Morgan Frost

[ruxpin]

55 minutes ago, jammer2 said:

Yes, that is the frustrating part, the lack of consistency

 

I really think that is part and parcel due to the youth on the team.    Ghost is just now at 2 years (third season, but partial in one and three--so far), Provorov is still a sophomore.   Konecny, same.    Then add Leier, Patrick and (occasionally) Sanheim.   And Laughton has a couple cups of coffee at the NHL level but not a ton of experience.  And even he's still only 23.    Definitely a whiff for a top-TWENTY pick, though. [edited, for your pleasure]

 

In any case, one of the things all the kids are going to have to learn is to sand off the highs and lows.    Don't get too high, don't get too low.   They haven't learned that yet, so they're a bit bipolar as a team and given to crises of confidence.

 

I don't think I blame the coach for that.  It's just the nature of the beast.    I do have a problem with the coach's in-game adjustments and some roster decisions, but I think the first part of that is realistically a little over-exaggerated.  I mean, there is something to it, but I think it tends to be overstated.

 

It takes 2-3 years for picks that aren't #1 or #2 overall to get to the NHL.   And that's if they're doing really well.    We're only now starting to see the fruit of Hextall's drafts, but it's really just the nascent stages of that.   We're only 3 drafts in, so the fact we have so many of his picks on the NHL roster already says something.   (Ghost was actually Holmgren's pick, wasn't he?  But even he took 4 years).  

 

People are saying 2-3 years.   That's probably accurate, but I don't think it's 2-3 years until we're solidly a playoff team.  That could even come as early as next year.  The caveat to that is that we'll again have a handful of rookies and a handful of sophomores doing the sophomore thing.   Heck, if things go unexpectedly right, they could even get their playoff feet wet  in a one-and-done this year.   Who knows?   I'm not expecting it, and that's extremely optimistic, but it could happen.

[vis]

6 minutes ago, brelic said:

 

I guess I'd ask who you label as the bottom 6. It's not often that Weise and Lehtera are in the lineup together,  and the bottom 6 as it currently stands, includes Patrick and Weal. 

At this point, I would not call Patrick or Weal talented enough for the NHL.  That's not to say that Patrick won't become talented enough.  But right now, no, I would not call Patrick or Weal talented enough for a PO-caliber team. 

 

6 minutes ago, brelic said:

In any case, I'll focus specifically on Laughton for this post. I'm not sure how you can say he has no talent. Currently sits at 7g and 13 points. He's got a CF% of 50.8 while starting in the DZ 46% of the time, is on pace for 26 points and 14 goals.

Do you think Laughton is a talented player?  Did I say Bellemare Paquette or whoever else is more talented than Laughton?

 

6 minutes ago, brelic said:

Weise and Lehtera - they have talent and have show it in the past, but it just doesn't show up here in Philly. 

Disagree.  Lehterable brings absolutely nothing to the table.  Weise?  Meh.

 

6 minutes ago, brelic said:

So overall, I agree with you in principle, but I think zero talent is a bit harsh.

 

A tiny, little bit of talent.  Better?  

[ruxpin]

17 minutes ago, brelic said:

So overall, I agree with you in principle, but I think zero talent is a bit harsh.

 

I agree with your post.

 

Laughton is not really first round pick talent, in my opinion.  But he and Leier and player X usually do a very good job as a 4th line when they're out there.   Who knows if Laughton grows into more, but I'm doubtful.   In any case, at his pay rate he's a very competent 4th line center.    Leier is probably meh.    Again, can't beat him for the price and he's serviceable.    He could surprise me, but at this point I don't think anyone should expect top 6 talent from the guy. 

 

I'm not a fan of Weal.   Again, he's not terribly expensive and on a workable term.   I agree with you that he shows flashes.   If Hakstol could eventually get him to be consistent, maybe there's long-term middle-six potential.  But I think by the end of his contract he will probably be passed by one or more of the kids coming along.   That would be the hope, anyway.

 

So, if that's all that was meant by "talentless" I guess I understand in context, but I agree it's a bit harsh.    I think it's clear that this team as currently constructed needs to play at the high end of their talent level each night to get it done, but I suppose there's not a lot of teams where that isn't the case.  They'll get there.

 

We all (well, most of us) wanted a build.   This is what that looks like.    I mean, Edmonton has had what, 47 #1 picks?   And they're still third from last in the west.   For whatever it's worth, the #1-less Flyers actually have 7 more points than McJesus and his Oily Apostles with a game in hand.   And Hextall has been at this a lot shorter than them, so...

 

 

[brelic]

17 minutes ago, vis said:

At this point, I would not call Patrick or Weal talented enough for the NHL.  That's not to say that Patrick won't become talented enough.  But right now, no, I would not call Patrick or Weal talented enough for a PO-caliber team. 

 

I agree that Patrick doesn't look like he belongs in the NHL right now. Weal, I'm not so sure. He might be miscast where he is, I don't know. Maybe he's a 4th liner. He's on pace for 24 points, which is great production for the 4th line. Of course, you could argue that he might not reach those levels with 9-10 minutes a night on the 4th line.

 

But, he's 25 now, and probably not going to get a whole lot better at this point. 

 

I do agree that expecting either Patrick or Weal to play somewhere in the middle six is above their current talent levels for a PO-team, of which we are barely one.

 

Quote

Do you think Laughton is a talented player?  Did I say Bellemare Paquette or whoever else is more talented than Laughton?

 

I do think he's a talented player. He does a lot of things right, he's fast, and he's got some offensive skills - definitely enough for a job in the NHL. 

 

While you didn't say PEB or Paquette are more talented than Laughton, your statement leads one to believe that if we have zero talent, surely other teams must have > 0 talent, no? So I looked at the best/better teams in the NHL and what their 4th line looks like. It's not any better than Laughton.

 

Quote

Disagree.  Lehterable brings absolutely nothing to the table.  Weise?  Meh.

 

Agreed - as in, right now, in Philly, they bring close to zero. 

 

Quote

A tiny, little bit of talent.  Better?  

 

Yes

 

So my question to you would be, outside of Weise and Lehtera, is it an age/experience issue (i.e. they will get better in time) or do you think it's a personnel issue?

 

 

[King Knut]

48 minutes ago, vis said:

The bottom 6 has zero talent.  The words talent do not come to mind re: Laughton, Leier, Raffl, Weise or Lehtera.  Too early for Patrick.  The defense, aside from Provorov and Ghost, is not talented.  In fact, the defense is very young.  The goaltenders are not talented.  I don't love Hakstol by any stretch, but I think you also have to evaluate the strength of the roster.  From my vantage point, it's not very strong.

 

Really depends on what you mean by bottom 6 doesn't it?  

 

The last few games the Bottom 6 has included Simmonds, Patrick, Weal and Laughton.  

I don't think anyone remotely attempting objectivity could qualify those players as having zero talent.  

 

Now Lehtera, Weise, Leier and Goulbourne?  You'd have a point.

 

Maybe it's the word talent we're getting caught up on.

Is it that you believe Patrick, Weal, Laughton and perhaps Konecney have no talent?  

 

48 minutes ago, vis said:

I think a different coach could improve some things.  But I don't think a new coach would automatically make them a top 3 team in the division.

 

I've said it in the past, but I'll say it again...  The Flyers are 9 points out of first place in the Metro.  There are between 8-14 points (depending on how tough you want to be on him) that I believe this team would have were it not for Hakstol being such a terrible bench coach.  

 

Now one could make the argument that his systems are a big part of getting them where they are and that another coach may have coached the bench better, but with weaker systems would have lost other games that Hakstol's team won. 

 

But watching how these Flyers play when they're focused (the way they've played when they've beaten Tampa, St. Louis, Chicago, Toronto, et al) I just can't see calling them untalented and saying that they can't be a top 3 team in the division.  

 

Even the penguins games... which have been utterly demoralizing and depressing to me... they should have won the first one and the last one was literally a matter of 4 terrible minutes of hockey.  As depressed as I was after that game with their performance, when I thought about it... it all happened in 4 minutes.  This is the sign of a weak willed and inexperienced team that is actually at least marginally talented and I do believe a stronger anchor and someone they could rely on behind their bench (the way teams rely on Laviolette or Quennville or Sutter before the Kings fired him) would result in a significantly better record. 

 

Essentially:  They're not winning these games because other teams are falling apart, they're winning because they execute well.  However they ARE losing the games they lose because they are falling apart.  

 

48 minutes ago, vis said:

I don't know what this means.

 

What I mean by this is that Hitchcock was pretty terrible at utilizing players based on their talents.  The guy had LeClair, Roenick, Primeau, Gagne, Williams, Recchi, Oates, Fedotenko, Amonte, Zhamnov, Desjardins, Johnsson, Pitkanen and his team couldn't buy a goal to save it's life when it counted.  

 

When he came in, he made a big deal about being able to identify how to utilize guys like LeClair and put them in a position to excel and how this was different for every team and he was looking forward to sorting it out.  Yet that never really happened.  He perpetually just hammered players for not doing exactly what he wanted.  As a result, the only guys who truly excelled in his system were guys who were multi-talented enough to capitalize on turning a shut down role into unexpected offense (Primeau, Handzus and Gagne and to an extent Recchi).  But the long and short is that team wasn't built for Hitchcock's coaching style and he wasn't a coach built for their skill sets.  Clarke kept adding talent to the roster that was being wasted on the ice. 

 

Likewise, I don't think Hakstol has a good track record of utilizing the likes of Ghost, B. Schenn, Couturier(until now), Konecney (until last week) and others in a way that best suits their skill sets. 

 

I'll grant him that last year was a special case.  I know why he shifted their plan (and it did in fact make them look horribly untalented-but I do think it was his intention to play that way) but I'm not sure that was what was best for them.  It won then more games in the short term, but it seemed to be designed to preserve the sanity and confidence of a defense that by and large wouldn't be in tact long term and a pair of goalies that we all knew were on their way out.  

 

 

[jammer2]

2 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

I really think that is part and parcel due to the youth on the team.    Ghost is just now at 2 years (third season, but partial in one and three--so far), Provorov is still a sophomore.   Konecny, same.    Then add Leier, Patrick and (occasionally) Sanheim.   And Laughton has a couple cups of coffee at the NHL level but not a ton of experience.  And even he's still only 23.    Definitely a whiff for a top-ten pick, though.

 

In any case, one of the things all the kids are going to have to learn is to sand off the highs and lows.    Don't get too high, don't get too low.   They haven't learned that yet, so they're a bit bipolar as a team and given to crises of confidence.

 

I don't think I blame the coach for that.  It's just the nature of the beast.    I do have a problem with the coach's in-game adjustments and some roster decisions, but I think the first part of that is realistically a little over-exaggerated.  I mean, there is something to it, but I think it tends to be overstated.

 

It takes 2-3 years for picks that aren't #1 or #2 overall to get to the NHL.   And that's if they're doing really well.    We're only now starting to see the fruit of Hextall's drafts, but it's really just the nascent stages of that.   We're only 3 drafts in, so the fact we have so many of his picks on the NHL roster already says something.   (Ghost was actually Holmgren's pick, wasn't he?  But even he took 4 years).  

 

People are saying 2-3 years.   That's probably accurate, but I don't think it's 2-3 years until we're solidly a playoff team.  That could even come as early as next year.  The caveat to that is that we'll again have a handful of rookies and a handful of sophomores doing the sophomore thing.   Heck, if things go unexpectedly right, they could even get their playoff feet wet  in a one-and-done this year.   Who knows?   I'm not expecting it, and that's extremely optimistic, but it could happen.

 

 

 All true. You are going to get mistakes and gaps in play from young players, no doubt. The veterans are not picking up their fair share of the slack in my estimation. My main questions are .....are they being prepared properly and do they want to play for this coach?

[flyercanuck]

14 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

I really think that is part and parcel due to the youth on the team.    Ghost is just now at 2 years (third season, but partial in one and three--so far), Provorov is still a sophomore.   Konecny, same.    Then add Leier, Patrick and (occasionally) Sanheim.   And Laughton has a couple cups of coffee at the NHL level but not a ton of experience.  And even he's still only 23.    Definitely a whiff for a top-ten pick, though.

 

I agree...it's a younger team and guys like Provorov and Konecny are nowhere near finished products. Laughton isn't a top 10 pick, he went 20th. 

 

14 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

In any case, one of the things all the kids are going to have to learn is to sand off the highs and lows.    Don't get too high, don't get too low.   They haven't learned that yet, so they're a bit bipolar as a team and given to crises of confidence.

 

I don't think I blame the coach for that.  It's just the nature of the beast.    I do have a problem with the coach's in-game adjustments and some roster decisions, but I think the first part of that is realistically a little over-exaggerated.  I mean, there is something to it, but I think it tends to be overstated.

 

It takes 2-3 years for picks that aren't #1 or #2 overall to get to the NHL.   And that's if they're doing really well.    We're only now starting to see the fruit of Hextall's drafts, but it's really just the nascent stages of that.   We're only 3 drafts in, so the fact we have so many of his picks on the NHL roster already says something.   (Ghost was actually Holmgren's pick, wasn't he?  But even he took 4 years).  

 

 Ghost was Homers pick....amazing what you can do when you hold on to a 3rd rounder. They don't always hit, but when they do it's a lot better than 19 games of Jaroslav Modry.

14 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

People are saying 2-3 years.   That's probably accurate, but I don't think it's 2-3 years until we're solidly a playoff team.  That could even come as early as next year.  The caveat to that is that we'll again have a handful of rookies and a handful of sophomores doing the sophomore thing.   Heck, if things go unexpectedly right, they could even get their playoff feet wet  in a one-and-done this year.   Who knows?   I'm not expecting it, and that's extremely optimistic, but it could happen.

 

 The D will likely take a few years longer to solidify, it's the nature of the beast with young defencemen. We also still have to wait for Hart/Sandstrom/Lyon to prove worthy as an NHL tandem....again, a few years. Lindblom might come up this year, but he'll likely have to adjust to the NHL game. Then there's whoever makes it out of the Frost/Rubtsov/Ratcliffe/Allison/Bunnamen/Vorobyov/Aube-Kubel/Twarynski/Marody/Sushko etc crapload of forwards Hextall is hoarding...with more to come this draft.

 

It's another year where I don't even care if they make the playoffs. I think Hextalls doing the right thing stockpiling all this young talent. Once they're actually a real contender, he can trade some of that/picks for a need. 

[King Knut]

42 minutes ago, vis said:

My point to KK was that while Hakstol gets a lot of heat (deservedly so in most instances), the roster isn't that talented to begin with.

 

 

I agree with the big caveat to the above statemen being to add the word "...yet"  to the end of it.

 

People didn't think Couturier was talented for 5 years.  I begged to differ and caught a lot of flak for it.  It was frustrating, but I saw the guy being just shy of putting it all together in a brilliant way.  Was it the D zone starts?  was it the defensive draws?  Was it the line mates?  Probably all of the above.  

 

I likewise see a lot of talent on this roster that is doing a lot of "Just missing".  There are no McDavids,  Matthews or Tavareses (unless you count Giroux who is looking an awful lot like his old self lately) but these guys are getting there and I think they will be very good once they start putting it together.

 

The problem I have right now is that Weise and Lehtera, MacDonald, Manning and maybe Leier and definitely Elliott and Neuvy are all not part of "putting it together".  So why are they there when they don't need to be (granted, Elliott and Neuvy both still need to be there which is unfortunate but inescapable right now).  

 

42 minutes ago, vis said:

What would we think of Hakstol (and the team in general) if they had the same number of points, but not these ridiculous highs and lows?  I.e., would we be as critical if they were consistently average, instead of Jekyll and Hyde?

 

I'd be really depressed to be honest.  If that were the case, I'd feel like there was little future for this squad.  It's the fact that they show such promise in some moments that lead to big wins and commit highly correctable mistakes in other moments that lead to stupid losses.... and by and large the stupid mistakes are coming from inexperienced rookies who are learning on the job and from below average vets who will not be here long. 

 

I just see the path forward being very clear and bright.  

 

[ruxpin]

Just now, jammer2 said:

The veterans are not picking up their fair share of the slack in my estimation. My main questions are .....are they being prepared properly and do they want to play for this coach?

 

This depends upon which veterans we're talking about.   I mean, Voracek and Giroux are #1 and #2 in the league in assists.   And both are top 6 in points.   Voracek will always make some boneheaded plays.    And Giroux may just be the Von Hayes of the Flyers.

 

But they're actually producing.

 

I guess you really have to include Couturier as a veteran.   He's obviously picked it up.   I don't think there's any issue with wanting to play for the coach for these three.

 

Simmonds isn't quite Simmonds this year.    I've blamed it on the injuries early in the season.   I imagine that could still be a thing, but it really is prolonged at this point.   Maybe the bye week helps that.    I don't think his is an attitude thing, though.

 

So, then we're down to Filppula, Lehtera and Weise.   Am I forgetting anyone?   There's a reason why Filppula was expendable for the Bolts even in a season that Stamkos was injured.   Lehtera is the StayPuft Marshmallow Man on skates.  And Weise was average at best in Montreal and isn't even that here.   That was simply a bust of a signing, but that's already been covered and beaten to death.   I don't think it's a matter of not wanting to play for this coach.   I think it's more a matter of being unable to play to the level that is required.   So, rotate the latter two in and out of the bottom six as needed until we have quantifiable better options.  I think there are a couple kids in the system that probably could already be better, but possibly the hope is to keep grooming them where they are so that their ceiling isn't simply better than Lehtera or Weise.   Because that's not exactly a high bar.

 

So, anyway, no I don't think he's lost the room or people are unwilling to play for him.   I just think he's trying to bluff with a still weak hand.

 

 

[ruxpin]

3 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

Laughton isn't a top 10 pick, he went 20th. 

 

Yeah, I realized that after I posted but hoped no one noticed.   

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

I don't know why everyone is hating on Laughton. He's been fantastic in his role and would actually be promoted to either the 2nd or 3rd spot, but those are gifted to Filpputurd and Patrick. Laughton has done what's been asked of him and it's Haktard's fault for not rewarding Laughton for his play. If he turns out to be a 25 to 30 point line 4 player, that's good enough for me. And remember that he wasn't a top 10 pick either. Laughton was drafted 20th. I think you move Laughton into a 3rd line role and he's good for 40 points a season. 

 

The big thing is that the Flyers now have an abundance of depth and there's no need to rush guys into the lineup. As great as it is that we've got some potentially elite prospects, the nice thing is that they don't need to be rushed. Yes, that means having to suffer with crap like Filpputurd, Weise and Lehtera, but the good news is that it's only short periods. Filpputurd is gone after this year, Lehturda next year and Weisecrap the year after that. That's around $12 million in toilet bowl fodder that's coming off the books.

[ruxpin]

6 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

Laughton isn't a top 10 pick, he went 20th. 

 

It wasn't a typo, either.   When I typed it initially, I was thinking he was #7 for some reason.   I looked him up to see his age and noticed the #20.

[ruxpin]

12 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

I don't know why everyone is hating on Laughton. He's been fantastic in his role and would actually be promoted to either the 2nd or 3rd spot, but those are gifted to Filpputurd and Patrick. Laughton has done what's been asked of him and it's Haktard's fault for not rewarding Laughton for his play. If he turns out to be a 25 to 30 point line 4 player, that's good enough for me. And remember that he wasn't a top 10 pick either. Laughton was drafted 20th. I think you move Laughton into a 3rd line role and he's good for 40 points a season. 

 

I was actually defending him.    But I definitely did remember wrong on the draft position.    I'm going to go edit that before the tiki torch line forms.

 

But yeah, not remotely high on any list of negatives/concerns.

 

And you may be right on that last line.

[jammer2]

1 minute ago, ruxpin said:

So, anyway, no I don't think he's lost the room or people are unwilling to play for him.   I just think he's trying to bluff with a still weak hand.

 

 

 When you have a coach new to the league, you are gonna get bumpy rides. Rarely does somebody step in as a rookie coach and dominate, and certainly not with this roster. If the Flyers are patient with Hak, he will be judged on how the upcoming crop of youngsters assimilate into the team and league. The old Dick Vermeil line comes to mind "you can't make chicken sandwiches out of chicken ****"....so there is that perspective. The next couple years will be hard for Flyer fans. In a city (and fan base) that is famous for making quick twitch judgements this will seem like an eternity. 

[ruxpin]

Just now, jammer2 said:

The next couple years will be hard for Flyer fans. In a city (and fan base) that is famous for making quick twitch judgements this will seem like an eternity. 

 

 

TRUST.THE.PROCESS.

 

or some ****.

[King Knut]

4 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

So, then we're down to Filppula, Lehtera and Weise. 

 

 

The thing that no one seems to be keeping in mind is that with the exception of Weise (who was signed as a bottom 6 player) these players are only here as a means to some other ends.  

 

Neither Filppula nor Lehtera will be anything more than a distant memory in two years.  Possible next year if we're lucky (re: Lehtera) and neither one were acquired because Hextall said, "Damn... I really need me some Jori Lehtera or Val Filppula right now!  That's what this team's missing!"

[ruxpin]

Just now, King Knut said:

 

The thing that no one seems to be keeping in mind is that with the exception of Weise (who was signed as a bottom 6 player) these players are only here as a means to some other ends.  

 

Neither Filppula nor Lehtera will be anything more than a distant memory in two years.  Possible next year if we're lucky (re: Lehtera) and neither one were acquired because Hextall said, "Damn... I really need me some Jori Lehtera or Val Filppula right now!  That's what this team's missing!"

 

Exactly.   Completely agree.    

[King Knut]

2 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

Exactly.   Completely agree.    

 

I feel like the deal worked perfectly for everyone.  

 

We got a serviceable if not amazing NHL caliber center for two years to keep the position warm while prospects developed, not to mention two picks.

Tampa got their cap problem taken care of and made roster room for their prospects that WERE ready.

Pittsburgh got an extra warm body that could move the puck if needed for their cup run (which they won).

And Streit got his Stanley Cup ring.  

 

That trade was the feel good everyone wins story of the year as far as I was concerned.  

 

I have no problems with Filppula on this team.  He's not offensively special at this point, but he's also not defensively irresponsible either.  If he weren't here, Giroux would probably still be playing center and think about where that leaves this team right now.

 

 

[ruxpin]

1 minute ago, King Knut said:

 

I feel like the deal worked perfectly for everyone.  

 

We got a serviceable if not amazing NHL caliber center for two years to keep the position warm while prospects developed, not to mention two picks.

Tampa got their cap problem taken care of and made roster room for their prospects that WERE ready.

Pittsburgh got an extra warm body that could move the puck if needed for their cup run (which they won).

And Streit got his Stanley Cup ring.  

 

That trade was the feel good everyone wins story of the year as far as I was concerned.  

 

I have no problems with Filppula on this team.  He's not offensively special at this point, but he's also not defensively irresponsible either.  If he weren't here, Giroux would probably still be playing center and think about where that leaves this team right now.

 

 

 

No arguments from here on any of that.   Well said.

[AJgoal]

 Laughton's on the Flyers' 4th line, but is producing very well. He's actually fourth on the Flyers in points/60, his 1.63 is 192nd overall for forwards, which makes his production that of a top-tier third liner (average of 6.8th on an average team).  Kid's got talent.

 

Players Laughton is outpacing in goal scoring:

Artem Anisimov

Rick Nash

Victor Arvidsson

Chris Kreider

Matt Duchesne

Mike Hoffman

Jonathan Druoin

 

In points scoring:

Ryan Johanssen

Mika Zibenejad

Logan Couture

Pierre-Luc Dubois

Sidney Crosby

 

None of this means that he is better than those players listed, but maybe given an increased role, you'll see better raw numbers, like we saw with Couturier last season after the deadline, and then again this season. There's actually a good case to be made for swapping Laughton and Filpulla. Laughton's not afraid to shoot, and he has a plus shot. Putting him with Voracek should result in more chances for him to use it. It hurts nothing to give Laughton more minutes and see if his scoring is sustainable against better competition and over more minutes per game. It might hurt Filpulla's trade value, but the most important thing you're getting when Filpulla leaves is his cap space anyway.

[OccamsRazor]

Well count me in the Laughton has talent group.

 

Kid brings intensity and speed tonthe team is nowhere on the ice he won't pursue the puck.

 

Just because he is on the 4th line doesn't mean that is his ceiling.

 

I would ne ok with him playing the the 3rd if i wasn't concerned with who will take his spot on the 4th and still do a good job at it.

 

I would bring Vecchione up and let him play on the 4th with Leier and Goulbourne waive Weise or Lehtera or send Sanheim down to make room.

 

28 Claude Giroux - 14 Sean Couturier - 11 Travis Konecny 
 

12 Michael Raffl - 51 Valtteri Filppula - 93 Jakub Voracek
 

21 Scott Laughton - 19 Nolan Patrick - 17 Wayne Simmonds
 

56 Tyrell Goulbourne - 26 Mike Vecchione - 40 Jordan Weal
 

 

Yeah i know never will happen.

[mojo1917]

I think Laughton has been good to very good this year also. 

I don't know where the "no skill" idea has taken shape, gotten legs, whatever...

 

He has attributes that can't be taught. He is fast, he is hyper-competitive. As AJ says he has a nice shot, and isn't afraid to pull the trigger. I think he sees the ice pretty well. Usually he and Leier & as people have said "player X" cycle the **** out of the puck. 

He is exhibit-A for why the AHL works.  He was allowed to go to LHV and get right, get his game on and get confident. 

 

I hope he continues to be a Flyer, I'd take 2 more of him if possible.

[Philly29]

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 5:45 AM, OccamsRazor said:

I think that is fair. And my apologies for the smart ass comment i didn't think you'd be that offended...i'm a smart ass all the time.

I was not offended bud I thought it was funny and that's why I called you key board tough guy and typed "lol" All good man no biggie, last thing I want is fellow Flyer fans to bitch at each other like women. So all good not offended at all bud, passion is a good thing.

 

[radoran]

3 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

I feel like the deal worked perfectly for everyone.  

 

We got a serviceable if not amazing NHL caliber center for two years to keep the position warm while prospects developed, not to mention two picks.

Tampa got their cap problem taken care of and made roster room for their prospects that WERE ready.

Pittsburgh got an extra warm body that could move the puck if needed for their cup run (which they won).

And Streit got his Stanley Cup ring.  

 

That trade was the feel good everyone wins story of the year as far as I was concerned.  

 

I have no problems with Filppula on this team.  He's not offensively special at this point, but he's also not defensively irresponsible either.  If he weren't here, Giroux would probably still be playing center and think about where that leaves this team right now.

 

They are good deals, but they are deals that "definitley a playoff" teams don't  make. And after two rounds of playoffs in five years, "a few more years" to even seriously compete is tedious at best.

 

There isn't much of a better choice at this point, which is really a reflection of just how badly screwed the executives prior to Hextall left the team.

 

And, as you note,  the current exec's choice of coach.

 

But just give them time...?

 

We don't really have a choice, do we?

[radoran]

@vis

 

50 points to visyndor for Lehterable.