2022/23 Roster Thread XVI: Suite 16, Room for Improvement

[blackjackmulligan]

Just looked on Twitter and through articles and somehow couldn’t find a single quote stating that Atkinson was the only option Chuck had when trading Voracek.

I must be missing where it was stated because people wouldn’t just pull lies out of their asses like that, right?

Maybe it was said on a podcast? Or a press conference? I’ll check and report back. If anyone finds it before I do, let me know.

let us know what you find. Surely there are numerous articles saying there were multiple suitors for Jake.

Should change your user name to the truth. Carl Williams aint got nothing on you.

The Flyers disagree with you.

why not trade a 7th for Brown rather than risk another team claiming him? Surely that is something a dunce like Chuck would do to appease Kevin no?

 

[renberg]

If Scott doesn’t force Fletcher, I bet AV is still here.

And for that I am eternally grateful. He gets a pass from me for some other things since he did do this.

 

[FlyerNutter]

If Scott doesn’t force Fletcher, I bet AV is still here.

Chuck exclusively blames COVID, injuries, the old leadership group, and the youth. Hes defended the incompetent staff at every single opportunity and thrown players under the bus unprompted.

I'd actually prefer AV over Torts. Would take Hak over both.

That's a statement never thought I'd have to make.

 

[Striiker]

I'd actually prefer AV over Torts. Would take Hak over both.

That's a statement never thought I'd have to make.

All three are horrendous beyond belief. Three incompetent dinosaurs in a row and no end in sight.

Hard to really rank them but I’d put AV as the worst. Dogshit coach, dogshit human being, lazy, ignorant, arrogant, just all around disgusting.

 

[FlyerNutter]

All three are horrendous beyond belief. Three incompetent dinosaurs in a row and no end in sight.

Hard to really rank them but I’d put AV as the worst. Dogshit coach, dogshit human being, lazy, ignorant, arrogant, just all around disgusting.

I see Torts as the worst of the 3 as I think his inability to work with young players that are outside of his mold will truly hurt whatever half ass retool we are seeing.

AV was lazy enough, and Hak p***y enough to not interfere as much. Imo anyway.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

OK, the Flyers have the 7th worst points percentage in the NHL.

6th to 9th from the bottom is probably a good estimate of where the Flyers will finish in the standings.

Chicago, Anaheim, Columbus, and San Jose are much worse. Arizona and Montreal are slightly worse than the Flyers record-wise. I kind of doubt both will rise above the Flyers by season's end, but one of them could.

Of the the teams just ahead of the Flyers: Florida is unlikely to drop below the Flyers, and Vancouver and St. Louis probably will stay above the Flyers, though I guess it's possible both could fall with injuries.

Odds of the #1 or #2 pick:

6th worst: 7.5%, 7.9%
7th worst: 6.5%, 6.9%
8th worst: 6.0%, 6.4%
9th worst: 5.0%, 5.4%

Compare that to the teams that finish 2nd and 3rd worst:

2nd worst: 13.5%, 14.4%
3rd worst: 11.5%, 11.5%
4th worst: 9.5%, 9.8%
5th worst: 8.5%, 8.8%

Even the dead last team only has a 25% chance at Bedard, 75% chance of not picking first.

So is it really the right strategy to intentionally make the team as bad as possible?

To trade away their best players in TK, Sanheim, Provorov, etc. (who are still pretty young) in order to better "compete" with .300 points % teams like Chicago, Anaheim, Columbus, and San Jose to be worst of the lot?

For an at best 25% chance to take Bedard, and more likely a 13.5% to 8.5% chance to take Bedard?

All while you can keep your best young players, start building improvement *this season* rather than actively and intentionally making things even worse, and still have a 7.5% to 5% chance at winning Bedard?

Worst case scenario an improving team headed in the right direction toward next season ends up with the 6th to 10th overall draft choice in a very deep draft where they will still get an unusually excellent prospect in that range.

 

[Striiker]

Just looked on Twitter and through articles and somehow couldn’t find a single quote stating that Atkinson was the only option Chuck had when trading Voracek.

I must be missing where it was stated because people wouldn’t just pull lies out of their asses like that, right?

Maybe it was said on a podcast? Or a press conference? I’ll check and report back. If anyone finds it before I do, let me know.

Guys, I’m stumped.

I’ve now looked at every tweet, article, news report, podcast, and press conference from the Voracek/Atkinson trade onwards and I haven’t seen a single person say that Atkinson was the only option.

I’m starting to get a little worried that this might not be true. But how could that be? People wouldn’t post such an easily disprovable lie, would they?

 

[renberg]

As we've seen in the past, betting on the lottery is a fool's game. Perhaps I'm too much of a cynic but I believe that the league FO gets involved and puts their fingers on the scale to determine who gets that top pick. To me it's no accident that Pittsburgh got Crosby; that the Devils have had a run on early picks above their finish line. This is a business and the League FO, for whatever reason, wants certain franchises to succeed. When the dust settles, I believe that Anaheim will have Bedard to boost WC hockey. Chicago will get the local boy in Fantilli. After that game on.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

OK, the Flyers have the 7th worst points percentage in the NHL.

6th to 9th from the bottom is probably a good estimate of where the Flyers will finish in the standings.

Chicago, Anaheim, Columbus, and San Jose are much worse. Arizona and Montreal are slightly worse than the Flyers record-wise. I kind of doubt both will rise above the Flyers by season's end, but one of them could.

Of the the teams just ahead of the Flyers: Florida is unlikely to drop below the Flyers, and Vancouver and St. Louis probably will stay above the Flyers, though I guess it's possible both could fall with injuries.

Odds of the #1 or #2 pick:

6th worst: 7.5%, 7.9%
7th worst: 6.5%, 6.9%
8th worst: 6.0%, 6.4%
9th worst: 5.0%, 5.4%

Compare that to the teams that finish 2nd and 3rd worst:

2nd worst: 13.5%, 14.4%
3rd worst: 11.5%, 11.5%
4th worst: 9.5%, 9.8%
5th worst: 8.5%, 8.8%

Even the dead last team only has a 25% chance at Bedard, 75% chance of not picking first.

So is it really the right strategy to intentionally make the team as bad as possible?

To trade away their best players in TK, Sanheim, Provorov, etc. (who are still pretty young) in order to better "compete" with .300 points % teams like Chicago, Anaheim, Columbus, and San Jose to be worst of the lot?

For an at best 25% chance to take Bedard, and more likely a 13.5% to 8.5% chance to take Bedard?

All while you can keep your best young players, start building improvement *this season* rather than actively and intentionally making things even worse, and still have a 7.5% to 5% chance at winning Bedard?

Worst case scenario an improving team headed in the right direction toward next season ends up with the 6th to 10th overall draft choice in a very deep draft where they will still get an unusually excellent prospect in that range.

#spinnintiresinthemud4ever..


neat strategy.

 

[Beef Invictus]

If only they were improving or heading in the right direction. 2012 isn't the right direction.

 

[flyers0909]

Guys, I’m stumped.

I’ve now looked at every tweet, article, news report, podcast, and press conference from the Voracek/Atkinson trade onwards and I haven’t seen a single person say that Atkinson was the only option.

I’m starting to get a little worried that this might not be true. But how could that be? People wouldn’t post such an easily disprovable lie, would they?

Love how it's now turned around to you needing to find an article showing there were multiple suitors.

 

[kudymen]

Love how it's now turned around to you needing to find an article showing there were multiple suitors.

Burden of proof is an amusing concept isn't it

 

[dragonoffrost]

They are the worst run organization in sports, and it’s led by the Ivy League incompetence that is Cuck Fletchbag.

If the Flyers were a soft drink, they’d be Crystal Pepsi
If they were a car, they’d be the Ford Edsel
If they were an entertainer, they’d be Carrottop
And, if Cuck was a team owner, he’d be Daniel Snyder.

This team could f*** up a wet dream, 7 days a week and twice on Sundays.

 

[Striiker]

Love how it's now turned around to you needing to find an article showing there were multiple suitors.

Because, as we all know, the burden of proof falls on the defense, not the one making ridiculous claims.

"Giroux is a lizard!"
"Huh?"
"If I'm wrong then find a statement from the Flyers explicitly saying he's not a lizard!"
*searches*
"Well shit, I guess he really is a lizard..."

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Because, as we all know, the burden of proof falls on the defense, not the one making ridiculous claims.

"Giroux is a lizard!"
"Huh?"
"If I'm wrong then find a statement from the Flyers explicitly saying he's not a lizard!"
*searches*
"Well shit, I guess he really is a lizard..."

i f***ing knew the lizard people were real..

ahhhaaaa

 

[deadhead]

Guys, I’m stumped.

I’ve now looked at every tweet, article, news report, podcast, and press conference from the Voracek/Atkinson trade onwards and I haven’t seen a single person say that Atkinson was the only option.

I’m starting to get a little worried that this might not be true. But how could that be? People wouldn’t post such an easily disprovable lie, would they?

xGF 47.36%, xGFrel -4.05, 2.38 pp/60, 3yr at $8.25M starting at age 32.

Seattle passed on him in the expansion draft (and on Ghost as well, wanted a 1st rd pick to take Ghost).
There were zero rumors of any team offering any asset for Voracek.

A year later his value was worse:

Aaron Portzline of The Athletic: Columbus Blues GM Jarmo Kekalainen didn’t like that Oliver Bjorkstrand trade and said “it was the best of the no-good options.” Trading two years of Jakub Voracek at $8.25 million may have to include a top prospect and a first.

 

[Beef Invictus]

xGF 47.36%, xGFrel -4.05, 2.38 pp/60, 3yr at $8.25M starting at age 32.

Seattle passed on him in the expansion draft (and on Ghost as well, wanted a 1st rd pick to take Ghost).
There were zero rumors of any team offering any asset for Voracek.

A year later his value was worse:

Aaron Portzline of The Athletic: Columbus Blues GM Jarmo Kekalainen didn’t like that Oliver Bjorkstrand trade and said “it was the best of the no-good options.” Trading two years of Jakub Voracek at $8.25 million may have to include a top prospect and a first.

Seattle passed on a ton of players for no good reason. Not exactly a good standard.

 

[Striiker]

Seattle passed on a ton of players for no good reason. Not exactly a good standard.

Seattles proves Twarynski is better than JVR, Voracek, and Ghost because that’s how determining value and skill works.

 

[deadhead]

No, Seattle showed that a veteran with an unmovable contract had no value (since they'd take a veteran if they could flip him for assets).

 

[VladDrag]

In general, Seattle was not taking on salary without taking a pick along with it. It doesn't mean that Voracek didn't have value.

 

[deadhead]

In general, Seattle was not taking on salary without taking a pick along with it. It doesn't mean that Voracek didn't have value.

Yes it did, because of his contract. It's not just the player, but the cap hit that determines value.

A year later, despite only having two years left, he required a 1st and a prospect to be moved.
Compare to Giroux. Who was resigned to a 3 year deal only $1.5M cheaper than Voracek's 2 years.

Voracek simply wasn't highly valued with that contract.

 

[Striiker]

In Seattle and Fletchers defense, Arizona has sure ate a whole lot of shit for taking on that Ghost contract.

If they hadn't received those picks to lessen the sting, they’d be in a world of hurt right now.

Negative value indeed.

 

[Magua]

But magically the Flyers can flip Cam Atkinson and Rasmus Ristolainen, right?

 

[Beef Invictus]

No, Seattle showed that a veteran with an unmovable contract had no value (since they'd take a veteran if they could flip him for assets).

What about all the other good players who don't fit that mold that they skipped? Seattle was trying to play a game and they lost.

It's a poor comparison. Almost as poor as assuming GM's collectively are infallible.

 

[deadhead]

Anyone could have taken Ghost for free. No takers. No even that summer when they could have moved players around to fit him under the cap. Value is determined ex ante, not ex post.