Jones! Jones! Jones! Maybe Hamilton! Probably Savard/Larsson. Jones! Jones! Jones!
- Tomahawk

To you (frank)ers who are eager to trade Coots.... Jones + Laine for Coots + Provorov in the offseason, would you do it?
- Tomahawk

No I don’t....but it made me think. To me it’s Jones over Provy, but Couts way over Laine....and I like Laine.

Think of it as Coots for Jones, Laine for Provorov

(I personally don't like Laine btw, just throwing this out there)
- Tomahawk

Great hypothetical. A big factor here would be what kind of salary Laine is looking for on his next deal. He's younger than Couts, and has the offensive stats that get paid. I'm still a big Provy fan despite his current struggles. I think he has all the tools to be a true #1, and I believe he'll get there. He's just not ready yet. He's being asked to shoulder too much too soon IMO.

In the end, I wouldn't do this deal. Don't really want to pay Laine at the expense of losing Couts, and I'm not ready to give up on Provy. Although Jones is mighty tempting..

Look at point 1:

Again:

1. Do not undergo treatment. Disease will kill you with 100% probability.
- PT21

Of course if the only two options were to win the cup or not win the cup everyone would choose to win the cup. Flawed analogy fella.

Ok now do Giroux's production from his first few trips to the playoffs. Giroux from Age 22-24 in the playoffs. 44 games 19 goals, 31 assist 50 points. Seems pretty good...no?

McDavid in the playoffs from age 20 thru 23 17 games 18 points. According to the stats Giroux was the better player in his early 20's.
- mickel25

No, lets stay on track.

The point was never compare Giroux as a player to McDavid as a player or at similar stages.

The point was that Giroux, at this stage, on this team, based on a fairly decent sample set, is not a playoff impact player.

Of course if the only two options were to win the cup or not win the cup everyone would choose to win the cup. Flawed analogy fella.
- mickel25

Sigh.

Edit:

The two examples were chosen to illustrate that there are no guarantees in either. That even the treatment has a very high failure rate. But the alternative has a negligible success rate.

So don't look at failures in and of themselves. Look at rates, and look at success rates in particular.

Only 1 team has won the cup in the last 15 years without a very high draft pick playing a critical role. That's Boston. They got their critical piece via FA.

Just staying on course and "drafting and developing well" has a success rate of 0 %.

No, lets stay on track.

The point was never compare Giroux as a player to McDavid as a player or at similar stages.

The point was that Giroux, at this stage, on this team, based on a fairly decent sample set, is not a playoff impact player.
- PT21

Yikes. What a pointless exercise then.

So the solution is to get a Connor McDavid? Because they grow on trees?

No, lets stay on track.

The point was never compare Giroux as a player to McDavid as a player or at similar stages.

The point was that Giroux, at this stage, on this team, based on a fairly decent sample set, is not a playoff impact player.
- PT21

Each one of the players has only won a single series during your timeframe. So how much better can one be than the other? Please keep in mind winning the cup is the only thing that matters.

Chuck says we’ve had a rough month but we still have a good hockey team. Lol

Looks like I’ll be rooting for another team next year. Sigh
- hereticpride

He also said he's been more aggressive than other teams in making calls, but nobody's willing to take on dollars and term.

...and he said that the makeup of the team is not right and he needs to address that going forward to get the right mix.

...and...that some of the young players need to play better

We can all see the same problems he does. What do you expect him to say?

Yikes. What a pointless exercise then.

So the solution is to get a Connor McDavid? Because they grow on trees?
- Tomahawk

Why? Because you did not backread?

The original point was that Giroux is not an impact playoff player anymore, and if he stays here, will soak up $ that could be diverted to other FAs. Given that we will resign Couts and are committed to Hayes, this likely means you have 3 forwards with a net AAV of 7 million and no one among them who can be a true impact player in the playoffs.

Each one of the players has only won a single series during your timeframe. So how much better can one be than the other? Please keep in mind winning the cup is the only thing that matters.
- mickel25

As I am sure you are aware, the playoffs are not individual drills, and the players around them matter.

The original point was: is Giroux NOW still an impact player in the playoffs on this team?

And when you average 0.5 ppg in the playoffs, with 2 goals over 28 games from 2016-, the answer is clear.

Is Fletcher’s presser still going on? Or did he run out of nothing to say?

Is this on vid anywhere or is it best to ignore it, like the rest of the season aside from when trades and firings happen?
- RajaAmpat

Flyers posted the quote on their Facebook page.

As far as moving the vets in the near future, I think it would be possible to move G at this deadline. Not saying it would be easy given his salary, but I do think it's possible. He seems like the type of guy that teams looking to make a run are looking to add for a scoring boost in the playoffs (yes, I'm well aware of his past lack of production in the playoffs). He's experienced, versatile (can play C or LW), great on faceoffs, and can boost a PP (even if on the second unit). It would be very difficult for a team to add his salary, but not impossible. Especially if the Flyers retain some salary. I know some on here hate that idea and will immediately dismiss it, but for me it would depend on the return coming back. If the right package were coming back, I'd be willing to eat some salary.
Moving him would open up an expansion draft spot, shake up the culture, avoid having to go through a potentially awkward contract negotiation after next year, and if the return is mostly picks & prospects it would hopefully open up some cap space.

He also said he's been more aggressive than other teams in making calls, but nobody's willing to take on dollars and term.

...and he said that the makeup of the team is not right and he needs to address that going forward to get the right mix.

...and...that some of the young players need to play better

We can all see the same problems he does. What do you expect him to say?
- Dkos

For those who still don't believe that GMs are taking expansion and the flat cap seriously... that's straight from the horses mouth.

As far as moving the vets in the near future, I think it would be possible to move G at this deadline. Not saying it would be easy given his salary, but I do think it's possible. He seems like the type of guy that teams looking to make a run are looking to add for a scoring boost in the playoffs (yes, I'm well aware of his past lack of production in the playoffs). He's experienced, versatile (can play C or LW), great on faceoffs, and can boost a PP (even if on the second unit). It would be very difficult for a team to add his salary, but not impossible. Especially if the Flyers retain some salary. I know some on here hate that idea and will immediately dismiss it, but for me it would depend on the return coming back. If the right package were coming back, I'd be willing to eat some salary.
Moving him would open up an expansion draft spot, shake up the culture, avoid having to go through a potentially awkward contract negotiation after next year, and if the return is mostly picks & prospects it would hopefully open up some cap space.
- Big_E_88

No one is taking that contract at the deadline. It’ll be easier to move him in the summer when all interested teams have the flexibility get involved.

Why? Because you did not backread?

The original point was that Giroux is not an impact playoff player anymore, and if he stays here, will soak up $ that could be diverted to other FAs. Given that we will resign Couts and are committed to Hayes, this likely means you have 3 forwards with a net AAV of 7 million and no one among them who can be a true impact player in the playoffs.
- PT21

Not a hard concept. Some people just don’t want to believe it. This franchise has been tortured by bad front office decisions by GM after GM

Why? Because you did not backread?

The original point was that Giroux is not an impact playoff player anymore, and if he stays here, will soak up $ that could be diverted to other FAs. Given that we will resign Couts and are committed to Hayes, this likely means you have 3 forwards with a net AAV of 7 million and no one among them who can be a true impact player in the playoffs.
- PT21

Totally did not backread.

For those who still don't believe that GMs are taking expansion and the flat cap seriously... that's straight from the horses mouth.
- Tomahawk

It is the extent of the $ and the extend of the term, imo.

Of course teams will not take on Voracek/JVR etc.

But you have to sweeten the deal and share the pain. JVR is 7 mil a year. Would he be a good bargain at 5 mil this summer? I think he would.

All that has to happen is that Flyers and trading partners now split the 2 mil difference two ways. Retain 1 mil a year apiece.

That's not a lot. I would be surprised if no playoff team team is willing.

For those who still don't believe that GMs are taking expansion and the flat cap seriously... that's straight from the horses mouth.
- Tomahawk

And it's a fairly obvious point for those paying attention.

Not a hard concept. Some people just don’t want to believe it. This franchise has been tortured by bad front office decisions by GM after GM
- hereticpride

It apparently is.

People go on and on about how Giroux is not a bad player and so on. But dang it, no one is saying he is a dog.

He is however not enough in the playoffs and hogs up resources. As do many other vets. None of whom are dregs.

How many frikking dollars are we going to apportion to "not bad but not good enough players" before we run out of $ and run out of our lifetimes without another cup?

No. Laine is not the kind of player you win with. Jones is better than Provy right now. However, no GM in the league would trade Coots for Laine.
- mickel25

Laine is a dog, no thanks!

It apparently is.

People go on and on about how Giroux is not a bad player and so on. But dang it, no one is saying he is a dog.

He is however not enough in the playoffs and hogs up resources. As do many other vets. None of whom are dregs.

How many frikking dollars are we going to apportion to "not bad but not good enough players" before we run out of $ and run out of our lifetimes without another cup?
- PT21

This group of forwards would be ok if they had one more legit forward piece and a legit D man besides Provy.

Fact is we’ve never had that and what sense does it make to keep what core you do have together for an entire decade if you’re not going to get them the help they need.

They’ve wasted so many years that I honestly don’t know how we fix this without tearing this core down for cap space and prospects/draft picks.

Laine is a dog, no thanks!
- jd250

Get a high pick this year. (Top 7)

Trade TK, Sanheim, Foerster, 1st round this year and 1st round next year for Eichel.

That's the kind of trade I would like to see.

EDIT: That was a grotesque overpayment upon reflection. The first 3 should get it done.

He also said he's been more aggressive than other teams in making calls, but nobody's willing to take on dollars and term.

...and he said that the makeup of the team is not right and he needs to address that going forward to get the right mix.

...and...that some of the young players need to play better

We can all see the same problems he does. What do you expect him to say?
- Dkos

no one wants to take on the flyers contracts and I don't blame them. Clode at 50% retention would get picks/prospects and a solid nhl roster player minimum imo.