Possible lineups ... free agent wishlist too!

by MaximumTalbot on Jun 29, 2009 6:09 PM EDT

So with the Pronger trade now in the books, like it or not, the Flyers have a VERY different look about them. Number one, they acquired another 6-million-dollar defenseman. Number two, the most consistent linemates up front last season, Hartnell, Carter, and Lupul, will not be playing together. Number three, the cap looms larger every day.

So what could possibly be happening in a few days, once free agency begins? What needs do the Flyers still have, and how can they address them?

Concern #1 is how close to the salary cap they already are. So we can pretty much assume that unless someone gets traded for a minor-leaguer and some baseball cards, Knuble, Alberts, and Niittymaki are gone. There just isn't justification to keep them - which sucks, because I actually like all three. Knuble will still score his 20 goals next year, Alberts actually came on strong at the end of the season, and while Niitty isn't a starter, he's sure a good backup. But the void in the Flyers team right now is one that none of those guys can fill adequately. The hole in the Flyers squad currently is ... at center.

You're saying, "What? Are you *^*&%$!!!! nuts?!?! CENTER? The Flyers have so many centers they'll be playing them as wings next year!" Which is absolutely true, in my opinion. Consider this - the one thing that killed the Flyers in the playoffs was the lack of a defensive centerman. Faceoffs were lost, pucks were kept in the defensive zone, goals were given up. What the team needs most right now (now that the back end hole has been MOST adequately shored up by Pronger) is a faceoff man with defensive skills, something missing since Mikael Handzus was in Orange and Black (no offense to Glen Metropolit, but he was still learning to play that role when we lost him). Do you see any such player, either with the Flyers now or in the system? NOPE. In fact, the closest thing to a defensive center is the "throw-away" player they got with Chris Pronger, Ryan Dingle, who played last year for Iowa in the AHL but bounces between that level of play and the ECHL.

The Flyers centers may have two-way ability, or even decent defensive skills when properly motivated (Richards and Carter, respectively) but none have defensive specialization. Briere? No way. Giroux? Not really bad in his own zone, but not a real defensive center either. Powe has the defense but can't win a faceoff to save his life. And Jared Ross is just too damn small. So what is a powerfully-offensive team to do???

Allow me to blow your minds. Listed as his natural position, Claude Giroux is, in fact, a right wing. So, rather than trying to find room for him as a center or wasting his talent on the third or fourth line, let him play right wing! If Knuble can't be signed (or we choose not to) then move Giroux up to the first line right wing! So Gagne is the shooter, Richards is the all-around player, and Giroux is the playmaker. Sounds like a balanced line to me!

Point number two - putting a several-million-a-year player like Briere on the third line is simply a waste as well. But Carter is definitely the second-line center, so ... let Briere play left wing! Hartnell gets to move to right wing, his more natural spot, and be the mucker for this line. Briere on the left becomes the playmaker in the zone and the mobilization out from the goalie, while Carter gets even more help than ever feeding that wicked wrist shot. Can you see Carter posting 60 goals with someone like Danny Briere feeding him??? Sick!

SO what then becomes of the third line? I think Darrell Powe has definitely earned a spot, with his smart and physical play. Carcillo has enough skill to play third line winger, if he can just mature a hairsbreadth and stop taking stupid penalties (and if not, Asham will happily play more minutes). And here is the open center position! So, why this free agent center rather than a winger? A top-six winger commands a much bigger salary than a third-line center! I mean, Lupul was a 20-goal scorer and was due $4.25 million this season! Enter Samuel Pahlsson, Free Agent, recently of the Chicago Blackhawks and paid a whopping $1.4 million last year. In 65 games last season, he had only 18 points. BUT he also won 54% of his faceoffs, and only got hit for 34 menalty minutes. He's 31 years old, reliable, and FILLS THE NEED. And there are a few players out there in the market like that - heck, maybe swiping John Madden from the Devils is worth the extra cap money!

And just look at the Flyers lineup then ...

Gagne - Richards - Giroux

Briere - Carter - Hartnell

Carcillo - Pahlsson - Powe

Cote - Ross - Asham

Timonen - Coburn

Pronger - Carle

Parent - Jones

Emery - uh, still looking. How 'bout Scott Clemmensen? :)

Whatcha think????

This item was written by a member of this community and is not necessarily endorsed by Broad Street Hockey.

Tweet Comment 33 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Minor tweak

I generally agree with what you say. Pahlsson would be a great addition and fill a massive void. But, by all estimates, the team has about $5 million in cap space available right now. (NHLnumbers.com has that at $5.9 million once Rathje’s cap hit is subtracted) You sign Pahlsson to a $1.4-$1.75 million contract, add Clemmensen at $1-$1.25 million, and you’ve still got about $2-3 million. I think that money has to go to Mike Knuble. $2 million won’t be enough, but in the unlikely scenario where Jones is dumped, there’s plenty of room. Alternatively, if this team starts with Carcillo, Asham, and Cote, I’ll be shocked. Most likely to go is Cote, and if Knuble is resigned, Cote will be cut. That gains $550k. So, adding Knuble and subtracting Cote should leave the team with around $750k-$1 million in room.

Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 29, 2009 6:57 PM EDT reply actions

I, honestly, like this scenario a lot. You couldn’t be more right about the serious ineptitude that the Flyers have with faceoffs. Richards and Carter are not horrible, but neither are spectacular either. A faceoff specialist is badly needed for those late game, defensive zone draws. Pahlsson is a perfect prototype; isn’t gonna score much but wins faceoffs and is defensively reliable. And if he throws his weight around and roughs it up a bit, then hes perfect. Also, by adding a strong faceoff man to anchor the third line you leave at least two centers on each line (excluding the 4th) meaning that the team has line versatility and a backup center to take faceoffs in case the first guys gets chucked by the ref (…not a big deal, I know, but I thought I point it out). Either way, the Flyers once gaping inability to win a faceoff is, hopefully, solved.

The only thing I don’t like is the loss of Knuble. I think he is such an important player and leader for this team and will really be unhappy if he leaves (especially if he goes to the Rangers or Penguins, which has been rumored). But with the lines offered in the post above (which I like as well) there isn’t much room for him. Hypothetically assuming that, somehow, the Flyers do resign Knubs and a third line faceoff man, that would put Mike on the third line wing. He would not only have to take a pay cut but a line demotion and a probable limited role (which a lot of people have been calling for). Knowing that, would he do it? Mike is a class act so maybe . . . but idk. I REALLY hope so.

by Mitchell Green on Jun 30, 2009 12:38 AM EDT reply actions

Also, here is The Fourth Period’s list of Top 30 UFAs if anyone is interested . . .

by Mitchell Green on Jun 30, 2009 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions

as far as faceoff specialists go, my hope is that Richards and Carter work their asses off to improve that aspect of their game this off-season. Being good at faceoffs is really more about timing and determination than it is skill. these things can be learned.

by njh3293 on Jun 30, 2009 9:31 AM EDT reply actions

face offs - defensive forward

i would prefer john madden over pahlsson

by fitzy first on Jun 30, 2009 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions

Follow up ...

Since Pittsburgh has re-signed Bill Guerin, the odds of Knuble going there are getting slim. I would like to see him as a Flyer, but then how would the lineup appear? Could we convince Pahlsson or the like to play with Giroux on the wing, and hope SOMEHOW they can get him the puck enough? I dunno …

by MaximumTalbot on Jun 30, 2009 10:11 AM EDT reply actions

Concern #1 is how close to the salary cap they already are

Amen… we’re still playing fast and loose with the cap. Whether their numbers are perfect or not, according to capgeek.com, our Flyers have the least money available per opening on our roster at $700k per empty roster spot. That’s nothing. With the league minimum now at $500k, their hands are tied until the get rid of more cap room. Even if capgeek’s numbers are wrong, we’re still dangerously close no matter what numbers you use. It’s not just about how much cap space we have at around 5-6 mil, but how many rosters spots need to be filled too, which by my count is about 6 people.

by DragonGirl0583 on Jun 30, 2009 10:29 AM EDT reply actions

How to Sign Knuble

I would offer him this contract a 4-year deal worth 8 million with the following breakdown 4 million this year 2.5 million next and 1.5 million and 1 million in the last two years. He gets 4 million now and only hits the cap at 2 million. In two years we could buy him out at 2.5 million or he retires.

I would rather have the good luck charm of Rusty Fedotenko over Pahlsson to play 3rd line with Giroux he still is fairly young and can bury the great scoring chances Giroux is going to give him plus he scores huge goals in the playoffs.

by chrislanci on Jun 30, 2009 1:13 PM EDT reply actions

I like the idea of bringing Rusty back. That way he can’t kill us in the playoffs anymore and can instead win games in the playoffs for us again ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_c6sgNS-to … half our goals in that series right there ). He’d want more than his previous $2.25m/year though — can’t blame him for that — and even $2.25m is out of our range.

by Ben Feldman on Jun 30, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Where is JVR?
Why Pronger on the 2nd with Carle?

by MathB on Jul 1, 2009 1:14 AM EDT reply actions

JVR

will be sitting in the minors. I agree that Pronger will probably be on the 1st d-line though

by Alon on Jul 1, 2009 1:25 AM EDT up reply actions

Indeed. The loses of Lupul and presumably Knuble make it more likely for a JVR or Maroon to make the squad, but ideally they continue to develop in the minors. You don’t want to rush them on the 3rd line, and the 4th line is a waste.

by FredEx on Jul 1, 2009 1:40 AM EDT up reply actions

Here's a couple ideas

How about Mike Zigomanis from Pittsburgh as the third line center instead of Pahlsson? Better at faceoffs and cheaper, while swiping that element from the Pens to boot!
And I placed Pronger with Carle specifically to represent the lineup IF the Flyers are planning (as they have stated) to try and match up against the Penguins lineup, which is to say you need TWO top pairings of defensemen – one for Sidney’s line, and one for Evgeni’s. Could Timonen play with Pronger? Sure – but why? Is it better to have 26 minutes a game of dominant defense and then much lesser coverage the remainder, or powerfully good defense for 45+ minutes per game? That will depend on both coaching philosophy and how the pairings gel in training camp.

by MaximumTalbot on Jul 1, 2009 10:30 AM EDT reply actions

Oh, and

I totally agree that JVR needs more seasoning before he’s ready for the NHL lineup. He looked totally lost in his few AHL games last season – I saw his debut game, and while he showed his speed and puck handling ability in spurts, he really wasn’t a factor at all. Give him another year to get used to the difference between college and pro hockey, and THEN he can be a force on the wing … like, you know, after the one-year deal that Holmgren wants Knuble to sign!

by MaximumTalbot on Jul 1, 2009 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions

Good point on JVR and Knuble

But Yes I want 25 min of dominant defense, look at Detroit or Anaheim (before the Pronger trade). I think Carle and Coburn had a good season last year so i’m not scared to put them together again this year.

by MathB on Jul 1, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions

well

There’s a better way to look at it. Pronger & Timonen combine for dominant defense against teams’ first and second lines (~26 minutes a game), Coburn & Carle combine for dominant defense against teams’ second and 3rd lines (~20 minutes a game), and Parent & Jones/whoever combine for dominant defense against teams’ 3rd and 4th lines (~14 minutes a game). So it’s not that we’re not getting dominant D when one of Pronger & Timonen is not on the ice. It’s about getting dominant D relative to what the opponent has out on the ice.

Would there be occasions when Malkin’s line is out against Jones + Parent? Probably, but that happens no matter how ya slice it — we’d have to depend on Stevens to not f* our matchups up so badly that that would happen.

by Alon on Jul 1, 2009 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Pronger and Timonen as a pair

I say NO way Parent and Timonen were an excellent pair last year. Parent is only going to get better. I rather have 85% of the game with either Timonen and Pronger on the ice that 40% with both of them out there together. Plus Coburn and Pronger both have great reach being over 6’5’’ and 6’6’’ not much space out there. And I know we want Coburn to learn to play with more of an edge or some edge for that matter hopefully Pronger will rub off on him. I would pair the up on the PK and split them up the PP a QB on the second powerplay unit has been missing forever.

by chrislanci on Jul 1, 2009 1:47 PM EDT reply actions

Ian Laperriere

He is a pretty good face-off guy. I know he isn’t a natural center, but (I know its corny but…) his face-off rating in NHL 09 is an 80 (Richie and Carter are under 75). Could he be an answer to the face-off problems? If he’s not then you figure he’ll play on the right side with Carcillo on the left, and you bump Powe to the fourth line center and Ross goes down, leaving a spot for your third line center.

by orangeandblack20 on Jul 1, 2009 6:24 PM EDT reply actions

You got to split up the best guys over three lines...

You still need a left winger for the third line but this is what I think the lines should be:
1.) Gagne – Briere – Laperriere
2.) Carcillo – Carter – Hartnell
3.) Open/Someone from minors/Free Agent – Richards – Giroux
4.) Riley (Punching Bag) Cote – Powe – Asham

Defense:
Timonen – Pronger
Coburn – Carle
Parent – Jones

Right now I don’t see Richards as being as a good passer as Briere especially around the net. To me it seems as though Briere is better with Gagne as well.
Also, Richards is their best Two-player he needs to be on the 3rd line cause he makes it instantly a threat and neutralizes the other teams line. If you look at Pitt they have three strong lines. You just can’t do it with two lines – it just ain’t going to happen.

I don’t think Laperriere was brought in to replace Knuble I think Holmgren wants gritty players who are going to out muscle you. He wants the Bullies. Lets face it we all do.

Your crazy if you think Timonen will not be playing with Pronger – I think during the power plays you’ll have other defensemen playing with either Pronger or Timonen.

I am looking forward to this season.

by Jaxadelphia_J on Jul 2, 2009 11:27 AM EDT reply actions

i wouldnt separate richy and gags… you need your first line to play great two way hockey… richy and gags plus 22 and 21 respectively… two years ago briere was a MINUS 22 on the first line. so again, briere is not first line center.

by fitzy first on Jul 2, 2009 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions

If you’re going to take the top 6 forwards, and go with 2-2-2, I think you keep the pairs from last season. No reason to break up Richards/Gagne, Carter/Hartell, and/or Briere/Giroux. If you’re going to spread it out, I think you might as well keep it the same.

by FredEx on Jul 2, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions

You don't "Have" to split them up over 3 lines

You want to put your lines out that will maximize chemistry & scoring. If that means 3 lines of 2 good players w/ 1 grinder, as opposed to 2 lines with 3 good players, that’s fine. But look at it this way: Anaheim went very far (won the cup, got to semifinals) using the 2-line paradigm. DET’s top 2 were dominant, the 3rd was a big step down. Ditto Pitt. It’s not that the 3rd line would have NO good players, it’s just that when you have essentially 2 PP type lines on for a total of 40 minutes of the game or so (with 3rd & 4th lines getting the rest), you’re likely to put up more goals.

That said, I would prefer having 3 great lines to 2 excellent ones, because that allows everyone to stay a bit more fresh and can account for/neutralize a top-heavy opponent.

I wouldn’t mind Briere & Gags on the 1st or 2nd line. The ~~22 stuff is overrated -~~ those negatives ain’t his fault. Richards is our best player, though, besides Parent, so if he’s not getting max ice time we’re not using him well. Perhaps a 1st line of Powe – Richards – Giroux packs a punch, or Gagne – Richards – Laperriere since Gagne & Richards do play well together and so do Briere/Giroux (with Carcillo or Powe on the other wing). No matter what, though, we still have a hole on the wing — be it on the 3rd line you proposed or the 2nd line I’m proposing (Hartnell/Carter/????).

Then again, this is a possible in-house fix:

Gagne – Richards – Lappy
Hartnell – Carter – Asham
Powe – Briere – Giroux
Carcillo – Matsumoto/Dingle – Cote/Ross (both outta position, but who cares?)

Or, if you want top-heavy (just picture the chemistry! PP lines for 40 minutes)

Gagne – Richards – Briere
Hartnell – Carter – Giroux
Powe – Lappy – Asham
Carcillo – Matsumoto/Dingle – Cote/Ross (both outta position, but who cares?)

If you wanna go Hossa/Toews/Kane on them:

Gagne – Richards – Carter
Hartnell/Powe/Carcillo – Briere – Giroux
Hartnell/Powe/Carcillo – Lappy – Asham
Carcillo/Powe – Mats/Dingle – Cote

Final thought, readjusting the above possibility for high end 1 but depth through 3:

Gagne – Richards – Carter
Carcillo – Briere – Giroux
Hartnell – Powe – Lappy
Cote – Mats/Dingle – Asham

With Carter/Briere/Giroux all interchangeable

by Alon on Jul 4, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Lines

I would prefer a two scoring line and 3rd line checking line who goes against the top lines but I think the coaching staff prefers building their lines off pairs of players. Briere-Giroux, Gagne-Richards, Carter-Hartnell. With a more up tempo style of play promised by Homer for next season I think two line system works better and is being planned for in the moves they have made this offseason. The top two lines can concentrate on attack with a 2-man forecheck while the 3rd line checks the other top scoring line. With Fedotenko and LaRose signing for under 2million here is hoping Malhotra comes to Philly for around the same price to fill out the checking line. I don’t think there is enough ice time to go around to have a successful 3rd line as a scoring line especially with all the special team time that dominates the “new” NHL. It would be a waste of both Giroux and Briere talents to have them only get 10-15 min of 5 on 5 time a game. Also a 3rd line checking line is typical Flyers hockey we need those “muckers and grinders.”

by chrislanci on Jul 5, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions

I completely agree.

It’s great to have 3 great lines, but I also prefer 2 excellent ones. 3 excellent ones would be best, of course, trumped only by 4 excellent ones, but that seems pretty unlikely given the cap.

It is definitely all about maximizing our talent per ice time. Particularly, considering how great most of our F’s are defensively, I think we can have 2 scoring lines that can simultaneously check their top scoring lines, with our 3rd line giving the first 2 breathers and providing a nice change of pace. The 4th line would, I suppose, be a diet version of the 3rd line, although I think we have the depth to essentially have a line 3 and a line 3a to go with our line 1 and line 1a. Is that better than having 3 lines of 2 good players and a gaping hole? I think so.

by Alon on Jul 5, 2009 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Thoughts

I feel John Madden would be a great pick up he is awesome on the PK, I think pronger will be playing with Timonen, and just putting another FA out there Scottie Upshall? i know he is a RFA but he could prob be gettin mighty cheap and then u can have the Upshall Giroux Powe

by Zachswider on Jul 3, 2009 2:18 PM EDT reply actions

Madden already signed in Chicago and Upshall will be too expensive for us, which is why we traded him in the first place.

Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Jul 3, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions

It’s not fun have essentially no money, and still having a hole or two left.

Is Todd Bertuzzi due for another pay cut?

by FredEx on Jul 3, 2009 5:34 PM EDT reply actions

Big Bert

Todd Bertuzzi is overdue for retirement.

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Jul 3, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Heh, if we do actually trying to sign another scoring forward it’s going to have be someone (at least borderline) washed up (assuming we don’t make a trade).

by FredEx on Jul 3, 2009 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions

Let's reach deep down into the minors...

I believe Pat Falloon is still playing for Foxwarren.

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Jul 3, 2009 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions

Bertuzzi???

For the contract length and money Bertuzzi wants ($4.5mil over 2 years) we could have resigned Knuble, who is younger, better, and liked the Flyers!
I think Holmgren may be done with free agency. There’s not much he can sign with the $45 and a bag of Chumpie Chips he has left in the purse.
So which minor league player will be the extra forward? Nodl? Laliberte? Kalinski? Maybe Dingle? My money is on Pat Maroon (not Pat Falloon, mikefive, although that would be funny in an ironic sort of way) to make the big club this year.

by MaximumTalbot on Jul 6, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Sorry, I wasn’t aware of Bertuzzi’s contract demands. I knew Bertuzzi was making under 2 last season, and with his age concern, if there was a potential lack of interest, I thought maybe he could be had for 1.5ish.

Also, perhaps Knuble is better and likes the Flyers, but he’ s 3 years older.

I agree we are likely done in free agent, but was just throwing out a ‘scoring forward’ that we could potentially sign. If we do try to make another signing it has to be some washed up guy, due to our lack of money.

Who get the last roster spot, will also depend on the how we want to set up the lines. You’re not going to bring up Maroon for the 4th line.

by FredEx on Jul 6, 2009 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions

You are correct

Big Bert is younger … I admit, I didn’t research that. But it seems Knuble ‘plays’ younger, eh? And if no one bites on Bertuzzi’s contract demand, maybe he could be bought for less.

And no, I don’t expect Maroon on the fourth line; I would expect him to be a top-six forward. It will certainly depend on the lines used – if they go with the top-heavy two lines, then he hasn’t got any shot. If they do decide that three scoring lines is more feasible, look for Maroon on the wing of a line with maybe Carter and Briere or Richards and Gagne.

And personally I like Chumpie Chips, just for the record.

by MaximumTalbot on Jul 7, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions