Stomaching the Flyers rebuild? John Tortorella factor? Ivan Provorov trade return? Mailbag

Publish date: 2024-06-23

We’ve now reached the true dog days of summer and the offseason. But the monthly Flyers mailbag marches on.

Our two-part July edition starts with a focus on bigger-picture questions — namely, the looming rebuild, and whether the Flyers are approaching it with the right mindset and the right coach in charge. In Part 2, we’ll turn to more specific questions about prospects and players that played a role in shaping the present and will help mold the future.

Advertisement

Onto the questions.

Note: Submitted questions may be edited for clarity and style.

After one year of Torts, which prejudices don’t hold up? — Jacob J.

I would say the biggest negative John Tortorella prejudice — one that I shared last summer — which no longer holds up for me anymore is that he’s only a “win-now” coach.

There’s still some truth to it, in the sense that if you want your team to bottom out and “tank” for high draft picks across multiple seasons, you probably shouldn’t hire Tortorella. He’s just too demanding and unwilling to accept the type of lack of commitment to structure that would lead to a deluge of losses. But there are some coaches who will always choose to play veterans over unproven youngsters, just to squeeze out a couple of extra wins here and there. Torts very much showed last year that he’s willing to embrace an organization-wide rebuilding mentality and the lineup implications that come with it. In fact, Tortorella was probably the most vocal advocate for the pivot to a rebuild. If anything, he was trying to drag the rest of the organization away from a win-now approach and toward more long-term thinking.

You saw it in his willingness to dump extra minutes onto players like Owen Tippett, Cam York and Noah Cates and live with the mistakes. He deployed youngsters in late-game situations, even while trying to protect tight leads. He advocated for defensemen like Egor Zamula and Ronnie Attard to make the team out of camp. He juggled the lineup late in the season to ensure that the team’s many call-ups didn’t merely get to play, but would be given the kind of usage that would allow them to truly showcase their abilities.

There were some missteps in my eyes. His early treatment of Morgan Frost wasn’t great. I would have liked to have seen more of Tanner Laczynski down the stretch. And the “he’s always hurt” comments on Wade Allison fell flat for me, given the easy-to-make assumption that he was challenging the player’s willingness to play through pain. But on the whole, Tortorella coached the Flyers last season as a rebuilding coach, and his “mistakes” were more about his personal feelings about individual players rather than disagreement with the overarching “win-later” plan.

Advertisement

One can reasonably argue that Tortorella isn’t the right rebuilding coach for the Flyers, especially if you disagree with his communication and disciplinary methods. But after 2022-23, it’s no longer fair to contend that he doesn’t qualify as a rebuilding coach.

I’d like to get your take on if Torts is his own worst enemy in a rebuild situation. He seems to do a good job of getting the most out of his players, and I like his focus on culture and accountability. But, this simultaneously hurts us (potentially) in the draft order and kills player value for trades when he is outspoken about them to the media (Hayes is front and center IMO). Was he hired maybe three years too early? — Chris C.

There are a few aspects to this (very good) question, so I’ll try to take them all on individually.

I do believe that Tortorella’s approach to coaching probably hurts the Flyers’ chances of securing high-end talent through the draft. Torts just isn’t a “tanking” coach, and he never will be, which means that as talent-deficient as his teams may be, they’re unlikely to finish in the bottom three in the league standings — the spots that would give the club its highest possible lottery odds. Superstars are easiest to find in that range, so yes, Tortorella as head coach makes it more difficult to nab those types of players.

More difficult, but not impossible, as the Flyers proved in June when they selected Matvei Michkov at No. 7. Now, maybe that was a unique set of circumstances, but if the Flyers are picking in the top 10 for at least the next few years, they’ll be able to weigh upside versus certainty each year in some way or another, which could allow them to get the kind of star-level players they need — if done right. Also, it’s worth noting that the Flyers believe that star-level talent without culture isn’t going to win anything meaningful either, which is why they’re willing to sacrifice maxed-out lottery odds to implement the kind of accountability that they believe will allow their (still quite high) draft picks to develop into the best players possible. They may be right, and they may be wrong. But it’s not quite as simple as “Torts will keep them from getting superstars.” They think that without a presence like Tortorella creating a strong internal culture, those players with star-level upside won’t develop into stars anyway.

As for the idea that Tortorella kills the trade value of players, I think it’s a bit overblown. Take Kevin Hayes, for example. Yes, a sixth-round pick and 50 percent retention was an underwhelming return, and I totally understand why fans point to Tortorella’s public comments on Hayes and his decision to move him to wing as a driving force behind why the Flyers got back so little for him. But look at Ryan Johansen, who didn’t deal with a position change and wasn’t publicly disparaged by his coach in Nashville in 2022-23. He was traded with 50 percent retention on a similar cap hit ($8 mil) for essentially nothing, just a few days before Hayes was moved. Yes, Hayes was coming off a better season, but their ages were nearly identical and their production over the past two seasons — Johansen had 91 points in 134 games (0.679 PPG) and Hayes had 85 in his last 129 (0.659 PPG) — were extremely close as well. Centers who are 31 with big cap hits and just-OK offensive production just weren’t bringing back much of anything in a stagnant cap environment, regardless of whether their coach said nice things about them in the media or not.

Advertisement

Is it possible that Hayes brings back a fifth or maybe even a fourth if the Flyers focused on pumping up his value as much as possible in 2022-23 while secretly planning to trade him in the summer? Maybe. But for the most part, the players that were jettisoned this summer in Philadelphia because of Torts (Hayes and DeAngelo) were never going to bring back much. I’m skeptical that the Torts effect really torpedoed their values too much.

Is there really going to be any reason to watch this team this year? Does the current owner realize he has taken a gem of the league and obliterated it into obscurity? — William A.

I think ownership is fully aware of how far the Flyers have fallen. That’s why they’ve publicly embraced a long-term rebuild strategy for the first time in their history, and both relieved the GM of his duties and ushered their CEO/chairman into retirement. They get it.

Now, for your question of whether the Flyers will be watchable this season? It really depends on your appetite to watch a team execute a rebuild.

The Flyers are going to play hard. They’re going to give substantial roles to young-ish players like Tippett, Frost, York, Joel Farabee and Cates. They’re going to give long looks to prospects like Tyson Foerster, Zamula, Attard, Emil Andrae (most likely, assuming he stays in North America), Sam Ersson, Bobby Brink, Elliot Desnoyers, Adam Ginning, Olle Lycksell and maybe even a college guy or two near the end of the season. Your patience for this season really will depend on how much you enjoy evaluating young players and determining which guys you believe should be part of the future plan.

If you only care about wins and losses and whether a team ends its season hoisting a trophy, then yeah, this probably isn’t the season for you. But if you want to be part of the start of something, and feel a real connection to the team and the individual players for when they (hopefully) turn the corner into contention? Then there are very good reasons for you to watch.

Does Comcast and the front office have the stomach to do the rebuild correctly? I believe the real fans know, if it is to be done right, it will take five years minimum. Will they endure the drop in revenue as the fair weather fans stay away, or will they cave and try to “go for it” too early like they always do? — Mick B.

I will say that I don’t necessarily agree that a rebuild has to take five years minimum. If it’s well-executed and avoids any big errors, I suspect the Flyers could be a team on the playoff bubble in three-to-four seasons, though I do agree that any path to realistic Stanley Cup contention probably takes about a half-decade to reach that level. But I don’t think the team necessarily has to be wandering around in the wilderness until 2028. They can be relevant before that point.

The Comcast Spectacor side of the question is far more interesting, and it’s one that I ask higher-ups at the company whenever I have an opportunity to speak with one of them. Right now, they all swear up and down that they plan to remain patient and see this through for the long term, and that underwhelming ticket sales and falling revenue won’t send them into panic mode. But this is uncharted territory for them, and it’s impossible to know for sure if they’ll have the stomach to stick it out.

Advertisement

They’re going to have to prove it.

One of Dom Luszczyszyn’s recent articles made me realize how a lot of national writers think the Flyers are going to be a lot worse this year, due to the subtractions made. Am I a fool for thinking the Flyers could actually be better? Do you think full seasons of Couturier, Forester, Atkinson and Hathaway, bounce-backs from Farabee/Sanheim, and continued development from Frost, York, Cates, and Tippett, could more than make up for the subtractions that were made? How likely is that outcome? — Thomas S.

Is it possible the Flyers get significantly better in 2023-24? Sure. But it would require a lot to go right.

Ivan Provorov, Hayes and Tony DeAngelo weren’t great for the Flyers in 2022-23 — Hayes was pretty clearly the best of the three, and even he had major defensive issues and disappeared from a scoring standpoint after the All-Star break. But we’re still talking about the team’s No. 1 defenseman, second-highest scorer, and highest-scoring defenseman (and best power play threat). Losing them is going to have an impact, and the blue line corps in particular is looking mighty weak now. York, I believe in as a player, but is he ready to take on Provorov’s role? I’m skeptical. And if he’s not, that basically leaves Travis Sanheim and Rasmus Ristolainen as your two top-pair defensemen. Sean Walker or Marc Staal may be in the top four. Yikes.

Yes, the forward corps could be significantly better if your scenario plays out. Foerster could be the player he was in his eight-game NHL audition over a full season. Couturier and Atkinson could return at close to full strength. Farabee could deliver a bounce-back year after a full offseason’s worth of training. Frost, Cates and Tippett could take further steps forward. In that case, the Flyers might very well improve, even with the concerns about the defense.

But it’s pretty easy to imagine a nightmare scenario, too. What if Foerster has a bad camp and gets sent down for a couple months like York did last year? What if Couturier and Atkinson are shells of their former selves or get hurt again? What if all the youngsters stagnate, in large part because the defense can’t get them the puck enough? These are all legitimate possibilities.

And then, there’s the goaltending, which has one big question looming overhead — what happens with Carter Hart? The police findings from the investigation into the 2018 Hockey Canada sexual assault situation are expected to be released this summer and players involved could face discipline from the NHL. If Hart is out of the picture, the Flyers’ season could get ugly real fast, especially if Cal Petersen ends up taking over the starting job and replicates his work in Los Angeles over the past two seasons.

So there is plausible upside here, sure. I could see the Flyers finishing in the 18th to 24th range in terms of points percentage, still out of playoff contention but far from a cellar dweller. But there’s also No. 1 pick downside.

Ivan Provorov Ivan Provorov (Photo by Aaron Portzline / For The Athletic)

What do you think of the Provy trade now that we know some of the missing pieces? At the heart of it is Provy for Bonk, which doesn’t seem like a fair swap to me. I realize there are other pieces like Peterson, Walker and Helge Grans and a second-rounder in 2024. But this deal was all about getting a first-rounder back and the Flyers picked a guy whose upside by many accounts is a second-pair D-man with limited offensive skills. — Sean P.

A second-pair defenseman with limited offensive skills? Isn’t that what Provorov ultimately turned out to be?

Advertisement

If Bonk can be that, I’m perfectly fine with the trade. They also received two yet-to-be-used second-round picks out of the deal as well, so don’t forget about them.

With the current roster and prospect pool, what is in your opinion the most glaring need in order to complete the rebuild? — Brian T.

I think they desperately need an impact, all-situations top-pair defenseman more than anything else. I don’t think Cam York ultimately reached that point, and Bonk doesn’t have that kind of ceiling in my eyes, either.

A close second is a dynamic, playmaking 1C, but every team wants one of those. I think they could get by with a center group of Cutter Gauthier, a mostly healthy Sean Couturier and Noah Cates, especially if Michkov is the superstar on the wing that they hope he will be. They won’t be able to win without a true difference-maker on the back end, however. And I think they know that.

Take us behind the curtain, what’s the coolest part of reporting on the Flyers? (Besides getting to do the podcast, obviously.) — James D.

Some people might think it’s getting to talk to the players and coaches. And while yes, at times that can be a thrill, it becomes a pretty standard part of the job. In a weird sort of way, the mystique surrounding the athletes dissipates over time, and they almost become like co-workers more than anything else — albeit co-workers that make significantly more money.

For me, the coolest part of the job is simply getting paid to watch and talk about hockey. I have to pinch myself at least once a week when I remember that this is my actual job, that a company is giving me money to watch my favorite sport and analyze it — something that I’d probably be doing anyway in my living room or in the neighborhood. That’s the dream.

Which song by The National fits for each player of the 2018-19 roster? — Rebecca G.

This is a fun one, but I’ll only do five. Otherwise, it’ll turn into the whole article.

Claude Giroux — “Mr. November”

Wayne Simmonds — “Mistaken for Strangers”

Shayne Gostisbehere — “Sorrow”

Andrew MacDonald — “Afraid of Everyone”

James van Riemsdyk — “This is the Last Time”

(Photo: Eric Hartline / USA Today)

ncG1vNJzZmismJqutbTLnquim16YvK57k3BocmhnbHxzfJFsZmlvX2eDcLLLspyrq12fvKm6jK2mq6yfp7KtuMBmqZ6apZ65pXnMmqClmpGcfA%3D%3D