OccamsRazor Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Just now, brelic said: Don't know much about him. I would still love to add Mark Stone to the lineup but this would be a nice look to start... 28 Claude Giroux - 14 Sean Couturier - 11 Travis Konecny25 James van Riemsdyk - 19 Nolan Patrick - 93 Jakub Voracek23 Oskar Lindblom- 95 Henrik Borgström -17 Wayne Simmonds21 Scott Laughton - 24 Misha Vorobyev - 13 Nicolas Aube-Kubel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12 Michael Raffl Jake may have to wait till the offseason to move but i would do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, brelic said: I do remember Noel from the draft year and many Flyers fans happy he wasn't taken. He would be another prospect added to the pool. He will need another year of juniors i think but he has some upside. I would take Owen Tippett from them instead if they like. 6-2 205 RW. He is closer to being ready and could join the Phantoms next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 On 1/16/2019 at 8:15 AM, OccamsRazor said: Could Simmonds be auditioning for his new team? If Fletcher was just todo one more thing....waive Macdonald i would nominate him for GM of the year!!!!! But i just don't understand dressing Lehtera over Weise...unless it is to showcase him...then i get it. However this does help slow the team down. They won't get that lucky tonight vs. the Broons. I read something that was spitballing Weise being waived over Lehtera specifically because of Lehtera's legal trouble. Like if the team waives him, he or the NHLPA could make it a thing over his legal troubles. But I don't quite get that as it's not like the Flyers would be trying to get out of paying him the way Lombardi tried to screw Richards in LA. They'd just be trying to get out of having him almost single handedly lose them games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, King Knut said: I read something that was spitballing Weise being waived over Lehtera specifically because of Lehtera's legal trouble. Like if the team waives him, he or the NHLPA could make it a thing over his legal troubles. But I don't quite get that as it's not like the Flyers would be trying to get out of paying him the way Lombardi tried to screw Richards in LA. They'd just be trying to get out of having him almost single handedly lose them games. That makes no sense. Waiving a crappy player is legit. The Flyers would have a field day making that argument. NHLPA: "We are concerned you've illegally waived our client Jori "Snorts" Lehtera." Fletch: "You serious, bro? Haha, Gordon, roll the Lehtera blooper role. This gunna be good!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 minute ago, brelic said: That makes no sense. Waiving a crappy player is legit. The Flyers would have a field day making that argument. NHLPA: "We are concerned you've illegally waived our client Jori "Snorts" Lehtera." Fletch: "You serious, bro? Haha, Gordon, roll the Lehtera blooper role. This gunna be good!" To be sure, but in the wake of a few situations in recent history, that may not be the way Dave Scott thinks about it though. I've worked for enough large companies like that (especially companies in media) to know that they will swallow a bitter pill (or enema for that matter) for a long time rather than have to mobilize their legal teams. There may even be specific protocols in place within the Comcast Spectator corporate structure that disallow them from taking any action regarding any employee accused of a crime and that may be enough for their lawyers to poop themselves and politely urge management to just... Lehtera it fizzle itself out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, King Knut said: To be sure, but in the wake of a few situations in recent history, that may not be the way Dave Scott thinks about it though. I've worked for enough large companies like that (especially companies in media) to know that they will swallow a bitter pill (or enema for that matter) for a long time rather than have to mobilize their legal teams. There may even be specific protocols in place within the Comcast Spectator corporate structure that disallow them from taking any action regarding any employee accused of a crime and that may be enough for their lawyers to poop themselves and politely urge management to just... Lehtera it fizzle itself out. Yeah, I get that. But surely, they would be within their rights to suspend a player formally charged - not merely accused - with possessing cocaine, no? What happened in the domestic abuse stuff with Voynoy (I seem to remember others too?)? At what point were they able to cut ties with the player? Either way, Lehtera has about 35 games remaining in his NHL career. Enjoy the cottage, Jorald! It's fully stocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poulin20 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 So I skip 2 games in a row and they win them (I went to the Phantoms last night instead with a dad from my son's hockey team and that was fun!). Maybe it's me?? I assume you guys want me to go back to the WFC to get our lottery position as high as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howie58 Posted January 17, 2019 Author Share Posted January 17, 2019 Who knows? Maybe they are sick of losing. Or, they have gotten used to Gordon. And yes, they don't like the Hinkie Process Model and would like to wallow in mediocrity. Lehtera's hit...uttter f...ing stupidity. Maybe the guy knows it's the end of the line and doesn't care anymore....or he is seething. It was painful to watch. Hart was great. Coots showed his offensive talent. I don't think these wins will impact potential trades. What will be, will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 3 hours ago, Poulin20 said: I assume you guys want me to go back to the WFC to get our lottery position as high as possible. Yes back to your post. You are critical to this mission....then sell your seats for next year. That is all. Carry on!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 2 hours ago, Howie58 said: I don't think these wins will impact potential trades. Well i hope this helps show these bums can be helpful to some teams in need. Sell!!! Sell! Sell!!! Jake, Simmer, and Mcdud pack your bags!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howie58 Posted January 17, 2019 Author Share Posted January 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: Jake, Simmer, and Mcdud pack your bags!!!! Jake will be hard sell at his price. AMac....would there be a small market club that would take him to fill cap space for a year? Simmonds--I think the odds are that he departs. The sad, immediate problem: Weise and Lehtera occupy roster slots better dedicated to youngsters. Lehtera is gone at season's end. Weise is a different story. Maybe he gets packaged. Here is Weise's buyout: https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-calculator/dale-weise If we can't trade him out, I guess the question is cap hit of a million and change in 19-20. This was clearly not one of Hexy's finest hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 27 minutes ago, Howie58 said: Jake will be hard sell at his price. AMac....would there be a small market club that would take him to fill cap space for a year? Simmonds--I think the odds are that he departs. The sad, immediate problem: Weise and Lehtera occupy roster slots better dedicated to youngsters. Lehtera is gone at season's end. Weise is a different story. Maybe he gets packaged. Here is Weise's buyout: https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-calculator/dale-weise If we can't trade him out, I guess the question is cap hit of a million and change in 19-20. This was clearly not one of Hexy's finest hours. Weise is a good buy out candidate...i can live with Mcdud for one more year if he is the new Folin for next year kept as the 7th or 8th D man and Morin and Myers make the team....i have tolerated him this long if he is relegated to this role i'll live through one more year of him however if he gets top 4 minutes i will be pissed. Jake could be a end of the season move. So it maybe just Simmer being shipped out before the deadline...i just hope for a good return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 On 1/17/2019 at 10:22 AM, King Knut said: I read something that was spitballing Weise being waived over Lehtera specifically because of Lehtera's legal trouble. Like if the team waives him, he or the NHLPA could make it a thing over his legal troubles. But I don't quite get that as it's not like the Flyers would be trying to get out of paying him the way Lombardi tried to screw Richards in LA. They'd just be trying to get out of having him almost single handedly lose them games. Agree. He should be waived on merit, let alone his legal troubles. Although, I wonder about a team's ability to waive a player if that player is in a substance abuse recovery assistance program. Maybe Lehtera enrolled in an out-patient program after his legal troubles came to light and waiving him might pose some questions about whether he's being punished for substance abuse vs. for his play. Either way, they would have to pay him his salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 1 minute ago, vis said: Agree. He should be waived on merit, let alone his legal troubles. Although, I wonder about a team's ability to waive a player if that player is in a substance abuse recovery assistance program. Maybe Lehtera enrolled in an out-patient program after his legal troubles came to light and waiving him might pose some questions about whether he's being punished for substance abuse vs. for his play. Either way, they would have to pay him his salary. That's interesting, I really don't know. The fact is, he'll get paid either way, but uprooting him if he got claimed or transferred if he's entrenched in a program is a different thing entirely. I still suspect that it might just have something to do with lawyers telling Hextall, then Fletcher and Homer and Dave Scott... Just ride out the contract... please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 2 minutes ago, King Knut said: That's interesting, I really don't know. The fact is, he'll get paid either way, but uprooting him if he got claimed or transferred if he's entrenched in a program is a different thing entirely. I still suspect that it might just have something to do with lawyers telling Hextall, then Fletcher and Homer and Dave Scott... Just ride out the contract... please. Could be. Either way, it makes no difference. He gets paid and won't be back anyway. That said, Lehtera's situation is way different than Richards' and the NHL and NHLPA should be able to get comfortable if the Flyers wanted to waive him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 31 minutes ago, vis said: Could be. Either way, it makes no difference. He gets paid and won't be back anyway. That said, Lehtera's situation is way different than Richards' and the NHL and NHLPA should be able to get comfortable if the Flyers wanted to waive him. Should, sure... but like I said, in my experience, organizations large enough to have in house legal departments that take up entire floors usually prefer not to utilize them and avoid it altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 2 minutes ago, King Knut said: Should, sure... but like I said, in my experience, organizations large enough to have in house legal departments that take up entire floors usually prefer not to utilize them and avoid it altogether. Seems foolish and wasteful for organizations to do that, but ok. I was just reacting to your statement that lawyers were probably telling Flyers' management to ride out Weise's contract. If lawyers were involved, seems like they could distinguish Lehtera's situation pretty easily from Richards' and get the Flyers comfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 9 minutes ago, vis said: Seems foolish and wasteful for organizations to do that, but ok. I was just reacting to your statement that lawyers were probably telling Flyers' management to ride out Weise's contract. If lawyers were involved, seems like they could distinguish Lehtera's situation pretty easily from Richards' and get the Flyers comfortable. Seriously... the larger the organization, the less the organization likes having to utilize it's lawyers and the more you see those lawyers within that organization taking extreme efforts to explain to everyone else why they should never be involved with anything. I've seen it time and time again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 21 hours ago, King Knut said: Seriously... the larger the organization, the less the organization likes having to utilize it's lawyers and the more you see those lawyers within that organization taking extreme efforts to explain to everyone else why they should never be involved with anything. I've seen it time and time again. My experience is pretty opposite when dealing with general counsel and C-level executives. I could see rank and file managers and maybe lower level staff in the legal department taking that point of view. But it’s not a very good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 56 minutes ago, vis said: My experience is pretty opposite when dealing with general counsel and C-level executives. I could see rank and file managers and maybe lower level staff in the legal department taking that point of view. But it’s not a very good one. didnt say it was a good point of view. Makes my life hell a lot of the time. Just what I’ve dealt with for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 On 1/19/2019 at 11:18 AM, King Knut said: didnt say it was a good point of view. Makes my life hell a lot of the time. Just what I’ve dealt with for a long time. Which does? Interacting with legal or not interacting with them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 1 hour ago, vis said: Which does? Interacting with legal or not interacting with them? I think I should consult with an attorney before answering that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vis Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 4 hours ago, King Knut said: I think I should consult with an attorney before answering that. Lol. Wise man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.