Separately, the New York Rangers agreed to send their 1978 first-round pick (7th overall) to the Flyers in order to settle a tampering claim tied to the Rangers hiring Fred Shero as their coach and general manager while the Hall of Fame coach was still under contract to Philadelphia.

---------------------------------------------

I didn't know this. I guess I just never looked into it, interesting stuff, thanks Bill.

Not getting fussy in any way, I am more or less laughing.

Why is it better to keep him this year? Time to cut the cord. That being said I don't see many changes being made at all unless the GM starts trading young players and prospects to go for it now.
- hello it's me 2050

It’s a damn near impossible contract to move, please enlighten us on a trade that would get this done.

There's no need for sarcasm just because you disagree with me man

It's just an opinion. I said nothing about extending nor keeping him his whole career. In fact, I said it's better to keep him for THIS year and then maybe move on. IMO we are worse this season without Jake. Don't need to get fussy about it. I just think you can't pencil in Allison (long injury history and small sample size) or Oskar (cancer) just yet. Neither of them have sniffed an 85 point season or even close to 60.
- arichardson22

I didn't say they need to put up 85 points or even 60 points. All they have to do is increase their point totals which is a fair ask. Along with whoever they replace him with.

say 15 more each from Allison and Linblom. 30 from the replacement. Is that really an out of the ordinary ask?

It’s a damn near impossible contract to move, please enlighten us on a trade that would get this done.
- ClaudeFather

Good GM's find ways to get things done simple as that. There will be a cost. Up to the GM to see if he wants to accept said cost, whatever that cost will be.

Removing Jake is addition by subtraction imo.

Looking at raw totals is a bad way to evaluate anything, night in and night out he was sloppy with the puck and made turnovers we are not prone to seeing with him. He did not have a good season, asked to do a lot but he was part of the problem all year.
- ClaudeFather

agreed ....this was not a good year at all for Provy....it was even more exasperated because he was still the best one back there and continued to see a ton of ice time.

Not getting fussy in any way, I am more or less laughing.

Why is it better to keep him this year? Time to cut the cord. That being said I don't see many changes being made at all unless the GM starts trading young players and prospects to go for it now.
- hello it's me 2050

Few reasons, one will be hypothetical because of the ED:

1. It may not have looked it this year, but we have a "win-now" roster. This season was doom and gloom for sure, but let's take a step back: We took the Isles to 7 Games last year, the same team who has gone to ECF back-to-back seasons. Was that a fluke? Maybe, but I'd like to think not with how our team played in 19-20.

2. The only way we get rid of Jake is attaching picks + prospects, so you're not only losing Jake's production you're also losing assets.

3. IF (hypothetical) Seattle takes JVR and you trade Jake we are no longer a win-now team (IMO). Unless you really splurge in free agency but there's zero guarantee X or Y player signs with us.

4. Even if you make a hockey trade like some have proposed in recent weeks, such as Jake for Kessel or Jake for Wheeler, you ultimately have to bank on the right fit and you're still stuck with a long-term contract just with a different name attached to it.

5.It's not too much to ask for the younger guys to get 15 more points but it simply can't be penciled in or relied on just yet. And I say this as a big fan of Allison and Oskar.

It’s a damn near impossible contract to move, please enlighten us on a trade that would get this done.
- ClaudeFather

I thought that about Dion Phaneuf, he was then traded at least three times after I thought that. If you retain money or give up assets you can move anyone. Not saying it's wise or not, simply that nothing is impossible.

Not worried in the least about replacing his points. Which have been declining for 4 years now. Goal is to be a better team. It will be a cumulative effort to replace his points. Allison and Linblom can pick up some of it as well as the player they get to replace him.

You can remove guys with more points with guys who score less and be a better team. Or do you not think that isn't possible?
- hello it's me 2050

Totally agree. Many times teams keep Jake to the perimeter, where he is forced to skate around until he can find a play or just find someone open. If forced to just find someone open, the opponent has time to get back in position and the play eventually gets snuffed out in a variety of ways. This happens quite a bit.

I thought that about Dion Phaneuf, he was then traded at least three times after I thought that. If you retain money or give up assets you can move anyone. Not saying it's wise or not, simply that nothing is impossible.
- DraftandDestroy

Unless we are going to rebuild immediately, which they are not going to do, there isn’t a great play to unload that contract.

I thought that about Dion Phaneuf, he was then traded at least three times after I thought that. If you retain money or give up assets you can move anyone. Not saying it's wise or not, simply that nothing is impossible.
- DraftandDestroy

I agree with this, too many people saying this or that cant be done. Look at the history of trades, things can get done if needed. Lots of contracts that i thought were unmovebale ended up getting done.

I agree with this, too many people saying this or that cant be done. Look at the history of trades, things can get done if needed. Lots of contracts that i thought were unmovebale ended up getting done.
- bradster

We aren't in a position to trade away prospect or picks to get rid of players. This board has been complaining all summer (so far) that we lack impact prospects. So trade one of the few good ones we have to rid ourselves of a contract? On top of this, most of these trades that have happened in the past didn't happen in a flat cap world, that's the biggest hurdle with trading Jake currently IMO. I also have zero interest in retaining any money on Jake if he's traded

Like who? Surely you have a something in mind no? Amazes me so many want to bring back essentially the same team.
- hello it's me 2050

this is where Im at....I think its safe to assume they just weren't good enough. What ever excuses some want to use, this team needs to change some of the players. I do laugh when I read we need to fill a couple of holes....The "holes are a # one d man....A high end scoring winger and a very strong goalie to push Hart. Yet we shouldn't trade youth....or any of our prime assets...These "holes" I guess are magically going to be filled from thin air with the Flyers not having to pay a price.

We aren't in a position to trade away prospect or picks to get rid of players. This board has been complaining all summer (so far) that we lack impact prospects. So trade one of the few good ones we have to rid ourselves of a contract? On top of this, most of these trades that have happened in the past didn't happen in a flat cap world, that's the biggest hurdle with trading Jake currently IMO
- arichardson22

If the Flyers don't move Prospects or Picks how do they improve?

If the Flyers don't move Prospects or Picks how do they improve?
- landros 2

The point I'm making here is people complain about our prospects not being good enough, yet expect other teams to want them in a trade while also taking on a bad contract. The math doesn't add up

I am all for trading our 1st rounder this year if we can get defensive help or scoring winger. Mainly D-man though.

Good GM's find ways to get things done simple as that. There will be a cost. Up to the GM to see if he wants to accept said cost, whatever that cost will be.

Removing Jake is addition by subtraction imo.
- hello it's me 2050

Exactly.

And I don't know why everyone is so quick to move on from JVR. He was actually productive this season when things weren't so great with other players. I don't see his game as monotonous the way I see Jake's.

If the Flyers don't move Prospects or Picks how do they improve?
- landros 2

They trade prospects to "add" players not just to get "rid" of players. Adding prospects to trades to rid yourself of players is not a good practice. Making hockey trades that include prospects can lead to improvement.

https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/status/1404422212631908355?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1404423326739619841%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=
- hello it's me 2050

This is positive but how many teams will be in on him? It’ll be a big commitment, and we have to ascertain if he’s really the guy we need. If we sign him to a 7 year deal and he turns out not to be the guy. Uh oh.

I do like that we might be able to get him without giving up too much. I’m all for a switch up of chemistry, but don’t want to lose a lot of young players which will create one hole to fill another

Exactly.

And I don't know why everyone is so quick to move on from JVR. He was actually productive this season when things weren't so great with other players. I don't see his game as monotonous the way I see Jake's.
- BluehorseShoe64

I'm not quick to move on from JVR. It's more a compliment that I think Seattle would happily take him with his production and good-teammate presence. Having said that, the only thing JVR has on Jake is goal-scoring (imo).

Few reasons, one will be hypothetical because of the ED:

1. It may not have looked it this year, but we have a "win-now" roster. This season was doom and gloom for sure, but let's take a step back: We took the Isles to 7 Games last year, the same team who has gone to ECF back-to-back seasons. Was that a fluke? Maybe, but I'd like to think not with how our team played in 19-20.

2. The only way we get rid of Jake is attaching picks + prospects, so you're not only losing Jake's production you're also losing assets.

3. IF (hypothetical) Seattle takes JVR and you trade Jake we are no longer a win-now team (IMO). Unless you really splurge in free agency but there's zero guarantee X or Y player signs with us.

4. Even if you make a hockey trade like some have proposed in recent weeks, such as Jake for Kessel or Jake for Wheeler, you ultimately have to bank on the right fit and you're still stuck with a long-term contract just with a different name attached to it.

5.It's not too much to ask for the younger guys to get 15 more points but it simply can't be penciled in or relied on just yet. And I say this as a big fan of Allison and Oskar.
- arichardson22

1. I agree. It is a joke they are in that mode though it is what it is.

2. They have accumulated enough assets over the years to now move some. Though until you know the exact cost cant make a determination either way. I still think he can be moved for a player in a similar situation.

3. Not worried. All those points have done nothing to help the flyers win.

4. I am willing to make that move to get in new blood and remove the old guard. what they have currently doesn't work.

5. Well you have to pencil it in. that's what teams do and project.

Should be a big off-season for Chuck Fletcher, however, I'm not hearing or reading any Flyers rumors. That makes me nervous! They just simply cannot go into next season without some significant on-ice changes.

Good GM's find ways to get things done simple as that. There will be a cost. Up to the GM to see if he wants to accept said cost, whatever that cost will be.

Removing Jake is addition by subtraction imo.
- hello it's me 2050

your first quote says it all. Pressure is on Fletch to get things done. I was fine with Hextall getting canned, and like any thing the Flyers do, was willing to give the Fletcher hiring the benefit of the doubt. I liked his early moves but was startled by his complete failure this year to address the teams struggles....I heard all year that it's to tough to make moves during the season (although others seemed to do it)...OK now we will see if the excuses will stop and the Flyers can at least try and improve. If they choose to bring back the same group next year, I can't see why so many think things will be different. Im fine with removing Vorecek, as long as there's a corresponding move to replace his offence. For the last 8 years, the Flyers have become a mediocre franchise and that is disheartening.

Should be a big off-season for Chuck Fletcher, however, I'm not hearing or reading any Flyers rumors. That makes me nervous! They just simply cannot go into next season without some significant on-ice changes.
- DraftandDestroy

Maybe they stopped taking Ek's phone calls.

1. I agree. It is a joke they are in that mode though it is what it is.

2. They have accumulated enough assets over the years to now move some. Though until you know the exact cost cant make a determination either way. I still think he can be moved for a player in a similar situation.

3. Not worried. All those points have done nothing to help the flyers win.

4. I am willing to make that move to get in new blood and remove the old guard. what they have currently doesn't work.

5. Well you have to pencil it in. that's what teams do and project.
- hello it's me 2050

We have accumulated picks and prospects but most claim they don't move the needle. I personally don't think we should trade a guy say like Tyson Foerester, Wade Allison, or York. Would I trade guys like JOB or Ratcliffe? Yes, but what value do they even have? With point 3, if we lost JVR and Jake we may as well tear the whole damn thing down, which we all know Comcast is not willing to do. Imo, our biggest downfall this season was penciling in younger guys like NAK, Sanheim, Myers, Patrick (to an extent) to improve or take on more responsibly and we all saw how that worked. The only young guy who really met and exceeded expectations was Joel Farabee.

Maybe they stopped taking Ek's phone calls.
- landros 2

This was posted April 14, 2021....sounds like he likes the teams forwards makeup but he's looking for that top pairing dman.

https://www.nbcsports.com...se-he-was-too-comfortable

The Athletic written by Pierre LeBrun May 14th 2021

-----------------------------------------

LeBrun: Flyers GM Chuck Fletcher on Alain Vigneault, team expectations, offseason plans and more

Philadelphia Flyers general manager Chuck Fletcher paused and pondered the question for a moment.

How would he describe the 2020-21 Flyers season in one word?

“I will use two words: poor defensively,’’ he said.

There’s no possible argument to that. It’s as plain as day.

“We finished 31st in the league in goals against and 31st in the league in save percentage,” said Fletcher. “You have no chance to be successful giving up the number of chances and the number of goals that we did this year.’’

It was shocking in many ways. After all, the Flyers had the seventh-best defensive record in the league a year ago.

A team that many had pegged to challenge for the East Division title going into this pandemic season, ended up as one of the NHL’s most surprising disappointments.

“We didn’t perform to our expectations,’’ Fletcher continued in an interview this week with The Athletic.

In fact, Fletcher felt something was off even when the team got off to an 11-4-3 start.

“I don’t think our record was representative of our play,’’ he says now looking back. “We weren’t playing as an 11-4-3 team; we were finding ways to win games, which was great, but our process was off all year.’’

To which the question must be asked even if I didn’t believe it to be any other answer than the one Fletcher gave. But because there were a few murmurs around the league wondering, I asked: is head coach Alain Vigneault safe as head coach?

“Absolutely. AV’s our coach and we’re excited to have he and his staff back next season,’’ Fletcher said without any hesitation.

“We have a lot of work ahead of us to redefine our defensive game and our defensive structure. I can’t think of a better group to do it than the group of experienced coaches that we have behind our bench right now.’’

Which is the right answer. This is still the same Vigneault who worked wonders a year ago and has a track record in his career of being one of the best defensive minds in the game.

You don’t throw that overboard after one brutal season.

The loss of top-four blue-liner Matt Niskanen to a surprise retirement after last season was a blow that the Flyers never recovered from.

“I did a poor job of filling that void,” said Fletcher, who scoured the trade and free-agent market trying to find a top-4 D last fall. “It wasn’t for a lack of trying, but we didn’t do what we needed to do. And that falls on me.’’

The Flyers’ young blue line corps faltered. In fact, almost every player not named Joel Farabee struggled this season. Which, well, is a bit alarming.

“The majority of our young players either plateaued or regressed this season,” said Fletcher. “But I put our team in a tough position by asking too much of our young players. It starts with me, I have to do a better job.’’

And believe me, this sounds like a veteran GM determined to make this offseason count. The Flyers are going to be players in what should be a very busy offseason overall with the Seattle expansion draft.

I could see the Flyers looking into Jack Eichel, for example. I could also see them reaching out to Nashville and inquiring yet again on either Mattias Ekholm or Ryan Ellis.

And certainly, if for whatever reason the Blue Jackets aren’t able to extend Seth Jones, you can bet the Flyers will be all over that situation.

A busy offseason is ahead. But first, Fletcher says his organization must decompress after an emotional season. Then, a look inward before going outside and establishing a shopping list.

“We’re going to have to do certainly take a look internally first at our players and try to determine the players that we feel are part of the solution going forward,” said Fletcher. “And look at the areas we need to improve. You won’t be able to fill every hole you have in a salary cap system, particularly with a flat cap, so we’re going to have to prioritize and try to improve where we can.’’

The Flyers have the young pieces to get in on a major trade or two, and they’ve got their top picks intact. They’ve got the ammunition to be active.

A piece at forward, a piece on the blue line, and yes, finding a goalie to push Carter Hart will also be top of mind.

The Flyers have no issue with Brian Elliott, the pending UFA veteran did all he was asked and more in a tough situation this year with Hart faltering as much as he did.

So I think in a perfect world, while Fletcher wouldn’t come out and say it, the Flyers develop a 1a-1b situation by finding a goalie that really pushes Hart.

And certainly, there’s the matter of Selke Trophy winner Sean Couturier. He’s got one more year left on his deal before becoming a UFA.

“Our intention clearly is to keep Sean in Philadelphia for the rest of his career,” said Fletcher. “He’s one of our best players if not our best player. We’ll certainly make it a priority this summer to have conversations with him and try to find a way to continue this relationship going forward.’’

So, a busy summer ahead. And some soul searching.

Did the Flyers vastly overachieve a year ago? Did they vastly underachieve this season? Wherein lies the reality of their roster?

“In 19-20, we defended well, we defended as a unit of five, players seemed to be slotted properly and we were a hard team to play against,” said Fletcher. “This year we just completely lost that identity.

“I have complete faith that if we can make a couple of additions and refocus our group on playing the game the right way, we can dramatically improve our goals against as we did two years ago.

“If we do that, we’re still a very good hockey team,” continued Fletcher.

“But we have some work ahead of us. I think our issues were so obvious this year that we should be able to make a dent into fixing those issues and come back a better team.’’

This team might be able to bounce back next year.

But a productive offseason with meaningful roster changes might be required.