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.
- coffee junkie

Jones is too unproven for my liking. To get better, that pick should be traded for a veteran defenseman. The Flyers should offer Coburn as long as Colorado offers a 2nd rounder as well...you know, to help Colorado out.

Obviously, I'm joking (unless Colorado would do that, then I'm dead serious). But the point is you don't just toss aside young, unproven talent for a veteran player to get better in the short term. Those deals keep you competitive, but they don't win you championships.

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.
- TheGreat28

I was not in the boat of thinking that they should've gotten more for JVR. I was however in the past, not willing to trade Couturier for Subban. I was wrong about that one.
As far as Read for Bernier. Is that how you make a trade? Based on perceived value around the League? Or do you look at the value to your team, and your teams needs? Right now, under the current circumstances, I would not trade Read for Bernier. That's not to say that Bernier isn't going to go on to be a very good Goalie. Truthfully, none of us really know that for sure, myself included. But I know what Matt Read is, and his value to the Flyers. And I also would rather just see what we already have in Mason, if they're going in a different direction away from Bryzgalov. I don't see why they should give up more quality assets to get Bernier.

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

The thing is they will be competitive next year. Will they win the STanley Cup? Probably not. I do expect the Flyers to make the playoffs next year. There issues are systemic not a lack of talent for the most part. Fix 5 on 5 and they make the playoffs easily. Power play and penalty kill are both top 10 already. I am all for letting the young kids blossom. Hold onto the draft picks and add some if you can.

Jones is too unproven for my liking. To get better, that pick should be traded for a veteran defenseman. The Flyers should offer Coburn as long as Colorado offers a 2nd rounder as well...you know, to help Colorado out.

Obviously, I'm joking (unless Colorado would do that, then I'm dead serious). But the point is you don't just toss aside young, unproven talent for a veteran player to get better in the short term. Those deals keep you competitive, but they don't win you championships.
- jmatchett383

Tell that to LA. I do believe they have a banner hanging in the Staples Center that says otherwise.

But caveat...only when you are a piece or maybe two away.

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...
- TheGreat28

Yes, something has to give in order for the Flyers to elevate to cup contender. But two years is a long time, and a lot can happen in that time frame.

Some thoughts on Dissent's posts:

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.
- TheGreat28

Absolutely would not trade Couts for Subban. It's not just how good Subban is that's taken into question, you also have to consider how he fits in the lockerroom and whether or not he's a good teammate.

No way I trade Couts, a humble kid who is already defensively sound and has the potential to put up some decent points for the cocky headache known as Subban.

Yes, something has to give in order for the Flyers to elevate to cup contender. But two years is a long time, and a lot can happen in that time frame.
- MJL

Two offseasons, two trade deadlines, two entry drafts, not to mention lots of ordinary time in there means a lot can change in the trade landscape between then and now.

Tell that to LA. I do believe they have a banner hanging in the Staples Center that says otherwise.

But caveat...only when you are a piece or maybe two away.
- TheGreat28

That's my point. If the Flyers feel they need to add a piece to win a Cup, then go for it. Unfortunately, they're probably about 6 away. But the Kings kept their 2 core pieces in Kopitar and Brown, and got lucky that Voynov paved the way for Jack Johnson to be traded. So yes, if you feel you're just a couple moves from winning a Cup, you do that. The Flyers may be there in 3-4 years.

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.
- TheGreat28

My argument is just that--everyone has rose colored glasses, but in big markets, the size of said fan bases tends to amplify the intensity of the fanship to the point that it actually does have an effect on front office decisions. Media hype and fan pressure takes an effect on GMs, even if they don't admit it, and a team like Philly could easily get caught in a perpetual "we just need that one piece to compete" mode that sees a lot of the big market teams make poor decisions year in, year out. Wasn't saying any of these decisions or hypotheticals would be right or wrong really, was just commenting on how they're perceived and how they affect the larger picture. You know--logic and social dynamics and all that good stuff.

My argument is just that--everyone has rose colored glasses, but in big markets, the size of said fan bases tends to amplify the intensity of the fanship to the point that it actually does have an effect on front office decisions. Media hype and fan pressure takes an effect on GMs, even if they don't admit it, and a team like Philly could easily get caught in a perpetual "we just need that one piece to compete" mode that sees a lot of the big market teams make poor decisions year in, year out. Wasn't saying any of these decisions or hypotheticals would be right or wrong really, was just commenting on how they're perceived and how they affect the larger picture. You know--logic and social dynamics and all that good stuff.
- Dissent

So what you're actually saying is that the Flyers will trade Couturier for a short term want/need, and it's not a good idea. Got it. It's possible, I suppose.

My argument is just that--everyone has rose colored glasses, but in big markets, the size of said fan bases tends to amplify the intensity of the fanship to the point that it actually does have an effect on front office decisions. Media hype and fan pressure takes an effect on GMs, even if they don't admit it, and a team like Philly could easily get caught in a perpetual "we just need that one piece to compete" mode that sees a lot of the big market teams make poor decisions year in, year out. Wasn't saying any of these decisions or hypotheticals would be right or wrong really, was just commenting on how they're perceived and how they affect the larger picture. You know--logic and social dynamics and all that good stuff.
- Dissent

That's what they have been doing, and that's why we're all advocating to NOT make that trade. To NOT trade a player like Couturier for a short-term solution, and hope that Couturier can be a part of the long-term solution while contributing positively int he short-term.

I was not in the boat of thinking that they should've gotten more for JVR. I was however in the past, not willing to trade Couturier for Subban. I was wrong about that one.
As far as Read for Bernier. Is that how you make a trade? Based on perceived value around the League? Or do you look at the value to your team, and your teams needs? Right now, under the current circumstances, I would not trade Read for Bernier. That's not to say that Bernier isn't going to go on to be a very good Goalie. Truthfully, none of us really know that for sure, myself included. But I know what Matt Read is, and his value to the Flyers. And I also would rather just see what we already have in Mason, if they're going in a different direction away from Bryzgalov. I don't see why they should give up more quality assets to get Bernier.
- MJL

I was on the fence about Subban, but more wrong than right about Luke Schenn. None of us are or will ever be GM's, so its really all just a fun exercise anyway.

But regarding your next point, no, you don't make trades to "win" by getting more perceived value in the trade. Schenn for JVR clearly benefitted both teams, both short and long term, which is what you ideally want.

But if Holmgren thinks the best course of action is to get two young goalies and let them battle it out (the strategy), then you have to look at how LA AND the rest of the league values Bernier as well as the potential players they'll get back (the cost).
That valuation absolutely involves potential...the same way everyone is valuing Couturier's trade value based on what he has done, plus more importantly, what he is likely to do going forward.

By the way, to me you only trade for Bernier if you are in a retooling mode and are looking for 2 years out. Even then, it is only one option, and the option of keeping Read and signing Emery or a comparable is also valid. It all depends on how they see Mason.

My argument is just that--everyone has rose colored glasses, but in big markets, the size of said fan bases tends to amplify the intensity of the fanship to the point that it actually does have an effect on front office decisions. Media hype and fan pressure takes an effect on GMs, even if they don't admit it, and a team like Philly could easily get caught in a perpetual "we just need that one piece to compete" mode that sees a lot of the big market teams make poor decisions year in, year out. Wasn't saying any of these decisions or hypotheticals would be right or wrong really, was just commenting on how they're perceived and how they affect the larger picture. You know--logic and social dynamics and all that good stuff.
- Dissent

Actually, then I do agree with your premise. Let's face it, we all recognize the Snider effect. I think that it is equally driven by his desire to win one more cup in his lifetime as well as it is to due to perceived pressure from the fanbase.

I agree with the other posters here preaching patience, retaining youth, etc. I am in that camp as well. But most people here are more knowledgeable than the "average" fan, and there is a large contingency of Philadelphias that are "Championship or Bust" folks. Eagles fans are the worst in this regard.

But I do agree that there is a significant potential that the Flyers will not be patient.

My argument is just that--everyone has rose colored glasses, but in big markets, the size of said fan bases tends to amplify the intensity of the fanship to the point that it actually does have an effect on front office decisions. Media hype and fan pressure takes an effect on GMs, even if they don't admit it, and a team like Philly could easily get caught in a perpetual "we just need that one piece to compete" mode that sees a lot of the big market teams make poor decisions year in, year out. Wasn't saying any of these decisions or hypotheticals would be right or wrong really, was just commenting on how they're perceived and how they affect the larger picture. You know--logic and social dynamics and all that good stuff.
- Dissent

Actually, it seems that most of the fanbase is trying to avoid that sort of "perpetual cycle" by being unwilling to consider trading Couturier unless somebody overpays for him.

I doubt there's any regular poster on this board that really feels that the Flyers could trade Couturier for a Norris level defenseman straight up.

Me, I am open to trading him. I'm not eager to do so, nor would I be out there shopping him around. But in the right deal I'd certainly listen. Dealing in absolutes is a fool's game. Couturier could have a Patrice Bergeron type ceiling, which would make him more valuable than Keith Yandle.

But he could also top out at being a good defensive third line center, who score 12-15 goals a year, and obviously that is worth trading for a guy like Yandle.

Right now, nobody knows what he will end up as. But enough teams have asked to make people feel that there's enough that seem him as a potential Bergeron to sell him off while he's at his lowest value.

Yes, something has to give in order for the Flyers to elevate to cup contender. But two years is a long time, and a lot can happen in that time frame.
- MJL

True, but Homer has to MAKE it happen, meaning it won't just happen from growth of the current roster. And as you have stated many times, defenseman acquired through the draft are realistically 2-3 years out from making an impact.

has Brian Elliott been discussed yet ?

Halak/Allen will be the Blues tandem which leaves Elliott with a managable 1.8m contract til 14/15

has Brian Elliott been discussed yet ?

Halak/Allen will be the Blues tandem which leaves Elliott with a managable 1.8m contract til 14/15
- MrBigglesworth

No, but if available, he'd be a good short term option assuming Bryzgalov gets nuked.

LOL. If either is on the table, Couturier should be gone. Good luck getting that caliber of a defenseman any other way.
- isles10289

Letang is a UFA next season and giving him a big payday could potentially bring him here. Maybe patience is the best plan.

has Brian Elliott been discussed yet ?

Halak/Allen will be the Blues tandem which leaves Elliott with a managable 1.8m contract til 14/15
- MrBigglesworth

Halak is possibly the one who gets dealt. Does not have a good relationship with Hitchcock.

No interest in Elliott.

Good Lord. He's going to eat his way out of the league. I can't remember who was the subject of this Bob Clarke quote, but there was someone on the Flyers who had a weight/conditioning problem when he was the GM and what Clarke was quoted as saying has stuck with me to this day:

"Push yourself away from the table, man."
- AllInForFlyers

The weight is a concern, but he's playing some good hockey despite his size.

Obviously, you'd like to see more discipline, especially with a fork, but carrying that much bulk and displaying the skills he does is impressive.

Letang is a UFA next season and giving him a big payday could potentially bring him here. Maybe patience is the best plan.
- JAKEw1234

Absolutely. If Pitt can't afford Letang, Malkin, and Crosby, and Letang only has a year left on his current contract, why would any team do the Pens a favor by trading assets when they could wait until Letang is a FA? Makes no sense.

No, but if available, he'd be a good short term option assuming Bryzgalov gets nuked.
- Jsaquella

That guy is awful w/o a lock down, trap D in front of him.

That guy is awful w/o a lock down, trap D in front of him.
- Dissent

So is Bryzgalov. They'd be paying Elliot about $4mm less.

I was on the fence about Subban, but more wrong than right about Luke Schenn. None of us are or will ever be GM's, so its really all just a fun exercise anyway.

But regarding your next point, no, you don't make trades to "win" by getting more perceived value in the trade. Schenn for JVR clearly benefitted both teams, both short and long term, which is what you ideally want.

But if Holmgren thinks the best course of action is to get two young goalies and let them battle it out (the strategy), then you have to look at how LA AND the rest of the league values Bernier as well as the potential players they'll get back (the cost).
That valuation absolutely involves potential...the same way everyone is valuing Couturier's trade value based on what he has done, plus more importantly, what he is likely to do going forward.

By the way, to me you only trade for Bernier if you are in a retooling mode and are looking for 2 years out. Even then, it is only one option, and the option of keeping Read and signing Emery or a comparable is also valid. It all depends on how they see Mason.
- TheGreat28

Your last comment makes my point. You don't make a trade based on the value of a player around the League. You make it on the value of what it does for your club. Who cares what the rest of the League thinks.

I'm open to the idea of trading Couturier, but I don't necessarily advocate it.

My oft-stated personal preference is to buy out Briere and Bryzgalov, bring in a replacement vet goalie to split time with Mason, and look at cheaper options to augment the defense.

I do feel they can be a playoff team next season with minor tweaks, so long as they play a system more suited to their abilities as a team.
- Jsaquella

I'm with you on all of the above. I think an UFA like Grant Clitsome fits into that minor tweak / cheaper option to augment the defense.