Holmgren Deserves to get Fired
View Single Post
10-09-2013, 03:30 PM
Provolone & The Neck
Join Date: Sep 2009
Originally Posted by
Questionable. Neither one comes close to covering his defensive play, which is vital and a problem with the forward corps since the trades.
A valid point. Richards defensive ability is obviously missed. Outside of that though, Schenn and Simmonds I think are as good as Richards. In many respects individually, and in other respects only when looked at together. But the defense is not something the Flyers have replaced with these two.
Actually, Richards in place of Lecav could be superior, or at least equal. It's not like Richards is a slouch. Like I said, Schenn and Simmonds do not bring more to the table. If they did the defensive play among the forwards wouldn't be so nightmarish. We certainly wouldn't need Giroux on the PK anymore...or if he did still PK, let's not forget how many SH opportunities Richards and Giroux made for each other. We haven't been anywhere near the SH threat we were since Richards was hauled out.
I wasn't suggesting that I would necessarily rather have VL than Richards (haven't really given much thought to that). It was more of having Richards $5+ million salary and building around that.
Edit: As for building around him, that's the chief issue. And it's a big part of the reason he had to be traded. You can thank Holmgren's cap and asset management for that scenario. People always wanted examples of it actually holding the team back...well, there it is. One of the biggest examples for any team since the cap era began. It's probably that and the Chicago detonation right after they Cupped in '10...except one of those teams has done better than the other.
It is tough to imagine who would and wouldn't be here right now if Richards still were, which makes this even more of a tough topic to debate. Haha. Having Richards still (and not Simmonds and Schenn) would have drastically altered drafts, free agency, and trades in the past two years. We have Couturier now, but would we have taken Couturier at #8 with Dougie Hamilton there when we had Giroux, Richards, and Briere? What about Laughton the following year? Would Giroux have signed that long-term deal? It is really a tough thing to even argue about in terms of building around a guy with $5+ million in cap hits because it is too difficult to speculate as to what else we would have had to do in terms of signings/trades/drafts and so forth. You are 100% correct in saying that this team right now
have been turned into a Cup contender if Richards wasn't traded. But it is just as likely to speculate that the team would be in the same or worse position if Richards stayed.
My bad, I thought we were still including Couturier on some level.
Nah, I was just including him in the conversation in terms of showing what the team might look like if 18 was still here.
And no, they don't bring more to the table than what Richards did. They haven't even replaced it yet, much less surpassed it. His defensive game has to be taken into account.
That's really where we differ. I'd take Simmonds and Schenn over Richards. You wouldn't. I understand your position and I don't think it is really that far off. I'd be cool having Richards too, but for me, I'd go with Simmer and Schenn (and the third rounder that was parlayed into Grossmann).
Except they are, which is part of the problem with the plummet in the forward corps' defensive ability since the trades.
Defense is certainly an issue, but I think the rest of what they bring makes up for it. Richards is a better player than Schenn and a better player than Simmonds. But together, I'd take the latter.
Richards provided more than just points. He was/is a multi-faceted player...a top special teams player and elite two way player.
They do bring energy. But the moment either one needs a raise, the two of them combined are going to price themselves over Richards.
A valid point, but for a good chunk of the time, they will be cheaper.
I would too. But, we didn't do that. We haven't replaced his defensive abilities or special teams abilities. People staring only at production stats are ignoring the big picture. We knew from the start that the outcome of this trade would be heavily dependent on Schenn. So far he's just not delivering. Luckily he's young, so there's still time.
Again, this is where we differ. I think Schenn and Simmer bring better offense (collectively for sure, arguably individually); I think their defense is obviously not nearly as good as Richards; I think the rest of their games are pretty much on par with each other. I'd take the big jump in points over the drop in defense, especially when IMO the rest of their games are similar.
Edit: I'll expand on my Malkin example. When you ask if I would trade him for two 80 points players, that's like trading a mountain in the Rockies for two mountains in the Appalachians. Sure, neither one may be as good for climbing, but both of them together might give you hiking and camping opportunities that equal or surpass your old Rocky peak.
Not seeing the analogy there. Again, I think our big problem is you either you underrating Schenn/Simmonds or overating Richards with me doing the opposite in over/underrating the guys.
What I was trying to get at is trading Malkin for 3 33 point players who equal his production is like trading your Rocky mountain for a pile of crap the same height. Yes, you have something the same height, but at the end of the day it's not nearly as satisfying. You certainly wouldn't want to climb it.
Replacing a player like Richards with guys who can only surpass his point production is sort of like that. You've got the same height, but the whole overall product isn't as good as what you gave up...especially if the points production is partly cancelled by the downgrade from top defensive play to average defensive play.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DrinkFightFlyers