GAFlyer

Why do those "Philly" folks dress and talk like they're from Brooklyn? 'Course, I'm from the burbs so I can't really stereotype Kensington or Port Richmond or Fishtown etc.

Bettman for sure wants to keep all the smaller-market, non-traditional market teams going. He'd slit his wrists and forsake his darling Sid before he agreed to contraction - and he's nearly as preternaturally opposed to relocations if they don't suit his idea of perfect geographic distribution. So he's facing some bottom-up pressure (sorry for that phrasing) to get something approved by the big-time owners that enhances the ability of small-market teams to spend wisely and still compete. Meantime, he's facing a really reasonable proposal (by the parts we've seen) from his nemesis, who so far is clearly winning the PR battle but who is known for being just as recalcitrant (fancy word for ****) and is superb at the Art of Spin. What we have here is a perfect storm of egos and stubbornness, in a situation where some good-faith negotiations would reveal much common ground and illuminate a few paths to an agreement that benefits both labor and management. Revenue sharing can be a double-edged sword, but the NHL needs to improve it. Clearly, the definition of Revenue and the precise means to share and distribute it (to small-market clubs and the players) are the keys to solving this problem. But if the revenue is too generous, or a luxury tax too light, would that lead to -- crudely put -- a welfare-state of lower-market teams living on the dole and a few more high-flyers who then pillage the talent and relegate the others to farm teams, player-development operations? MLB comes to mind here (note the Fehr connection and frown). Or is there some more perfect means of revenue definition/sharing that creates a more equitable competitive situation? Think NFL, where there is more competitive and revenue parity (albeit in a more roundly popular sport in the US). There must be something that can bring this about, if the parties can actually work in good faith without digging trenches and lobbing artillery at each other while their teeth and feet rot. Not that we're gonna have a beer-soaked internet conversation and fix everything . Feel free to comment, and to decry my strained analogies.

That's an interesting thought, but does the NLRB have any authority over a league that operates in two sovereign nations? And the Union proposal is an excellent approach to relieving the league's revenue disparity without screwing anyone over, and with incentives for each side. Well played, Fehr!

Oh, yeah! Best miscue Clarkie ever had!

He drafted Giroux only because the Rangers took Sanguinetti, if I recall correctly. Orange Jesus was Plan B. Probably part of why Bob didn't remember Giroux's name....

If Manayunk Mike's reports are correct, I'm with Homer. Don't offer BSchenn, or Jake. Stick w/Mez. If it doesn't work, so be it.

As with most of y'all, Clemenson would be my first target. Unlike anyone so far, and at the risk of great ridicule, I'd take Biron back (as backup). He's perfectly capable in that role. He can stop pucks pretty well, it's the puck-handling that's frightening. Hedberg is pretty good, too, but I think Pods is right and he re-signed with NJ. Ellis, my third chioce. Not too sure about Huet. It'd have to be around $1 million or less.

And there's the rub. I don't think we need Bobby Ryan, but OTOH I do think he'd be a beast on a line w/Giroux and Hartnell. So, yeah, it'd be great, but no, it's not essential compared to one more really solid defenseman to replace the Finnish God of Defense. So if the cost is too high, so be it. Don't do it. The Flyers will still score goals. Couturier and B. Schenn should, to my mind, not be part of that deal. But you know Homer will think about it, if that was the asking price.

Yep, could be a costly trade. But a conversation worth having for Homer.

Digging the technical discussion here... You guys are both right -- with the half-wall setup, you don't really need the Dman quarterbacking from the point or anywhere else on the blueline. But with a guy like Yandle, now we can have two PP styles and deploy different looks against different PK styles. Besides all that, Yandle would be a fantastic addition if they can swing a trade. Timo isn't gonna be around much longer and Yandle is 25, and under contract for 5 years @ 5.25 million. Much better than a Weber contract would be, though it's not really apples-apples there. I'd be delighted with Yandle adding to the Flyers d-corp.

My nickname for Reece is officially "Old Weird Harold."

Doan would be a great fit for a 2yr deal but if we're dealing w/Phoenix, a trade for Yandle needs to be in the conversation. Yandle is under contract next five years at 5.25 cap hit. He's 25. That's a tough cap hit for the Flyers, but since it's a trade they might be able to balance it out. Adding Schenn is good for the bottom or 2nd parings; adding Yandle gives us a younger PP quarterback and a great all-around top-pair Dman, which will be necessary after the Finnish God of Defense plays his last season here. And it only helps this year. But the price could be high. I'm not sure what Phx would be seeking in return.

Thanks, Jammer -- I think we're right in the same place on this. I can see the Ducks asking for guys like Giroux, Couturier, or Jake from the offense, and Coburn, Carle, possibly Mez from the D-side. And perhaps picks too. I can see the Flyers saying G and Cooter and off-limits. I can see them mulling over B. Schenn, Simmer, Jake or Matt Read from the offense and Bourdon, Gus, Mez, or Brandon Manning from the D. I doubt they really want to part with Coby, and I am a Matt Carle fan (he's basically Ryan Suter in orange even if the haters won't admit it) so I'd not like to see him depart. And since he's UFA he's not likely a trade candidate until he signs. And we know Homer doesn't care how recently a player has signed . So to get Ryan, I wonder if Homer could offer up next year's 1st (assuming we have such a pick), and two of: Mez, Carle (if signed), Simmer, Jake, Read, Bourdon, or Gustavsson. And I wonder if that gets it done with benefit, at least long-term, to both sides. Just not sure....it'd be difficult to pull that trigger. I'd also like to see a parallel effort to get Yandle, in which case we forego the idea of Bobby Ryan.

Damn, Ryan would be ferocious on Giroux's line with Hartnell or Jake. But this would be very tricky deal to swing. Anaheim will want quite a lot, like Couturier or perhaps Coburn and more. Having just acquired L. Schenn, that begins to address needs on defense but Luke is not going be any kind of savior, just potentially a solidifying addition. So trading Coburn would put the Flyers right back where they were -- needing defense. The forward corps is good right now, and adding a 30-goal guy like Ryan would be huge but they'd be foolish to let go of Couturier, or even B. Schenn. And how many picks do the Flyers have? I think the Ducks are going to want one or two good roster players & a pick, or maybe one really good player and two picks. What I mean by that is, while Jake might be an attractive offer to Anaheim, I doubt Jake and two picks does it. Jake + Read + pick might do it, but then we've lost two forwards and gained one. Or combination of forward + defense + pick. It's a pickle. I simply don't know how they're going to get Ryan over here without a net loss of production or defense. Unless somehow Homer clears cap space enough that they can add Bobby Ryan AND Shea Weber. Which would be amazing but I fear the look of the rest of the team after that. But you know Homer will try....

JvR, Bob and picks won't get it done, I don't think. At the deadline last season, Howson was asking the moon and stars for Nash. Also, Nash is an excellent player with some years left, but he's already at or past prime and his production is already sliding. Now, his linemates are world-beaters and the Carter thing didn't work out either, but still -- for the kind of cap hit Nash would bring, and the loss of assets required to bring him, and his age and future projections -- I don't see this as a wise move. Flyers have really good core of young forwards top-to-bottom. They need defense --1 good solid guy who can play either top or 2nd pair, who can defend well, play physically, and move the puck reasonably.