Edited Jan. 1, 2018 at 2:57 a.m.
I've watched most of their games this season and it's clear their struggles are on LW and in their bottom 6 (aka secondary scoring). And as I said, even if Giroux becomes a permanent fixture on LW, you have no one else on LW that can produce/have any real impact.
1) No one, at least among hockey sports analysts, talk "top 9" players". It's usually in the context of a team's top 6 and bottom 6 (top 2 lines, then your 3rd and 4th line).
2) If you want to win with Giroux, Simmonds, and Voracek in their prime, the Flyers cannot afford to "allow the young talent to grow" at the NHL level and cost the prime years of Giroux/Simmonds/Voracek. That doesn't mean you have to trade away the young talent or marginalize them in juniors/AHL. With the additions/trades I made, it enables the Flyers to win now, and still have young prospects in the waiting to make it to the NHL level in the next 2 to 3 years. You're not hurting the Flyers in the long run at all. What you're suggesting is to rush players like Patrick, Lindblom, and Sanheim. You don't have to, and again the moves I made allows flexibility to give them a chance to make the team in the next 1-3 years. You don't however, fill out your bottom six with young players/talent to let them grow and develop, then cost the prime years of your best players. You just end up repeating the cycle. Obviously if a young talent can contribute now, then yes they stay and play at the NHL level. But outside of Provorov, Hagg, G, and Konecny, there aren't any other rookies that need to be at the NHL level. You risk 1, maybe 2 spots for "development". And that's where Laughton comes in as my 4th line center. Now if the Flyers were like Buffalo or Phoenix right now, then yeah of course you can afford to develop and play more of your young talent. But the Flyers have too much invested in their top 3-4 players right now and they can win the cup with just a few more additions (as I've made) without wasting their prime years.
2) Raffl averages about 13 minutes of TOI each game. His role/contributions/and skill doesn't merit that kind of time. He is a solid 4th line winger that at most should average 8-10 minutes TOI. I like that Raffl is a good defensive forward, but the Flyers have a greater need in secondary scoring, and Raffl doesn't provide that. If Raffle made less money, I'd keep him over Versteeg. But in order to add Neal and Perron, Raffl makes too much.
3) Carter Hart and Felix Sandstrom are another 2-3 years away from making it to the NHL level. Elliot provides some stability till then, and Stolarz deserves a shot to prove his worth. There are a lot ways his situation could play out, especially with Hart and Sandstrom in the pipeline. But at least start him as the backup to Elliot, and go from there.
4) Neal is a proven goal scorer and talent still in his prime. Since the UFA market will also include Kane and van Riemsdyk, I believe you can sign him for 5.5 to 6.5 million at 4 years. Adding Perron is a proven talent that can provide secondary scoring and leadership.
5) The defense is already young enough with Provorov, G, and Hagg. Sanheim needs another year at the AHL level, and in the mean time, having Mac D/Gudas/Franson helps balance out the blue line out with good experience and value. You sign Franson for 1 year, 2 at most so it's not costing a spot for a young defenseman long term. And given the nature of defenseman injuries, Sanheim will be called up to play.
6) Versteeg has proven he can contribute as a secondary scorer, and isn't bad as a defensive forward. Yeah of course he has slumped and is past his prime, but bringing him in for 1 year I think is the kind of low risk/potential for a high reward payoff the Flyers need.
Boozerelli and Zubrowka liked this.
Reply
CapFriendly
CapFriendly