I think trading Simmonds and Schenn will be fairly easy and the Flyers will get good value.

I would consider hanging on to Jake as I think he can be productive into the future and what the club would get back may not offset that.

Giroux? I have no idea.

Let me put it this way, radical sure... I just have no issues fully cleaning house in terms of that forward core.
- flyer_nutter

Replace Simmonds with Giroux and you're 100% correct. Giroux's value will never be higher.

Replace Simmonds with Giroux and you're 100% correct. Giroux's value will never be higher.
- CupOnBroadSt.

I dont know what the value of Giroux is. Really dont.

Would they have to retain? Thats becoming a little irrelevant to me. I dont want to keep around 'Sundin' if it means he keeps me drafting out of the top 3.

He has 1 more point than Giroux and plays on a far more talented team
- PhillySportsGuy

Your elite hockey sense remains unmatched!

Toews has 6 goals and 10 assists in his last 10 games. Giroux has 2 goals and 3 assists in his last 10 games.

Toews has 44 points in 52 games. Giroux has 43 points in 61 games.

Giroux has scored 12 points in 5 on 5 play. Toews has scored 25 at 5 on 5.

BJ's pummeled the Rangers. (frank)ing sweet

I'm a huge BJ fan come playoffs
- Just5

Pretty sure most are BJ fands regardless of time of year.

I think trading Simmonds and Schenn will be fairly easy and the Flyers will get good value.

I would consider hanging on to Jake as I think he can be productive into the future and what the club would get back may not offset that.

Giroux? I have no idea.

Let me put it this way, radical sure... I just have no issues fully cleaning house in terms of that forward core.
- flyer_nutter

I think the difficulty comes in with the fanbase, the STH, the ownership group.

I always have to remind myself we are such a small minority in the fangroup. Most have no idea about what we talk about or give a crap about any of the rest of the league except Crosby/Ovechkin. They want to go down and watch that red light and listen to the goal horn and hug their kids/grankids which reminds them of good old bully times. These people aren't willing to sit through a rebuild. I don't know if this organization can do it with all the other poop that goes along with. Remember who they have to answering to at the STH events...there's no time for losing!

I dont know what the value of Giroux is. Really dont.

Would they have to retain? Thats becoming a little irrelevant to me. I dont want to keep around 'Sundin' if it means he keeps me drafting out of the top 3.
- flyer_nutter

Part of me really thinks they could do G a huge favor by moving him to the wing. But then we have a massive hole down the middle.

Part of me really thinks they could do G a huge favor by moving him to the wing. But then we have a massive hole down the middle.
- hereticpride

I think we do both him and the club a favour by moving him off the club and retaining salary.

You do that, and he has some value in a trade. I dont care about the hole thats left, I really dont. I care about drafting higher than 10th.

I think trading Simmonds and Schenn will be fairly easy and the Flyers will get good value.


- flyer_nutter

Exactly what I mean. The Flyers would have no problem trading either player. It's about getting the right value not just good value. If you're doing it to set your team up for the future, then it has to be in the right deal. You can't miss. I don't think you get franchise value for either player.

Exactly what I mean. The Flyers would have no problem trading either player. It's about getting the right value not just good value. If you're doing it to set your team up for the future, then it has to be in the right deal. You can't miss. I don't think you get franchise value for either player.
- MJL

Its a two pronged approach so to speak.

By trading them you get pieces back, but also draft higher yourself. That to me is more important.

Edit: I dont simply hang on to these guys because I dont get as much back as I wanted. That accomplishes nothing.

Picking top three might be the key for all currently successful teams.

Sidney Crosby and Joe Thornton. Two former first overall picks just faced in the Stanley Cup Final. Patrick Marleau and Evgeni Malkin are two former second over picks, support players to the two players I just mentioned. Patrick Kane and John Tavares, franchise changing first overall picks. Toronto's current situation with Austin Matthews. I don't believe anyone who says the picks are what's gonna get us over the top. I'm starting to buy into needing a franchise changing generational talent if we truly believe we can win it all. Steve Stamkos has seen a Cup Final. Connor McDavid is trending in this direction. Alex Ovetchin's team I believe is a contender every year.
- SuperSchennBros

I will agree that more times than not, picking 1st overall, and in the top 3 multiple years, will without a doubt turn your team into a threat to win the Cup. Those teams you just mentioned as examples. But you can also cite several examples of not needing to tank/draft top 3 multiple years - many teams in the current NHL did not need to do this.

Here are a few examples:

LA Kings - aside from Doughty being a top 5 pick (and Provorov could be our Doughty), none of their forwards or key contributors were drafted top 3 or 1st overall. And they have two cups.

Anaheim - none of their key cogs up front were lottery picks. Perry/Getzlaf from the deep 2003 draft (much like the 2015 draft), as well as guys they acquired via trade, free agency or later in the draft. Then coupled with a couple of good young defensemen. Basically, they are ideally what our team was trying to do in a way. They've been in the conference finals recently and are a perennial playoff team capable of going deep.

Minnesota - very well could be poised for a deep run, and again no tanking really. All of their key contributors were not former 1st overall guys.

NY Rangers - pains me to write this, and I don't see them as a perrenial cup contender, and I personally think they are not a well managed team, but they have a very above average forward group that was all acquired via signings, trades and the sort. They didn't need to tank. Is it sustainable? Probably not. But worth noting.

Boston Bruins - they won a cup as recently as 2011 and were in a final in 2013, and they did not have to tank at all to get there. No true mega generational talent drafted in the top 3 there, and it worked out just fine.

Moral of the story - yes, getting a generational guy like Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, Ovechkin, Tavares, Stamkos, McDavid, ect is more of a lock in terms of building a contender, but it is not the only way to build your team. LA and Boston won cups without having to bottom feed for 4-5 years. And there's other teams that are probably good enough to win a cup that didn't have to do it either. And for every one of these first overall picks, you have busts too. Yakupov and so forth. If Edmonton doesn't get McDavid they are probably still a good team, but probably not a cup contender and they had how many first overall picks?

I guess what I'm trying to say is, Hexy is following the LA approach, and if we just give it a few more years, I'm sure he will pull the trigger once we are closer to contention on a big signing or trade ala Carter, Richards and Gaborik. You can still win a Cup without generational talent being drafted after a tank. There isn't one specific blueprint to follow. Sorry for the long post, but just my 2 cents

Its a two pronged approach so to speak.

By trading them you get pieces back, but also draft higher yourself. That to me is more important.
- flyer_nutter

Having a fire sale is not as easy as you think. You still have to weigh the return versus the value of the player. Think about what team would be interested in Simmonds. I would need at least one high value asset in return.

I will agree that more times than not, picking 1st overall, and in the top 3 multiple years, will without a doubt turn your team into a threat to win the Cup. ..................


Sorry for the long post, but just my 2 cents
- gypsypunk92

Very good post, and what holds me back sometimes when I say rebuild.

I think if the Giroux decline wasn't so evident, and the lack of development in Schen/Coots - I'd be more in line with this kind of thinking.

Having a fire sale is not as easy as you think. You still have to weigh the return versus the value of the player. Think about what team would be interested in Simmonds. I would need at least one high value asset in return.
- MJL

Haha thats very true. Hence why I am not GM. Thank god - for all our sakes.

Very good post, and what holds me back sometimes when I say rebuild.

I think if the Giroux decline wasn't so evident, and the lack of development in Schen/Coots - I'd be more in line with this kind of thinking.
- flyer_nutter

Unless there is some unknown factor with Giroux that we're not aware of, they have to at least listen to an offer if one is made, which I doubt. They also have to be open to trading other players in the right deal. They're in a tight spot.

Having a fire sale is not as easy as you think. You still have to weigh the return versus the value of the player. Think about what team would be interested in Simmonds. I would need at least one high value asset in return.
- MJL

Just trading Simmonds....could prevent a total fire sale IMO. There's no doubt in my mind that Simmonds could bring back a bounty. I think about Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton. What Edmonton would give to have either Lucic or Simmonds on the ice with Mcdavid at all times.

The problem with the better teams is they need to give up a blue chip piece. Im not interested in a package of mid-late 1st rounder with meh prospects. I need the piece.

The problem with the better teams is they need to give up a blue chip piece. Im not interested in a package of mid-late 1st rounder with meh prospects. I need the piece.
- Just5

Exactly. You won't get it for Simmonds.

Martin Hanzal and Ryan White for a 2017 first round pick, a 2018 second rounder and a conditional 2019 draft pick.

Love the Ryan White part of this deal not sold on Martin Hanzal

Quote from wild blog

Exactly. You won't get it for Simmonds.
- MJL

Which is why they need to find a team that will give a good return for Giroux.

Just trading Simmonds....could prevent a total fire sale IMO. There's no doubt in my mind that Simmonds could bring back a bounty. I think about Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton. What Edmonton would give to have either Lucic or Simmonds on the ice with Mcdavid at all times.

The problem with the better teams is they need to give up a blue chip piece. Im not interested in a package of mid-late 1st rounder with meh prospects. I need the piece.
- Just5

I look at Colorado. Having MacKinnon, Duchene, and Jost. Picking first overall.

Could the Flyers make a play for either Jost or the 1st overall?

I know everyone states he is untouchable but I dont believe if you offered up Simmonds +, Edmonton wouldn't explore Draisaitl. Maybe not I suppose.

Winnipeg needs to see results, Connor is a LW but another name (not straight up for Simmonds).

I agree with MJL where he states trading Simmonds or someone else wont solve all the team's issues. It wont, and that isn't the point. It helps - thats all. I think they have to draft their way out. Top 3 baby.

Very good post, and what holds me back sometimes when I say rebuild.

I think if the Giroux decline wasn't so evident, and the lack of development in Schen/Coots - I'd be more in line with this kind of thinking.
- flyer_nutter

Thanks for reading. And yeah, I really think that's what sucks about all of this. If G was able to play like he did 2-3 years ago, and could have kept that level of play up for say 2-3 more years, I honestly thought this team would have basically become Anaheim. Perry/Getzlaf at their age of 31/32 would have been our G and Jake.

I truly wonder if this is really it for G. I pray and hope it isn't. He actually started the season pretty well honestly which is why I'm holding on to a sliver of hope. I really wonder if he's honestly just playing hurt, not truly healed from that hip injury. That could really explain a lack of explosive speed and overall decline, that's a pretty serious injury that could hamper you if not properly healed. I honestly think the prudent thing to do with G is let him get an entire offseason to get healthy, and sit down with him and say hey, we need you to be that guy again. Let's give him another season before assessing that he truly is done. He is only 29, and realistically, a player of his type should be able to have some productive years in their early 30s. Yeah, he'll never be what he was in his early to mid 20s, but I honestly always thought he could still be a 65-70 point top line center until at least age 33. Guys like Pavelski are still just as productive as ever and he's in his early 30s. I want to give him another year or two to truly assess before we make a panic move with G

Which is why they need to find a team that will give a good return for Giroux.
- CupOnBroadSt.

Retain 3 million.

Quote from wild blog
- YuenglingJagr

If I knew White could get a 1st and multiple 2nds with Hanzal as a throw-in, I would've kept White over Weise. Surely White+Bellemare could have gotten at least a 1st.

Which is why they need to find a team that will give a good return for Giroux.
- CupOnBroadSt.

You won't get that for Giroux now either. He would be extremely difficult to trade now or during the off season.

I know everyone states he is untouchable but I dont believe if you offered up Simmonds +, Edmonton wouldn't explore Draisaitl. Maybe not I suppose.


- flyer_nutter

What would the + be? Edmonton is not giving up Draisaitl with Simmonds as the center piece.

bishop was had for peanuts we're not getting anything for anyone