Serious question, with a serious explanation of what I would do. First, I guess the most recent reports of what Steve Yzermen has offered Steven Stamkos was 8.5 million, which has low ball written all over it. So I ask, what would you trade to get Stamkos in a Flyers uniform?

My response to this is "ANYTHING!" Sean Couturier, Jake Voracek, Shayne Gostisbehere, even Claude Giroux. The only guy who would be safe from my point of view, isn't playing on the team yet. Iven Provorov is the only player who would be safe from making a trade for Steven Stamkos.

With this said, I don't wanna part with anyone but a one for one, Stamkos for Giroux, Stamkos would play in the same spot on the PP and would take over first line center. It's a little appealing because Stamkos is younger. Stamkos buys time for Morin, Samheim and others to come into the league. Voracek can do a decent job of setting up Stamkos all day.

To me this is an interesting debate, although if the Flyers got into talks, I'm offering Voracek before offering Giroux.

Thoughts?

RJ's numbers go down too away from Laughton. Worse than Laughts' actually. Much of Laughton's time away has been with VDV and White. RJ's sample away is 1/3 that of Laughton's too, and much of his time away has been with White too. Their WoWY don't reveal all that much using each other. Two poor possession players playing with equally poor players away from each other. You know what I learn from their WoWY? Man, Matt Read is terrific.

Laughton is a poor possession player. No two ways about it. He's also young, has room to grow, and has shown plus scoring and skating ability. With Read, his possession numbers are in plus territory. That leads me to believe that playing with another capable player can give them decent enough numbers. I am a move-him-to-wing fan, but it's because of more than just his faceoff numbers. If he did everything else right, that poop gets mitigated. White is a great faceoff man, puts up poor possession numbers. Because he's just a poor possession player -- even if they win a faceoff. Laughton's faceoffs are near the bottom of why I want him moved to wing tbh. Poor def acumen and inability to control the game flow are more glaring to me.
- Mononoke

So much win in this post.

(I'm not worried about FO% either... that almost always improves over time)

Serious question, with a serious explanation of what I would do. First, I guess the most recent reports of what Steve Yzermen has offered Steven Stamkos was 8.5 million, which has low ball written all over it. So I ask, what would you trade to get Stamkos in a Flyers uniform?

My response to this is "ANYTHING!" Sean Couturier, Jake Voracek, Shayne Gostisbehere, even Claude Giroux. The only guy who would be safe from my point of view, isn't playing on the team yet. Iven Provorov is the only player who would be safe from making a trade for Steven Stamkos.

With this said, I don't wanna part with anyone but a one for one, Stamkos for Giroux, Stamkos would play in the same spot on the PP and would take over first line center. It's a little appealing because Stamkos is younger. Stamkos buys time for Morin, Samheim and others to come into the league. Voracek can do a decent job of setting up Stamkos all day.

To me this is an interesting debate, although if the Flyers got into talks, I'm offering Voracek before offering Giroux.

Thoughts?
- SuperSchennBros

This post is so full of not win.

RJ's numbers go down too away from Laughton. Worse than Laughts' actually. Much of Laughton's time away has been with VDV and White. RJ's sample away is 1/3 that of Laughton's too, and much of his time away has been with White too. Their WoWY don't reveal all that much using each other. Two poor possession players playing with equally poor players away from each other. You know what I learn from their WoWY? Man, Matt Read is terrific.

Laughton is a poor possession player. No two ways about it. He's also young, has room to grow, and has shown plus scoring and skating ability. With Read, his possession numbers are in plus territory. That leads me to believe that playing with another capable player can give them decent enough numbers. I am a move-him-to-wing fan, but it's because of more than just his faceoff numbers. If he did everything else right, that poop gets mitigated. White is a great faceoff man, puts up poor possession numbers. Because he's just a poor possession player -- even if they win a faceoff. Laughton's faceoffs are near the bottom of why I want him moved to wing tbh. Poor def acumen and inability to control the game flow are more glaring to me.
- Mononoke

Or we can add Laughton to a package for Stamkos.

This post is so full of not win.
- Tomahawk

Okay, I'd like to hear a reason.

Serious question, with a serious explanation of what I would do. First, I guess the most recent reports of what Steve Yzermen has offered Steven Stamkos was 8.5 million, which has low ball written all over it. So I ask, what would you trade to get Stamkos in a Flyers uniform?

My response to this is "ANYTHING!" Sean Couturier, Jake Voracek, Shayne Gostisbehere, even Claude Giroux. The only guy who would be safe from my point of view, isn't playing on the team yet. Iven Provorov is the only player who would be safe from making a trade for Steven Stamkos.

With this said, I don't wanna part with anyone but a one for one, Stamkos for Giroux, Stamkos would play in the same spot on the PP and would take over first line center. It's a little appealing because Stamkos is younger. Stamkos buys time for Morin, Samheim and others to come into the league. Voracek can do a decent job of setting up Stamkos all day.

To me this is an interesting debate, although if the Flyers got into talks, I'm offering Voracek before offering Giroux.

Thoughts?
- SuperSchennBros

maybe he wants to go to free agency and go to the highest bidder

Okay, I'd like to hear a reason.
- SuperSchennBros

You know that low-ball $8.5M contract? Giroux is locked in for less than that right now, and IMO, he's just as good of a player as Stamkos.

(and FFS, trading Ghost? wtf)

Serious question, with a serious explanation of what I would do. First, I guess the most recent reports of what Steve Yzermen has offered Steven Stamkos was 8.5 million, which has low ball written all over it. So I ask, what would you trade to get Stamkos in a Flyers uniform?
- SuperSchennBros

In a realistic trade? Nothing. Stamkos isn't so significantly better than the Flyers' top-shelf players to make me want to deal for him.


In a silly trade? Weal

maybe he wants to go to free agency and go to the highest bidder
- funmaster18

In a realistic trade? Nothing
In a silly trade? Weal
- Scoob

- funmaster18

I actually made myself lol at that one. lol

maybe he wants to go to free agency and go to the highest bidder
- funmaster18

He's looking for 84 over 7. It's going to be ridiculous if he hits free agency.

maybe he wants to go to free agency and go to the highest bidder
- funmaster18

Always a possibility. I'm asking however, let's say Stamkos is purely motivated by money and we could get our foot in the door first. How far would you go to get him?

You know that low-ball $8.5M contract? Giroux is locked in for less than that right now, and IMO, he's just as good of a player as Stamkos.

(and FFS, trading Ghost? wtf)
- Tomahawk

Do you think the league thinks the same way? That G is Stamkos' equal?

In a realistic trade? Nothing. Stamkos isn't so significantly better than the Flyers' top-shelf players to make me want to deal for him.


In a silly trade? Weal
- Scoob

I would throw Voracek at Tampa Bay quicker then I can grab a beer from my fridge if Tampa would take him.

I would throw Voracek at Tampa Bay quicker then I can grab a beer from my fridge if Tampa would take him.
- SuperSchennBros

Imho, that's not realistic.

He's looking for 84 over 7. It's going to be ridiculous if he hits free agency.
- mayorofangrytown

if he makes it to free agency, some team is going to vastly overpay

Imho, that's not realistic.
- Scoob

It might not be but last year we were calling Voracek elite. I will say that I would be shocked if Stamkos was traded for another super star in the league. I think Stamkos hates being in Tampa and he'll be doing the Martin St Louis dance on his way out. So why isn't Voracek to start talks not realistic?

They're likely first round fodder for Washington if they got in. That doesn't change that Hextall is not going to abandon the playoff chase too early. He owes that to players such as Giroux, Voracek, Streit, Schultz, etc. They're playoff hopes are slim now, when it becomes clear that it's not going to happen, then he can fairly start to make some changes, and integrate some youth for the stretch run of the regular season.
- MJL

and I don't disagree with that thinking at all and I am not proposing inserting 2 lines of kids. However, I am suggesting trying to insert a young player in for a player or two who have not been effective and who do nothing in said playoff push.

It might not be but last year we were calling Voracek elite. I will say that I would be shocked if Stamkos was traded for another super star in the league. I think Stamkos hates being in Tampa and he'll be doing the Martin St Louis dance on his way out. So why isn't Voracek to start talks not realistic?
- SuperSchennBros

That's not what you said. You said Voracek for Stamkos, which I don't think is realistic.

if he makes it to free agency, some team is going to vastly overpay
- funmaster18

When was the last time a superstar made it to free agency? Marian Hossa?

Always a possibility. I'm asking however, let's say Stamkos is purely motivated by money and we could get our foot in the door first. How far would you go to get him?
- SuperSchennBros

I don't know. It's tough. If I can keep Giroux, then I might throw enough at him to get him and have a potent 1-2 punch down the middle with couturier in a much better 3rd line role. At the same time, this team is a couple years out from being really competitive as it stands, so I don't know if I want to pay the price it would take knowing we are trying to replenish the team, not take away. If they got Stamkos, the team would be taking a drastic turn in direction, IMO. If this was a year or two from now, I wouldn't be shocked at all at them going after him. Then again, I guess I wouldn't be shocked if they did it now either.

That's not what you said. You said Voracek for Stamkos, which I don't think is realistic.
- Scoob

Hang on. You misunderstood what I said because I didn't offer you an ideal package like your Steve Yzermen?

Do you think the league thinks the same way? That G is Stamkos' equal?
- SuperSchennBros

I don't really care what the league thinks...the league thinks Torts is a good enough coach to get 3 jobs in 4 years or so. Public opinion doesn't matter to me. Frankly, if Giroux reached FA the same year as Stammer he'd have gotten more too. As much as Stammer? Maybe not but close.

You asked for reasons to not make that trade earlier. Here's mine: Stamkos is on a downward trend, and much of his "league value" is based on numbers from years ago. Now the league is on a downward trend too, but Stamkos is supposed to be the best of the best. His relative numbers are sinking even with scoring sinking. He is pretty much a better goal scoring Giroux minus the PK ability, faceoffs, and playoff performances. Is that worth $2.5 million a year more? It's pretty net neutral in my mind. I might take Stamkos 1 for 1, same cost but not for what it'd take to trade THEN sign him.

This season Stamkos has 6 more goals than G, and a lower PPG. Last season all you heard was how poor and invisible he performed for the Lightning in their playoffs. Doesn't sound like a good investment to me.

When was the last time a superstar made it to free agency? Marian Hossa?
- SuperSchennBros

I don't know. I don't think it matters. All that matters is what he wants to do. If he wants to go to free agency, he will go to free agency. If it's a money thing or just wants out of tampa and that's it, it can get done via trade. Flyers were apparently trying hard for him in the Holmgren era, so I guess we will see if there is still the same desire or not.