Confirmed with Link: Flyers trade 32nd overall pick to Edmonton for first round pick in 2025 or 2026 (Top 12 Protected In 2025)

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

tictactoe

Registered User
Jan 15, 2017
18,746
9,780
the only reason to like this if 2025 draft is like 2003 and it does not look that way.. where every players was pretty much NHLer with maybe one exception whoever NYR drafted.
 

sa cyred

Running Data Models
Sep 11, 2007
20,874
3,177
SJ
Based on Briere’s comments not needing a center prospect anymore and their position focus over BPA when drafting, they will probably pass on Hagens next year if we somehow got the 1st overall
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmanrulez

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
189,000
41,027
The way Capfreindly reads if EDM trades their 2026 1st then the 2025 becomes unprotected. The COL 1st does not read that way. You could interpret it that if COL's pick is top 10 then the Flyers receive nothing...
Not how it works
 

BobbyClarkeFan16

Registered User
Nov 29, 2005
10,795
3,904
Goderich, Ontario
I read a few places that the Flyers really liked Ben Danford. I'm wondering how much of Toronto drafting him played into the decision to trade the pick. Still hard to believe they moved on 32 when Chernyashov was still on the board.
 

Fight4yourRight

“Chuck’s my guy”
Dec 18, 2017
3,765
7,963
Now that I’ve had a chance to sleep on this one, it actually makes a whole lot more sense than trading down for the 3rd and losing out on a top line d-man.

The “premium” appears to be the high likelihood of it being better than 32nd. Not great, but not horrible. And I’d much rather they do this than pick whoever Flahr’s last minute buffet napkin whims directed them to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IronMarshal

absolute garbage

Registered User
Jan 22, 2006
4,459
1,826
The way Capfreindly reads if EDM trades their 2026 1st then the 2025 becomes unprotected. The COL 1st does not read that way. You could interpret it that if COL's pick is top 10 then the Flyers receive nothing...
I think it just means that if the Oilers end up trading their 2026 1st at some point, Flyers will get their 2025 1st no matter where that pick is (unprotected).

Flyers could have 6 picks in the top 40 next draft. Hey, I guess that's something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helistin

Random Forest

Registered User
May 12, 2010
14,593
1,229
Not terribly mad about the value here. As others have said, the “premium” is the expectation that the pick won’t be 32nd overall. The value to go from 26 to 21 this year was a late 2nd and a 7th. The value to go from 32 to ~25 would be similar.

I think there were players on the board worth taking at 32, so I don’t love it, but I get it.

If nothing else, it’s pretty obvious at this point that Briere is not trying to rush things. Whether he can execute is very much still in doubt, but he’s clearly committed to sticking to a ~three year plan with next year’s draft as the fulcrum. Makes me wonder if the plan is to shed more core assets than we’re expecting this summer (doubtful).
 

Sizzle Chest

Registered User
Aug 22, 2020
14
6
This is a weird move I can’t get my head around. Why not pick O’Reilly for more center depth? I guess they’ve seen him a lot and chose to pass.

Wonder if this time next year, the Flyers convey this pick back to Edmonton for the rights to Leon Draisaitl. That could be interesting.

 
Last edited:

Lindberg

Bennyflyers16 get a life
Oct 5, 2013
7,166
7,882
Not that I know anything about the prospects besides Celebrini but it seems like passing on Buium is the consensus mistake. Then to trade the 32nd pick that already delayed rebuilding seems.... questionable.

What on earth is this team doing. Are they rebuilding or going for it? Seems like they are content on being a team that fights for the wild card spot.
 

BritainStix

F**k Cutter Gauthier
Oct 20, 2016
6,721
9,789
The other option that is being missed, is that this still gives the flyers a trade chip.

This move certainly gives us more flexibility and we do go into next year with 3 firsts and a 3 seconds. That's an awful lot of real estate to move around in a draft.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
189,000
41,027
The other option that is being missed, is that this still gives the flyers a trade chip.

This move certainly gives us more flexibility and we do go into next year with 3 firsts and a 3 seconds. That's an awful lot of real estate to move around in a draft.
But we already know that you can’t do it in a way they are trying to
 

JojoTheWhale

CORN BOY
May 22, 2008
34,209
106,832
There are so few things we know are wrong. We push the sliders of what we prefer. We may have preferred a different player at 13, but they didn't go completely off the board or anything.

This isn't about who was on the board. If you think this trade is good value, you're irrevocably wrong. You are supposed to receive a premium for deferring a pick. The Flyers paid a premium to do so. This is factually shit value. If you're fine with that because you want to make a short play on Edmonton, great. But you've decided that decades of trades in every major sport were done incorrectly.
 

C0DITH

Registered User
Apr 30, 2017
430
548
I don't get this board lol. Next year is better by far in terms of top talent (don't need to hear that from the team itself), and for once, we have a stockpile when the draft will be on point. Literally for the first time in forever we've began to line this up, plus we might add even more TDL time. Lets go land Hagens or Misa next year, maybe try and follow that up with a Mcqueen/Spence/Martone. Danny seemed to try and make some splashes in the top10, I can seem them actually pulling the trigger next year on those types of moves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IronMarshal

JojoTheWhale

CORN BOY
May 22, 2008
34,209
106,832
I don't get this board lol. Next year is better by far in terms of top talent (don't need to hear that from the team itself), and for once, we have a stockpile when the draft will be on point. Literally for the first time in forever we've began to line this up, plus we might add even more TDL time. Lets go land Hagens or Misa next year, maybe try and follow that up with a Mcqueen/Spence/Martone. Danny seemed to try and make some splashes in the top10, I can seem them actually pulling the trigger next year on those types of moves.

The old, “It’s so easy! Just take the 1st rounder of a bubble playoff team and the 1sts of 2 contenders and get Hagens!” Thank Christ someone can teach the infidels.
 

LegionOfGloom

Registered User
Jun 9, 2021
391
1,007
I don't get this board lol. Next year is better by far in terms of top talent (don't need to hear that from the team itself), and for once, we have a stockpile when the draft will be on point. Literally for the first time in forever we've began to line this up, plus we might add even more TDL time. Lets go land Hagens or Misa next year, maybe try and follow that up with a Mcqueen/Spence/Martone. Danny seemed to try and make some splashes in the top10, I can seem them actually pulling the trigger next year on those types of moves.
Ok next year's draft is better. So we will add three Luchanko-ish players? How does that advance the ball at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rebels57 and Tripod

IronMarshal

Registered User
Mar 7, 2002
3,814
1,802
Langhorne, PA
Visit site
Terrible GM? Just sayin'. The Flyers' biggest needs are 1C and 1D. Buium has a chance to be a great 1D, 28 minutes/game stud Dman. Fell to us in a miracle. Luchanko is Laughton 2.0 if we are lucky. FFS, why is every draft, except for the fluke of Michkov falling last year, a disappointment?


C'mon, that's a bit harsh. No one is THAT bad.
Agree mostly, but Luchanko’s floor is Laughton. He is a younger and arguably smarter and a better skater than Laughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: renberg and Larry44

Tripod

I hate this team
Aug 12, 2008
78,994
86,472
Nova Scotia
I don't get this board lol. Next year is better by far in terms of top talent (don't need to hear that from the team itself), and for once, we have a stockpile when the draft will be on point. Literally for the first time in forever we've began to line this up, plus we might add even more TDL time. Lets go land Hagens or Misa next year, maybe try and follow that up with a Mcqueen/Spence/Martone. Danny seemed to try and make some splashes in the top10, I can seem them actually pulling the trigger next year on those types of moves.
An when a top player lands in your lap and we pass for a 2nd/3rc line upside guy?

Reality is the Flyers as a whole have shown how incompetent they are. Have more picks in a better draft doesn't change that.
 

IronMarshal

Registered User
Mar 7, 2002
3,814
1,802
Langhorne, PA
Visit site
Terrible GM? Just sayin'. The Flyers' biggest needs are 1C and 1D. Buium has a chance to be a great 1D, 28 minutes/game stud Dman. Fell to us in a miracle. Luchanko is Laughton 2.0 if we are lucky. FFS, why is every draft, except for the fluke of Michkov falling last year, a disappointment?


C'mon, that's a bit harsh. No one is THAT bad.
Agree mostly, but Luchanko’s floor is Laughton. He is a younger
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larry44

Random Forest

Registered User
May 12, 2010
14,593
1,229
There are so few things we know are wrong. We push the sliders of what we prefer. We may have preferred a different player at 13, but they didn't go completely off the board or anything.

This isn't about who was on the board. If you think this trade is good value, you're irrevocably wrong. You are supposed to receive a premium for deferring a pick. The Flyers paid a premium to do so. This is factually shit value. If you're fine with that because you want to make a short play on Edmonton, great. But you've decided that decades of trades in every major sport were done incorrectly.
Ehh, I don’t see it this way, and I’m not trying to excuse a poorly managed draft, which I think this was in a lot of ways.

The most likely outcome for Edmonton’s 2025 pick is in the 18-26 range. Reasonable chance that it’s in the 26-32 range. I think we can establish that moving from 32 to ~25 would cost roughly a late 2nd, more if it’s to 20, less if it’s to 28, etc. That premium you want (correctly) is embedded in whatever weighted probability you assign to the pick being in each of those spots.

It’s actually a complicated math problem if you broke it down by the expected value + weighted probabilities and then discounted it for time value. But I don’t think it’s shit value. If Edmonton’s pick is at 32, yes it will be shitty. But given the odds of where that pick will land, I don’t think the value is all that off.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad