HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Unproven but huge potential > proven stars?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-23-2011, 08:26 AM
  #26
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
This notion is COMPLETELY overblown.

It makes it easier if your star players are on ELCs, but that's not realistic.

What is true though is you cannot win the Cup without young, cheap talent. They don't need to be stars, and they don't need to be on ELCs either.

They can be players like Coburn or Carle, on contracts just after their ELC but before their "prime" contract.

Or they can be players like vanRiemsdyk, Nodl, Bartulis; young players basically making ELC money chipping in as much as they can to help the team win.


Basically what you should be saying is that in order to win the cup, your players can't all be in their "prime" contracts like Bryzgalov, Hartnell, Briere, Timonen, etc. You need other contracts in their that are bargains to balance that out.
It's not overblown at all. The poster made an excellent point. You need young quality players on EL deals to make significant contributions.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 08:29 AM
  #27
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanSciver View Post
It's not overblown at all. The poster made an excellent point. You need young quality players on EL deals to make significant contributions.
You don't enjoy reading do you?

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 08:33 AM
  #28
JoeFlyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 289
vCash: 500
The core of out team (presuming we can sign them all and they all work out good enough) could be:

JvR - Schenn - Giroux (I'd probably move him to wing again but that's just personal taste)
??? - Couturier - Voracek

Mezsaros - Carle
Coburn - ???

Bryzgalov
Bobrovsky (maybe?)

Plus a few others like Simmonds, Bartulis, Gustafsson, Read, etc... filling out some of the other spots I think the future is fairly bright. Just bring in 2 or 3 good UFA's down the line, add a spattering of role players and I think you have a damn fine team... All hypothetical of course

JoeFlyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 08:37 AM
  #29
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
You don't enjoy reading do you?
I read your posts. You were incorrect in stating that the posters point about having young quality players on EL contracts was overblown. Having a continuing pipeline of quality players through the draft couldn't be more important, and is even more important in a Cap era.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 08:37 AM
  #30
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeFlyer View Post
The core of out team (presuming we can sign them all and they all work out good enough) could be:

JvR - Schenn - Giroux (I'd probably move him to wing again but that's just personal taste)
??? - Couturier - Voracek

Mezsaros - Carle
Coburn - ???

Bryzgalov
Bobrovsky (maybe?)

Plus a few others like Simmonds, Bartulis, Gustafsson, Read, etc... filling out some of the other spots I think the future is fairly bright. Just bring in 2 or 3 good UFA's down the line, add a spattering of role players and I think you have a damn fine team... All hypothetical of course
I think the best case scenario young core looks something like this:

vanRiemsdyk - Giroux - Ranford
Wellwood - Couturier - Voracek
Simmonds - Schenn - Akeson
Nodl - Holmstrom - Testwuide
Rinaldo

Meszaros - Gustafsson
Coburn - Carle
Manning - Marshall
Lauridsen

Bryzgalov (not young but locked in 9 more years)
Bobrovsky


That's not exactly a realistic hope though, and that defense looks really shaky. Right now, my biggest prayers go out to Ranford and Akeson. If Akeson can bulk up and Ranford can fix his skating, they could be real NHL threats on the outside with Giroux-->Couturier-->Schenn down the middle.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 08:45 AM
  #31
JoeFlyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
I think the best case scenario young core looks something like this:

vanRiemsdyk - Giroux - Ranford
Wellwood - Couturier - Voracek
Simmonds - Schenn - Akeson
Nodl - Holmstrom - Testwuide
Rinaldo

Meszaros - Gustafsson
Coburn - Carle
Manning - Marshall
Lauridsen

Bryzgalov (not young but locked in 9 more years)
Bobrovsky


That's not exactly a realistic hope though, and that defense looks really shaky. Right now, my biggest prayers go out to Ranford and Akeson. If Akeson can bulk up and Ranford can fix his skating, they could be real NHL threats on the outside with Giroux-->Couturier-->Schenn down the middle.
I'm not that up on all those players so I can't pass judgment but I think it's probably always healthy to bring in a few outsiders via UFA and such but essentially it is a pretty decent core... I wouldn't be sold on that D so much, chuck in a really good UFA and I'd be happier but it's all good.

JoeFlyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 08:47 AM
  #32
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeFlyer View Post
I'm not that up on all those players so I can't pass judgment but I think it's probably always healthy to bring in a few outsiders via UFA and such but essentially it is a pretty decent core... I wouldn't be sold on that D so much, chuck in a really good UFA and I'd be happier but it's all good.
Obviously that's not how our team will look. I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that our team will look nothing like that.

However, hoping that guys like Ranford and/or Akeson pay dividends is nice. If either of them pay off, we have a real powerhouse NHL offense in the making set up long-term considering who we have down the middle and already on the wing.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 08:47 AM
  #33
JVR21
G
 
JVR21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 7,849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
Most people who understand hockey think Homer is a colossal **** up.

An unproven player is an unproven player is an unproven player. Until we see them consistently for 4-5 years they are still question marks, while Richards and Carter both proved to be excellent players on a consistent basis.

To the person who said Schenn and Couturier shouldn't be allowed near the media, sorry, I disagree. The media contributed heavily to Richards' trade and these new guys shouldn't be sheltered. Let them jump into the fire and see what it's like.

Btw did anyone else see the quote from Homer in the latest issue of the Hockey News? Something along the lines of "I don't know if we got better but we got different.". Makes me sooo confident in the job he and Snider did.
This post screams "I'm emotionally attached to Richards and Carter." You really think they traded these two for no reason? You're the same person who wished Snider never said we needed a goalie, but now you want him to badmouth Richards and Carter to the media?

JVR21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 09:00 AM
  #34
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVR21 View Post
This post screams "I'm emotionally attached to Richards and Carter." You really think they traded these two for no reason? You're the same person who wished Snider never said we needed a goalie, but now you want him to badmouth Richards and Carter to the media?
I was emotionally attached to a team that has imploded before my eyes. What I see now is the laughing stock of the NHL. It is what it is, right? Enjoy.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 09:13 AM
  #35
Guffaw
Registered User
 
Guffaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Drexel Hill PA
Country: United States
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
I was emotionally attached to a team that has imploded before my eyes. What I see now is the laughing stock of the NHL. It is what it is, right? Enjoy.
Aww come on. What imploded? A team that got swept and a playoff goaltending performance that may go down as the worst ever?

Your top 3 forwards are still here. All your D are still here and time will tell, but you have a huge upgrade at the most important position.

Not to mention your window of opportunity is much larger with all the 18-20 yr old talent acquired.

Why not give it a chance? More than one analyst that likely knows more than both of us thinks the Flyers will be a very tough team.

Guffaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 09:17 AM
  #36
JoeFlyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Obviously that's not how our team will look. I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that our team will look nothing like that.

However, hoping that guys like Ranford and/or Akeson pay dividends is nice. If either of them pay off, we have a real powerhouse NHL offense in the making set up long-term considering who we have down the middle and already on the wing.
For sure, hoping that JvR, Giroux, Schenn, Couturier, Voracek achieve all we want is also not anything like a given, just perhaps a little easier to predict because they should be of some use no matter what.

The bigger problem is perhaps how we make that transition... Lets say we're 2 years down the line, we've resigned those aforementioned players for the longer haul, Mezs still has a year at 4mil cap hit (which should hopefully be a bargin) Carle and Coburn also resigned. Timonen has gone, Hartnell is UFA. You only have Talbot, Briere, Pronger and Bryz still around. at this point i think the Briere and Pronger deals become bad. $11.4 cap hit and you can't do anything at all with Prongers as its 35+ (cept trade him?) and Briere has a NMC... Of course if Briere still rocks then it's ok(ish) though we'd have loads of centres... I can't see Pronger living up to his cap hit for enough of the rest of his contract... Still I think the futures deffo bright.

JoeFlyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 09:19 AM
  #37
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
I was emotionally attached to a team that has imploded before my eyes. What I see now is the laughing stock of the NHL. It is what it is, right? Enjoy.
Laughing stock? We aren't the leafs.. Still a playoff team imo.. Get over the trades already

Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 09:19 AM
  #38
Guffaw
Registered User
 
Guffaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Drexel Hill PA
Country: United States
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
As to the unproven player is an unproven player etc. etc.

I want you to look up past MVP's of World Junior championships. Then look at the top 8 picks in the past drafts. History says it's unlikely that all 3 top 8 picks will be busts.

Not to mention Voracek is already "proven". Wasn't he a 50pt player on a bad team? Ok so put him with talent like Jagr, Giroux, and Briere and give him all the pp time that Richards got and see what the goal totals look like.

They're gone. Accept it and move on. I feel you've seen the best of both their careers already. Richards doesn't have the talent and Carter doesn't have the guts to get it done when the going get's tough. Maybe Bryzgalov, Voracek, Couturier, and Schenn will.

Guffaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 09:30 AM
  #39
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,302
vCash: 156
I prefer the sure thing to a "maybe." Unless that maybe is essentially a "sure thing" as well. Even then, id only trade the proven talent if there were absolutely no doubt that the prospect would end up being better than my proven player.

It seems many other gms agree with that, too. Hence why other pieces came back with schenn and voracek.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 09:49 AM
  #40
Codith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
Most people who understand hockey think Homer is a colossal **** up.

while Richards and Carter both proved to be excellent players on a consistent basis.

Consistent? Not quite the word I would use for either of those guys

Codith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:06 AM
  #41
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,817
vCash: 500
You can use expectational analysis.

It would be like handling very risky stocks versus vary safe stocks, and it would also be based on if you're risk averse, neutral or lover.

I'll just use a simple Wiki example:

Quote:
A person is given the choice between two scenarios, one with a guaranteed payoff and one without. In the guaranteed scenario, the person receives $50. In the uncertain scenario, a coin is flipped to decide whether the person receives $100 or nothing. The expected payoff for both scenarios is $50, meaning that an individual who was insensitive to risk would not care whether they took the guaranteed payment or the gamble. However, individuals may have different risk attitudes. A person is:

risk-averse (or risk-avoiding) - if he or she would accept a certain payment (certainty equivalent) of less than $50 (for example, $40), rather than taking the gamble and possibly receiving nothing.
risk-neutral - if he or she is indifferent between the bet and a certain $50 payment.
risk-loving (or risk-seeking) - if the guaranteed payment must be more than $50 (for example, $60) to induce him or her to take the guaranteed option, rather than taking the gamble and possibly winning $100.
Even when they have the same expected value, we can see how someones preference's value it differently.

Unfortunately we can't accurately measure their probability to succeed or fail, nor all the outcomes in between. (Some may argue that)

Even then you still have to deal with a "lag" effect, of not acquiring that potential until down the road.

Lastly the law of averages will eventually kick in, and not every prospect will pan out no matter how "good" they looked.


Last edited by KimiFerrari: 07-23-2011 at 10:16 AM.
KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:16 AM
  #42
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
You can use expectational analysis.

It would be like handling very risky stocks versus vary safe stocks, and it would also be based on if you're risk averse, neutral or lover.

I'll just use a simple Wiki example:



Even when they have the same expect value, we can see how someones preference's value it differently.

Unfortunately we can't accurately measure their probability to succeed or fail, nor all the outcomes in between. (Some may argue that)

Even then you still have to deal with a "lag" effect, of not acquiring that potential until down the road.

Lastly the law of averages will eventually kick in, and not every prospect will pan out no matter how "good" they looked.
Theoretically though in this scenario...

Richards + Carter = 50

Schenn + Couturier = 0-50

Voracek + Simmonds = 25-50

So in this case scenario, the worst you come out with is 25 (aka the level Simmonds and Voracek are now). Best case scenario talent-wise you come out with 100 (though unlikely because Simmonds certainly does not have to potential of the rest).

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:27 AM
  #43
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Theoretically though in this scenario...

Richards + Carter = 50

Schenn + Couturier = 0-50

Voracek + Simmonds = 25-50

So in this case scenario, the worst you come out with is 25 (aka the level Simmonds and Voracek are now). Best case scenario talent-wise you come out with 100 (though unlikely because Simmonds certainly does not have to potential of the rest).

As I said it is difficult to accurately gauge their potential and the probabilities.

Even if we go with you scenario of; Carter + Richards has a 100% = 50 (would probably be more complicated than that). I just used that example to provided something simple to get the point across.

What are the probabilities of Schenn + Couturier = 0-50 and Voracek + Simmonds = 25-50? You have to quantify almost every outcome and then sum their expectations.

Something like; 1%X25 + 5%x30 + 6%x35............. +1%x100 = ?

Will that be > or < 50? (This is not an actual question, its rhetorical because no one here is nearly qualified enough to quantify those numbers)

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:33 AM
  #44
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
As I said it is difficult to accurately gauge their potential and the probabilities.

Even if we go with you scenario of; Carter + Richards has a 100% = 50 (would probably be more complicated than that). I just used that example to provided something simple to get the point across.

What are the probabilities of Schenn + Couturier = 0-50 and Voracek + Simmonds = 25-50? You have to quantify almost every outcome and then sum their expectations.

Something like; 1%X25 + 5%x30 + 6%x35............. +1%x100 = ?

Will that be > or < 50? (This is not an actual question, its rhetorical because no one here is nearly qualified enough to quantify those numbers)
Expected value arguments always go over well around here. Good luck with this.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:34 AM
  #45
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
As I said it is difficult to accurately gauge their potential and the probabilities.

Even if we go with you scenario of; Carter + Richards has a 100% = 50 (would probably be more complicated than that). I just used that example to provided something simple to get the point across.

What are the probabilities of Schenn + Couturier = 0-50 and Voracek + Simmonds = 25-50? You have to quantify almost every outcome and then sum their expectations.

Something like; 1%X25 + 5%x30 + 6%x35............. +1%x100 = ?

Will that be > or < 50? (This is not an actual question, its rhetorical because no one here is nearly qualified enough to quantify those numbers)
Pretty much why I'm bowing out the minute this goes anywhere past the theoretical level.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:36 AM
  #46
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Expected value arguments always go over well around here. Good luck with this.
Haha. Yes, I've seen you try.

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:42 AM
  #47
malfeasance
Registered User
 
malfeasance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: At Sea
Country: United States
Posts: 859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
vanRiemsdyk - Giroux - Ranford
Wellwood - Couturier - Voracek
Simmonds - Schenn - Akeson
Nodl - Holmstrom - Testwuide
Rinaldo

Meszaros - Gustafsson
Coburn - Carle
Manning - Marshall
Lauridsen

Bryzgalov (not young but locked in 9 more years)
Bobrovsky

malfeasance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:53 AM
  #48
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by malfeasance View Post
Seriously. why are you facepalming?

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 10:58 AM
  #49
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Seriously. why are you facepalming?
I think he thinks your lineup is an actual one that they are going to use

Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2011, 11:05 AM
  #50
malfeasance
Registered User
 
malfeasance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: At Sea
Country: United States
Posts: 859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Seriously. why are you facepalming?
gee, I don't know - off the top of my head:


Absolutely dreadful D corps

Old goalie + that dreadful D corps

You admittedly reached to put a major question mark on your first line




I don't care if every single forward on that roster over-reaches the hf's crystal ball of career/potential projection.........that team gets mangled by the one we just disassembled.

AND it's chock full of holes that we will need to overpay FAs to plug.

malfeasance is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:18 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.