So, after reconsidering my previous position on the unlikelihood of the Philadelphia Flyers dealing Forsberg elsewhere [1], I have to say that although not fully sold on the idea, I think it is becoming more of a possibility.
The more the Flyers solidify their status as basement dwellers this season, and considering Forsberg's contract expires at the end of it, it's not outlandish to assume that at some point the front office is going to have to re-examine the way they approach the remainder of the season. ("Reexamining" a mere euphemism for "trade Forsberg.")
Now, it's apparent that with the evicting of Bobby Clarke and Ken Hitchcock that, indeed, the front office has been busy re-examining. But if the team's slide continues, they're going to have to swallow the realization that, for the first time in over a decade, they ain't making the playoffs. And with that understanding comes the need to rebuild the team around speed and finesse and youth, which will ultimately yield versatility. (Bye, bye bruisers!)
Ridding of Forsberg will open up salary cap room to spend more freely on lower-priced skaters; his high trade value increases the chances of the Flyers receiving some good talent in return for whom some believe to be the best all-around hockey player to ever lace up the skates.
I still don't truly believe the Flyers trading Forsberg is the best thing — he transcends the conventional image of consistent (when he's healthy, a problem on its own) and has had no trouble adjusting to the rule changes in the NHL on either side of the puck — but that doesn't mean they won't bid farewell to each other. At some point, management will have to make a tough decision: keep Forsberg and hope it all turns around or part ways and look to the future. There are good outcomes from either choice.
No answer is absolute. Although, one solution would be to try to dump marginal players — by trade, or waivers, or flat out cutting them (Kyle Calder's lousy start makes his acquisition questionable) — keep your big guns (Simon Gagne, Mike Richards, et al.) and campaign to resign No. 21 on the basis that the team is going to leave behind its archaic tactics and foster a team that can compete.
But to convince Forsberg to stay (if he's not traded, of course), the Flyers are going to have to take those steps sooner than later; he grows more brittle by the game. But that is a task easier said than done. The Flyers don't have a wealth of depth to offer in trades that will bring in better talent. Sadly, the Flyers' only reasonable bargaining chip is Forsberg (isolated even more by Gagne's pre-season contract extension).
And that will take work. It will take a good general manager who knows the league, has a good reputation and solid relationships with other GMs in the league; but it can happen. This week NHL GMs are meeting in Toronto and you'd be a fool to think Flyers interim-GM Paul Holmgren hasn't been working the line for potential moves, discussing prospective exchanges for Forsberg.
The Flyers are also in a more advantageous situation than most NHL clubs because they have the luxury of sharing a parking lot with their minor league affiliate. The new NHL has proven that home brewing talent inside the farm system is the best method of team advancement. Cite Buffalo, as almost everyone has, as a case study for effective team development.
The draft is also more important now because the Joe Thorntons and Marion Hossas of the hockey world are retaining their value and teams are becoming reluctant to let them go. The Washington Capitals and the Pittsburgh Penguins have utilized their draft choices better than most, due in part to their horrendous finishes in previous seasons. Regardless, they have made solid draft picks and are now fighting their way back to the post-season promise land.
The Flyers acquired Richards, Jeff Carter and Gagne, while holding later picks. Their amateur scouting crew has to take the reins and adjust from the inside out. If the Sabres and Penguins and Capitals can do it — two teams in small-money markets and one in a city where even apathy loses to indifference — then the Flyers, with their stature in the NHL and bottomless pit of a checkbook, can do it too.
Still, if not Forsberg, then who? Well, one name floating around the NHL has been Forsberg's and Gagne's linemate, Mike Knuble. Knuble has enhanced his value since coming to Philadelphia after the lockout. Last year, he had a career year with 65 points (34 goals, 31 assists), his prior best being 59 in 2002-2003 with the Boston Bruins. But reservations about Knuble's offensive production (which is responsible for his worth) are warranted. In his 10th year in the league, and with his fourth team, is Knuble's offensive surfacing anything more than a result of finding himself at the right side of Peter the Great?
The most obvious flaw in the Flyers' roster is their lead-footed defense. Writer after writer (including this author) has excoriated Bob Clarke for bringing in the all-but-expired Derian Hatcher and Mike Rathje — collectively, the two have one assist and are minus-24. But the one defenseman who has rarely, if at all, found himself under the microscope of scrutiny is Joni Pitkanen. A beacon for draft practices that were not Clarke's regular forte, Pitkanen was chauffeured into the league and portrayed as part of the next generation of NHL blue-liners. But his tendency to rush the puck and his lack of defensive zone awareness routinely put him out of position.
Need an example, how about the Flyers' first overtime loss to the Sabres in the first round of the 2005-2006 playoffs? Pitkanen, looking like a bush-leaguer, blindly ignored the winger who crept in backdoor and buried the game winner, beginning the end of the Flyers' season. (Defensemen learn in pee-wee hockey to "swivel" their heads when in front of their own net to stop that exact play!)
Pitkanen is young, mobile, and negotiable — save for his habit of acting like a cat fixated on a ball of yarn. His four years pro experience (three with the Flyers) have proved mediocre. If the opportunity presents itself, Holmgren should jump on it and bring in a more defensive-minded player to seal the cracks Clarke created.
But back top main crux. Does Forsberg leave? Perhaps. Who knows? Forsberg is like the great players of hockey — Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Mark Messier, and in a few years, Sidney Crosby — he makes those around him better. The Flyers, whose lack of goal scoring is confounding (ahead of only the Columbus Blue Jackets in goals for), would be wise to consider the repercussions of shipping the one player who is always scoring and helping his teammates do the same. But smarter NHL columnists with incredible access suggest Forsberg's departure is imminent (Google "E.J. Hradek"). Either way, stay or go, the Flyers are in a mess. Fortunately, for them, it's fixable.
[1]: A position first vocalized around the office water cooler, it consisted of steadfast adherence that the Flyers will definitely not trade Forsberg to help revamp the team. It sounded something like, "You don't rid of your best player after a shoddy first-third of a season to try and salvage the remainder. Accepting your playoff-less fate and rebuild for next year, yes, but not now."
November 25, 2006
Justin:
When are you writers going to figure it out that the only way Forsberg is leaving the Flyers before the season’s end is if he wants to - he has a no trade clause and a no move clause - meaning he can’t be traded or put on waivers hoping someone would pick him up. He is staying with the Flyers unless he waives his no trade clause. He has consistently said, along with management, that he wants to stay. He might retire at the end of the season, but he isn’t getting traded unless he wants to go.