This article says that Bonk would be the centerpiece of a trade with Canes. I am not an expert but seems Bonk could be a top 4 defenseman and that there must be a better way to get a 1/2 C.
https://thehockeywriters.com/philadelphia-flyers-all-in-martin-necas/
by Traumopod
16 Comments
If we trade bonk Iād hope we get Pesce as well as Necas. But I also worry itās too early in the rebuild to acquire guys in their prime. Bonk and Laughton for Pesce and Necas is tempting though
I disagree. Carolina should still very much be in win now mode. If they can’t afford Necas, Farabee would be a very good alternative. Throw in Laughton and maybe a mid round pick and we’re cooking. A high pick or prospects should not entice them in their current situation.
Oh God no. Please make it stop.
Philly fans get too attached to prospects. Iāll take the proven asset over a prospect any day
Bonk doesn’t make sense as a Centerpiece for Carolina, but that’s not the discussion at hand here.
If you were absolutely, positively, 100% sure Necas could play Center long term? Yeah it’d be worth it. But I don’t think you could be sure of that, so I don’t think it’d be a good idea to move Bonk in a trade like that
I would need Necas to be more of a known commodity to give up my best D prospect at current. Necas could be a 1C which would absolutely be worth it. He can also max out as a middle six winger which absolutely isnāt. I like Necas but I think I would explore more of a hockey trade with established players over prospects. Which I expect Carolina would want to
Rebuild.
Carolina won’t be trading Necas.
I like Necas, heās 25, heās better than most forwards we have at present (all but TK, peak Coots/Tippet, Delauries and improved Foerster?). That said, heās due a new contract, we are still in rebuild mode, so it really doesnāt make sense unless itās a player for player swap Ć la Farabee or a d-man (as if Carolina needs more defenceman lol).
Maybe itās attractive to them if they feel they can get a similar player at a lesser cap hit, and I think we can still take on some higher cap hits in the short term.
As for bonk, I like him a lot, I agree with the above commenter that flyers fans do get too attached to prospects, but he looks to be a really solid piece and I donāt think it makes sense to move him now. Maybe in the future as the rebuild metamorphosis is complete and itās showtime.
Also indeed, the canes want to win cups now, I donāt see them moving him for an asset when thereās teams around the league willing to trade middle 6 forwards (plural) for a guy like him.
It’s an easy no. He’ll be 26 next season. Bonk fits the timeline better. Unless the return is an undisputed 1C, it’s a no for me dawg
And break up bonk and barkey š„ŗ
Glad i see 12 posts a day about necas. Where do you think we fit him cap wise? Why are you trying to pick up free agent assets when we are in a rebuild? You happy with 12-20? Cause thats where we pick when we sell all prospects for a guy who didnt fit his system. Rather than adapt, he says he was mismanaged. so what happens when he can do that here too? We have another liability? Cool plan. Rather shit my pants
I like Martin Necas a lot, but holy shit, when did the hockey world start convincing itself that heās a prime, top-tier asset? The dude has put up more than 53 points in a season once in his career, and thatās on a team that has excellent possession stats.
He doesnāt move the needle enough to think about giving up long-term assets for him. Iām not saying I think Bonk will ever be as good as Necas, but I feel pretty confident that Necasās age, track record, and ambiguity about whether or not he can even play center is more than enough reason to not change course right now.
Necas blows
Nobody commenting on the fact that we would lose out on the Bonk – Brink – Bump synergy. Every gamer knows thatās +30 agility to the whole team
How about we keep our prospects and actually build this team through the draft
I’ve made this argument before but it bears repeating, we are uniquely at capacity at RD. Even if Drysdale doesn’t work out long-term as a top pair guy (jury’s still out), you’re still looking at the practically immovable Sanheim contract while he seems to be an objectively better player on the right side. Then you have a guy like Andrae who will be pushing for an NHL spot soon, and if you can’t move Ristolainen in a move that makes sense, you suddenly have a logjam. So you have a right side that doesn’t have room for Andrae, let alone Bonk, and an organizational need for (preferably) a LD with #1 upside, and a 1C.
Given that information, you could trade to make room for him, but you’d likely be doing so at a loss. Either Sanheim or Ristolainen’s contract will probably require additional assets or retention to sweeten the deal in order to move – so suddenly to make room for Bonk, it will likely cost us to make that possible. I’m not saying we absolutely need to move on from Bonk to satisfy some other organizational need – maybe we can have our cake and eat it too – but that increasingly seems less and less likely/possible.