There is really nothing wrong with a prospect playing mostly on the fourth line in his rookie year. It does not hurt development, as he would be practicing and learning with NHLers. Also Laughton really doesn't have much more to gain by a fourth season in the OHL. I understand the point about not burning a year off his entry-level contract they think he's NHL ready now, he should be on the team, even if it's in a 4th line role.
- bmeltzer

I would love for him to win the 4th line center job. No way can playing 10 mins a night in the NHL league stunt development. I really dont care about burning an EL year. If he's ready he's ready. Hall by no means has cemented the spot. Were talking about a player we picked up on waivers

What is the early return on NHL 14? Anyone have it yet? Is the advancing in GM mode any faster? If not I'm not getting it brutally slow

Well first of all, why does Laughton have to play on the 3rd line? He can also play on the 4th line. And I see it as the opposite. This is the perfect time to develop a player like Laughton in the NHL. They legitimately aren't a contender on paper. Anything can happen when you make the playoffs, and you never know. But letting Laughton get through the inevitable growing pains in the NHL this season, could have him farther in his development. And far more ready to contribute in a few years, when the team is hopefully, close to Championship level.
- MJL

And that's where we just have to agree to disagree -- I absolutely do not think that 8-10 minutes on the fourth line in the NHL, at 19 years of age, is better than 20-plus minutes in all situations as the first-line center in major junior.

Again, just my opinion. I just don't believe that. If you tell me he's going to get 14-15 minutes a game, maybe some PK time, then fine. But I'm sorry; playing 7-10 minutes a game, maybe no shifts in the third period...no, no, no. I'm sorry, but no.

And that's where we just have to agree to disagree -- I absolutely do not think that 8-10 minutes on the fourth line in the NHL, at 19 years of age, is better than 20-plus minutes in all situations as the first-line center in major junior.

Again, just my opinion. I just don't believe that. If you tell me he's going to get 14-15 minutes a game, maybe some PK time, then fine. But I'm sorry; playing 7-10 minutes a game, maybe no shifts in the third period...no, no, no. I'm sorry, but no.
- AllInForFlyers

He will also be practicing with NHLers all year...that's important too

He will also be practicing with NHLers all year...that's important too
- Just5

I do think it's important...but only to a certain point, and not that high of a standard.

For instance, I look at a guy like Ryan Strome from the Islanders.

Now granted, we've all watched hockey long enough to know that all players are different, and players develop at different paces, and that what's good for one player might not work for another. So I'm not making a direct, apples-to-apples comparison, here.

But the Islanders refused to even consider putting Ryan Strome on the NHL roster, not even for his five games, as a 19-year-old last year, after damn near ruining Nino Neiderreiter. People criticize Garth Snow, but he was honest: He said John Tavares is our No. 1 center, and Frans Nielsen is our No. 3 center, and Strome isn't ready to be our No. 2 center. So yeah, even though he could be our No. 4 center and be in the NHL, we're not going to do that. He's going back to junior, and he's going to dominate there and get bigger and stronger and physically mature.

Ryan Strome's one of the best prospects in the world. How is that logic good enough for the Islanders, to not have that player on the fourth line, but the Flyers shouldn't do that simply because Scott Laughton might beat out Adam Hall or Zac Rinaldo?

He will also be practicing with NHLers all year...that's important too
- Just5

Not as important as playing big minutes in all types of situations like he would back in the juniors. No matter how much he progressed last year, there is still much to work on that can only come with playing time, not practice time.

I can understand both sides of the argument here, and I will say both have merit. Personally, I'm never against being patient and not rushing a player.

If he can play 12 or so minutes on the third line then I'm all in. I'd have reservations against giving him 5-7 minutes a night on the 4th line though.

Not as important as playing big minutes in all types of situations like he would back in the juniors. No matter how much he progressed last year, there is still much to work on that can only come with playing time, not practice time.

I can understand both sides of the argument here, and I will say both have merit. Personally, I'm never against being patient and not rushing a player.

If he can play 12 or so minutes on the third line then I'm all in. I'd have reservations against giving him 5-7 minutes a night on the 4th line though.
- 77rams

This is what it boils down to for me. If he's stuck on the fourth line, playing low minutes and not getting much chance on the PK or against occasional tougher opponents, send him to Oshawa.

If they use him like they did Couturier as a rookie, keep him, because he got enough minutes to develop, despite the stumbles of the second season.

This is what it boils down to for me. If he's stuck on the fourth line, playing low minutes and not getting much chance on the PK or against occasional tougher opponents, send him to Oshawa.

If they use him like they did Couturier as a rookie, keep him, because he got enough minutes to develop, despite the stumbles of the second season.
- Jsaquella

Well to know that it's burn a year of the ELC, hopefully they can manage things and get him those 8 - 10 even if some is PK time.

This is what it boils down to for me. If he's stuck on the fourth line, playing low minutes and not getting much chance on the PK or against occasional tougher opponents, send him to Oshawa.

If they use him like they did Couturier as a rookie, keep him, because he got enough minutes to develop, despite the stumbles of the second season.
- Jsaquella

It's that simple.

I do think it's important...but only to a certain point, and not that high of a standard.

For instance, I look at a guy like Ryan Strome from the Islanders.

Now granted, we've all watched hockey long enough to know that all players are different, and players develop at different paces, and that what's good for one player might not work for another. So I'm not making a direct, apples-to-apples comparison, here.

But the Islanders refused to even consider putting Ryan Strome on the NHL roster, not even for his five games, as a 19-year-old last year, after damn near ruining Nino Neiderreiter. People criticize Garth Snow, but he was honest: He said John Tavares is our No. 1 center, and Frans Nielsen is our No. 3 center, and Strome isn't ready to be our No. 2 center. So yeah, even though he could be our No. 4 center and be in the NHL, we're not going to do that. He's going back to junior, and he's going to dominate there and get bigger and stronger and physically mature.

Ryan Strome's one of the best prospects in the world. How is that logic good enough for the Islanders, to not have that player on the fourth line, but the Flyers shouldn't do that simply because Scott Laughton might beat out Adam Hall or Zac Rinaldo?
- AllInForFlyers

I think Strome projects as a definite top 6 player. His numbers suggest he is an altogether different type of talent

Here are his numbers in the OHL from his first year to last year.

2010-11 65 GP 106 PTS
2012-13 53 GP 94 PTS

On the surface, it doesn't look like much growth point wise.

I think Laughton projects as a top 3rd line center in the league, maybe just maybe he could be good enough to be a steady #2. Laughton's game is suited for a bottom 6 role. If he contributes more then great. But if his game is ready in the defensive end right now. Then I say keep him up. I just dont think his game will grow that much in juniors.

It's that simple.
- 77rams

It really is -- you can't have Laughton getting zero shifts in the third, playing against other fourth lines for eight minutes, never getting any starts in the offensive zone and maybe none in the defensive zone, likely no special teams, then pretend like that's development because he's doing stick drills with Scott Hartnell and Max Talbot during practice.

This is what it boils down to for me. If he's stuck on the fourth line, playing low minutes and not getting much chance on the PK or against occasional tougher opponents, send him to Oshawa.

If they use him like they did Couturier as a rookie, keep him, because he got enough minutes to develop, despite the stumbles of the second season.
- Jsaquella

Yep. If they dont see him contributing on the PK at some point then I wouldn't keep him up

Yep. If they dont see him contributing on the PK at some point then I wouldn't keep him up
- Just5

Defense & the PK are things he does very well.

What is the early return on NHL 14? Anyone have it yet? Is the advancing in GM mode any faster? If not I'm not getting it brutally slow
- Just5

Gameplay is much improvement as player motion is MUCH more fluid.

But it still suffers from some of the same big problems as always. Load times are terrible(although better than last year). And player ratings make no sense. Emery went 17-1 last year and he's ranked an 80. Mason is a 79.

But to answer your question I'm still in the preseason in GM mode but it's a bit faster, but still on the slow side.

He will also be practicing with NHLers all year...that's important too
- Just5

Absolutely. There's no question in my mind that playing on the 4th line in the NHL, is infinitely better for his development then going back to Juniors. If he's ready for the NHL. Regardless of what role or how many minutes he plays in Juniors.

And you and OB18, others...I don't necessarily disagree with that statement: If he earns a spot, he should be on the team. I don't know that he shouldn't have stayed with the team last year, to be honest -- he wasn't the worst forward on the team in those five games he played, though he was certainly sheltered some.

But at the same time...this is an important year for the franchise. They just missed the playoffs. That's horrifying. I don't know that this is the year for Scott Laughton to be learning on the fly -- that's why I was in favor of Daniel Cleary being brought in, for 3LW. For that specific role -- the Flyers need production there.

I want Scott Laughton to be a good, productive NHL player, and I do believe that he looked really strong last season in junior -- I watched two of his games when he went crazy for about three weeks -- and he didn't look out of place last year.

But at the same time, he had no points. The Flyers can't afford that for an extended period from 3LW, this season. They have to be focused on making the playoffs. If Laughton is able to be productive, great. But to me, again, IMO, this is not the year for Laughton to be developed at the NHL level -- not when you're coming off a non-playoff year and heads will absolutely roll if this team isn't playing good, consistent hockey from Day 1.
- AllInForFlyers

I'm just happy to have been born a fan of one of the very few hockey organizations that view missing the playoffs as a disgusting tragedy, because of how little it happens. This past season marked just the 9th time we've ever missed the playoffs. That's beautiful, to me.

It really is -- you can't have Laughton getting zero shifts in the third, playing against other fourth lines for eight minutes, never getting any starts in the offensive zone and maybe none in the defensive zone, likely no special teams, then pretend like that's development because he's doing stick drills with Scott Hartnell and Max Talbot during practice.
- AllInForFlyers

A young player gets better by playing against competition that is above him, not below him. Playing top minutes in Juniors, against most kids that he's bigger, stronger, and more mature then, does him little good in my opinion. Laughton through the course of the Season, we'll see his share of key moments in games, to see what he's got. If he's NHL ready, he should stay in my opinion. An NHL ready player doesn't benefit from going back to Juniors. We'll see.

I'm just happy to have been born a fan of one of the very few hockey organizations that view missing the playoffs as a disgusting tragedy, because of how little it happens. This past season marked just the 9th time we've ever missed the playoffs. That's beautiful, to me.
- JAKEw1234

It is amazing, isn't it? I realize that it is entirely possible that cost the Flyers a Cup or two, via the Lindros trade and not bottoming out for a few years, like the Blackhawks and Penguins both did, after The Season That Shall Not Be Named. They were so bad that year, they probably should have missed another two seasons, minimum.

But I don't care. I'd lose my mind if it was acceptable to miss the playoffs more than once, if it wasn't viewed with absolute disdain. We all know that everybody except maybe Ron Hextall's getting fired, if this thing goes sideways this year. This isn't the NBA, or baseball. In hockey, you can outwork teams and get the 8th spot. You can will yourself into the 8th spot, if you have a baseline of talent.

to me it just boils down to where the flyers feel he stacks up on the depth chart: if they feel he is 11th or better at forward, then i think he should stay. in reality, i think that means he should make it as long as he beats out raffl and mcginn (barring a total darkhorse)

I do think it's important...but only to a certain point, and not that high of a standard.

For instance, I look at a guy like Ryan Strome from the Islanders.

Now granted, we've all watched hockey long enough to know that all players are different, and players develop at different paces, and that what's good for one player might not work for another. So I'm not making a direct, apples-to-apples comparison, here.

But the Islanders refused to even consider putting Ryan Strome on the NHL roster, not even for his five games, as a 19-year-old last year, after damn near ruining Nino Neiderreiter. People criticize Garth Snow, but he was honest: He said John Tavares is our No. 1 center, and Frans Nielsen is our No. 3 center, and Strome isn't ready to be our No. 2 center. So yeah, even though he could be our No. 4 center and be in the NHL, we're not going to do that. He's going back to junior, and he's going to dominate there and get bigger and stronger and physically mature.

Ryan Strome's one of the best prospects in the world. How is that logic good enough for the Islanders, to not have that player on the fourth line, but the Flyers shouldn't do that simply because Scott Laughton might beat out Adam Hall or Zac Rinaldo?
- AllInForFlyers

but he's the next mike richards haven't you heard?????????

I'd love to see Laughton make the big club. Best players play, IMO. Read-Couts-Laughton could be that shutdown line.

Halifax Mooseheads - 2
Charlottetown Islanders - 5

Alexis Pépin (Charlottetown) with 2 assists

For the season? Haha that depends on how the team plays.

A lot of questions, gut tells me Holmgren doesn't survive the experiment.
- flyer_nutter

what experiment?

Is this right:

Flyers waive Rosehill, Hall and Gervais they should be cap compliant by $46,478.

Day 1 they put Pronger on LTIR. So Pronger LTIR - $46,478 is what they have available over the season?
$4,941,429 - $46,478 = $4,894,951 + $64,300,000 = $69,194,951.

Pretty damn brilliant if you ask me, if that's right of course.

Then Bourdon and maybe MEz goes on LTIR and they aren't eating up $$$ towards that cap.

Is this correct?

Is this right:

Flyers waive Rosehill, Hall and Gervais they should be cap compliant by $46,478.

Day 1 they put Pronger on LTIR. So Pronger LTIR - $46,478 is what they have available over the season?
$4,941,429 - $46,478 = $4,894,951 + $64,300,000 = $69,194,951.

Pretty damn brilliant if you ask me, if that's right of course.

Then Bourdon and maybe MEz goes on LTIR and they aren't eating up $$$ towards that cap.

Is this correct?
- jstross

Mez will be ready to go by opening day, I think.