I say if you want to stay competitive and make the playoffs next year (avoid the rebuild), you cash in the unknown for a known. The overvaluing of Couturier is in not wanting to trade him when doing so could accomplish your goal of bringing in some solid D and making your team better as a whole.
- Dissent

Trading unknowns for a known really turned out well for Toronto, eh?

I say if you want to stay competitive and make the playoffs next year (avoid the rebuild), you cash in the unknown for a known. The overvaluing of Couturier is in not wanting to trade him when doing so could accomplish your goal of bringing in some solid D and making your team better as a whole.
- Dissent

Agreed. Instead of keeping their young players and developing them like the Flyers have done for the last 15 seasons, the Flyers should adopt a new approach and trade their young players and draft picks for more expensive, veteran players. I fully endorse this bold new direction.

I say if you want to stay competitive and make the playoffs next year (avoid the rebuild), you cash in the unknown for a known. The overvaluing of Couturier is in not wanting to trade him when doing so could accomplish your goal of bringing in some solid D and making your team better as a whole.
- Dissent

Why not trade Claude Giroux for a defenseman, by that logic?

Disclaimer: I am not actually suggesting the Flyers trade Claude Giroux. I specifically do NOT want the Flyers to trade Claude Giroux.

I say if you want to stay competitive and make the playoffs next year (avoid the rebuild), you cash in the unknown for a known. The overvaluing of Couturier is in not wanting to trade him when doing so could accomplish your goal of bringing in some solid D and making your team better as a whole.
- Dissent

Uh, WHAT? You can't be serious. Now I know you're trolling.

Because if you're serious, then as an Avalanche fan, is there a good reason not to trade Gabriel Landeskog for Chris Kunitz?

Chris Kunitz is a LW. He's more productive than Gabriel Landeskog.

Certainly, you wouldn't turn that deal down because of what you THINK Gabriel Landeskog's potential would be, correct?

Why not trade Claude Giroux for a defenseman, by that logic?

Disclaimer: I am not actually suggesting the Flyers trade Claude Giroux. I specifically do NOT want the Flyers to trade Claude Giroux.
- BulliesPhan87

You're clearly overvaluing Claude Giroux if you think he's worth a defenseman. Ryan O'Rielly, on the other hand, is worth at least 2 #7 defensemen.

Agreed. Instead of keeping their young players and developing them like the Flyers have done for the last 15 seasons, the Flyers should adopt a new approach and trade their young players and draft picks for more expensive, veteran players. I fully endorse this bold new direction.
- jmatchett383

Let's include draft picks, too. I'd really like to avoid any danger of overvaluing any picks, let alone the players we select with them. It'd be an absolute nightmare!

Uh, WHAT? You can't be serious. Now I know you're trolling.

Because if you're serious, then as an Avalanche fan, is there a good reason not to trade Gabriel Landeskog for Chris Kunitz?

Chris Kunitz is a LW. He's more productive than Gabriel Landeskog.

Certainly, you wouldn't turn that deal down because of what you THINK Gabriel Landeskog's potential would be, correct?
- AllInForFlyers

Actually, they should be trading that #1 pick for Kunitz. You never know if that young player they choose will ever be any good. Why not take the proven commodity in Kunitz?

Edit: I fully believe that the evil Dr. Bettman is concoting this deal somehow.

Couturier's prime is still about four seasons away. He's right on schedule for sustained defensive dominance. Offensively, his second season was a lateral or very slightly backward step from his rookie promise, particularly in light of his half-season of top-line and second-line use in the AHL during the NHL lockout. But it really wasn't the offensive disaster some painted it to be. It was a just-turned 20-year-old who had the equivalent of a rough half-season in the offensive zone while primarily performing defensive duties.

As far as the trade rumors go, it certainly stands to reason that other NHL teams ask for Couturier in any deal for a defenseman. In my view, I would be hesitant to trade Couturier one-on-one for most of the defensemen in the NHL and it would take a Norris Trophy caliber player coming back this way to even consider for a moment packaging Couturier (or Brayden Schenn) along with other assets.

Exactly. Let's hold on to these kids and watch them develop in the O&B because they are going to be something special - likely All-Star caliber players - in a few short seasons.

Uh, WHAT? You can't be serious. Now I know you're trolling.

Because if you're serious, then as an Avalanche fan, is there a good reason not to trade Gabriel Landeskog for Chris Kunitz?

Chris Kunitz is a LW. He's more productive than Gabriel Landeskog.

Certainly, you wouldn't turn that deal down because of what you THINK Gabriel Landeskog's potential would be, correct?
- AllInForFlyers

Hey man, we're already awful--'tis been rebuild city here for a while now so we're cool with developing our young players. All I was saying is that your club has made a series of unfortunate signings (Briere/Bryz), and had the Pronger incident sort of cripple your team and paint you into a corner to the point where from the perspective of an outside observer, you're kind of at the tipping point of a rebuild. If you want to go ahead w/ said rebuild and play the kids and have the type of season you just had and live through the frustrations, by all means--it's part of the cycle. On the other hand, if you guys feel the need to stay immediately competitive w/ certain other elite teams in your division, then the smartest move is likely going to be moving that still partially unknown asset for a known asset, which in this case is a stable, top-pairing defenseman.

Actually, they should be trading that #1 pick for Kunitz. You never know if that young player they choose will ever be any good. Why not take the proven commodity in Kunitz?
- jmatchett383

Exactly -- young players and draft picks for everyone! Step right up and trade your "proven veterans" here! Because clearly, "proven veterans" were never "young players," once upon a time!

Agreed. Instead of keeping their young players and developing them like the Flyers have done for the last 15 seasons, the Flyers should adopt a new approach and trade their young players and draft picks for more expensive, veteran players. I fully endorse this bold new direction.
- jmatchett383

Stop it hurts

Trading unknowns for a known really turned out well for Toronto, eh?
- Tomahawk

Are you calling the Flyers and their fans the new Toronto Fans--from say like...ten years ago? Good one, sir.

See, now that's me trolling...

Hey man, we're already awful--'tis been rebuild city here for a while now so we're cool with developing our young players. All I was saying is that your club has made a series of unfortunate signings (Briere/Bryz), and had the Pronger incident sort of cripple your team and paint you into a corner to the point where from the perspective of an outside observer, you're kind of at the tipping point of a rebuild. If you want to go ahead w/ said rebuild and play the kids and have the type of season you just had and live through the frustrations, by all means--it's part of the cycle. On the other hand, if you guys feel the need to stay immediately competitive w/ certain other elite teams in your division, then the smartest move is likely going to be moving that still partially unknown asset for a known asset, which in this case is a stable, top-pairing defenseman.
- Dissent

That's every team -- every team in the NHL is a series of "unfortunate signings" or "Pronger incidents" away from disaster. David Jones and Paul Statsny, I'm sure, sound familiar. As does "Chris Stewart and Kevin Shattenkirk for Erik Johnson."

Actually, that proves my point: Colorado moved Kevin Shattenkirk and had NO IDEA what he was. Montreal moved Ryan McDonagh before they had a clue what he was.

I'm not going to beat the dead horse any further, because that's all I, as well as many others, have said: Just because Keith Yandle's a good player now doesn't mean the Flyers have to trade Sean Couturier now.

Hey man, we're already awful--'tis been rebuild city here for a while now so we're cool with developing our young players. All I was saying is that your club has made a series of unfortunate signings (Briere/Bryz), and had the Pronger incident sort of cripple your team and paint you into a corner to the point where from the perspective of an outside observer, you're kind of at the tipping point of a rebuild. If you want to go ahead w/ said rebuild and play the kids and have the type of season you just had and live through the frustrations, by all means--it's part of the cycle. On the other hand, if you guys feel the need to stay immediately competitive w/ certain other elite teams in your division, then the smartest move is likely going to be moving that still partially unknown asset for a known asset, which in this case is a stable, top-pairing defenseman.
- Dissent

So really what you're saying is it took you two years to realize the Flyers were taking a step back to go with youth?

Hey man, we're already awful--'tis been rebuild city here for a while now so we're cool with developing our young players. All I was saying is that your club has made a series of unfortunate signings (Briere/Bryz), and had the Pronger incident sort of cripple your team and paint you into a corner to the point where from the perspective of an outside observer, you're kind of at the tipping point of a rebuild. If you want to go ahead w/ said rebuild and play the kids and have the type of season you just had and live through the frustrations, by all means--it's part of the cycle. On the other hand, if you guys feel the need to stay immediately competitive w/ certain other elite teams in your division, then the smartest move is likely going to be moving that still partially unknown asset for a known asset, which in this case is a stable, top-pairing defenseman.
- Dissent

If a stable #1 top-pairing defenseman becomes available (Chara/Weber/Pietrangelo/etc) then yes, we'll trade him. Unless that is the case, I think most people on here (not the WIP radio crowd) are advocating patience for a few years.

I say if you want to stay competitive and make the playoffs next year (avoid the rebuild), you cash in the unknown for a known. The overvaluing of Couturier is in not wanting to trade him when doing so could accomplish your goal of bringing in some solid D and making your team better as a whole.
- Dissent

The Flyers don't need to trade Couturier to make the playoffs next year. Couturier is not being overvalued. You don't make a bad trade just to fill a need. When that trade creates another need.

Hey man, we're already awful--'tis been rebuild city here for a while now so we're cool with developing our young players. All I was saying is that your club has made a series of unfortunate signings (Briere/Bryz), and had the Pronger incident sort of cripple your team and paint you into a corner to the point where from the perspective of an outside observer, you're kind of at the tipping point of a rebuild. If you want to go ahead w/ said rebuild and play the kids and have the type of season you just had and live through the frustrations, by all means--it's part of the cycle. On the other hand, if you guys feel the need to stay immediately competitive w/ certain other elite teams in your division, then the smartest move is likely going to be moving that still partially unknown asset for a known asset, which in this case is a stable, top-pairing defenseman.
- Dissent

Briere wasn't an unfortunate signing. It was a solid signing. Bryzgalov is yet to be determined. Not living up to the expectations wiht the latter, but there is still time for that.

Briere wasn't an unfortunate signing. It was a solid signing. Bryzgalov is yet to be determined. Not living up to the expectations wiht the latter, but there is still time for that.
- MJL

Beat me to it. Briere has been an excellent signing. He helped pull us out of the season we don't talk about here and has been an excellent PO performer and professional while in Philly. Just because we are buying him out doesn't mean he was a bad signing at all. Bryz? Gee, so far not so good. I would've left that one alone.

Let's include draft picks, too. I'd really like to avoid any danger of overvaluing any picks, let alone the players we select with them. It'd be an absolute nightmare!
- BulliesPhan87

It's the traditional comment I've never ever understood, "Trade him now while he's got value." As though a player's value to you on the ice (or field) is always less than the value of what you'd get for them in trade.

Some thoughts on Dissent's posts:

I actually agree that fans tend to overvalue players. I don't think this is a case of small market vs. large, or east vs. west coast. I think we all tend to see through rose-colored glasses when valuing OUR players. How many people here thought we should have gotten back more than Schenn for JVR? (myself included).

Last year I seem to remember some posters wouldn't trade Couturier for PK Subban. Some probably still wouldn't, even if he does win the Norris this year. As much as I love Matt Read, if Holmgren wanted Bernier he may well have to throw in a pick, because I think league-wide Bernier, unproven as he is, still has more perceived value than Read, especially given the position.

Also, it is a completely valid scenario to trade unproven talent with high-end upside for a more known quantity. LA successfully did that last year with Schenn+ for Richards. But you only do that when you are one piece away. The Flyers are not one piece away, so O'Reilly for Couturier made no sense last year, or in the near future for that matter. For the "right" young defenseman is another matter.

He needs to improve his strength upper body and his stride. Gary Roberts program did wonders for stamkos. He needs to sign up for that
- Just5

I need to sign up for that.

Agreed. Instead of keeping their young players and developing them like the Flyers have done for the last 15 seasons, the Flyers should adopt a new approach and trade their young players and draft picks for more expensive, veteran players. I fully endorse this bold new direction.
- jmatchett383

Hey man, we're already awful--'tis been rebuild city here for a while now so we're cool with developing our young players. All I was saying is that your club has made a series of unfortunate signings (Briere/Bryz), and had the Pronger incident sort of cripple your team and paint you into a corner to the point where from the perspective of an outside observer, you're kind of at the tipping point of a rebuild. If you want to go ahead w/ said rebuild and play the kids and have the type of season you just had and live through the frustrations, by all means--it's part of the cycle. On the other hand, if you guys feel the need to stay immediately competitive w/ certain other elite teams in your division, then the smartest move is likely going to be moving that still partially unknown asset for a known asset, which in this case is a stable, top-pairing defenseman.
- Dissent

You have to be pretty stoked about Jones. I used to live in CO for 8 years and was a closet AVS fan. Jones will be a beast for both the marketing of the team and on the ice. I think things will get better before they get worse.

It's the traditional comment I've never ever understood, "Trade him now while he's got value." As though a player's value to you on the ice (or field) is always less than the value of what you'd get for them in trade.
- bodiva88

Well, obviously it's because teams should focus on winning trades, not Cups.

Dried out from yesterday's lovely weather yet?

The Flyers don't need to trade Couturier to make the playoffs next year. Couturier is not being overvalued. You don't make a bad trade just to fill a need. When that trade creates another need.
- MJL

I agree with you on most of this. My only point is that assuming growth and retention of the young core, can this team realistically compete for a title over the next couple of years? I just don't see the defense being strong enough, and the stop-gap measures that are likely to be available won't necessarily do it either. Then you have Kimmo leaving next year, which makes it worse.

So something's gotta give...