I completely agree with MJL on this one. You really are undervaluing Read. Even without his defensive ability, he totaled 47 points in his first year here. And his point about taking away G's passing and playmaking ability was fair. You can have your cake and eat it too. At the end of the day if we're talking about a player's value to the team, you have to consider his entire skillset, not pick and choose skills to make your point.
- TheGreat28

Yes, Matt Read is all those things, and I'm really fond of him as a player.

But out of all the players on the team that I wouldn't want to see traded, he's the guy I could most easily let go of, and for one simple reason: his age.

Even though he had a late start to his career, 29/30 is historically the beginning of the end for peak production from forwards -- even if he rebounds from last season, who's to say how many years he has left of 40-ish points/20-ish goals?

When his legs start declining, does he have enough game/talent to keep being that steady middle-6 guy? I don't know.

You're incorrect, I never labeled Read as an elite player or used the term elite to describe Read as a player.



No there isn't a difference, which is my exact point. Whether you look at RW point totals at ES, or forwards as a whole, it put's Read in the same spot, which was the point I was making.
We don't have the same exact opinion on Read as a player. In my opinion, I think he's a much better player than you give him credit for.



Read's salary is what it is now, not what it will be when he current deal runs out, which is what you're speculating on.
You're entire opinion on why Read will be a trade candidate in the future is speculative, that's my point. Not that it's impossible for Read to be a trade candidate in the future, just that it's not a fact that he will be.
You made a blanket statement that there is no new contract for Read in the future. If need be, I'll link that.
- MJL

You amaze me with how much you repeat the same basic information, yet somehow feel as though you are conveying something new with each response.

I've literally responded to every single point in this post what feels like 3 times already. I've come to the conclusion the two of us can't carry a basic conversation. I'm leaving it at that. Enjoy your day.

edit: this is why I don't bother engaging him, it's not worth the time. He makes good points now and then, but the incessant quibbling over semantics and the overwhelming need to be right are just exhausting.
- BiggE

Ok so it's definitely not just me.

Jesus christ. I thought I was dreaming there for sec, no joke.

edit: this is why I don't bother engaging him, it's not worth the time. He makes good points now and then, but the incessant quibbling over semantics and the overwhelming need to be right are just exhausting.
- BiggE

I know. Especially because I'm the one who's always right.

Yes, Matt Read is all those things, and I'm really fond of him as a player.

But out of all the players on the team that I wouldn't want to see traded, he's the guy I could most easily let go of, and for one simple reason: his age.

Even though he had a late start to his career, 29/30 is historically the beginning of the end for peak production from forwards -- even if he rebounds from last season, who's to say how many years he has left of 40-ish points/20-ish goals?

When his legs start declining, does he have enough game/talent to keep being that steady middle-6 guy? I don't know.
- Tomahawk

Yes, I pretty much said the same thing later in the thread. I think the team needs to realign the defense before it can realistically compete. I think Read might just miss that window.

Schenn-Giroux-Simmonds
Raffl-Couturier-Voracek
Read-Laughton-Gagner
Umberger-Bellemare-White

Hakstol rolls 4 lines religiously.
- mochoson

Not a fan of Schenn and Simmonds on the same line. Almost the same kind of player. Otherwise looks good.

You amaze me with how much you repeat the same basic information, yet somehow feel as though you are conveying something new with each response.

I've literally responded to every single point in this post what feels like 3 times already. I've come to the conclusion the two of us can't carry a basic conversation. I'm leaving it at that. Enjoy your day.
- mochoson

If he has to repeat himself at all, while still making his point, judging by your frustration, maybe your overlooking the fact that just maybe your point of view is incorrect.

I know. Especially because I'm the one who's always right.
- jmatchett383

My opinion is always the correct one. Like right now. Don't fight it.

If he has to repeat himself at all, while still making his point, judging by your frustration, maybe your overlooking the fact that just maybe your point of view is incorrect.
- SuperSchennBros

If you're so curious, go read back through the pages and find out for yourself.

I skimmed through the last number of pages but a Raffl vs. Schenn debate is interesting but I feel many overlook the reasoning behind any struggles Schenn might have on the top line.

Brayden Schenn is a natural center who was asked to play wing with two of the very best talents in the league. Hartnell is best suited away from the puck, crashing the net and taping pucks into the net as a natural winger. Raffl isn't as physical but is capable of the same game. Seeing how Raffl's assists are down, I believe him not to be great with the puck or likely to set up plays. Schenn is different. Schenn is OK with the puck and more effective when handling the puck and not being a support player but being apart of the support. On a Couturier, Read and Schenn line, I think all three players aren't expected to be the guy of impact.
- SuperSchennBros

I agree with pretty much most of what you say, especially the playing away from the puck. But you and I have always been in agreement on Schenn. Also I think some players like to have their bodies open to the net, meaning a left-handed shot playing the middle to right side. All of the team's RW seem to feel this way.

Considering all the love for Raffl though, I can't help but wonder the reason why. I think it is more a case of that nickel you found under the cushion bringing you more joy than the dollar you have in your wallet.

If you're so curious, go read back through the pages and find out for yourself.
- mochoson

Not a fan of Schenn and Simmonds on the same line. Almost the same kind of player. Otherwise looks good.
- MatveiDmitrii

I'm interested to see what Hakstol does. I really, really like Schenn at RW. Outside of Umberger and Raffl, I have no idea who'll play left wing. Bellemare and Read?

Raffl-Giroux-Schenn
Read-Couturier-Voracek
Bellemare-Laughton-Simmonds
Umberger-White-Gagner
-Lecavalier, VV

Trade Luke for a draft pick and we're all set

My opinion is always the correct one. Like right now. Don't fight it.
- wolfhounds

I have an opinion on that!

Zac Rinaldo will win the Art Ross, Norris, and Vezina trophies next season. But not the Lady Byng, that's not his style.

I'm interested to see what Hakstol does. I really, really like Schenn at RW. Outside of Umberger and Raffl, I have no idea who'll play left wing. Bellemare and Read?

Raffl-Giroux-Schenn
Read-Couturier-Voracek
Bellemare-Laughton-Simmonds
Umberger-White-Gagner
-Lecavalier, VV

Trade Luke for a draft pick and we're all set


- mochoson

Which one of those lines goes out there when we're down a goal with a minute to go?

Which one of those lines goes out there when we're down a goal with a minute to go?
- jmatchett383

Giroux-Coututier-Voracek

Which one of those lines goes out there when we're down a goal with a minute to go?
- jmatchett383

Id mix it up.. honestly. Id probably go with

Gagner/Schenn-Giroux-Voracek

Giroux-Coututier-Voracek
- mochoson

If you think that's the best combination of players to score a goal, why not keep them as a line?

Also, why would you put our best faceoff man at wing?

I'm interested to see what Hakstol does. I really, really like Schenn at RW. Outside of Umberger and Raffl, I have no idea who'll play left wing. Bellemare and Read?

Raffl-Giroux-Schenn
Read-Couturier-Voracek
Bellemare-Laughton-Simmonds
Umberger-White-Gagner
-Lecavalier, VV

Trade Luke for a draft pick and we're all set


- mochoson

Don't know who the 3rd center will be. I guess you could say everything is inter changeable sans Giroux as your 1C.

I like balance and having all 4 lines being a threat to score (easier said than done I know).

Not a fan of Schenn and Simmonds on the same line. Almost the same kind of player. Otherwise looks good.
- MatveiDmitrii

I agree, both players need a playmaker. Unfortunately, they don't have one for the 2nd line, unless Gagner steps up in that role.

If you think that's the best combination of players to score a goal, why not keep them as a line?

Also, why would you put our best faceoff man at wing?
- jmatchett383

In a game situation,either of them can take the faceoff. Quite frankly they can call out to each other mid shift and claim a position at any given point if it means the guy closer to the puck/in a better position to make a good play. It happens all the time. Voracek occupying strictly the right side of the ice makes it easy. But ideally, I want Giroux and Voracek on the wings because they're the most athletic of the 3.

Having G and Coots on one line also helps in the situation you describe because both are decent at faceoffs if one gets thrown out of the circle.

You don't play them all on one line at once for obvious reasons .

In a game situation,either of them can take the faceoff. Quite frankly they can call out to each other mid shift and claim a position at any given point if it means the guy closer to the puck/in a better position to make a good play. It happens all the time. Voracek occupying strictly the right side of the ice makes it easy. But ideally, I want Giroux and Voracek on the wings because they're the most athletic of the 3.

Having G and Coots on one line also helps in the situation you describe because both are decent at faceoffs if one gets thrown out of the circle.

You don't play them all on one line at once for obvious reasons .
- mochoson

If I'm down a goal, personally, I want my forward combinations to be the ones who I feel work best together, which is why I want Giroux and Voracek on the same line. I don't want them having no time together and then throw them out with a minute left and expecting instant chemistry.

Also, I don't get how Bellemare is a top-9 player over Gagner. He had, what, 6 goals in 82 games last year? Granted, it was 4th line minutes. But he had fewer goals/points than your healthy scratch VdV, so why not put VdV on the 3rd line and scratch Bellemare? I like Bellemare on the 4th line.

In a game situation,either of them can take the faceoff. Quite frankly they can call out to each other mid shift and claim a position at any given point if it means the guy closer to the puck/in a better position to make a good play. It happens all the time. Voracek occupying strictly the right side of the ice makes it easy. But ideally, I want Giroux and Voracek on the wings because they're the most athletic of the 3.

Having G and Coots on one line also helps in the situation you describe because both are decent at faceoffs if one gets thrown out of the circle.

You don't play them all on one line at once for obvious reasons .
- mochoson

With the game on the line, I'm not moving one of the best players in the league, and one of the best playmaking centers in the league, out of position. That's a mistake in my opinion.

With the game on the line, I'm not moving one of the best players in the league, and one of the best playmaking centers in the league, out of position. That's a mistake in my opinion.
- MJL

If it provides any clarity, Giroux would take the faceoff. But technically, If I'm the coach, I'd immediately have them swap off the face-off if it's won. Given how good Giroux is at face-offs, I'm expecting this to happen. I wouldn't have them change spots until there was established puck possession in the offensive zone.

Alternatively, I'd consider Bellemare and Raffl over Couturier in the last minute of the game. I consider Giroux, Voracek, and Couturier to be the Flyers 3 best forwards as of this writing, so that's probably the first 3 I'd go with. Streit and MDZ on D if we're down a goal.