off_the_post Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 You said he doesn't have the foot/skating and he reminds you of Handzus. Well for a top ten pick to me that sounds like a bust.....In my opnion yes he might not be Grabner when it comes to skating that does not mean he will not be a super star some day. His skating is not that bad he did score all those points in the minors for some reason. His rookie year he single handedly shut down the whole Pittsburgh squad. I mean if were going to trade guys that barley played two years because of this and that why even draft at all? Just trade our picks away then...It isn't like VL is the fastest skater you know. Your saying VL who is passed his prime what 34 or 35 years old for $4.5 mil a year is an asset but Coots a guy who again as I stated has not played a full two years of hockey is not an asset, at least a future one? We have not even really see Laughton play yet only a handful of games but he is more of an untouchable then Coots is? Why? It is not a wonder why our rookie players that we draft might start off slow or half to play in the minors for a few years there probably so up tight about performing like Crosby right off the bat or they will be traded for some aging star... or some other teams rookie... Let them be and build a team through the draft and keep the players we draft for more then one season before we call them a bust and trade them off. Not some much directed at you "off_the_post" as more directed to management.Really? How many games has Handzus played in the NHL? There are a lot of 1st round draft picks that have had great careers in the NHL that are not busts but never considered stars. So you may think that qualifies as a bust but I don't and never said it. The reason I would trade Coots is that he is an asset and is marketable and could actually net a decent return. The reason I would trade Coots and not Laughton is that Coots projects higher than Laughton. Laughton is projected to be a 3rd line player if I recall from the media coverage when he was drafted. I trade Coots over Laughton to get a better return now. The goal is to improve the defense using excess assets at center. Coots will return more in a trade. Hey I was all for developing in a draft until the VL signing. But fact is VL is signed so I am trying to think of what else to do with that fact. To me trading Coots makes the most sense. Many players score in Junior. Many of those never sniff that level of production in the NHL. Based on Coots skating speed I think he may be a 2nd line center but definitely not a number 1. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 @brelic Carts and RIchie were not blocked really, but could have been. The season that might have been their rookie year was cancelled due to the strike. They went from their junior squads directly to the AHL playoffs due to the NHL strike. Forget who was there at the time, that may have potentially blocked them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly29 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 (edited) Really? How many games has Handzus played in the NHL? There are a lot of 1st round draft picks that have had great careers in the NHL that are not busts but never considered stars. So you may think that qualifies as a bust but I don't and never said it. The reason I would trade Coots is that he is an asset and is marketable and could actually net a decent return. The reason I would trade Coots and not Laughton is that Coots projects higher than Laughton. Laughton is projected to be a 3rd line player if I recall from the media coverage when he was drafted. I trade Coots over Laughton to get a better return now. The goal is to improve the defense using excess assets at center. Coots will return more in a trade. Hey I was all for developing in a draft until the VL signing. But fact is VL is signed so I am trying to think of what else to do with that fact. To me trading Coots makes the most sense. Many players score in Junior. Many of those never sniff that level of production in the NHL. Based on Coots skating speed I think he may be a 2nd line center but definitely not a number 1.Why trade Coots though at all, I do not understand? Why sign Vinny and trade Coots why not just take the time to draft defense and keep your young guys at the same time? Coots is marketable so is Giroux doesn't mean we should trade him because we have a whole in the defense. Yes we are center heavy but it doesn't make sense to me to draft a guy to trade him a year + later...Take the time and draft to fill the holes. What is wrong with having Giroux, Coots, Schenn, and Laughton as your centers. You would be running four solid lines for years. It does not make sense to trade a center for a dman and take an aging player like VL and plug him in the center position for a few years to fill the void you made. I think it is a lateral move you fill one void by creating another. Yes I would like a player that was picked 8th overall in the draft to have a weee bit more talent then Handzus which I think Coots has. Why not move VL to LW see how he does? Edited July 4, 2013 by Philly29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
off_the_post Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 Why trade Coots though at all, I do not understand? Why sign Vinny and trade Coots why not just take the time to draft defense and keep your young guys at the same time? Coots is marketable so is Giroux doesn't mean we should trade him because we have a whole in the defense. Yes we are center heavy but it doesn't make sense to me to draft a guy to trade him a year + later...Take the time and draft to fill the holes. What is wrong with having Giroux, Coots, Schenn, and Laughton as your centers. You would be running four solid lines for years. It does not make sense to trade a center for a dman and take an aging player like VL and plug him in the center position for a few years to fill the void you made. I think it is a lateral move you fill one void by creating another. Yes I would like a player that was picked 8th overall in the draft to have a weee bit more talent then Handzus which I think Coots has. Why not move VL to LW see how he does? You trade Coots now because the Flyers have too many centers. So you either play them out of position which could work out or you trade to get a young talented defenseman. Did I say trade Giroux? I would hope that somebody could see the difference between wanting to trade Coot versus Giroux. Most teams draft the best available player. I believe that is what the flyers thought when drafting Coots. So if Coots does turn out to be a great player but could fill a team's need via a trade then you have that luxury. 2 does not equal 1. Sure trading Coots for an equally talented defenseman is a lateral move but then by bringing in VL as part of the equation is a net upgrade. Your are suggesting to move players to play out of their nature position. I am suggesting to trade an excess asset for an equaled valued asset of a different kind. Bogosian was drafted 3rd overall in 2008. Coots was drafted 7th overall in 2011. Draft position aside, I think that is a fair trade the benefits both teams. Jesh, it is not like I am suggesting they trade Coots for Gonchar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 Anyway, the more I thought about it, the more I came to think that yes, it could be applied to Richards and Carter regardless of how they were handled in the first few yearI'm less likely to apply the theory to Richards and Carter. Forsberg was moved out when they were still fairly young and I don't think either were blocked by Briere.If anything, I think they trusted Richards almost too much, as evidenced by giving him the C as his high school graduation present. I'm completely with your initial post, but I think Carts and Richie may actually have been an example of the exception. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly29 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 (edited) You trade Coots now because the Flyers have too many centers. So you either play them out of position which could work out or you trade to get a young talented defenseman. Did I say trade Giroux? I would hope that somebody could see the difference between wanting to trade Coot versus Giroux. Most teams draft the best available player. I believe that is what the flyers thought when drafting Coots. So if Coots does turn out to be a great player but could fill a team's need via a trade then you have that luxury. 2 does not equal 1. Sure trading Coots for an equally talented defenseman is a lateral move but then by bringing in VL as part of the equation is a net upgrade. Your are suggesting to move players to play out of their nature position. I am suggesting to trade an excess asset for an equaled valued asset of a different kind. Bogosian was drafted 3rd overall in 2008. Coots was drafted 7th overall in 2011. Draft position aside, I think that is a fair trade the benefits both teams. Jesh, it is not like I am suggesting they trade Coots for Gonchar.I never said that you wanted Giroux traded....but as far as trading Coots goes...even though you are filling a void in the defense by trading Coots and with VL signing fills the gap. The problem with that is VL wont be playing forever...hes getting older and when he is no longer on the team now we half to fill the center position again with another older player or draft another center. Guys like Laughton are not a sure thing so lets say Giroux and Schenn are the only two centers who reach there potential so now we are out 1 to 2 centers instead of just leaving it being and drafting a dman from the start. Edited July 4, 2013 by Philly29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 @Philly29 Laughton is a sure thing as far as work ethic goes, so he will be a legit 3rd or 4th line center. We already know he does not look out of place skating in the NHL, so....in my mind....he is a for sure thing. The only iffy thing is how much offense he will supply, and I think everyone is going to eventually be pleasantly surprised by that part of his game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly29 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 (edited) @Philly29 Laughton is a sure thing as far as work ethic goes, so he will be a legit 3rd or 4th line center. We already know he does not look out of place skating in the NHL, so....in my mind....he is a for sure thing. The only iffy thing is how much offense he will supply, and I think everyone is going to eventually be pleasantly surprised by that part of his game.That's awesome very encouraging and I stand corrected jammer thank you. I will not change my mind though about trading Coots. I just would like for once to see this team build through the draft and keep there picks. Edited July 4, 2013 by Philly29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent05 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 I just would like for once to see this team build through the draft and keep there picks.We all do but NOT gonna happen with Snider hiring his puppets to run the team. Every year they will try to sign or trade for the biggest name on the market. It's about making money not winning Cups. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 It's about making money not winning Cups.we-ell....come on ... I mean that's what it's about for every team. Every pro team every sport everywhere. The owners are the ultimate decision-makers, they call the shots because they decide how much $$ the GMs will have to spend.Vincent05 - this is not meant for you, this is just an "in general" statement:Snider gets such a bad rap on this board it's almost unbelievable. Some of you guys really need to read his bio, find out something about the man before you label him. And if you think all his success is ancient history think again. I'm not saying he's a prince or the perfect ambassador; far from it, he's done some things when it comes to the business of players vs owners that are, frankly dishonorable. We only need to go back a few months to see one of the worst examples of his hypocrisy with the lockout, his role in it. But the nasty, duplicitous moves have to be weighed against the enormous good he's done, not only for the Flyers but for the NHL ...and the city of Philadelphia. Like I said, not a perfect ambassador, not an unstained hero, but not a bogey-man out to ruin the Flyers either. In the end he's a businessman first who's been more generous than most with his success. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 in the end he's a businessman first who's been more generous than most with his success Comcast's/Snider's money.Fixed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canoli Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 you're right. Better now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyS Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 we-ell....come on ... I mean that's what it's about for every team. Every pro team every sport everywhere. The owners are the ultimate decision-makers, they call the shots because they decide how much $$ the GMs will have to spend.Vincent05 - this is not meant for you, this is just an "in general" statement:Snider gets such a bad rap on this board it's almost unbelievable. Some of you guys really need to read his bio, find out something about the man before you label him. And if you think all his success is ancient history think again. I'm not saying he's a prince or the perfect ambassador; far from it, he's done some things when it comes to the business of players vs owners that are, frankly dishonorable. We only need to go back a few months to see one of the worst examples of his hypocrisy with the lockout, his role in it. But the nasty, duplicitous moves have to be weighed against the enormous good he's done, not only for the Flyers but for the NHL ...and the city of Philadelphia. Like I said, not a perfect ambassador, not an unstained hero, but not a bogey-man out to ruin the Flyers either. In the end he's a businessman first who's been more generous than most with his success.I like Snider. He loves this team & wants to win. And he's willing to spend money to get it done.That is much better than a lot of other NHL owners can say.Has his way resulted in championships? Not in a long time, but it ain't for lack of trying or caring.I hope we win a Cup again before he passes away. He deserves that much, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent05 Posted July 6, 2013 Share Posted July 6, 2013 @canoliYes every sports team is in it to make money, that I know. Any of them BS their fans that they want to win the Championship? How many times have we hear him say that but yet find a true way of winning it all. I get that he's trying but he's been trying for over 30 years now and he should see by now what he's doing wrong and yet he keeps repeating on with the same path. Yes he spends money to build a competitive team out there but if he doesn't spend and put a competitive team out there he can't sell tickets or make money. I read somewhere that to make a good profit you gotta make the playoffs.We all know and I'm sure he knows that signing big FAs every year and turning the roster over yearly won't win it all but does he care to really win it. Yes we sucked in 2007 and could've start the rebuild process but what did he and Homer do sign the biggest FA out there to get back into the playoffs. The same exact thing is happening again this year. This is why I am thinking the way I do. We won't win it all til Snider dies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.