Let's see if he is 2C or 3C. Regular power play time (and teamwide PP improvement) or not. Then a points expectation becomes more projectable. His ES production was good last season as it turned out but the PP numbers weren't there.
- bmeltzer

The difference in ice time between 2C and 3C might be small. And the difference in quality of teammates might also be small. The Flyers have Konency, Atkinson and Tippett to play RW so the top 3 centers should all have one quality goal scorer next to them.

You don't know that to be a fact. It's about the future.
- MJL

Yes, I don't know this for a fact, but I talk to some folks in the know who watch him and say the same thing. So this is what I project. I think Michkov has a better chance to be a center. And BTW, if Frost wants to stick he needs to significantly improve his face-off percentage, even if playing 3C.

Provorov did have the harder matchups but he did not defend well. Sanheim did.
- MJL

what are you using to determine this. elaborate.

don' know about the teams best defender. Provie had the harder match ups. I would take provie over travis any day of the week.
- Peter Richards

Provorov gave up 26 more goals than Sanheim did at 5on5 while only playing 117 more minutes. And I don't think his matchups were that much more difficult. Sanheim was the clear #2 in total ice time and ice time per game, so it's not like he was being sheltered on the 3rd pairing.

https://www.naturalstattr...ines=single&draftteam=ALL

Sanheim gave up the same number on 5on5 goals as the new & improved Ristolainen did, despite the fact Sanheim played 241 more minutes.

I don't know if I agree with that. It depends on what level Frost develops to. I think he's most likely a 3C with a top upside of a 2C. Cates has that prototypical two way 3C play along with future Selke potential. I don't see them moving that kind of player. Even though I think Cates offensive production will plumet playing 3C.
- MJL

Key point, if both continue to develop, making the assumption the improvement is similar. A point producing C is going to have more replacement value in my opinion, more replacement value, would make me keep Frost and move Cates. Add in 2 years from now, I assume the Torts era is coming to a conclusion.

If Cates O spikes, then they move frost

Exactly: a rebuild doesn't mean dump every vet at the first chance. It means everyone is available for the right return but there's also no rush to trade top players in their primes just for the sake of assets. See if you can gain leverage and, when the time is right, deal from strength.

Have to be honest here: If Torts hadn't been publicly critical of Hayes and DeAngelo -- and made it obvious to everyone that he wanted them gone at all costs -- the Flyers might have gotten at least a little more back in return. Sanheim's contract term made a deal tough anyway, but Torts ripping on him so publicly and seemingly prioritizing him as another player who'd be gone if he had his druthers, certainly didn't help the Flyers' chances of trying to make a trade from anything but a position of weakness.

Sometimes, Torts' candor is a double-edged sword. Moving forward, while he shouldn't -- and almost certainly won't -- totally avoid scathing critiques when he believes they're merited, he should also consider the factor of trying not to tie the GM's hands. Just my opinion.
- bmeltzer

Taking into consideration, and not arguing it, a coach wants player types he wants... and unless the head coach is also the GM (which Torts is not) the HC must work with the hand he is dealt to the best of his ability.

I understand that Hayes, TDA, Sandheim, etc may not be players that play Tort's hockey, but IMO a good HC must either mold the players into one's that fit into the team... and, if not possible, must mold the team into one that can best utilize the players talents... with sights on the organization's goals and plans.

Torts, as you stated, lost value of return with players... and it seems made no attempt to coach the team in a manner that best uses their talents. Worst case, he could have propped them up, which in turn would have propped up the return... Best case, he could have found a way to use their talent to better the team, both long and short term... the great HCs utilize their players' talents, and learn from the process. One could say that Shero had his preferred methods, but he also constantly learned... and also allowed the dancers to dance, and the singers to sing. I cannot think of a player under Shero who ended up worse after Freddie coached them.

I was not a Torts fan, but I must admit that he at least temporarily won me over with his enthusiasm, and his personality... I fear that my initial feelings on Torts may have been correct... say what you will about the pluses and minuses of Hayes, but he has some high talents, and was on a much better path, after his health returned to near 100%... Torts nipped that path, reduced the return, and did a disservice to the player, as well as his GM's job. I believe Torts is going nowhere during this contract... and will probably not change his MO... I imagine Danny will attempt to obtain and develop players Torts wants, and can work with... but is this anyway to run an organization? //Rant

what are you using to determine this. elaborate.
- Peter Richards

GA/60 at 5on5

Sanheim - 2.16
Braun - 2.24
York - 2.53
Seeler - 2.56
Risto - 2.61
Angelo - 2.92
Provorov - 3.02

Provorov gave up 26 more goals than Sanheim did at 5on5 while only playing 117 more minutes. And I don't think his matchups were that much more difficult. Sanheim was the clear #2 in total ice time and ice time per game, so it's not like he was being sheltered on the 3rd pairing.

https://www.naturalstattr...ines=single&draftteam=ALL

Sanheim gave up the same number on 5on5 goals as the new & improved Ristolainen did, despite the fact Sanheim played 241 more minutes.
- Feanor

so you don't think it matters that provie is going against the mcdavid's and matthews lines?

or his partner a bunch was TDA?

https://www.naturalstattr...&td=&tgp=410&lines=single

Yes, I don't know this for a fact, but I talk to some folks in the know who watch him and say the same thing. So this is what I project. I think Michkov has a better chance to be a center. And BTW, if Frost wants to stick he needs to significantly improve his face-off percentage, even if playing 3C.
- jd250

Who are those folks? Can you link to that? We know that BC and the Flyers want him at center.

what are you using to determine this. elaborate.
- Peter Richards

GA/60 at 5 on 5.

Provorov gave up 26 more goals than Sanheim did at 5on5 while only playing 117 more minutes. And I don't think his matchups were that much more difficult. Sanheim was the clear #2 in total ice time and ice time per game, so it's not like he was being sheltered on the 3rd pairing.

https://www.naturalstattr...ines=single&draftteam=ALL

Sanheim gave up the same number on 5on5 goals as the new & improved Ristolainen did, despite the fact Sanheim played 241 more minutes.
- Feanor

Probably worth pointing out that Provy played majority of time with TDA, one of the worst defensive players in the league. I don’t think it’s very clear that Sanheim was better when you look at all the factors

Key point, if both continue to develop, making the assumption the improvement is similar. A point producing C is going to have more replacement value in my opinion, more replacement value, would make me keep Frost and move Cates. Add in 2 years from now, I assume the Torts era is coming to a conclusion.

If Cates O spikes, then they move frost
- wcorvette

I'm not sure what you mean by replacement value. I think most teams would prefer the two way center with Selke level defensive skills over the one way point producing 3C.

GA/60 at 5 on 5.
- MJL

then cam york was the best.

Probably worth pointing out that Provy played majority of time with TDA, one of the worst defensive players in the league. I don’t think it’s very clear that Sanheim was better when you look at all the factors
- ClaudeFather

That is false. Provorov's most frequent partner was York

then cam york was the best.
- Peter Richards

Nope, Sanheim's GA/60 at 5 on 5 was significantly better than York's.

That is false. Provorov's most frequent partner was York
- MJL

Was he the most frequent partner of Tony? And what was his GAA with York verse Tony?

Taking into consideration, and not arguing it, a coach wants player types he wants... and unless the head coach is also the GM (which Torts is not) the HC must work with the hand he is dealt to the best of his ability.

I understand that Hayes, TDA, Sandheim, etc may not be players that play Tort's hockey, but IMO a good HC must either mold the players into one's that fit into the team... and, if not possible, must mold the team into one that can best utilize the players talents... with sights on the organization's goals and plans.

Torts, as you stated, lost value of return with players... and it seems made no attempt to coach the team in a manner that best uses their talents. Worst case, he could have propped them up, which in turn would have propped up the return... Best case, he could have found a way to use their talent to better the team, both long and short term... the great HCs utilize their players' talents, and learn from the process. One could say that Shero had his preferred methods, but he also constantly learned... and also allowed the dancers to dance, and the singers to sing. I cannot think of a player under Shero who ended up worse after Freddie coached them.

I was not a Torts fan, but I must admit that he at least temporarily won me over with his enthusiasm, and his personality... I fear that my initial feelings on Torts may have been correct... say what you will about the pluses and minuses of Hayes, but he has some high talents, and was on a much better path, after his health returned to near 100%... Torts nipped that path, reduced the return, and did a disservice to the player, as well as his GM's job. I believe Torts is going nowhere during this contract... and will probably not change his MO... I imagine Danny will attempt to obtain and develop players Torts wants, and can work with... but is this anyway to run an organization? //Rant
- ForeverFlyer16

Is that what you're looking for from a head coach? Enthusiasm and personality. Then there is the question of his idiosyncrasies and borderline schizophrenia of his personality. Not sure how that wins someone over.

so you don't think it matters that provie is going against the mcdavid's and matthews lines?

or his partner a bunch was TDA?

https://www.naturalstattr...&td=&tgp=410&lines=single
- Peter Richards

Sanheim played 331:19 with Angelo at 5on5. Provorov played 436:12 with Angelo at 5on5. 105 extra minutes with him doesn't explain the huge gap in goals allowed.

Provorov actually had worse goals against results with Risto (17 GA in 290:16), than he did with Angelo (22 GA in 436:12).

https://www.naturalstattr...te=n&v=t&playerid=8478500

The #2 dman also sees plenty of time against 1st lines. It's not possible for the #1 dman to match up only against the other teams top players.

Exactly: a rebuild doesn't mean dump every vet at the first chance. It means everyone is available for the right return but there's also no rush to trade top players in their primes just for the sake of assets. See if you can gain leverage and, when the time is right, deal from strength.

Have to be honest here: If Torts hadn't been publicly critical of Hayes and DeAngelo -- and made it obvious to everyone that he wanted them gone at all costs -- the Flyers might have gotten at least a little more back in return. Sanheim's contract term made a deal tough anyway, but Torts ripping on him so publicly and seemingly prioritizing him as another player who'd be gone if he had his druthers, certainly didn't help the Flyers' chances of trying to make a trade from anything but a position of weakness.

Sometimes, Torts' candor is a double-edged sword. Moving forward, while he shouldn't -- and almost certainly won't -- totally avoid scathing critiques when he believes they're merited, he should also consider the factor of trying not to tie the GM's hands. Just my opinion.
- bmeltzer

There was zero reason DeAngelo couldn’t have been a really good deadline deal. That’s where I blame Torts. That’s where I blame Briere for not telling his employees to work it out and do what’s best for the team.

Was he the most frequent partner of Tony? And what was his GAA with York verse Tony?
- ClaudeFather

Angelo was Provorov's most frequent partner.

GA/60 with Angelo was 3.03 versus 2.95 with York. Not much difference.

Angelo was Provorov's most frequent partner.

GA/60 with Angelo was 3.03 versus 2.95 with York. Not much difference.
- MJL

It was time for him to go

Here is why potentially. Frost is a center. Couturier is back and signed to a long term deal. If he is healthy and plays well, he is locked in unless traded in the future. Cates is a strong two way center who regardless of lineup spot, is pretty much going to be cemented into the lineup. They Gauthier playing center. Michkov has been moved to center in the KHL, although 3 years away. There is a potential logjam at center.
- MJL

We could be really deep at center or really thin. I personally liked Cates better at wing his first year. What I’ve seen of Gauthier at center wasn’t that impress. In fact his skill sets say he’d be a very impactful winger. I haven’t seen enough of Michkov but if he’s the talent we believe he is, I think he should continue develop as the player we drafted, not the player we want him to be. Meaning leaving him at wing.

Sanheim has earned the opportunity to be the teams #1 dman. I am looking forward to see how he does in this role. Gonna make Chuck look like a genius. In this case anyway.

If they can get thru camp healthy, the Flyers can start the season with a 22 man roster and $2.5m in cap space just by demoting Sandstrom and Foerster. And that's with Ellis on IR, not LTIR.

https://www.capfriendly.c.../armchair-gm/team/4561252

Angelo was Provorov's most frequent partner.

GA/60 with Angelo was 3.03 versus 2.95 with York. Not much difference.
- MJL

Run a T test to see if it is a significant difference. Let us know the results.