Yes, probably. They could recall Raffl or maybe add a guy like Mitchell via trade...Still, boils down to risking Rosehill or Hall, and I'd waive Rosehill everytime.
- Jsaquella

So would I. But I think we'll know more and have a better understanding why in a day or so. At least I hope so, or it doesn't make sense.

So would I. But I think we'll know more and have a better understanding why in a day or so. At least I hope so, or it doesn't make sense.
- MJL

I fully expect something to go down. They still have to get under the cap, and Holmgren did say he wasn't going to send Schenn or Couturier to the AHL on paper.

He's not irreplaceable. But he is a good solid player that several teams wanted last year. Hall is not just a good face-off guy, but he's also a very capable penalty killer.

Jay Rosehill is a goon, who was playing in the AHL when the Flyers traded for him because Jake Voracek got into a fight. He is the definition of replaceable. It's dumb to waive a guy that can play and fill a role to keep a guy who's only hockey skill is being able to fight.
- Jsaquella

this and the laughton ELC discussion are obvious. maybe the flyers are up on a deal or they're putting laughton on the zubrus/sbisa plan, but questioning their judgement here is clearly justified based on their history.

I fully expect something to go down. They still have to get under the cap, and Holmgren did say he wasn't going to send Schenn or Couturier to the AHL on paper.
- Jsaquella

maybe if schenn got some time in the paper league, he'd play better. not liking him on wing, but that's what happens when a guy like vinny gets brought in. schenn shows flashes of being like richards when he plays at C...esp as a playmaker. on wing he reminds me more of nick foligno...meh territory.

maybe if schenn got some time in the paper league, he'd play better. not liking him on wing, but that's what happens when a guy like vinny gets brought in. schenn shows flashes of being like richards when he plays at C...esp as a playmaker. on wing he reminds me more of nick foligno...meh territory.
- isaiah520

If you ask me, he belongs on the 3rd line until he proves otherwise. I do not like him on the 2nd line wing. I'd love to see them give Read a fair shot at that slot.

If you ask me, he belongs on the 3rd line until he proves otherwise. I do not like him on the 2nd line wing. I'd love to see them give Read a fair shot at that slot.
- hereticpride

Agreed

Easier to replace Hall than Rosehill IMO.
- huks99

This is sarcasm right? Because if it isn't then, wow.

I don't need to convince myself. I just proved it. And I'll spell it out further.

Let's say that Couturier was sent back to Juniors in the 11/12 Season instead of making the Flyers.
A player is eligible for Free Agency at 27 years of age, or 7 Accrued Seasons.

So as it stands now, Couturier would be eligible for Free Agency after the 17/18 Season, because that will be his 7th Accrued Season. So if they had sent him back in 11/12, that would extend his eligibility for Free Agency another year to 18/19.

So let's look at a possible scenario. His EL deal ends this Season, and his 2 year bridge deal he just signed, ends in 15/16. Which when it expires, he will still be a RFA. So what do you think is going to happen then? I think it's reasonable to assume, unless he totally flops, that the Flyers will look to extend him in a multi year deal. So let's say they offer him a solid deal for 4 years. Do you think Couturier is going to turn that down, and reject that security? Or do you think he would agree to a fair long term deal? So if he signs that 4 year deal, or it could be even longer. After that 4 years, he will be a UFA in the 19/20 Season. So as you see that is actually 1 Season later then if they had let his deal slide, and sent him back in 11/12, instead of keeping him on the Flyers.

This is why starting Laughtons EL deal, is not a factor. Because that's easy to deal with. And the Flyers have a history of extending young players into their free agency years.
- MJL

All speculative. Need to see actual proven data on this.

If you ask me, he belongs on the 3rd line until he proves otherwise. I do not like him on the 2nd line wing. I'd love to see them give Read a fair shot at that slot.
- hereticpride

2nd, but I don't think the Flyers are enamored with Schenn's ability to perform on a "checking" line so to speak.

You know its bad when waiving hall gets this much traction.

this and the laughton ELC discussion are obvious. maybe the flyers are up on a deal or they're putting laughton on the zubrus/sbisa plan, but questioning their judgement here is clearly justified based on their history.
- isaiah520

Does that history also include Couturier? I agree when looking at their history, and using a little bit of insight to contract structure, that it's obvious that worrying about starting Laughton's ELC is a non factor on whether he should make the team or not.

maybe if schenn got some time in the paper league, he'd play better. not liking him on wing, but that's what happens when a guy like vinny gets brought in. schenn shows flashes of being like richards when he plays at C...esp as a playmaker. on wing he reminds me more of nick foligno...meh territory.
- isaiah520

He's a young player who has played around 120 games and is adjusting to playing a new position. Maybe give him some time. How can he show flashes when he's only had a handful of pre season games at Wing. Compared to how many at Center?

All speculative. Need to see actual proven data on this.
- Flyers1218

It is speculative, but it's based on basic NHL Contract structure. And as was stated in my post, Flyers have a history of signing young player to deals that taken them into their Free Agency years.

So feel free to look at the "actual proven data" of the contracts of Giroux, Voracek, and Simmonds. And contracts also done by the Flyers of past Flyers such as JVR, Carter, and Richards.

All players signed to deals while RFA's that extend into their Free Agency years.

It is speculative, but it's based on basic NHL Contract structure. And as was stated in my post, Flyers have a history of signing young player to deals that taken them into their Free Agency years.

So feel free to look at the "actual proven data" of the contracts of Giroux, Voracek, and Simmonds. And contracts also done by the Flyers of past Flyers such as JVR, Carter, and Richards.

All players signed to deals while RFA's that extend into their Free Agency years.
- MJL

Doesn't change the fact that you are speculating or simply "guessing" that this is how things would have worked out for Couterier. Furthermore, you are using this speculation to forecast why burning a year of Laughton's ELC isn't a big deal. Because of that, I would like to see something more concrete to put me at ease about wasting a year of his ELC as a 4th line center. Or the simple fact is every player and contract situation is different and it's always a big deal when making decisions regarding the amount of time a team controls their young talent.

Doesn't change the fact that you are speculating or simply "guessing" that this is how things would have worked out for Couterier. Furthermore, you are using this speculation to forecast why burning a year of Laughton's ELC isn't a big deal. Because of that, I would like to see something more concrete to put me at ease about wasting a year of his ELC as a 4th line center. Or the simple fact is every player and contract situation is different and it's always a big deal when making decisions regarding the amount of time a team controls their young talent.
- Flyers1218

What I've given is all that is needed to show that starting his ELC is not a concern. You're not wasting anything by giving a player valuable NHL playing experience in the NHL. The only thing that is a big deal is whether he is capable of playing in the NHL, and if he can help the team. Those are the only factors that should be considered.

I've done my part and provided a sound case of why starting his ELC is not a factor. Which includes precedence of a number of other player contracts. If you disagree and can show otherwise, I'd be happy to read it.

Re Laughton: The ELC issue isn't a big deal for me, I'm much more concerned with the Flyers putting their best 12 forwards on the ice. I'm not sure what is all the fuss about Hall. Last year in 37 total games he had 0 goals and 4 points and over the last 3 seasons he has 176 games with 9 goals and a whopping 29 points.

Yes Hall wins faceoffs, but with the pickup of Lacavalier and the fact that Couturier has looked MUCH better on draws this preseason, I don't think Hall's faceoff ability is still a big consideration. And lets face it, outside of faceoffs, what does Hall bring to the table? There's a reason the guy was waived twice last year.

Laughton, IMHO, is already a better player than Hall. So unless the Flyers acquire a better option via trade, I would rather see Laughton on the opening day roster over Hall or for that matter, Raffl or Vandevelde.

Seeing Rosehill in there makes me cry a little.

In similar news (mind you, I'm the biggest Phillies fan around...), I'm not kidding you fine ladies and gents when I say that I cried like a (frank)in baby for 10 minutes when Jeter and Pettite took Mo out of the game instead of Girardi.

Jeter said, "It's time to go, Mo..."

I lost it.
- Giroux_Is_God

Rosehill was always going to play against Toronto.

Rosehill was always going to play against Toronto.
- Feanor

Maybe I am off the mark here, but it looks as though the org decided that Laughton can't progress at the Junior level any longer, so they've decided to let Hall go and see how he develops here. Very similar to Cooter as others have mentioned. I don't like losing Hall, but it's the way they decided to go. Damn it's stupid players like Laughton can't be assigned to the AHL. Rosehill is the enforcer that they like to carry so he fits a specific role.

If you ask me, he belongs on the 3rd line until he proves otherwise. I do not like him on the 2nd line wing. I'd love to see them give Read a fair shot at that slot.
- hereticpride

yes, that line could use the speed

Re Laughton: The ELC issue isn't a big deal for me, I'm much more concerned with the Flyers putting their best 12 forwards on the ice. I'm not sure what is all the fuss about Hall. Last year in 37 total games he had 0 goals and 4 points and over the last 3 seasons he has 176 games with 9 goals and a whopping 29 points.

Yes Hall wins faceoffs, but with the pickup of Lacavalier and the fact that Couturier has looked MUCH better on draws this preseason, I don't think Hall's faceoff ability is still a big consideration. And lets face it, outside of faceoffs, what does Hall bring to the table? There's a reason the guy was waived twice last year.

Laughton, IMHO, is already a better player than Hall. So unless the Flyers acquire a better option via trade, I would rather see Laughton on the opening day roster over Hall or for that matter, Raffl or Vandevelde.
- BiggE

hall's the better plyr in the 4th line center role. better on the PK, better at the dot and tougher to play against. and if you want to start the clock on an ELC for a guy who was still a second line level plyr in Jrs, go ahead...fits the homer philosophy to a tee.

hall's the better plyr in the 4th line center role. better on the PK, better at the dot and tougher to play against. and if you want to start the clock on an ELC for a guy who was still a second line level plyr in Jrs, go ahead...fits the homer philosophy to a tee.
- isaiah520

This is where I come in. It has been asked whether or not it is better for
Laughton to play in the NHL now and get valuable experience, or go back for a 4th year in juniors and dominate. Well, nothing I have seen from Laughton in his Junior career or his NHL play leads me to believe he will be "dominating" anything.

I dont really care about his ELC, I come in with MJL on that and believe its a non issue.

But I simply think he has enough parts of his game he needs to work on and would probably be better suited getting major minutes in juniors to work on those parts. THEN if he dominates so much the better, but I hardly think that is a guarantee.

This is where I come in. It has been asked whether or not it is better for
Laughton to play in the NHL now and get valuable experience, or go back for a 4th year in juniors and dominate. Well, nothing I have seen from Laughton in his Junior career or his NHL play leads me to believe he will be "dominating" anything.

I dont really care about his ELC, I come in with MJL on that and believe its a non issue.

But I simply think he has enough parts of his game he needs to work on and would probably be better suited getting major minutes in juniors to work on those parts. THEN if he dominates so much the better, but I hardly think that is a guarantee.
- MBFlyerfan

That's my view. The ELC is a secondary consideration, call it a "bonus feaure" to keeping him in the OHL.

The difference between Couturier and Laughton is, Couturier came into camp and flat out won a job. There was really no question that he deserved to make the team. Laughton didn't do that in my eyes. It's as simple as that.

Re Laughton: The ELC issue isn't a big deal for me, I'm much more concerned with the Flyers putting their best 12 forwards on the ice. I'm not sure what is all the fuss about Hall. Last year in 37 total games he had 0 goals and 4 points and over the last 3 seasons he has 176 games with 9 goals and a whopping 29 points.

Yes Hall wins faceoffs, but with the pickup of Lacavalier and the fact that Couturier has looked MUCH better on draws this preseason, I don't think Hall's faceoff ability is still a big consideration. And lets face it, outside of faceoffs, what does Hall bring to the table? There's a reason the guy was waived twice last year.

Laughton, IMHO, is already a better player than Hall. So unless the Flyers acquire a better option via trade, I would rather see Laughton on the opening day roster over Hall or for that matter, Raffl or Vandevelde.
- BiggE

I don;t think Laughton outperformed either Raffl or Hall, in the games that I saw. I think in time he will be the better player, but right now, it's debatable.

Guess it could be worse. The Leafs trade Joe Colbourne to Calgary for a 4th rounder so they could keep Colton Orr and Frazer McLaren.

Guess it could be worse. The Leafs trade Joe Colbourne to Calgary for a 4th rounder so they could keep Colton Orr and Frazer McLaren.
- Jsaquella

just doing them a solid...like gautier and a 2nd for 2 slugs