Flyers working on a Carter Hart Trade

[GASabresIUFAN]

30 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

So are we done with Comrie after what, 7-8 games?

Not entirely. I think he’ll be waived and sent to Rochester if unclaimed.  He played 19 games last season for us and gave us a .886 save %.  This way he’ll be injury insurance.

Edited June 7, 2023 by GASabresIUFAN

[Thorny]

Preface - yes, I know, eXpEcTeD bY wHoOooOm?

column on far right is expected goals. List is out of 107

There’s Hellebuyck in 4th. Carter Hart in 15th

[Thorny]

And I don’t wanna hear about Sabre D. Craig Anderson finished 52nd with a 0.4

[GASabresIUFAN]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Preface - yes, I know, eXpEcTeD bY wHoOooOm?

column on far right is expected goals. List is out of 107

So your saying our goaltending was bad last year?

Where was Hart on this list?

[Thorny]

10 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

It's so hard to say. Comrie played well in Winnipeg and was injured most of his time here. UPL had shown flashes but has technique issues that could be corrected. And of course every Sabres goalie played behind, at times, poor defenses. So for me it's a coin flip. I'll go with whoever they decide to move.

Please what? Do you feel like Comrie played enough without injury to be properly evaluated?

I don’t mean this in snark, and it’s totally fine if you don’t agree with me, but I’ve typed *countless* words of late explaining my position on why we have a decade’s worth of working evidence on what Comrie is. Yes, he’s been evaluated. I don’t really wanna type it all again but I can link my post from yesterday if you like 

1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

So your saying our goaltending was bad last year?

Where was Hart on this list?

Too quick for me. I posted a second chart

[Thorny]

5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

So your saying our goaltending was bad last year?

Where was Hart on this list?

Anderson did pretty well

n e wayz, here’s the link https://moneypuck.com/goalies.htm

Edited June 7, 2023 by Thorny

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Too quick for me. I posted a second chart

So Hart is actually a pretty good goalie, despite posts here to the contrary.

The whole thing may be moot anyway.  Briere said he isn’t actively shopping Hart, but is listening to offers.  I guess it will depend on how quickly Danny thinks he can turn the Flyers around.  

[French Collection]

8 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

So your saying our goaltending was bad last year?

Where was Hart on this list?

15th best.

Helle was 4th.

[GASabresIUFAN]

1 minute ago, French Collection said:

15th best.

Helle was 4th.

15th of 107.  Not bad at all when our top goalie was 52nd and our other goalies 85+.

The problem with Helle is cost to acquire and only a one year contract. 

[Thorny]

4 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

So Hart is actually a pretty good goalie, despite posts here to the contrary.

The whole thing may be moot anyway.  Briere said he isn’t actively shopping Hart, but is listening to offers.  I guess it will depend on how quickly Danny thinks he can turn the Flyers around.  

That’s why I don’t get the Hart proposals. Why would they significantly downgrade for merely a second round pick? Just keep Hart? It’s a totally different situation to, say, Hellebuyck. I understand why we feel by market a second can get in done but I’d be shocked if Danny B felt that worth pulling the trigger 

[Zamboni]

Hart and Levi would be a better tandem than the current cast of goalies. I would get Briere’s attention by offering UPL, Murray or Weissbach and a 2023 second round pick. If that didn’t do it, I’d throw in a 2024 5th or 6th round pick too. But that’s it. That’s enough. Overpayment yes. I don’t think that’s an obscene overpayment that will hurt in the long run. And if that’s what’s gonna take to get the attention of Briere that we are serious about Hart… Then so be it.

[Thorny]

What asset do we have that’s roughly equivalent to Hart? Doesn’t need to be a goalie. It’s difficult, but which player/prospect do we equate to roughly equal value? 

[Mr. Allen]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What asset do we have that’s roughly equivalent to Hart? Doesn’t need to be a goalie. It’s difficult, but which player/prospect do we equate to roughly equal value? 

Ryan Johnson?  🙂 

[Eleven]

46 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Please what? Do you feel like Comrie played enough without injury to be properly evaluated?

I don't think he played enough without injury to be properly evaluated AND I don't think it matters.  Comrie is an unknown.  If you feel that Hart is a B+ goalie or that Hellebyuck is an A+ goalie, you have to bring them in over an unknown.  Yes, there is a somewhat small chance that Comrie could turn out to be better than Hart, and yes, there is a minuscule chance that he could turn out to be better than Hellebyuck, but the Sabres are no longer at the stage where they should be kicking tires.  They need to buy a good car now.  If they know they can get a good or great one, they should do so, even if it means that the model still in development at the factory is abandoned.

[GASabresIUFAN]

25 minutes ago, Thorny said:

That’s why I don’t get the Hart proposals. Why would they significantly downgrade for merely a second round pick? Just keep Hart? It’s a totally different situation to, say, Hellebuyck. I understand why we feel by market a second can get in done but I’d be shocked if Danny B felt that worth pulling the trigger 

I never said a second would get it done for Hart.  You snickered at my 13th and UPL proposal for Hart and that may be too much, but a 2nd is also clearly not enough. 

[Thorny]

1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I never said a second would get it done for Hart.  You snickered at my 13th and UPL proposal for Hart and that may be too much, but a 2nd is also clearly not enough. 

My post was to work in congruence with yours, I agree with your Hart evaluations 

[Marvin]

OK.  I underestimated Hart.  I did not realise the played as well as he did.  A 1st and a small add work for for me.

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

If either of those players were lost at sea, I wouldn't care, at least as far as the Sabres go. Of course I'd care for their personal well-being 🙂

And some people think Sabrespace is a mean, heartless place.

 

34 minutes ago, Thorny said:

That’s why I don’t get the Hart proposals. Why would they significantly downgrade for merely a second round pick? Just keep Hart? It’s a totally different situation to, say, Hellebuyck. I understand why we feel by market a second can get in done but I’d be shocked if Danny B felt that worth pulling the trigger 

 

20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What asset do we have that’s roughly equivalent to Hart? Doesn’t need to be a goalie. It’s difficult, but which player/prospect do we equate to roughly equal value? 

There are a number of reasons Briere might trade Hart for a 2nd plus UPL/other non-premium prospect:

- Hart has a $4MM cap hit

- Hart will need a new contract next summer (which, btw, likely depresses his market value in trade)

- Hart might not want to be the goalie for more years of rebuilding Flyers suckitude

- Briere might not like Hart's game

- Briere might want to tank (probably not as Briere seems like a smart guy)

- No one is willing to give up a better package for Hart -- among other factors, he has a good amount of Flyers stink on him at this point

As for an equivalent-value prospect that the Sabres could offer -- that's a tricky one.  His numbers for the last 2 years on a crappy Flyers team are decent, but not great -- 2 years ago, 13-31, 3.16, .905; last year, 23-33, 2.94, .907.  I think it's pretty reasonable to value all of JJP, Quinn, Krebs, #13, Kulich, Savoie, Östlund and Rosen above Hart (factoring in Hart's contract status, Flyers stink and the inherent volatility of the G position), and to value Rousek, Novikov, Komarov, etc. below Hart.  Not sure there is a good equivalent.

EDIT:  actually, as suggested upthread, Ryan Johnson might be a good equivalent.

[Thorny]

2 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

And some people think Sabrespace is a mean, heartless place.

 

 

There are a number of reasons Briere might trade Hart for a 2nd plus UPL/other non-premium prospect:

- Hart has a $4MM cap hit

- Hart will need a new contract next summer (which, btw, likely depresses his market value in trade)

- Hart might not want to be the goalie for more years of rebuilding Flyers suckitude

- Briere might not like Hart's game

- Briere might want to tank (probably not as Briere seems like a smart guy)

- No one is willing to give up a better package for Hart -- among other factors, he has a good amount of Flyers stink on him at this point

As for an equivalent-value prospect that the Sabres could offer -- that's a tricky one.  His numbers for the last 2 years on a crappy Flyers team are decent, but not great -- 2 years ago, 13-31, 3.16, .905; last year, 23-33, 2.94, .907.  I think it's pretty reasonable to value all of JJP, Quinn, Krebs, #13, Kulich, Savoie, Östlund and Rosen above Hart (factoring in Hart's contract status, Flyers stink and the inherent volatility of the G position), and to value Rousek, Novikov, Komarov, etc. below Hart.  Not sure there is a good equivalent.

EDIT:  actually, as suggested upthread, Ryan Johnson might be a good equivalent.

Thanks for this. So, a bonafide starting goalie who was about 15th out of 107 last year by the advanced metrics, who played over 50 NHL games last season, is worth roughly a prospect, mid pair d-man who might be an NHLer, in a few years. Just trying to take the temperature, this definitely suffices 

[thewookie1]

Just now, Thorny said:

Thanks for this. So, a bonafide starting goalie who was about 15th out of 107 last year by the advanced metrics, who played over 50 NHL games last season, is worth roughly a prospect, mid pair d-man who might be an NHLer, in a few years. Just trying to take the temperature, this definitely suffices 

 

In the end one effective year doesn't erase the 3 or so bad ones

[Dr. Who]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Thanks for this. So, a bonafide starting goalie who was about 15th out of 107 last year by the advanced metrics, who played over 50 NHL games last season, is worth roughly a prospect, mid pair d-man who might be an NHLer, in a few years. Just trying to take the temperature, this definitely suffices 

I think Rosen is closer to the answer, but I may overvalue goalie at this point. (And I don't want to trade Rosen, nor do I want to actually give the Flyers equal value. I want to fleece them, but if I can't do that, pay as little as possible.)

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Not entirely. I think he’ll be waived and sent to Rochester if unclaimed.  He played 19 games last season for us and gave us a .886 save %.  This way he’ll be injury insurance.

I think he'll be traded first. Besides, are you putting Comrie ahead of Subban on the Amerks?

[Thorny]

9 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

 

In the end one effective year doesn't erase the 3 or so bad ones

4 of his 5 seasons, as a developing G trying to break into the league, behind a bad team, are at a .905 sv% or ABOVE.

.917, .914, .877, .905, .907

Isnt the .877 the outlier?

...I know mystery box thinking is a big thing but I didn’t think it was THIS prevalent. Is the secret just.. not playing? Hart, as a young man, playing really pretty well tanks his value, because if he simply failed to seize a starting role in a decade, he’d be an “unknown” like Comrie with sky high potential retained? 

It’s just Schrödinger's cat, where we assume the unknown is best case scenario and punish and documented results that aren’t that 

“Peter Parker. Brilliant...but lazy.”

Edited June 7, 2023 by Thorny

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

And some people think Sabrespace is a mean, heartless place.

As for an equivalent-value prospect that the Sabres could offer -- that's a tricky one.  His numbers for the last 2 years on a crappy Flyers team are decent, but not great -- 2 years ago, 13-31, 3.16, .905; last year, 23-33, 2.94, .907.  I think it's pretty reasonable to value all of JJP, Quinn, Krebs, #13, Kulich, Savoie, Östlund and Rosen above Hart (factoring in Hart's contract status, Flyers stink and the inherent volatility of the G position), and to value Rousek, Novikov, Komarov, etc. below Hart.  Not sure there is a good equivalent.

EDIT:  actually, as suggested upthread, Ryan Johnson might be a good equivalent.

I would be unwilling to trade any of the aforementioned players for Hart other than Savoie (I am not as high on him as most people are--and more on that in a minute), Rosen, and Östlund.  #13 certainly is in play, especially with @LGR4GM's evaluation of this draft pool.  And some of these would need to be in packages with more coming back to the Sabres.  Johnson is untradeable due to lack of D depth, not because he's going to light the world on fire like Canada has.

Östlund straight up?  Sure.

Rosen straight up?  Maybe.  MAYBE.  As others have noted, the Sabres will need cheaper players in a few years, and I do think Rosen will be a contributor at the NHL level in 2024-25 ish.

Savoie is interesting.  His ceiling, IMO, is no other than the GM of the Flyers himself, Danny Briere.  And I don't think Savoie will get there, but Danny just might see enough of himself in the kid to give the Sabres Hart, Grans, and some other piece (9/10D maybe?).

#13OA is another opportunity to get more than just Hart out of the trade.

It doesn't have to be about packaging assets to get Hart.  It can be about sending a more valuable asset--at young forward, where the Sabres are overstocked--and getting a package back.

Edited June 7, 2023 by Eleven

[thewookie1]

Just now, Thorny said:

4 of his 5 seasons, as a developing G trying to break into the league, behind a bad team, are at a .905 sv% or ABOVE.

.917, .914, .877, .905, .907

Isnt the .877 the outlier?

...I know mystery box thinking is a big thing but I didn’t think it was THIS prevalent. Is the secret just.. not playing? Hart, as a young man, playing really pretty well tanks his value, because if he simply failed to seize a starting role in a decade, he’d be an “unknown” like Comrie with sky high potential retained? 

It’s just Schrödinger's cat, where we assume the unknown is best case scenario and punish and documented results that aren’t that 

Strangely yes in terms of value