Nobody's saying bring in Boyle and ride him into the ground... we're saying, keep Kimmo, keep AMac (or another two-way guy) and bring in a guy like Boyle to share the load.... instead of continuing to trot one-dimensional guys like Streit/Grossmann out there in top-4 minutes to get exposed.
- Tomahawk

You'd be doing the same thing with Boyle as is being done with Streit. They're mirror images of each other at this point.

Unless you're going to play Boyle and Striet together, which is a bad idea. Then you'd have 2 out of 3 pairings with a one way offensive defenseman that needs to be hidden from top competition, and from key defensive situations. Makes the mix worse then it is now. If you could move Streit, and sign Boyle to a lesser deal, I'm all for it. But I don't see it happening.

I love Bieksa, maybe 3-4 years ago. The injury history is worrisome. Do I really want to give up bSchenn for that?

I think the bigger thing for all of us to notice here, is just how unwilling teams are willing to move really quality d-men. Being able to at the very least help your quest, with growing some from within is crucial. Flyers waited too long to start that process, when they did have opportunities to do so.
- flyer_nutter

Only reason I mention Bieksa is that there's the possibility that they'd be willing to part with him for less than Brayden Schenn -- team is in turmoil, GM is on full tilt, etc, they have younger righty D looking for playing time, etc.

And yeah, totally on board with growing from within... but need guys to bridge the gap, otherwise you're left with the scary prospect of the Flyers rushing the kids into the lineup to capitalize on their ELC's.

http://www.capgeek.com/ufa-finder/?position_id=D
- MJL

Thanks

Only reason I mention Bieksa is that there's the possibility that they'd be willing to part with him for less than Brayden Schenn -- team is in turmoil, GM is on full tilt, etc, they have younger righty D looking for playing time, etc.

And yeah, totally on board with growing from within... but need guys to bridge the gap, otherwise you're left with the scary prospect of the Flyers rushing the kids into the lineup to capitalize on their ELC's.
- Tomahawk

Bieksa would be a good fit, in my opinion.

Meszaros.....
- PLindbergh31

Mez looks great today, they gave him that goal.

Just in regards to the development of that D.

I really would love for there to be a bit of an opening next year. You have Guss, who I will admit I am not too high on, but he deserves a bit of a shot.

You also have Alt and Lauridsen that are on cheap entry level contracts.

I'd like to see the Flyers build a team with a little more leeway to allow your players to enter the league. Currently as constructed, there has been, and is no room unless the guys burn the doors off the barn in their first game impressing everyone.

Even with his obvious faults, what they have done with Guss, or going back to Sbisa for that matter. Is not the way to develop an NHL d-man. Nice to see them have let Luke Schenn play through for the most part.

Just in regards to the development of that D.

I really would love for there to be a bit of an opening next year. You have Guss, who I will admit I am not too high on, but he deserves a bit of a shot.

You also have Alt and Lauridsen that are on cheap entry level contracts.

I'd like to see the Flyers build a team with a little more leeway to allow your players to enter the league. Currently as constructed, there has been, and is no room unless the guys burn the doors off the barn in their first game impressing everyone.

Even with his obvious faults, what they have done with Guss, or going back to Sbisa for that matter. Is not the way to develop an NHL d-man. Nice to see them have let Luke Schenn play through for the most part.
- flyer_nutter

If the Flyers add a top defenseman, chances are they're going to need some cheaper role players to fill in spots in the lineup.

Only reason I mention Bieksa is that there's the possibility that they'd be willing to part with him for less than Brayden Schenn -- team is in turmoil, GM is on full tilt, etc, they have younger righty D looking for playing time, etc.

And yeah, totally on board with growing from within... but need guys to bridge the gap, otherwise you're left with the scary prospect of the Flyers rushing the kids into the lineup to capitalize on their ELC's.
- Tomahawk

I do wonder with Gillis. He has held out hoping for more, and then sold his pieces for cheap. Not sure if they will even have him as GM in the future though, didn't management put a hold on a Kesler deal? Don't think they trust him anymore.

If the Flyers add a top defenseman, chances are they're going to need some cheaper role players to fill in spots in the lineup.
- MJL

Ohhh definitely. I would rather save the assets for that guy, or try to draft him. Instead of taking the safe choice, and overpaying for another average guy.

The Flyers may not need a Weber, or Suter. They do however need better all round talent than they have. As mentioned, someone on another tier. Say like Kronwall, Hamhuis or even the mentioned Bieksa with his injury concerns.

Just going back to that original point a little. Would you rather have a 2nd/3rd to try and bring in that player? Or would you rather just take the safe choice in Macdonald. You have to be willing to trust your scouting and development crew obviously. Which does not have a great track record with d-men, but you need to try.

I do wonder with Gillis. He has held out hoping for more, and then sold his pieces for cheap. Not sure if they will even have him as GM in the future though, didn't management put a hold on a Kesler deal? Don't think they trust him anymore.
- flyer_nutter

Either way, I think assets from that org are ripe to be plucked. If they hire a new guy, he'll probably be eager to put his stamp on things, and he won't feel beholden to the previous core of players.

Either way, I think assets from that org are ripe to be plucked. If they hire a new guy, he'll probably be eager to put his stamp on things, and he won't feel beholden to the previous core of players.
- Tomahawk

Yup. I wanted the Flyers to do that with Giordano last year. Sadly they re-signed him and named him captain.

Just looking at the Vancouver d-men. You have:
Edler - injury/consistency concerns
Hamhuis- my choice of the three, but he didn't want to sign here originally.
Bieksa- injury concerns

Tanev I do like, but again... Not on that real "above average" tier the team needs.

Ohhh definitely. I would rather save the assets for that guy, or try to draft him. Instead of taking the safe choice, and overpaying for another average guy.

The Flyers may not need a Weber, or Suter. They do however need better all round talent than they have. As mentioned, someone on another tier. Say like Kronwall, Hamhuis or even the mentioned Bieksa with his injury concerns.

Just going back to that original point a little. Would you rather have a 2nd/3rd to try and bring in that player? Or would you rather just take the safe choice in Macdonald. You have to be willing to trust your scouting and development crew obviously. Which does not have a great track record with d-men, but you need to try.
- flyer_nutter

The trade they made for MacDonald was a no brainer. Too good of a deal to pass up. The odds a drafting a player as good as McDonald is now, is very low with a 3rd round pick. Not to mention the time and years of developing that player in the hopes he gets to the level that MacDonald is at now.

Along with the Vancouver d-men.

We have possibilities in:
Yandle: question marks in his own zone
Buff: consistency concerns and question marks in his own zone

Fact is, any of the d-men, at least from what we have heard. Have pretty big concerns, its why their teams are willing to move them. If the Flyers do make a deal, I just hope they guy has a decent all round game. Not such high risk/high reward.

Yup. I wanted the Flyers to do that with Giordano last year. Sadly they re-signed him and named him captain.

Just looking at the Vancouver d-men. You have:
Edler - injury/consistency concerns
Hamhuis- my choice of the three, but he didn't want to sign here originally.
Bieksa- injury concerns

Tanev I do like, but again... Not on that real "above average" tier the team needs.
- flyer_nutter

Yeah, things would have been interesting if Hamhuis had elected to sign here.

Between Edler and Bieksa, I'd take Bieksa since he's a righty, cheaper to acquire, on a better contract for bridge purposes, and the swings between his ups and downs aren't nearly as wide as Edler's.

I doubt they'd look to move either Tanev or Corrado, no matter who's GM.

The trade they made for MacDonald was a no brainer. Too good of a deal to pass up. The odds a drafting a player as good as McDonald is now, is very low with a 3rd round pick. Not to mention the time and years of developing that player in the hopes he gets to the level that MacDonald is at now.
- MJL

A 2nd and 3rd round.

If you never have the chance to use those picks, then you never have a chance in the first place. I understand your premise, but who was the last drafted Flyer d-man that has player more than 5 seasons in the league in a top 4 role. Teams in the league do find and develop these guys. If you never take those chances, with the draft being so important, then you get some of what we have going on today.

Plenty end up being duds, but some also do end up contributing in big ways. I'd like to see the Flyers place a higher value on their picks, even if there is an element of risk there, and no immediate pay off.

A 2nd and 3rd round.

If you never have the chance to use those picks, then you never have a chance in the first place. I understand your premise, but who was the last drafted Flyer d-man that has player more than 5 seasons in the league in a top 4 role. Teams in the league do find and develop these guys. If you never take those chances, with the draft being so important, then you get some of what we have going on today.

Plenty end up being duds, but some also do end up contributing in big ways. I'd like to see the Flyers place a higher value on their picks, even if there is an element of risk there, and no immediate pay off.
- flyer_nutter

You're making my point for me. What was a better move, making that deal for an already established top 4 two way defenseman. Or using the picks and trying to draft one? Then when you do, how long does it take in development time to get him to the point of being ready to play in the NHL?
The Flyers have Morin, Ghostibhere, Alt, and Haag as defenseman they have drafted and are trying to develop.
The MacDonald trade was a steal and a no brainer. The only way it becomes a bad deal is if they don't re-sign him.

Yeah, things would have been interesting if Hamhuis had elected to sign here.

Between Edler and Bieksa, I'd take Bieksa since he's a righty, cheaper to acquire, on a better contract for bridge purposes, and the swings between his ups and downs aren't nearly as wide as Edler's.

I doubt they'd look to move either Tanev or Corrado, no matter who's GM.
- Tomahawk

You know what is most interesting in looking at Vancouver's defenseman? Percentage of defensive zone starts. All of their top minute defenseman including Hamhuis, Bieksa, Garrison, Edler, and Tanev. All have defensive zone starts percentages between 33.9% and 35%. Translation is that team spends a hell of a lot of time starting in it's own end.

You know what is most interesting in looking at Vancouver's defenseman? Percentage of defensive zone starts. All of their top minute defenseman including Hamhuis, Bieksa, Garrison, Edler, and Tanev. All have defensive zone starts percentages between 33.9% and 35%. Translation is that team spends a hell of a lot of time starting in it's own end.
- MJL

It could just mean they prefer to have their goalies stop play and take d-zone draws, since they're one of the better FO teams in the league. They're a good possession team, and they're #11 in both SA and GA, so it's probably not because they're constantly hemmed in.

It could just mean they prefer to have their goalies stop play and take d-zone draws, since they're one of the better FO teams in the league. They're a good possession team, and they're #11 in both SA and GA, so it's probably not because they're constantly hemmed in.
- Tomahawk

Regardless of why, it's still starting way to often in your own end, and having to go the full length of the ice to the opposition net.

Regardless of why, it's still starting way to often in your own end, and having to go the full length of the ice to the opposition net.
- MJL

The %'s are pretty consistent with more conservative, defensive-minded teams. If you really want to see a team that's out of the ordinary, check out the Leafs... some of their D are pushing near 40% on DZ St%.

The %'s are pretty consistent with more conservative, defensive-minded teams. If you really want to see a team that's out of the ordinary, check out the Leafs... some of their D are pushing near 40% on DZ St%.
- Tomahawk

The top defensive teams have a blend among their defense, of D men with numbers slanted towards D zone starts and offensive starts. Which signifies diversity in starts. When all of a team's high minute defenseman are slanted towards D zone starts, that's a problem.

The top defensive teams have a blend among their defense, of D men with numbers slanted towards D zone starts and offensive starts. Which signifies diversity in starts. When all of a team's high minute defenseman are slanted towards D zone starts, that's a problem.
- MJL

There's not a single dman on the Leafs with lower than 34.6%.
http://www.extraskater.co...?min_gp=25&pos=D&team=tor

That team is terrible.

There's not a single dman on the Leafs with lower than 34.6%.
http://www.extraskater.co...?min_gp=25&pos=D&team=tor

That team is terrible.
- Tomahawk

I understand that. Toronto is not a top defensive team.

There's not a single dman on the Leafs with lower than 34.6%.
http://www.extraskater.co...?min_gp=25&pos=D&team=tor

That team is terrible.
- Tomahawk

Leafs fans are lamenting what might have been.

Leafs fans are lamenting what might have been.


- PLindbergh31

That GIF is strangely mesmerizing. Horrifying, yet mesmerizing.