The '25-'26 Philadelphia Flyers thread

[bigegypt0417]

Yeah...I was being sarcastic since it seems like some have written the ending on that trade.

Should be an important year for Nesbitt...he'll be playing on a pretty talented team.

[bigegypt0417]

Tkachuk is coming off a couple of good years...a step down from his great year but still a very good player.

I guess we'll know if those are the new level or if this trade pushes him up.

[zambonir]

I can't help but wonder two things, going forward.

• Will the Flyers become a destination for one of these players?

• And if they don't, and don't have as much success as we'd like, who's a current member of the Flyers who will force a trade himself? (Not Michkov, someone who is already on a later contract/has protection).

Winning helps and the team's history and fan base also helps, but the combination of serious Cup contention and no state income tax is hard to beat, whether for landing a player or winning it. Nine of the last 14 Cup finalists and five of the seven winners were Florida, Texas or Nevada teams'.

Brady Tkachuk trade shows the NHL is changing dramatically — but maybe not how...

Quinn Hughes didn’t want to be in Vancouver anymore, so he was traded to a contender in Minnesota. Tkachuk didn’t want to be in Ottawa anymore, so he was traded to a contender in Florida. Then there’s McDavid’s shocking — and prudent — decision to sign for just two more years in Edmonton, essentially daring Oilers general manager Stan Bowman to prove he can build a lasting winner. In just nine months, three megastars have seized control of their fate, control of their careers.

And more are on their way. Dylan Larkin — like Hughes, Tkachuk and McDavid, the captain of his team — wants out of Detroit. He has a no-trade clause. Darnell Nurse has asked out of Edmonton; he has a no-movement clause. Winnipeg goaltender Connor Hellebuyck made pointed remarks to management after the season and could be available; he has a full no-movement clause. St. Louis might be looking to unload talented forward Jordan Kyrou, who can veto any deal. Blues teammate Colton Parayko already has. There’s been speculation Zach Werenski might ask out of Columbus; he has a no-movement clause.

Morgan Rielly? No-movement clause. Mason McTavish? No-movement clause. Elias Pettersson? No-movement clause. Vincent Trocheck? He has 12 teams on his no-trade list. Jordan Binnington has 14. Nico Hischier has 10. And what if Auston Matthews pulls a Hughes or a Tkachuk and decides he’s had enough in Toronto? Full no-movement clause, of course.

Where do you think they’ll all want to go?

[Austinfan]

Most players don't want to uproot their families if they're happy where they are.
Guys wanting to move:
1) aren't happy with losing
2) aren't happy with PT or role
3) have a wife who wants to go to a destination (how Giroux ended up in Ottawa)
4) want a family reunion

This is why you focus on intangibles when drafting and trading for players.
You don't want mercenaries focused on the max contract.

Contract note:
Dickinson and Murphy just got 5x$4M contracts at 30 and 32.
Defensive specialists, #3/#4 types.
Dvorak's deal looking like a bargain in the new cap world.

[zambonir]

But Giroux is also French-Canadian and from Ontario (albeit very far away). And he still went to Florida first. And apparently comes back to Philly often!

You don't want players who actually don't know their own worth either. Great players who are driven to win are also driven to get paid. And teams are always happy to uproot a player's life if they don't want the player anymore or are rebuilding, so turnabout is fair play. In the end it just means a Canadian team or a Philly team has to pay a player more than a no-tax state team.

For Ottawa (which made the playoffs), Detroit (which probably should have, if not for the Flyers lol) and Winnipeg (the best regular season team in the NHL last year but might still lose Connor, another American) this stings a lot more than if they were as bad as the 2025 Flyers.

Arguably not keeping Marner is what wrecked the Leafs too. Had the Rangers known they were gonna suck they would have probably liked to trade their guys last summer.

[dicemen99]

Most players don't want to uproot their families if they're happy where they are.
Guys wanting to move:
1) aren't happy with losing
2) aren't happy with PT or role
3) have a wife who wants to go to a destination (how Giroux ended up in Ottawa)
4) want a family reunion

This is why you focus on intangibles when drafting and trading for players.
You don't want mercenaries focused on the max contract.

Although all of the above may be true, not seeing the correlation to your conclusion.

Guys with "good" intangibles are not likely to be happy with losing. Family dynamics (wife) aren't really evident when drafting a guy, and I'm also not sure that really is evidence of not having "good" intangibles, unless you are talking about a Lindros/parent situation. Being a mercenary and wanting a max contract has nothing do to with any of the four points you listed.

Maybe two separate posts would have been better.

[LegoDoom]

I haven't had time to watch a lot. I like Ryan Roobroeck a bit, but that value is probably right in between picks.

[Austinfan]

Guys who good clubhouse guys and who want to win rarely maximize their contracts if they're happy with the organization. Hell, McDavid has given Edmonton huge discounts.
Now if you can't build and maintain a good team, and they want to leave, well . . .

But there are numerous players who put stat padding and their next contract before the team, these are the guys you should avoid like the plague.
On the other hand, you should never lowball the team player whose stats reflect their willingness to do the dirty work (PK, matchup against top lines, forecheck, play defense, etc). His teammates know what he does for the team, and if you don't reward him it leaves a bad taste in their mouth.

Create a winning organization, be fair with your players, treat them decently and you won't have many players you want to keep clamor to leave.

[flyers19rw]

Some of these guys signed contracts that were lucrative at the time and now want out in the middle of them. That’s not the deal. As a player, if you don’t like where you are, then play it out and go FA. If you signed the deal then shut up and play.
Contracts are two way streets with obligations on both parts. If NHL management and the NHLPA doesn’t deal with this, the league will be ruined. Why have a CBA? Both sides need to realize that without contract legitimacy the game will become a farce like the NBA where certain players run the show and fan support is destroyed.

[zambonir]

Contracts can be traded, so players can ask to be traded. Nothing about this stuff violates or voids the contract and none of these players are asking for new contracts. It was ultimately the Sens decision to trade Tkachuk now instead of letting him play out one more season or even two seasons. He wasn't going to not play.

We see Howie cut guys or renegotiate deals all the time and applaud his genius. No one says he's not honoring a contract. We love to see guys with control get moved at the MLB Deadline. And the NBA just had It's most-watched finals since 1998, apparenly unruined by the LeBron Decision that started this whole kind of thing.

And it's pretty hilarious to me that any Flyers fan would get on a high horse about this (including Cutter Gauthier) when they were the team that got Eric Lindros.

[Austinfan]

I have no problem with a player asking to be traded, I have a problem with some players' reasons.

[zambonir]

I can't really think of any hockey players that have gone full Ben Simmons or James Harden though (and in both cases the team was probably just as happy to be done with them and did bear some of the blame, even if in Harden's case it was purely about money he thought they'd promised him).

With Tkachuk, they basically let the Sens know he wouldn't be signing an extension next July 1, and both parties benefit from moving on early. With Larkin, clearly the player lost faith in the Red Wings (even if he has been part of the failure), but also apparently didn't get along with Yzerman.

[flyers19rw]

The NHL is the NHL. Other sports are different. Maybe one of the reasons for the popularity of the NHL among most of its fans is that it has, for the most part, been able to operate in a different manner than other sports when it comes to player contracts and movement. Unlike other Leagues, the NHL seems to do more than play lip service to the organizational parity that the draft and honored contracts try to create. If a player wants out of an organization, there is a negotiated way for that to happen. Play out the deal and go FA. This is, in essence what Tkachuk did with Ottawa.
The Larkin situation is different. He has a signed contract that he agreed to that has several years to go on it. No one put a gun to his head to accept that deal. That he doesn't care for his boss and the way that he does his job is irrelevant. Perhaps his boss doesn't care for him and his play either. Larkin has an agreement that he has to honor. The Wings aren't going to lock out Larkin and refuse to pay him because his play failed to meet expectations. However if he is still on the Wings roster come September and he refuses to show, he'll probably be suspended without pay for violating his contract as would be Detroit's right.

[zambonir]

There's no chance Larkin is going to hold out. Also still very little chance he doesn't get traded. Right now the battle is over where he's willing to go.

The NHL you want is over, which I guess is why you're upset. Imagine how the Canadians feel! But if teams don't want these things to happen don't give out no-trade clauses. I'm not sure how the league can otherwise address some of the parity issues caused by the US/Canada gulf and the state income tax gulf.

It's still possible the Flyers will trade Owen Tippett in the right deal, why can't he also asked to be traded like Larkin is doing? Both within their contractual rights.

[LegoDoom]

The NFL is definitely different, but otherwise I see your point.

For the NHL... if management, coaches, etc change, then players should be able to ask for a trade. Heck, if their personal life changes they should be able to ask for one.

Yes, they signed a contract, but sometimes things change.

[flyers19rw]

An assumed degree of parity is the key to the success of the NHL. At the start of a season only a handful of teams are seen by their fans as being out of contention for a PO spot. It doesn't need super teams to survive or want them.
Unlike the other major sports, the NHL relies heavily on ticket sales and other forms of local revenue. Without the parity created through the draft, restrictions on player movement and the like, some franchises would fail. Allowing players to break this system in any manner jeopardizes the success of the League.
In the Larkin case, he broke an unwritten rule by taking his complaint to the media. (Compare his actions with those of Giroux when he wanted to leave the Flyers. G did what he wanted in a classy manner that embarrassed no one.) Now Larkin has placed the Wings and really the League in an awkward place as it attempts to maintain team parity. (Keep in mind that lurking in the background is the Quinn Hughes situation with Minnesota and his potential to force a trade to join his brothers with the Devils. ) There will be pressure on Yzerman to either get tremendous quality in return for Larkin or, if they keep him, to suspend him if he doesn't show in the fall. Allowing players to force their way off of teams is a potential critical problem for the League as it attempts to create parity for the success of the game.

[LegoDoom]

Yes, the way that G went about it was classy and the way that the Flyers handled it was classy. But if you want to really microscope it, then G gave like 2 teams to be traded to. The Flyers did him a favor.

Allowing players to force their way off of teams is a potential critical problem for the League as it attempts to create parity for the success of the game.

As a team, do you want to keep paying a player a lot of money when they don't want to be there? That is going to create a toxic lockerroom.

[flyers19rw]

Agreed. However there are ways to get this done without going to the press and demanding a trade when you have a four team NMC. Larkin wants out of town and to then pick where he wants to go. That's a bit much for most GMs. Especially when he's not played up to expectations down the stretch for two seasons in a row.

[bigegypt0417]

Is it too much?

Giannis just made the buck handle it with two teams.

At the end of the day the business of the sport dictates the outcome. Alienating a player also makes it difficult to work with that agent going forward.

Only fans see this as a game...everyone involved knows this is a job.

Larkin will force the red wings to trade him and getting value for that player is always difficult in the fact it's always quantity over quality.

[LegoDoom]

Only fans see this as a game...everyone involved knows this is a job.

This is very true and while I understand what flyers19rw is saying, this is likely an agent problem and not a player problem. The player can say he wants out... it's the agents job to facilitate that.