HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Wayne Simmonds Signs Extension (per media: 6 years, $3.84m cap hit)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-16-2012, 02:11 PM
  #101
zarley zelepukin
Registered User
 
zarley zelepukin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Norristown, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,608
vCash: 500
Good value, I think. I look forward to having Simmonds in O&B for the next 2 years.

zarley zelepukin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 02:42 PM
  #102
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Good job, you turned a thread about signing a player into a richards debate...........


Great signing for the flyers. Good length and cap hit. If this guy repeats his season the contract is going to be a steal.
I did nothing of the sort. It was a discussion about Holmgren.

But let me ask you -- if Simmonds goes back to his usual production (last year was a phenomenal year and outshone every single year he's ever played, including junior), is it a good contract? If the new CBA results in a lower cap hit and Holmgren has to jettison a couple of good players because of it, is it a good contract?

I don't hate Simmonds. I dislike that a GM signed a player to a big raise:
- who had no reason to hurry to sign a player when there are massive question marks about what the league will look like and what the salary cap will be
- when said player will be an RFA at the end of this season (assuming there is one, of course) and will remain Flyer property, thus lessening the need to sign him immediately
- when said player is a one-dimensional player who just had the year of his dreams and we have no way of knowing whether he can repeat it or not.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 02:49 PM
  #103
cheesesteak
Registered User
 
cheesesteak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,025
vCash: 500
Here goes a interview with Simmer I like how he started it off. Tpanotch just makes it confusing after that.

http://t.co/k6vKj72D

cheesesteak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 03:06 PM
  #104
Spongolium*
Potato Magician
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bridgend,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
I did nothing of the sort. It was a discussion about Holmgren.

But let me ask you -- if Simmonds goes back to his usual production (last year was a phenomenal year and outshone every single year he's ever played, including junior), is it a good contract? If the new CBA results in a lower cap hit and Holmgren has to jettison a couple of good players because of it, is it a good contract?

I don't hate Simmonds. I dislike that a GM signed a player to a big raise:
- who had no reason to hurry to sign a player when there are massive question marks about what the league will look like and what the salary cap will be
- when said player will be an RFA at the end of this season (assuming there is one, of course) and will remain Flyer property, thus lessening the need to sign him immediately
- when said player is a one-dimensional player who just had the year of his dreams and we have no way of knowing whether he can repeat it or not.
Lets get one thing straight.

This is the first year that Simmonds was allowed to become an offensive player. For years he was used in a pure shutdown line in LA. He also never had any powerplay time down in LA.

The flyers gave him a chance on the PP and by god he took it. He gave the flyers something that they have been missing since knuble left. A net presence. Notice how much better Hartnell was when he was allowed to roam in the slot due to Simmonds clogging up the front of the net?

Simmonds had a great year sure. But we have not seen the best of him yet. He moved lines all year last year. He developed some pretty good chemistry with Schenn towards the end of last year and into the play-offs. I expect them both to have great years this year.

Spongolium* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 03:22 PM
  #105
healthyscratch
Registered User
 
healthyscratch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philly
Posts: 5,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
I did nothing of the sort. It was a discussion about Holmgren.

But let me ask you -- if Simmonds goes back to his usual production (last year was a phenomenal year and outshone every single year he's ever played, including junior), is it a good contract? If the new CBA results in a lower cap hit and Holmgren has to jettison a couple of good players because of it, is it a good contract?

I don't hate Simmonds. I dislike that a GM signed a player to a big raise:
- who had no reason to hurry to sign a player when there are massive question marks about what the league will look like and what the salary cap will be
- when said player will be an RFA at the end of this season (assuming there is one, of course) and will remain Flyer property, thus lessening the need to sign him immediately
- when said player is a one-dimensional player who just had the year of his dreams and we have no way of knowing whether he can repeat it or not.
And the counter argument is what if he's starting to realize his potential and this signing turns out to be a steal? Like spong said, he now has an expanded role with this team, a lot more opportunity than he had in LA. I'm inclined to think that last season could be his averages going forward, wouldn't that make it a great signing?

And what is Wayne's one an only dimension you speak of?

healthyscratch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 03:23 PM
  #106
dookie88
Registered User
 
dookie88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
But let me ask you -- if Simmonds goes back to his usual production (last year was a phenomenal year and outshone every single year he's ever played, including junior), is it a good contract? If the new CBA results in a lower cap hit and Holmgren has to jettison a couple of good players because of it, is it a good contract?
If you mean his production on the Kings by usual you should really take some time off from this board. Everyone knows how they play and how the Flyers play. His point production also show signs of just another young player developing.
It's also a product of ice-time:

2011-2012: 15:54min/G 3:13PPmin/G 28goals 21assists 11PPgoals 5PPassists

2010-2011: 13:27min/G 0:50PPmin/G 14goals 16assists 1PPgoal 0 PPassists

2009-2010: 14:28min/G 0:09PPmin/G 16goals 24 assists 0PPgoals 0 PPassists

2009-2008: 13:50min/G 0:15PPmin/G 9goals 14 assists 2PPgoals 3 PPassists

Without the PP time Simmonds actually played less or around the same last season than he did in those previously. Without the PP points his offensive output would've been roughly the same.
Unless you can deliver good arguments why a) Wayne Simmonds shouldn't get roughly the same amount of ice time on the PP as he did last season and/or b) a PP that was one of the best in the last few year, with personell like Giroux, Briere, Hartnell and Voracek, should run dry or slow down significantly I don't see a real reason why Simmonds' production should drop.
And even in that case $3.8m is not a bad cap-hit for the stuff Simmonds brings. This is a good contract as long as he can give you 20goals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
I don't hate Simmonds. I dislike that a GM signed a player to a big raise:
- who had no reason to hurry to sign a player when there are massive question marks about what the league will look like and what the salary cap will be
- when said player will be an RFA at the end of this season (assuming there is one, of course) and will remain Flyer property, thus lessening the need to sign him immediately
- when said player is a one-dimensional player who just had the year of his dreams and we have no way of knowing whether he can repeat it or not.
1) You don't know the negotiation. If Simmonds repeated last season you can be asured he wouldn't have signed for $3.8m but likely for $4.8m.
2) You never know if a player can repeat their performances or not. Mike Richards didn't realy shine this year. Ryan Getzlaf wasn't up to his usual standard and I, quite frankly, wouldn't be surprised if Giroux would struggle next season. You never know if this or that player have a good next season or not. That's why you look at this long-term. You really think Wayne Simmonds won't be worth $3.8m in a few years? There's a chance, but how big is this chance? And this deal will not be one of our biggest problems if the cap will decrease because of a new CBA.

dookie88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 04:13 PM
  #107
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
I thought they were going to offersheet all our RFAs?

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 04:14 PM
  #108
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,748
vCash: 500
As far as I know, the Flyers are still talking an extension with Hartnell. If I were Homer I would use the contract as leverage to try to bring Hartnell's price down.

Sticking points:

-You're older.
-Produced more, but with better teammates. One of the best players in the league and a legend.
-You could hit a wall any day now.
-Simmonds could replace you.
-Look how cheaply I got Simmonds.

His counter:

-I'm better defensively.
-I'm UFA.
-Might be my last contract.
-Leadership.
-Lines I am on tend to produce, period.
-May take less for a NMC.

SeanCWombBroom is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 04:17 PM
  #109
BillDineen
Registered User
 
BillDineen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
It's very relevant when we're discussing the performance of a GM. Lombardi built his team logically and carefully, and has a Cup to show for it. Shero in Pittsburgh did the same (although he had some luck built in). Holmgren has not and has nothing but his willy in his hand. Sather has been brutal and has nothing to show for it in the last 18 years. Various and assorted GM's in Toronto have sucked terribly and don't have a Cup.

How else can you judge a GM's performance? Good, but not good enough, is not acceptable.
If Atlanta won the cup, would that have made the Zhitnik-Coburn trade worse for the Flyers? No. It was great, regardless of Atlanta's success or lack there of. Same with Richards. Carter is not even in the conversation because he was traded to Columbus.

BillDineen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 04:18 PM
  #110
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
I doubt Hartnell gets a significant raise, if any at all.

I could see it being anywhere from Simmonds' 3.85 to 4.50 at the very most.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 04:32 PM
  #111
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dookie88 View Post
2011-2012: 15:54min/G 3:13PPmin/G 28goals 21assists 11PPgoals 5PPassists
What's scary is that those numbers are those of a third line player. Wait until Simmonds starts getting 18 to 19 minutes a night of ice time. I've said Simmonds has the potential to be a 40 goal scorer. Scoring 28 with under 16 minutes a night of ice time is impressive. There's no reason to believe that if he doesn't get an extra two to three minutes of ice time per night, he can't add another 5 to 10 goals to his total over the course of a year. That puts Simmonds in the 40 goal range.

Holmgren signed Simmonds to a great contract. No doubt about it. A steal in most cases. As well, Simmonds hasn't even begun to fill out yet. He's playing at 175 pounds right now. Once he hits the 195/200 pound mark, Simmonds is going to be a nightmare to play against. He's already one tough hombre to play against right now.

As for the defensive side of the game, not worried about that at all. That comes with coaching and time. Simmonds is one of the more coachable guys in the game, so that's an area that shouldn't be an issue during this contract.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 04:59 PM
  #112
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
I doubt Hartnell gets a significant raise, if any at all.

I could see it being anywhere from Simmonds' 3.85 to 4.50 at the very most.
Hartnell is a UFA. Zero chance he takes a discount and a 100% chance he receives a raise.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:14 PM
  #113
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,748
vCash: 500
I'd imagine he'll get 5 to 5.5 million per (Hartnell).

SeanCWombBroom is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:20 PM
  #114
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
I'd imagine he'll get 5 to 5.5 million per (Hartnell).
Yup, he'll easily get north of $5M. If he hits the open market you're probably looking at $6+M.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:20 PM
  #115
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
I'd imagine he'll get 5 to 5.5 million per (Hartnell).
5.5 I'd guess. Worth that to me. If he takes 5, that's a discount in today's market.

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:26 PM
  #116
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
There are two market factors at work here with any change in Hartnell's salary.

1. Salary cap spike. (trending upward)
2. Hartnell's age. (trending downward)

Meanwhile there are other similarities at play in the market:

3. Hartnell's playstyle and production has remained largely consistent at the same level.
4. Hartnell was a UFA when signed to his last contract and is a UFA once again.

So basically, points 1 and 2 are the only possible outcomes to effect his salary in any significant way.

Unfortunately for Hartnell, these two factors may either counter each other or, should the salary cap drop with a new CBA, actually hurt him.

He will not be getting a significant raise either way; not unless he pulls 65 points again this season. I don't see that happening.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:27 PM
  #117
yianik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,888
vCash: 500
Good signing for you guys. Hes got good numbers but from what Ive seen of him he is also pretty consistent in showing up every game. Habs fan by the way.

yianik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:39 PM
  #118
flyersjamminontheone
In Claude we trust
 
flyersjamminontheone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brandon, Friendly MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
It's very relevant when we're discussing the performance of a GM. Lombardi built his team logically and carefully, and has a Cup to show for it. Shero in Pittsburgh did the same (although he had some luck built in). Holmgren has not and has nothing but his willy in his hand. Sather has been brutal and has nothing to show for it in the last 18 years. Various and assorted GM's in Toronto have sucked terribly and don't have a Cup.

How else can you judge a GM's performance? Good, but not good enough, is not acceptable.
Holmgren brought in names to a team that finished dead last in the league. The flyers had one bad year in the last ten. Toronto is a train wreck. Apples and oranges. Bottom line is Richards and carter let the millions of $$ go to their heads (can you blame a early 20's millionaire) then they turned into coca-nuts and were traded. Move on. Why not focus on the fact we currently have a top 5 forward in the league? Cause he didn't play for Kitchener?
And pittsburgh built a team the right way? Come on. A gift called crosby and draft Malkin and staal amidst how many pathetic years?
Yay simmer!


Last edited by flyersjamminontheone: 08-16-2012 at 05:43 PM. Reason: Not quite done ranting
flyersjamminontheone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:44 PM
  #119
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
There are two market factors at work here with any change in Hartnell's salary.

1. Salary cap spike. (trending upward)
2. Hartnell's age. (trending downward)

Meanwhile there are other similarities at play in the market:

3. Hartnell's playstyle and production has remained largely consistent at the same level.
4. Hartnell was a UFA when signed to his last contract and is a UFA once again.

So basically, points 1 and 2 are the only possible outcomes to effect his salary in any significant way.

Unfortunately for Hartnell, these two factors may either counter each other or, should the salary cap drop with a new CBA, actually hurt him.

He will not be getting a significant raise either way; not unless he pulls 65 points again this season. I don't see that happening.
Wouldn't hartnell's age be trending upwards? He's not getting any younger

Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 05:50 PM
  #120
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Wouldn't hartnell's age be trending upwards? He's not getting any younger
His value is trending upwards because of the recent years' increases in salary cap.

His value is trending downwards because he is getting older.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 06:55 PM
  #121
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,422
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Stoked on this.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 06:56 PM
  #122
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
His value is trending upwards because of the recent years' increases in salary cap.

His value is trending downwards because he is getting older.
His age isn't going to hurt him at all when Shane Doan has reportedly received a $7M+ offer for 4 years at the age of 36. The only thing that can hurt him is a new CBA and even then I don't see how he gets less than $5M. Simmonds money (RFA) is just laughable. If he has another 30+ goal season he is going to get paid.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 08:01 PM
  #123
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,041
vCash: 5792
Unless the Flyers can get Hartnell with dead years on the end (CBA pending), the first number of his next contract's AAV will be a 6.


Another guy signed a year ahead of time, and no reason to think he won't progress, but he's not being paid like a future consistent 30-goal scorer. JVR redux.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 08:15 PM
  #124
RIPRichardsCarter
Registered User
 
RIPRichardsCarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,954
vCash: 500
This is so cheap. Incredible deal.

<3 Simmonds.

RIPRichardsCarter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 10:39 PM
  #125
nuclear reactor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 506
vCash: 500
Could get better if there are salary concessions in the new CBA.

I wonder if Holmgren wants to get Hartnell under contract before the CBA as well to get a similar salary cut if he believes that will be part of the deal.

nuclear reactor 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 07:31 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.