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

Again, no idea. I am not good at this part of the game.

If the Flyers said Ghost, Simmonds and the first this season. Feels like an overpay, but who knows. Again - not good at these mock proposals I have no idea what GM's want/ask.

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
- gypsypunk92

Sir, you are posting in hockeybuzz where rational thought is not recognized and generally shunned.

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.
- Mononoke

They should've kept White over Weise. Weise is another guy who scores maybe once a month. The Flyers had enough of those type of players already. White was a part of a good, physical 4th line and they tore it apart.

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

Theres always risk to assume.

Look at MIN prospect forwards....Kunin/Eriksson Ek/Kaprisov. If they miss this spring they'll go for it again. Simmonds could fit.

ANA has Sam Steel. Maybe they're an option


These players + another draft piece are enticing enough.

Our players don't poop gold. Lets get that out there right now.

Some people laugh at me on here when I say it, but I've said it before and I'll say it again: Bellemare could do what Coots does for 1/4 the cost. They're pretty similar players, and I actually think Bellemare might be better defensively. And during the win streak, he did fill that role, and we won. People can criticize me for saying it, but the truth is the truth. People get way too attached to dime a dozen guys like Coots. If we could get a low 1st for him, I would in a heartbeat.
- Mononoke

the only reason coots gets much more leeway is that he was a top 10 pick

Again, no idea. I am not good at this part of the game.

If the Flyers said Ghost, Simmonds and the first this season. Feels like an overpay, but who knows. Again - not good at these mock proposals I have no idea what GM's want/ask.
- flyer_nutter

Draisaitl is a star player. He's likely going to be a 70 point center at 21. Do the math.

Draisaitl is a star player. He's likely going to be a 70 point center at 21. Do the math.
- MJL

Well see? Top 3 drafting it is.

Theres always risk to assume.

Look at MIN prospect forwards....Kunin/Eriksson Ek/Kaprisov. If they miss this spring they'll go for it again. Simmonds could fit.

ANA has Sam Steel. Maybe they're an option


These players + another draft piece are enticing enough.

Our players don't poop gold. Lets get that out there right now.
- Just5

What do you honestly and truly know about any of those players?

What do you honestly and truly know about any of those players?
- MJL

Minnesota could actually be a fit and maybe one of the better ones

What do you honestly and truly know about any of those players?
- MJL

It's not about that. It's about realizing what the trade value is for Simmonds and believing that yes you can get a blue chip piece back. How old was Filip Forsberg when traded? 17-18?

Don't underestimate a GM/Coach on the chopping block and what kind of value that could bring back trading with them that's all. The combination of the contract/player when we're talking about Simmonds is rare.

Lucic trade with LAK got them the #13 pick, Martin Jones, and a prospect

That's Lucic coming off an 18 goal 44 point season, and a 20 goal/55 point season the year before with just one year left on his deal on a 6 million dollar cap hit.

Simmonds is light years ahead in value, with every team in the league capable of fitting him into their salary structure if the flyers retain salary. Realize what you have

It's not about that. It's about realizing what the trade value is for Simmonds and believing that yes you can get a blue chip piece back. How old was Filip Forsberg when traded? 17-18?

Don't underestimate a GM/Coach on the chopping block and what kind of value that could bring back trading with them that's all. The combination of the contract/player when we're talking about Simmonds is rare.

Lucic trade with LAK got them the #13 pick, Martin Jones, and a prospect

That's Lucic coming off an 18 goal 44 point season, and a 20 goal/55 point season the year before with just one year left on his deal on a 6 million dollar cap hit.

Simmonds is light years ahead in value, with every team in the league capable of fitting him into their salary structure if the flyers retain salary. Realize what you have
- Just5

Yes, it is about that. Who doubts that Simmonds, who is a 30 goal 60 point winger would bring back a blue chip prospect? Combined with his cap hit, he's a valuable piece to trade. You're not informing anyone in stating realize what you have. You have to get the right players back. Prospects are just prospects until they become more. You have to be successful in the trade of a player like Simmonds, or you screwed up.

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
- gypsypunk92

bishop was had for peanuts we're not getting anything for anyone
- 2Real

the trade deadline is Wednesday. plenty of time

- nastyflyergirl

All of those teams had one thing the Flyers don't. Solid goaltending to say the least.

Yes, it is about that. Who doubts that Simmonds, who is a 30 goal 60 point winger would bring back a blue chip prospect? Combined with his cap hit, he's a valuable piece to trade. You're not informing anyone in stating realize what you have. You have to get the right players back. Prospects are just prospects until they become more. You have to be successful in the trade of a player like Simmonds, or you screwed up.
- MJL

You mentioned franchise prospect. I don't know of any that aren't playing in the NHL for their teams. So you're not getting Gaudreau, Matthews or Marner, etc. Im not sure what's meant by that.

You need to get a blue chip Center prospect and a 1st. That means those players or player of that ilk I mentioned and a 1st. That to me is worth it and that's what I think his value is, bare minimal.

You will start a bidding war putting him on the market. Because everyone can afford him. Its crazy important

You mentioned franchise prospect. I don't know of any that aren't playing in the NHL for their teams. So you're not getting Gaudreau, Matthews or Marner, etc. Im not sure what's meant by that.

You need to get a blue chip Center prospect and a 1st. That means those players or player of that ilk I mentioned and a 1st. That to me is worth it and that's what I think his value is, bare minimal.

You will start a bidding war putting him on the market. Because everyone can afford him. Its crazy important
- Just5

My point is that just like I don't, you don't know enough about those players to know that it's worth it. They're just names.

All of those teams had one thing the Flyers don't. Solid goaltending to say the least.
- CupOnBroadSt.

absolutely need to sure up the goaltending but that wasn't his point. the point was there are more ways to build a winner than tanking and getting top 3 picks

My point is that just like I don't, you don't know enough about those players to know that it's worth it. They're just names.
- MJL

A young prospect center that you believe can fill a top 6 role with 1C upside plus a first...bare minimal.

A young prospect center that you believe can fill a top 6 role with 1C upside plus a first...bare minimal.
- Just5

Who is that player, and on what team? We can all make a general statement. I don't believe there are many teams if any, that would give you a prospect that has 1C potential and a first round pick for Simmonds.

Im not following this...its probably obvious but Im not getting it right now.

Giroux's decline is just such a massive situation right now. prohockeytalk's article about typical regression is insanely laughable. Crosby is scoring more now than at any point in his career and leads the league in goals. Giroux looks passable as a 3rd line scoring center. Giroux's decline might lead to Simmonds departure. Its crazy.

I agree with a large part of what you said because Giroux is just not that guy anymore. They could retool before...now it's a rebuild, or it should be a rebuild barring some unforeseen injury in Giroux that's really hampering him.

There's no real reason to dig into any situation but this Giroux one. Not the coach, the goalies, etc. Giroux is it
- Just5

and with johnston behind the bench he wasnt a point per game player and people were saying the end was near. is it implausible to think that giroux could rebound as well?

Who is that player, and on what team? We can all make a general statement. I don't believe there are many teams if any, that would give you a prospect that has 1C potential and a first round pick for Simmonds.
- MJL

Of course you can....look at what Kessel got on what was universally seen as an anchor contract. Kessel is a good player but Simmonds has more of an arsenal while scoring 30 goals...add PK to the list.

and with johnston behind the bench he wasnt a point per game player and people were saying the end was near. is it implausible to think that giroux could rebound as well?
- stayinthefnnet

I am a bit worried that Hak's system and style has been holding Giroux back these past 2 years

Of course you can....look at what Kessel got on what was universally seen as an anchor contract. Kessel is a good player but Simmonds has more of an arsenal while scoring 30 goals...add PK to the list.
- Just5

Who is the prospect with 1C upside that Toronto got for Kessel?

Kessel is a better player than Simmonds.

and with johnston behind the bench he wasnt a point per game player and people were saying the end was near. is it implausible to think that giroux could rebound as well?
- stayinthefnnet

Was Sidney Crosby ever chased down on a clear breakaway by Kevin Klein after a 15 foot head start?

Giroux I believe best case scenario could get back to 70 pts

Kessel is a better player than Simmonds.
- MJL

I dont think their is a single GM that would say "give me Phil Kessel over Wayne Simmonds"