So. I get it. I've read it. I just want to make sure I am saying this as nicely as I can, because I disagree with this premise strongly:

I'm not saying you can't trade Schenn. Nor am I entirely opposed to maximizing value on an asset. But I cannot express how strongly I disagree with the idea of trading him for, in essence, a draft pick.

Just say Schenn is what he has been, 40-50 points. Say the 59 points is a complete aberration. He is more 18-20 goals, 25-30 assists. That's what he is.

But we're saying that we went through five years of development for that, missing the playoffs twice as he developed and was a factor in us missing it, only to trade him for another draft pick in hopes that draft pick might be...what, exactly?

I'm serious. I need it spelled out to me -- we're trading the known quantity for an unknown. Not another developed asset at a different position. Not a roster player.

But a draft pick who we would then wait years to see if they can a) play, b) play as well as Schenn, and c) be better than Schenn.

I'm sorry. I realize it's opinions, and we all have them. But that is something I am unwilling to do. Because if the best I have to root for is five-year rolling cycles of development in search of "not too hot, not too cold, just right," for 23-25 year olds, that is simply unacceptable.

Because at some point, you have to build a team. You can't build a team around prospects and hope for the future, all while plugging in the Teddy Purcells of the world for a year here, two years there, while throwing more darts at the board and then bringing a Brett Connolly while the 2016 darts are thrown, then when they don't work out in 2020, we sell them for 2024.

At what point do you say "the 50 point guy is good enough," and let's address things we don't have instead of creating more holes?

When does that happen?
- AllInForFlyers

The big question with Schenn is his new contract. You gotta believe if he was asking for average money/length of contract, (whatever that actually is) the deal would have been done already. The fact that it isn't makes me suspicious that he wants WAY more than what the Flyers are comfortable with. If that is the case, trading him may be the better solution (assuming the other team is willing to give him what he wants).

If he was already signed for a length and amount that didn't hurt the cap situation, I wouldn't dream of trading him. I like him and the Flyers have invested a lot in him already, as you mentioned. But he isn't, and that variable is where most of this speculation is coming from...

This is interesting:

http://www.theverge.com/2...t-suzanne-vega-toms-diner
- jmatchett383

Congratulations! Hipster post of the week.

Source was wearing a Rush '84 US Tour shirt and making a Top 10 list.
- jmatchett383

Circumstantial evidence

But you are totally downplaying the "if" the asset you acquire even makes it -- there's no getting around the fact that Brayden Schenn is an NHL player. Even when I was all over him, nobody ever heard me say he wasn't an NHL player.

There is always risk that these guys are Brett Connolly, or worse, Zach Hamill.

Could you overvalue Schenn on a deal? Sure. Is it better to keep rolling the dice for guys who wind up with zero value? I don't see how that's possible.

Use Schenn in a package for a roster player, fine. Go for it. Use Schenn for a draft pick? That's not for me. I understand the position of others, but to me, that is not how to do it.
- AllInForFlyers

You will not get a roster player for Schenn that is already better than Schenn unless you are packaging in a top prospect. That's the issue with that. Why not trade Provorov for Shattenkirk then? One is a top pairing guy; one has never played a game. Adding Shattenkirk in his prime makes the team better than adding Provorov in his first few years....maybe Provorov never ends up as good as Shattenkirk.

There's always risks to trading NHL knowns for unknowns. There's also rewards. A team has to decide how they truly value a player....and relative to how another GM values him. And then take that chance. Or not.

You will not get a roster player for Schenn that is already better than Schenn unless you are packaging in a top prospect. That's the issue with that. Why not trade Provorov for Shattenkirk then? One is a top pairing guy; one has never played a game. Adding Shattenkirk in his prime makes the team better than adding Provorov in his first few years....maybe Provorov never ends up as good as Shattenkirk.

There's always risks to trading NHL knowns for unknowns. There's also rewards. A team has to decide how they truly value a player....and relative to how another GM values him. And then take that chance. Or not.
- Mononoke

Granted; understood. I don't mind agreeing to disagree; it's a lively debate.

I just disagree.

There should be no arguments made to keep Sam Gagner for any reason.

There should be no arguments made to keep Sam Gagner for any reason.
- roenick97

The big question with Schenn is his new contract. You gotta believe if he was asking for average money/length of contract, (whatever that actually is) the deal would have been done already. The fact that it isn't makes me suspicious that he wants WAY more than what the Flyers are comfortable with. If that is the case, trading him may be the better solution (assuming the other team is willing to give him what he wants).

If he was already signed for a length and amount that didn't hurt the cap situation, I wouldn't dream of trading him. I like him and the Flyers have invested a lot in him already, as you mentioned. But he isn't, and that variable is where most of this speculation is coming from...
- WhirlingDervish

Understood, as well; there are certainly limits to what you can pay guys, as well. But I'm also one of those people that will beat your ass in arbitration, so if Schenn's talking crazy on his AAV, let's let an arbitrator decide whether his high shooting percentage in one season offsets multiple pointless streaks in every other season he's played.

The Flyers shouldn't fear beating Brayden Schenn's ass in arbitration and making him do it again

I think we agree for the most part. Obviously the Flyers have to identify what they think he is worth, both to the team, and in cap dollars. But the decision of trading him because hes not part of the core doesnt have to come now. He can be resigned and traded a year or 3 later. He still has value to the Flyers right now to where it might not be worth trading him now.
- YuenglingJagr

I think Schenn can be replaced in the short term. Like I said, a short term signing or two to add up for the same cost. Maybe Konecny makes the team. If they think that someone like Keller (or whoever) not only can replace Schenn but surpass him, then and only then you mull it over. Really the contract, at his age, isn't make or break. It's a factor, but the issue of whether you view him as essential or as a chance to sell high -- that's the main thing.

Listen, you can't create a team of only "essential" players. Some guys are just respectable/good and complimentary, maybe even a tad overpaid. It's why I'm not opposed to a new contract for him. It's all about value.

Checked the Flyers Instagram feed. People want to trade Giroux and sign Vanek. So there's that.

I think Schenn can be replaced in the short term. Like I said, a short term signing or two to add up for the same cost. Maybe Konecny makes the team. If they think that someone like Keller (or whoever) not only can replace Schenn but surpass him, then and only then you mull it over. Really the contract, at his age, isn't make or break. It's a factor, but the issue of whether you view him as essential or as a chance to sell high -- that's the main thing.

Listen, you can't create a team of only "essential" players. Some guys are just respectable/good and complimentary, maybe even a tad overpaid. It's why I'm not opposed to a new contract for him. It's all about value.
- Mononoke

I'm gonna bookmark the last 5 pages.

I'm gonna need a strong drink for tonight.

Understood, as well; there are certainly limits to what you can pay guys, as well. But I'm also one of those people that will beat your ass in arbitration, so if Schenn's talking crazy on his AAV, let's let an arbitrator decide whether his high shooting percentage in one season offsets multiple pointless streaks in every other season he's played.

The Flyers shouldn't fear beating Brayden Schenn's ass in arbitration and making him do it again
- AllInForFlyers

An arbitration deal would only be for 1 year, right?

I'm gonna need a strong drink for tonight.
- FlyersGrace

It is a day of the week, after all.

An arbitration deal would only be for 1 year, right?
- wolfhounds

You can sometimes elect two, but I don't know exactly when that applies

Checked the Flyers Instagram feed. People want to trade Giroux and sign Vanek. So there's that.
- hereticpride

Hexy also has to decide, realistically, how close/far we are and when our window truly opens. In 5 years, when you'd think the d men are all in their primes or entering them, our top forwards are entering their mid-30s. It sounds far away, but a 33 year old Giroux/Simmer (if resigned), a 32 year old Jake....it's a concern that we may need another legitimate 1C or 1W in the making to help out....and extend our window in the process. Anaheim is going through much the same thing with their D/FWD age gap. And I worry that they're in a liminal state of contending.

As for Brayden Schenn, I personally think we are a bubble/low seed team with or without him. I don't think he drastically changes the immediate years's forecast, provided he is replaced piecemeal.

That's the chicken/egg problem right there. NHL's popularity isn't getting them a major US tv deal.
- wolfhounds

NHL should be able to negotiate a deal that includes the Cup Final being played on NBC

Last minute predictions? I think Columbus moves back from 3 looking for Logan Brown but surprise, surprise he is off the board by the time they pick. I also think we see at least one pick in the 10-17 range moved.

Understood, as well; there are certainly limits to what you can pay guys, as well. But I'm also one of those people that will beat your ass in arbitration, so if Schenn's talking crazy on his AAV, let's let an arbitrator decide whether his high shooting percentage in one season offsets multiple pointless streaks in every other season he's played.

The Flyers shouldn't fear beating Brayden Schenn's ass in arbitration and making him do it again
- AllInForFlyers

I think most of this from a money standpoint is an overraction. He's a restricted free agent. I've seen restricted free agents take all summer to get a deal done. From a production standpoint, I think this is called developing a young player.

You can sometimes elect two, but I don't know exactly when that applies
- AllInForFlyers

If the player has to agree to 2, you have to assume that's unlikely given they believe they should be earning more. But, you should get a player who busts his ass trying to have a contract year.

Nah, the Hinkie move would be to trade Ghost to Columbus for their 2018 1st.
- hereticpride

Nope. A Hinkie move would be trading Schenn for Colorado's first this year and their first next year. Then using the first next year to trade down 2 spots and getting another first for 2019.

Thats a mother(frank)ing Hinkie

- wolfhounds

The correct response.

Nope. A Hinkie move would be trading Schenn for Colorado's first this year and their first next year. Then using the first next year to trade down 2 spots and getting another first for 2019.

Thats a mother(frank)ing Hinkie
- PhillySportsGuy

True.

NHL should be able to negotiate a deal that includes the Cup Final being played on NBC
- PhillySportsGuy

Agreed. That's the clearest indicator of hockey's popularity in the United States, the fact that golf and crappy tv shows are more valuable to NBC.