With all due respect to Bill, I have to disagree on a few things.




The bottom line as I see it, is the Couturier is a good player that is still very young, and has some nice upside potential. Having said that, I believe that many overrate his current level of play as well as his potential, thus overvaluing the player in talks of potential trades and the like. In particular, I think many fans tend to inflate his defensive acumen, to the point where "Selke" is associated with him in many discussions...(I wonder by how many neutral observers have used that term in relation to him). I am not trying to say that Couturier will be a bust, or that he won't be a good, possibly very good two-way player someday, but I think it's prudent, as fans and within the organziation, to reel in the expectations somewhat and not project our hopes and hypes onto the young player, as this bias tends to distort reality and could be counter productive. I think a realistic expectation for Couturier's ceiling is 50+ point forward with a decent (not dominant) defensive game. Anything more, I believe, is largely based on hopeful specualtion of Flyer fans. I'm as big a fan as anyone, but I'm trying to manage my expectations and keep things in perspective and not take his and other young players upside for granted. In my estimation, Coots has a looong way to go to fulfill his upside promise based on his current play, and there's certainly no guarantee he ever will.
I hope he does, as a Flyer...but there's that chance he doesn't...it's not like his play thus far has given definitive indications. That's why I'd be willing to trade Couturier in a deal for say, a Keith Yandle. While the former is a young player valued on mostly his youth, draft pedigree and potential, the latter is a player entering his prime who is valued on his proven ability to perform in the NHL...also considered is the premium required to acquire an upper echelon D man in trade is high. I would consider Schenn in the same category and would do a straight up deal for Yandle with him too....personally, I don't think the Yotes do it...they'd probably ask for a 1st rd'er and/or another good young prospect or roster player on top of Coots or Schenn...I'd be hesitant to go much beyond maybe a 2nd rd pick or B level prospect or 3rd/4th liner as a sweetener...perhaps if they'd take Meszaros or Coby that could work too...but I'm not giving both Coots sand Schenn or a package consisting of one of them plus other A level assets...if there's no deal to be made, on those terms, then so be it.
- exlund

I try to keep as open a mind as possible, especially on the younger players.

I used the Mark Howe-Ken Linseman trade example on here a couple days ago. The Flyers made a tough decision, trading the 23 year old center who led the team in scoring and was the first "Next Bobby Clarke" heir apparent, along with a prospect and 1st & 3rd rounders for Howe and the whalers' 3rd rounder.

It was a huge cost, both as a move for the immediate future and long term, as Howe was 4 years older than Linseman at the time and coming off his worst season and a significant injury.

No thank you.
- hereticpride

I'm already grumbling about the package the yotes would want for Yandle,
Malkin, (not that I would even consider it, no way), could be similar to the Gretzky trade or close to it.

I try to keep as open a mind as possible, especially on the younger players.

I used the Mark Howe-Ken Linseman trade example on here a couple days ago. The Flyers made a tough decision, trading the 23 year old center who led the team in scoring and was the first "Next Bobby Clarke" heir apparent, along with a prospect and 1st & 3rd rounders for Howe and the whalers' 3rd rounder.

It was a huge cost, both as a move for the immediate future and long term, as Howe was 4 years older than Linseman at the time and coming off his worst season and a significant injury.
- Jsaquella

Broke my heart mentioning that, the Rat was my favorite player at the time, but the trade had to be made, (I think he had a ton of penalty minutes that season), many careless infractions, but the team needed an offensive catalyst from the back end in the worst way.

Broke my heart mentioning that, the Rat was my favorite player at the time, but the trade had to be made, (I think he had a ton of penalty minutes that season), many careless infractions, but the team needed an offensive catalyst from the back end in the worst way.
- puckhead17

It's odd how many parallels are there. The biggest difference being that the Flyers at that time were seen as being much closer to contention than they are now.

I've really been kicking the idea around in my head the last couple days, really the last few weeks, and I still am not sure what I'd do. I do lean towards standing pat, because I think that the defense can be OK, but I also agree that to take that step into being a serious contender they need a top pair guy that can move the puck at an exceptional level.

It's odd how many parallels are there. The biggest difference being that the Flyers at that time were seen as being much closer to contention than they are now.

I've really been kicking the idea around in my head the last couple days, really the last few weeks, and I still am not sure what I'd do. I do lean towards standing pat, because I think that the defense can be OK, but I also agree that to take that step into being a serious contender they need a top pair guy that can move the puck at an exceptional level.
- Jsaquella

in bold
It is a missing element, and the center position seems to be our top strength (as it always does), although still unknown potential is still a factor.
We have though maybe more unknown concerns on our back end, not as so much "missing elements" but returning health & consistency.

It's odd how many parallels are there. The biggest difference being that the Flyers at that time were seen as being much closer to contention than they are now.

I've really been kicking the idea around in my head the last couple days, really the last few weeks, and I still am not sure what I'd do. I do lean towards standing pat, because I think that the defense can be OK, but I also agree that to take that step into being a serious contender they need a top pair guy that can move the puck at an exceptional level.
- Jsaquella

I've been all over the place as well but I think I'm going to stick with taking the best D man available @ 11 as well as moving a forward and perhaps the 2nd or 3rd to make the best D trade possible. Ultimately puts the D depth in a much better position. We'd be down a forward but we draft well there and its a much easier position to address in FA.

I've been all over the place as well but I think I'm going to stick with taking the best D man available @ 11 as well as moving a forward and perhaps the 2nd or 3rd to make the best D trade possible. Ultimately puts the D depth in a much better position. We'd be down a forward but we draft well there and its a much easier position to address in FA.
- hereticpride

I want to draft the best player available, period, at 11. If it's a defenseman, great. If it's a center, that's great, too.

Passing up a better prospect to take a position rarely works out well.

in bold
It is a missing element, and the center position seems to be our top strength (as it always does), although still unknown potential is still a factor.
We have though maybe more unknown concerns on our back end, not as so much "missing elements" but returning health & consistency.
- puckhead17

If everyone returns healthy, I think the defense will be good enough to be a playoff team....if utilized correctly.

But they will still need a better puck mover to be a serious contender, regardless of health.

I want to draft the best player available, period, at 11. If it's a defenseman, great. If it's a center, that's great, too.

Passing up a better prospect to take a position rarely works out well.
- Jsaquella

Usually I'd agree. But we're over a barrel with every team in the league when it comes to acquiring D men. I've reached the point where I have to draft one in the 1st. That is assuming there isn't a top 5 forward that somehow drops in our lap.

Usually I'd agree. But we're over a barrel with every team in the league when it comes to acquiring D men. I've reached the point where I have to draft one in the 1st. That is assuming there isn't a top 5 forward that somehow drops in our lap.
- hereticpride

I still can't draft positionally, because picking this high in a relatively good draft class is a pick they can't afford to miss on.

I'd spend 10 years kicking myself if I ended up with John Slaney and passed on the next Patrick Kane or Jason Spezza

If everyone returns healthy, I think the defense will be good enough to be a playoff team....if utilized correctly.

But they will still need a better puck mover to be a serious contender, regardless of health.
- Jsaquella

I agree, we both agree, our Defense is not as bad as many say when healthy & utilized to their proper strengths

i worry more about Grossman than Meszaros, 2 concussions in 2 straight seasons, can he come back & play the same way? And we all know about Mez's medical issues, and lack of consistency, and then we have Kimmo who is literally on his last aging leg.
Maybe we have more to worry about then we think.
I keep thinking, although he's not Weber, where would we be if we didn't trade JVR for Luke Schenn?
And will another somewhat similar swap in some capacity be, not just a choice, but a necessity?

I agree, we both agree, our Defense is not as bad as many say when healthy & utilized to their proper strengths

i worry more about Grossman than Meszaros, 2 concussions in 2 straight seasons, can he come back & play the same way? And we all know about Mez's medical issues, and lack of consistency, and then we have Kimmo who is literally on his last aging leg.
Maybe we have more to worry about then we think.
I keep thinking, although he's not Weber, where would we be if we didn't trade JVR for Luke Schenn?
And will another somewhat similar swap in some capacity be, not just a choice, but a necessity?
- puckhead17

Without Luke Schenn we'd be up poop creek.

I worry that it may be a necessity. It's why I can't see dealing Coburn. I have no faith in Meszaros being healthy and who knows with Grossmann?

I still can't draft positionally, because picking this high in a relatively good draft class is a pick they can't afford to miss on.

I'd spend 10 years kicking myself if I ended up with John Slaney and passed on the next Patrick Kane or Jason Spezza
- Jsaquella

True, I wouldn't reach for position if that makes sense but at 11 there will likely still be 2 of the top 5 highly touted D men in this draft. I wouldn't take Pulock over Barkov or Monahan if either were there at 11 but if things play out as I think they will I cant be too thrilled if they take Domi over Pulock or Ristolainen.

I just want to see us get our D depth get straightened out in the long run. At some point you have to draft some high prospects or you're stuck paying for a Ford with Mercedes money over and over again.

Without Luke Schenn we'd be up poop creek.

I worry that it may be a necessity. It's why I can't see dealing Coburn. I have no faith in Meszaros being healthy and who knows with Grossmann?
- Jsaquella

Agreed again!
I keep Coburn as well, I'm not down on the season he had, he signed that contract, and with Carle leaving may have put too much pressure on himself,(I picture he & Luke as the 2 main "cogs" we have returning).

God I hope they really aren't looking at Byfuglien!

True, I wouldn't reach for position if that makes sense but at 11 there will likely still be 2 of the top 5 highly touted D men in this draft. I wouldn't take Pulock over Barkov or Monahan if either were there at 11 but if things play out as I think they will I cant be too thrilled if they take Domi over Pulock or Ristolainen.

I just want to see us get our D depth get straightened out in the long run. At some point you have to draft some high prospects or you're stuck paying for a Ford with Mercedes money.
- hereticpride

That I agree with. If you have to guys that you rate at nearly the same, go ahead and take the position.

I just think back to the Giroux draft. The next 5 defensemen selected after him have combined to play fewer NHL games than Giroux has goals scored.

I agree that orange-tinted glasses may have some effect, but Couturier is the guy that all teams want first from us right now, which has to mean something still looks good beyond the orange glasses.
- JAKEw1234

I agree that he has some nice value in trade, he's a 20 yr old and thus still has a lot of value in terms of his youth and draft pedigree... but then again, teams seemingly aren't willing to deal a top pairing type defenseman for just Couturier...I think the Yotes reportedly asked for Coots and Schenn +...meanwhile, a lot of Flyer fans seem to place his value so high as to where a straight up deal for a Yandle or other top pairing offensive D men types would be too much of an overpayment...I disagree.

Agreed again!
I keep Coburn as well, I'm not down on the season he had, he signed that contract, and with Carle leaving may have put too much pressure on himself,(I picture he & Luke as the 2 main "cogs" we have returning).

God I hope they really aren't looking at Byfuglien!
- puckhead17

Not a huge Byfuglien fan, but if he came cheaply, I'd be open to it...definitely not a first choice.

I think Coburn's issues had multiple causes. The ones you stated, as well as the role he was asked to fill is one he simply couldn't handle.

True, I wouldn't reach for position if that makes sense but at 11 there will likely still be 2 of the top 5 highly touted D men in this draft. I wouldn't take Pulock over Barkov or Monahan if either were there at 11 but if things play out as I think they will I cant be too thrilled if they take Domi over Pulock or Ristolainen.

I just want to see us get our D depth get straightened out in the long run. At some point you have to draft some high prospects or you're stuck paying for a Ford with Mercedes money over and over again.
- hereticpride

in bold
Great analogy!!!

was Carle more like a chevy, with all options & extras paid for with BMW $$?

That I agree with. If you have to guys that you rate at nearly the same, go ahead and take the position.

I just think back to the Giroux draft. The next 5 defensemen selected after him have combined to play fewer NHL games than Giroux has goals scored.
- Jsaquella

in bold, didn't realize that, that's scary!!!

Not a huge Byfuglien fan, but if he came cheaply, I'd be open to it...definitely not a first choice.

I think Coburn's issues had multiple causes. The ones you stated, as well as the role he was asked to fill is one he simply couldn't handle.
- Jsaquella

He's signed for 3 more years, he weighs 1000 lb's (albeit he moves well despite it), but coming to philly?
The cheese steaks alone would be a hazzard waiting to happen

I've been all over the place as well but I think I'm going to stick with taking the best D man available @ 11 as well as moving a forward and perhaps the 2nd or 3rd to make the best D trade possible. Ultimately puts the D depth in a much better position. We'd be down a forward but we draft well there and its a much easier position to address in FA.
- hereticpride

The D situation is very convoluted. It's very difficult to be able to assess the team's needs and act to fill them when you don't know how much you're going to get from some key players coming off season ending injuries, like Mez, Coburn and Grossmann... and how will Timonen play...will he be fully recovered? Will he lose yet another step? Will Gustafsson be able to parlay his recent escalation in play into a top 4 type role or will he struggle in that attempt and be relegated to third pairing with only modest contributions? I'd have to think that so many question marks make it extremely difficult for Holmgren to make moves over the summer...somehow I think he'll take a chance or two and make something happen.

If everyone returns healthy, I think the defense will be good enough to be a playoff team....if utilized correctly.

But they will still need a better puck mover to be a serious contender, regardless of health.
- Jsaquella

I don't think it's so much a "puck mover" as a offensive-defensemen with high-end puck skills that they need...beyond Timonen (who is almost done), there's no other D men who can be counted on for consistent offensive production...a guy who can carry the puck in transition, join the play, distribute the puck and fire good shots on net, a guy who can QB the PP...to me, the need goes far beyond mere puck movement.

I don't think it's so much a "puck mover" as a offensive-defensemen with high-end puck skills that they need...beyond Timonen (who is almost done), there's no other D men who can be counted on for consistent offensive production...a guy who can carry the puck in transition, join the play, distribute the puck and fire good shots on net, a guy who can QB the PP...to me, the need goes far beyond mere puck movement.
- exlund

True, but typing all that gives me carpal tunnel syndrome

I still can't draft positionally, because picking this high in a relatively good draft class is a pick they can't afford to miss on.

I'd spend 10 years kicking myself if I ended up with John Slaney and passed on the next Patrick Kane or Jason Spezza
- Jsaquella

I have a mix of BPA forwards interspersed within the defensemen I would like them to target...my latest list looks something like this:

Not going to happen:

Drouin
MacKinnon
Jones
Barkov
------------


Would have to take as BPA if they fell:

Nichushkin
Lindholm
Monahan
-------------


The kill zone (one or more of these guys should be there at #11)..in order my preference would be:
------------
Nurse
Zadorov
Pulock
Morrissey
Shinkaruk
------------

Trade down scenario/2nd rd hopefuls:

Horvat
Shea Theodore
Samuel Morin
Ristolainen
Hagg

I have a mix of BPA forwards interspersed within the defensemen I would like them to target...my latest list looks something like this:

Not going to happen:

Drouin
MacKinnon
Jones
Barkov
------------


Would have to take as BPA if they fell:

Nichushkin
Lindholm
Monahan
-------------


The kill zone (one or more of these guys should be there at #11)..in order my preference would be:
------------
Nurse
Zadorov
Pulock
Morrissey
Shinkaruk
------------

Trade down scenario/2nd rd hopefuls:

Horvat
Shea Theodore
Samuel Morin
Ristolainen
Hagg
- exlund

My list is similar, some slight tweaks (Pulock ahead of Nurse and Zadorov by a bit & Shinkaruk ahead of Morrissey), but yeah, pretty much how I see things shaking out.