Suggestion: Wayne Simmonds.

[AlbertaBoy12]

Im curious what everyone thinks of this. There has been alot of talk about trying to pry Luke Schenn out of Philly. What does everyone think it would take to pry Schenn and Simmonds out of philly. I would say they need cap relief more then anyone, especially with voracek coming up to UFA.

 

To get the conversation started I would say

 

Granlund, Hiller, 2nd(From Wsh), 3rd(from Wsh), Drew Shore could be used as well.

 

Im curious to hear what everyone thinks.

[andymo]

I don't think cap relief is much of a sell in this deal as Hiller has a bigger cap hit than Simmonds next year and then becomes UFA. Simmonds is a young player on a good contract with term.  He is good for 25-30 goals a season, fast and gritty and a RHS RW. All of these things make him a valuable commodity. I like Simmonds, he is exactly the kind of player we could use going forward, but the assets required to acquire him would be the kind we want to keep. Can't think of anything that would work for both sides here.

[AlbertaBoy12]

Hiller was just a name I was throwing out there. 

Simmonds cap hit is 3 975 000.

 

Hillers is  4 500 000.

 

Only difference being HIller is a UFA next summer where simmonds is not. He is the type of player we want and in my opinion we have the assets on the left side, at centre and in draft picks to make a move for him.

[Flyerfan52]

Hiller was just a name I was throwing out there. 

Simmonds cap hit is 3 975 000.

 

Hillers is  4 500 000.

 

Only difference being HIller is a UFA next summer where simmonds is not. He is the type of player we want and in my opinion we have the assets on the left side, at centre and in draft picks to make a move for him.

Yep. Except @ 3.95 x 4 Simmonds is exactly the type the Flyers want to retain.

 

With Mason @ 4.1 x 2 adding Hiller is a no go. Granlund, Shore & the late Washington picks aren't worth a heck off a lot.

 

There isn't a lot the Flames could trade to get Simmonds unless you're talking pieces that hurt more than adding Simmonds helps. Like centers like Monahan or an asset like Bennett which is self-defeating.

***************************************************

Try kowing about the other team before doing these. You know some of us have dual affiliations so will shoot these down while even offers that are such obvious rip-offs will cause a stir.

The hockey world may revolve around the Flames for you but the real GMs want to keep their jobs.

[AlbertaBoy12]

Yep. Except @ 3.95 x 4 Simmonds is exactly the type the Flyers want to retain.

 

With Mason @ 4.1 x 2 adding Hiller is a no go. Granlund, Shore & the late Washington picks aren't worth a heck off a lot.

 

There isn't a lot the Flames could trade to get Simmonds unless you're talking pieces that hurt more than adding Simmonds helps. Like centers like Monahan or an asset like Bennett which is self-defeating.

***************************************************

Try kowing about the other team before doing these. You know some of us have dual affiliations so will shoot these down while even offers that are such obvious rip-offs will cause a stir.

The hockey world may revolve around the Flames for you but the real GMs want to keep their jobs.

Granlund could be worth alot to some teams, just because you dont think shore or granlund isent worth a heck of alot doesnt mean everyone does. Both have potential.

 

Sounds to me like you are shooting it down cause you cheer for the flyers. I made a suggestion, and I was asking for peoples opinions or suggestions, apparantly you have nothing constructive to add?

 

You dont think ron hextall will take a look at the fact he actually has 0 cap space right now? and once Pronger goes on LTIR he will have about 4.3 million to spend. Im sure he would like to free up some space and make some deals.

[Flyerfan52]

Granlund could be worth alot to some teams, just because you dont think shore or granlund isent worth a heck of alot doesnt mean everyone does. Both have potential.

 

Sounds to me like you are shooting it down cause you cheer for the flyers. I made a suggestion, and I was asking for peoples opinions or suggestions, apparantly you have nothing constructive to add?

 

You dont think ron hextall will take a look at the fact he actually has 0 cap space right now? and once Pronger goes on LTIR he will have about 4.3 million to spend. Im sure he would like to free up some space and make some deals.

Let's put it this way. If the Flames had a cost controlled young (26 year old) power forward on that contract would you trade him for a handful of  could be worth a lot & potential  when the 2 contracts (Granlund pending RFA in a year @ 0.767 & the rights to RFA Shore) eat 1/2 that salary would you do it?

You mentioned wanting Luke Schenn. His brother is also tradable.

 

When Pronger goes on LTIR again (hypocracy by NHL as they also employ him) there is cap space without giving up a cap effecient contract.

 

As I said, learn a bit/check facts before posting trades that don't work.

A few fans on here will can tell you that I look @ trades between the 2 teams closest but try to make them fair. Your's was far from that so I believe I actually did add something constructive.

Yours by contrast was a fanboy offer.

[JTech780]

To get Simmonds I think we would have to give up the 15th pick. The 45th and Klimchuk or Poirier might get it done but I am not sure that is enough value for the Flyers to give up Simmonds.

 

If the Flyers are looking to dump some salary they have a number of players that they will look to trade or buyout before moving Simmonds. Guys like Umberger, Lecavalier, Read, B.Schenn, Streit, MacDonald, L.Schenn, Grossmann, Del Zotto. I would look at targeting any of Read, B.Schenn, L.Schenn, Grossmann, Del Zotto.

[AlbertaBoy12]

 

As I said, learn a bit/check facts before posting trades that don't work.

A few fans on here will can tell you that I look @ trades between the 2 teams closest but try to make them fair. Your's was far from that so I believe I actually did add something constructive.

Yours by contrast was a fanboy offer.

I can turn down offers, its not really constructive to the conversation. I said before my suggestion heres some ideas to get things started.

 

As I said, it was a suggestion.  I threw some names out there, Do you really think simmonds is untradeable?

I believe the point of this is to suggest trades and discuss options. I think the 45th pick and klimchuk is a good starting place for a deal.

 

I dont think Umberger, Lecavaler, Read fetch any real value.

[Flyerfan52]

I can turn down offers, its not really constructive to the conversation. I said before my suggestion heres some ideas to get things started.

 

As I said, it was a suggestion.  I threw some names out there, Do you really think simmonds is untradeable?

I believe the point of this is to suggest trades and discuss options. I think the 45th pick and klimchuk is a good starting place for a deal.

 

I dont think Umberger, Lecavaler, Read fetch any real value.

Nope. But neither do Granlund or Shore. Klimchuk falls in that range & a 45th pick is another maybe.

 

The reason you want Simmonds is the same reason the Flyers would keep him.

****************************************************************

When proposing a trade ask yourself if your would take that return for what you offer if you had the player you want.

[AlbertaBoy12]

Nope. But neither do Granlund or Shore. Klimchuk falls in that range & a 45th pick is another maybe.

 

The reason you want Simmonds is the same reason the Flyers would keep him.

****************************************************************

When proposing a trade ask yourself if your would take that return for what you offer if you had the player you want.

If I was in the flyers position sure I might take 3 young prosects and a draft pick.

 

what do you think it would take in this case?

[travel_dude]

If I was in the flyers position sure I might take 3 young prosects and a draft pick.

 

what do you think it would take in this case?

 

What would you want for a younger version of Hudler in a trade?  Scores about 28 goals per year....

 

If you have a player like that, why do you trade him away for prospects and picks, or prospects and a old goalie? 

[cross16]

Simmons would be very tough to pull out of Philly and I'm not sure I see a workable deal there. I don't see the flyers rebuilding and wanting just picks and prospects, I see them wanting NHL bodies now and NHL bodies with decent upside. That's not something the flames have very much of.

Only way I can see it is if thru get desperate with their cap and have to move him to sign Voracek. I don't see that happening and if it did I think there are other teams out there that can offer better deals because they can offer defence. That's what flyers need badly.

[AlbertaBoy12]

Simmons would be very tough to pull out of Philly and I'm not sure I see a workable deal there. I don't see the flyers rebuilding and wanting just picks and prospects, I see them wanting NHL bodies now and NHL bodies with decent upside. That's not something the flames have very much of.

Only way I can see it is if thru get desperate with their cap and have to move him to sign Voracek. I don't see that happening and if it did I think there are other teams out there that can offer better deals because they can offer defence. That's what flyers need badly.

Thats true. But the flyers do need defense as you said. I would be interested to see if the flyers make some trades of forwards to make room for FA signings on D and maybe trading some assets for defense or forwards to fill spots. If the trade simmonds for shore and granlund plus a couple others, they would free up cap space and have more oppurtunitys.

[cross16]

Thats true. But the flyers do need defense as you said. I would be interested to see if the flyers make some trades of forwards to make room for FA signings on D and maybe trading some assets for defense or forwards to fill spots. If the trade simmonds for shore and granlund plus a couple others, they would free up cap space and have more oppurtunitys.

 

But why would you trade Simmonds for spare parts to clear cap space, get out of trouble and then get right back in by signing an overpriced guy in FA? Let's say they trade Simmonds for Shore, Granlund and the 15th overall pick (I don't think this is enough but its getting closer and I'm thining hypothetical anyway) and then say they sign Cody Franson in free agency for 5.5 a year. Would you argue they are a better team? I wouldn't.

 

If, and I stress if, they traded Simmonds is to fix holes elsewhere ie trade for a blueliner. Trading him for depth pieces so they can sign someone else doesn't make sense. I think the only way the Flames could possible get Simmonds is if they overpay using the 15th overall pick plus a top prospect, plus a roster piece or start discussing TJ Brodie. Neither option I would do.

[AlbertaBoy12]

I dont see granlund or shore as spare parts. Im not suggesting they trade him for cap space and then overpay. Im just saying the possibility is there for them to trade a forward for cap space so they can make a deal for a defenseman.

[cross16]

I dont see granlund or shore as spare parts. Im not suggesting they trade him for cap space and then overpay. Im just saying the possibility is there for them to trade a forward for cap space so they can make a deal for a defenseman.

 

I think that's the problem with discussing a deal for the Flames centred around those two. They ARE spare parts that's the thing. I mean Shore is waiver eligible next year so if a team really wants him they'll get him cheap and all the Flames had to give up to get him is a fringe prospect. Granlund has some value but I think its very limited value and I don't think you'll see him help a team in their top 9 next year so for me that's a spare part. He might become something in the future but I stress "might". I dont' think Granlund has as much potential as some other people do.

 

I get your point about the cap space but what I'm saying is that there will be enough interest in Simmonds that they can make a trade to create cap space AND still get good value in return. You seem to be implying they would have to dump Simmonds for cap reason and thus the value is less and that's not the case. They'll get great value if they put him on the block.

[AlbertaBoy12]

I think that's the problem with discussing a deal for the Flames centred around those two. They ARE spare parts that's the thing. I mean Shore is waiver eligible next year so if a team really wants him they'll get him cheap and all the Flames had to give up to get him is a fringe prospect. Granlund has some value but I think its very limited value and I don't think you'll see him help a team in their top 9 next year so for me that's a spare part. He might become something in the future but I stress "might". I dont' think Granlund has as much potential as some other people do.

 

I get your point about the cap space but what I'm saying is that there will be enough interest in Simmonds that they can make a trade to create cap space AND still get good value in return. You seem to be implying they would have to dump Simmonds for cap reason and thus the value is less and that's not the case. They'll get great value if they put him on the block.

Im not disagreeing necessarily on value. Im suggesting we give more then granlund and shore, I dont think we need to include brodie. But lets say we took the cap space out of the equation do you think wideman + a couple prospects + a draft pick would be a starting place? Im just here for the discussion on the deal.

[cross16]

Im not disagreeing necessarily on value. Im suggesting we give more then granlund and shore, I dont think we need to include brodie. But lets say we took the cap space out of the equation do you think wideman + a couple prospects + a draft pick would be a starting place? Im just here for the discussion on the deal.

 

No, because I don't see Philly trading Simmonds in the prime of his career for Wideman who is nearing the end of his. Their problem is their best dman is nearing the end of his career and they have a very large gap down to the next dman.

 

I think if you want Simmonds you have to talk about Brodie. I'm not saying Brodie for Simmonds straight up is fair but I also don't think its that far off. 25-30 goal scorers who are 26, RH and play a physical game do not grow on trees, Simmonds is a very good hockey player who is a borderline top liner and signed to a VERY reasonable contract. He has very high trade value so I think if you want him start talking Brodie, because I don't see another reason why Philly would trade him to Calgary for anthing else. Unless of course that someone else is Monahan or Bennett which are also clear non starters for me.

[Flyerfan52]

Simmons would be very tough to pull out of Philly and I'm not sure I see a workable deal there. I don't see the flyers rebuilding and wanting just picks and prospects, I see them wanting NHL bodies now and NHL bodies with decent upside. That's not something the flames have very much of.

Only way I can see it is if thru get desperate with their cap and have to move him to sign Voracek. I don't see that happening and if it did I think there are other teams out there that can offer better deals because they can offer defence. That's what flyers need badly.

The thing is the Flyers have lots of decent depth defensemen & promising D like Sanheim, Gostisbehere, Morin & Hagg ready to take the next step (I expect 1 or 2 in the lineup next season) so the real need is a top pairing type (even 2nd tier top 2).

 

The only was I could see Simmonds moved is as part of a deal for a top pairing capable D. We can't give up Gio or Brodie as it's a step back rather than forward.

Off the top of my head the Jets, Preds & Blues are among the few teams deep enough in top tier D to be able to afford trading 1.

[robrob1974]

Who on the Flames would be worth a Simmons? Maybe Backlund and a Jooris, Granlund or a Klimchuk or something along those lines of the plus prospects. Simmons is a known commodity and has a production value. Granlund and other prospects only have potential. I see them as on the fence of making it or breaking it. 

 

I see a decent two-way game shaping up in Granlund's game, but will he get there? 

It's one thing to be excited about our prospects but I think we tend to overvalue them with rose coloured glasses. 

[cccsberg]

Who on the Flames would be worth a Simmons? Maybe Backlund and a Jooris, Granlund or a Klimchuk or something along those lines of the plus prospects. Simmons is a known commodity and has a production value. Granlund and other prospects only have potential. I see them as on the fence of making it or breaking it. 

 

I see a decent two-way game shaping up in Granlund's game, but will he get there? 

It's one thing to be excited about our prospects but I think we tend to overvalue them with rose coloured glasses. 

Not so much overvaluing them, just looking at and valuing different things.  Just because someone is a prospect and unproven yet at the NHL level doesn't mean they don't have value, sometimes tremendous value.  If you value what a particular player brings to the table, either now or in the future he's going to be worth a lot to you.  

 

Simmonds is proven and very valuable today, 3-5 years from now maybe not so much.  Meanwhile a prospect may be only potential today but (if they work out) tremendously valuable in current terms 3-5 years down the road.

[kehatch]

Prospects have value. But the guys you are talking about don't have enough value to get you someone like Simmonds. Not even close.

[cccsberg]

Prospects have value. But the guys you are talking about don't have enough value to get you someone like Simmonds. Not even close.

Value is in the eyes of the beholder, and there are always extenuating circumstances (i.e. Cap, willingness to sign...).  That said I'd say Backlund and Simmons are in the same range of value, and the upcoming prospects, less.  

[kehatch]

Value is in the eyes of the beholder, and there are always extenuating circumstances (i.e. Cap, willingness to sign...).  That said I'd say Backlund and Simmons are in the same range of value, and the upcoming prospects, less.  

 

Simmonds is 26 years old.  He is a right handed shot RW.  He plays a physical power forward game.  He has put up 25 goals or more the last 4 seasons (shortened season pro-rated).  He works hard on the ice and is decent at both ends.  Plus he is signed to a value contract for 4 more seasons.  

 

I don't care who your beholder is.  Nobody is giving that up for a collection of spare parts like Granlund and Jooris.  Backlund isn't enough either.  What incentive does Philly have to make that trade?  Simmonds is good in the present and future and he has a value contract.  You aren't trading that for B level prospects.  It makes absolutely zero sense to do that.  

 

The only reason they trade him is to get a similar player at a position they have a greater need.  Even then, they are probably going to want similar upside in terms of a young player that helps now and in the future.  With Giroux, Schenn, and Couturier I don't see them having a need for Backlund.  Certainly not straight up for Simmonds.  

 

I don't see a good match between Calgary and Philly.  At least not for Simmonds.  We don't have the right pieces they are looking for (specifically a young top 4D).  The only exception might be if we take a nasty contract (like Lecavalier) off of their hands.  But I doubt they give up Simmonds just to create cap space.  

[cccsberg]

Simmonds is 26 years old.  He is a right handed shot RW.  He plays a physical power forward game.  He has put up 25 goals or more the last 4 seasons (shortened season pro-rated).  He works hard on the ice and is decent at both ends.  Plus he is signed to a value contract for 4 more seasons.  

 

I don't care who your beholder is.  Nobody is giving that up for a collection of spare parts like Granlund and Jooris.  Backlund isn't enough either.  What incentive does Philly have to make that trade?  Simmonds is good in the present and future and he has a value contract.  You aren't trading that for B level prospects.  It makes absolutely zero sense to do that.  

 

The only reason they trade him is to get a similar player at a position they have a greater need.  Even then, they are probably going to want similar upside in terms of a young player that helps now and in the future.  With Giroux, Schenn, and Couturier I don't see them having a need for Backlund.  Certainly not straight up for Simmonds.  

 

I don't see a good match between Calgary and Philly.  At least not for Simmonds.  We don't have the right pieces they are looking for (specifically a young top 4D).  The only exception might be if we take a nasty contract (like Lecavalier) off of their hands.  But I doubt they give up Simmonds just to create cap space.  

Don't disagree that Simmons is a Philly type of player and they have little incentive to trade him.  I agree with you.  My comments were purely re: valuation and how trades sometimes come together.