Awww come on man: you know that the NHL veterans don't really try in the preseason.

I've heard it from a source that Sidney Crosby was very upset with his goal and assist last night since it made it look like he was trying too hard.
- jmatchett383

I think returning from back surgery and the way he is skating could be the convenient excuse to get Sanheim to stick, although in reality he has earned the spot.

Everyone who has seen me around other boards knows I am a Manning fan, but that being said, I still don't see what AMac brings to the table over Mandog(other than a few more years of experience). Manning is more physical in his own end, actually challenges players, and can win the one-on-one battles in the corners. AMac retreats and usually gets knocked off the puck.

I would say their passing skills are about equal and neither brings much to the table offensively. Manning does make some ill advised pinches, but AMac has been known to leave his partner out to dry as well. I think a Manning-Gudas third pairing would be effective if one of the youngsters goes back to LHV. Sit AMac as the 7th.
- boxcar65

MacDonald is a much better player than Manning is. MacDonald doesn't leave his partner's out to dry. It's just the opposite. He is a conservative player who is normally well positioned and covers for his partner well.

Sending them down would accomplish both
- YuenglingJagr

But the argument was for them to rest and not get overtaxed. Also, Hexy has stated that, if they make the team, they're here to stay, not to get shuttled back and forth.

MacDonald is a much better player than Manning is. MacDonald doesn't leave his partner's out to dry. It's just the opposite. He is a conservative player who is normally well positioned and covers for his partner well.
- MJL

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of AMac, contract aside, but he's just a better player than Manning.

Manning does make some ill advised pinches

Brandon "Pinchy" Manning ain't so bad, just look at him.

Brandon "Pinchy" Manning ain't so bad, just look at him.


- Feanor

Then let me ask ya this...have ya got any spare change?

But the argument was for them to rest and not get overtaxed. Also, Hexy has stated that, if they make the team, they're here to stay, not to get shuttled back and forth.
- jmatchett383

I know what he said and I expanded on it. You can do it without "shuffling" and the AHL is less taxing.

I don't think they will actually rotate players, I just don't think the lineup for the rest of the season needs to be determined this week. I can see it changing due to more than just injuries

I know what he said and I expanded on it. You can do it without "shuffling" and the AHL is less taxing.

I don't think they will actually rotate players, I just don't think the lineup for the rest of the season needs to be determined this week. I can see it changing due to more than just injuries
- YuenglingJagr

I agree, I just don't think any of them should be sent to the AHL once they're up. I'd rather they stay with the team, even if it's just for the practice and full season's worth of learning.

And also, Hexy has said that he only wants to have a player up if the player is going to stay in the NHL, so I don't think he'd be down for demoting a guy for a few games just to give him a break.

Wow, Robby Fabbri out for the season. Huge blow for StL.

I agree, I just don't think any of them should be sent to the AHL once they're up. I'd rather they stay with the team, even if it's just for the practice and full season's worth of learning.

And also, Hexy has said that he only wants to have a player up if the player is going to stay in the NHL, so I don't think he'd be down for demoting a guy for a few games just to give him a break.
- jmatchett383

I think the majority of posters would support them making the roster and staying up vs. any kind of rotation. I also think it makes sense to break them in now given their growth curve and the fact we will probably continue breaking in guys for the next 2-3 years. We have a whole crop of potential forwards that will be coming up and Meyers as well.

I think the majority of posters would support them making the roster and staying up vs. any kind of rotation. I also think it makes sense to break them in now given their growth curve and the fact we will probably continue breaking in guys for the next 2-3 years. We have a whole crop of potential forwards that will be coming up and Meyers as well.
- juiced

If they want to give the kids a break here and there, I'm okay, because I doubt they all have true rookie season like Ghost and Provorov. Those are the anomalies. They're going to hit walls, and if they need to take a game or 2 to recover, I'm okay with it, as long as it's very temporary.

I agree, I just don't think any of them should be sent to the AHL once they're up. I'd rather they stay with the team, even if it's just for the practice and full season's worth of learning.

And also, Hexy has said that he only wants to have a player up if the player is going to stay in the NHL, so I don't think he'd be down for demoting a guy for a few games just to give him a break.
- jmatchett383

I am not concerned about giving them a break at all.

So if, let's just say, Hagg stays up and Sanheim is sent down, and after like a month Hagg looks to be in a bit over his head. Hextall does nothing because the decision has been made?

Hextall said he will place them at a level they are ready for and leave them there. I.e. not just give them 9 games then send them back to junior or call them up for a random game without believing they are actually ready for the NHL. All three are ready for the NHL, so it isn't a situation where they are being given a game at a level they shouldn't be at.

I agree with what Bill had to say about what his preference is. I think having Macdonald as the # 7 would be a perfect scenario. Manning is a serviceable # 7, but has not played anywhere near as good as the other 7 guys. Infact I have never seen Manning play as well as what I have seen out of Sanheim. This team may have trouble scoring again, It makes no sense to me at all to send back a guy who can help. Sanheim got some much needed time last year in the AHL so it's not like he's making the jump straight from JR. Hextall always said the youngsters would make the big club if they made the Flyers better....anyone think Sanheim doesn't accomplish that???

today, I would say start with 3 rooks and send Manning down, though someone could claim him, I believe. I would like to send AMAC, but I dont like the message to the rest of the league, they have to hope they can trade him at some point.

That said, the next 2 games are going to be more like regular season games. If all D play the same as they are now, 3 rooks but?????

MacDonald is a much better player than Manning is. MacDonald doesn't leave his partner's out to dry. It's just the opposite. He is a conservative player who is normally well positioned and covers for his partner well.
- MJL

for sure Macdonald is a better option.....I could care less if we lost Manning to waivers. There are other kids on their way. Time to take the training wheels off and take the best 7 D men.

It will hurt Provorov's development if you pair him with AMAC. Provorov should take a step forward this season on the O side.


Patrick- once he is in game shape and completely recovered, should be really good.

Waiving MacDonald and keeping Manning as the #7 is safer from an organizational depth perspective, plus it would pretty much force the coach to use all three rookies in the top 6.

Provorov-Gudas
Sanheim-Ghost
Morin-Hagg
Manning

The "new" NHL is a young league.....20 years ago you would never have 6 rookies in the lineup to start a year......I do remember Tocchet, Zezel and Derek Smith one year though....I might be getting old but weren't all three rookies together in the mid 80's. excuse me if I'm wrong, it was like 30 years ago...lol

I am not concerned about giving them a break at all.

So if, let's just say, Hagg stays up and Sanheim is sent down, and after like a month Hagg looks to be in a bit over his head. Hextall does nothing because the decision has been made?

Hextall said he will place them at a level they are ready for and leave them there. I.e. not just give them 9 games then send them back to junior or call them up for a random game without believing they are actually ready for the NHL. All three are ready for the NHL, so it isn't a situation where they are being given a game at a level they shouldn't be at.
- YuenglingJagr

Agreed possibility is send Manning down and put AMac in the 7th spot. Then the club has a vet d player ready to go when one of the rookies begins to struggle. Maybe give them a game or two off as a scratch and back on the ice they go. Certainly a small chance all 6 dmen play all 82 games.

To expand on my thoughts for clarity....

The biggest concern I have is for the development of the defensemen (and young players in general). That has been happening since they were drafted and all along what Hextall has preached. Being ready to play in the NHL and being capable of excelling in top 4 (or 2) minutes for an NHL season are two different things.

You don't throw caution to the wind and say good luck guys once they get to the NHL. This season isn't about making the best top 6 on opening day, it is about creating the best Flyers team for the future. I think all three are good enough and have enough experience in lower ranks to be okay, but I do not think Hextall is willing to just roll the dice on that. I think there is little downside to waiting a couple months longer.

Bill Meltzer: Flyers Preseason Gameday: 9/28 vs. BOS; Briere & Timonen in Alumni Game
- bmeltzer

I think my biggest concern is the Flyers assign Sanheim to the phantoms, the team has an average to below average October and than we finally bring up Sanheim, and we play catch up. Basically I'm not so sure I wanna see a repeat of Ghost's rookie season. We made the playoffs but we might have been a better team having him around all year.

The more I think about, not keeping all 3 kids on D both on the roster and in the lineup would just be foolish. After Provorov and Gudas, the 3 rookies are, IMO, the next best 3 all around Dmen on the team. I love Ghost for what he brings to the table offensively, but he still makes some bonehead decisions and plays with the puck now and then and he's not a guy who you want defending against a top line in the D zone or being used on the pp.

AMac should not be in the lineup over any of these kids. Sanheim brings an offensive dimension to the game that AMac could only dream of and he moves the puck better and more accurately with his first pass out of the zone. Plus he's bigger, faster and stronger than AMac too. Morin has been, IMO, the best all around player of the 3. He's made good decisions with the puck, is a physical but disciplined force, and will be a monster on the PK this year. Plus his very presence will cut down on the amount of times our goalies get run into. Finally Hagg does pretty much everything, other than blocking shots, better than AMac and is simply the better player.

It really even shouldn't be a hard decision. While I understand the business side of waiving AMac and keeping Manning, I think it sends a bad message to the players. AMac is clearly the better player and a he's a respected vet. If someone gets nicked up on the first game of a back to back or just needs a night off, AMac should be the guy coming off the bench, not Manning. I don't think that they will lose Manning if they waive him, but if they do, so be it. It's a trivial loss and he's an easy player to replace.

It will hurt Provorov's development if you pair him with AMAC. Provorov should take a step forward this season on the O side.
- wcorvette

Provorov was productive offensively at ES last year. To take a step forward on the O side he'll need to produce more than 2 points on PP2.

Waiving MacDonald and keeping Manning as the #7 is safer from an organizational depth perspective, plus it would pretty much force the coach to use all three rookies in the top 6.

Provorov-Gudas
Sanheim-Ghost
Morin-Hagg
Manning
- Feanor

Lol you say that like Hakstol doesn't stay up at night thinking of getting to play ManDog

The "new" NHL is a young league.....20 years ago you would never have 6 rookies in the lineup to start a year......I do remember Tocchet, Zezel and Derek Smith one year though....I might be getting old but weren't all three rookies together in the mid 80's. excuse me if I'm wrong, it was like 30 years ago...lol
- landros 2

in 84-85, the following Flyers were all rookies:
Zezel
Tocchet
Derrick Smith
Joe Patterson

Plus, the following were all in only their second year:
Craven
both Sutters
Dave Brown
Len Hachborn
Lindsay Carson

They had a pretty experienced D, but Dave Poulin, at the ripe old age of 25 on opening night, was the oldest forward on the roster other than Bill Barber who was on IR the entire year.