top power forward. Simmonds is great but u take that deal and run.

 

[Sniped]

Definitely no for a few reasons.

1) Simmonds' contract is absolutely freaking amazing. Arguably the best value in the league.

2) We are growing plenty of young, talented D in-house.

3) We aren't contending this season clearly so why try to? Besides, Ghost or Alt could possibly boost our D just as much as Faulk and if that happens and Coburn/Mac come back healthy then the D actually might be okay at that point.

4) Our prospect pool for scoring forwards is extremely, ridiculously weak. If we move Simmonds we can't replace him in-house as is. That goes for just about any scoring forward on the roster too. If we start shipping out forwards for D we end up having the inverse of our current situation down the line most likely with plenty of good to great D and a **** offense near bottom of the league waiting for prospects to develop. No need to go around another circus like that down the line.

This is the most important reason, for me, why Simmonds goes nowhere. You summed it up nice GG.

 

[Qyburn]

Haven't even considered trading Simmonds in at least a year. Overnight our offense would go from above average to significantly below. Who would be 3rd best offensive forward? Read? lol

 

[Beef Invictus]

I feel like the term #1 dman is dated.

Sort of. Its a problematic term because there just aren't enough dmen of that caliber to go around.

 

[Random Forest]

He is younger than Simmonds and is nowhere close to his prime while Simmonds is right in his now.

Why?


Just because a player is younger doesn't mean he will improve indefinitely. That's lazy, HFboards logic.

 

[Garbage Goal]

Sort of. Its a problematic term because there just aren't enough dmen of that caliber to go around.

For just about every position ranking term (1D, 1C, whatever) there's problems with there being no universal definition and not every team having a true player of that caliber, even if someone has to play the role. For instance, I doubt Buffalo has a 1 anything currently.

 

[RJ8812*]

Why?


Just because a player is younger doesn't mean he will improve indefinitely. That's lazy, HFboards logic.

HFBoard logic: where potential that may never be reached is more valuable than current ability

 

[TheLegendkiller]

Absolutely and it's not even close. Quality right handed defensemen are hard to find. He is younger than Simmonds and is nowhere close to his prime while Simmonds is right in his now. Faulk will keep getting better while Simmonds will only decline from here. Top pairing defenseman is worth way more than a top power forward. Simmonds is great but u take that deal and run.

No. No that's stupid. All of it. You tell Carolina to **** off and go back to playing Simmonds.

 

[The Couturier Effect]

Nope. No point in sacrificing forward depth for something we can develop in a couple of years. We need to be patient.