In all seriousness, though, if VL were willing to go to NSH (a stretch), it's not like they don't have a number of "bad" contracts they'd love to send back the other way -- Nystrom Gaustad, Stalberg, etc.
- Tomahawk

I'd take Stalberg straight up.

Wow, I took the whole life could be worse approach and you went the life could be better!
- FlyersGrace

MUCH better. I'm an optimist.

"Paul Holmgren said this week one of the reasons Vincent Lecavalier struggled is because Peter Laviolette, who recruited him, left, and Lecavalier wasn't a fit in Craig Berube's system. Is there a trade fit now that Laviolette is in Nashville? Flyers would probably have to eat a good chunk of his salary, but Holmgren and Poile have a history of getting deals done. "

Yes, pure conjecture.
- jmatchett383

Yes, it is pure conjecture. It's based on Laviolette's interest in Lecavalier while he was the coach in Philly. That doesn't mean that he still would have interest, or that more importantly, Poile would. It's purely circumstantial. As opposed to rumors that are created when sources get wind that the teams are actually discussing a trade for player.

nashville seems like one of the natural places we could get Hartnell to waive to move to. i don't know the history btwn him and Lavy though to know if there'd be interest.
- wilsonecho91

i don't know of any rift between them, so i could see him going back there. having pieces like weber, jones, and rinne would make it attractive.

So, it is clear why Homer lied/dissembled about not being in any hurry to change seats etc? From all that has come out, it seems this move was months in the making. They were not ready to reveal things, I presume, but why be so categorical? Why not say - we will evaulate things etc.? I think it just makes the organization look really dumb.
- PT21

Leaves it open to speculation that they'll then have to deal with. Better to deny it and deal with it when they're ready to, is all I can guess.

I miss that so much. Nowadays, you'd never get that because the intermission is sent "back to the studio" so that Barkan and Tocchet can take 12 minutes + commercials to say nothing.
- jmatchett383

the intermission is awful. and i do miss dorney.

Could be 12 min of Pit Bull...
- FlyersGrace

i might prefer this.

This post caught my eye today.

Andy MacDonald is making too much. MacDonald's points this season came from a team that didn't have a true number one defenseman on it. Brayden Coburn in my opinion is very similar to MacDonald and had a pretty good point production when first coming to Philly until picking up Pronger, Carle and Meszaros. I actually believe Coburn is better then MacDonald. I don't even like MacDonald on the second unit of the power play but make no mistake, I do like the player. He's single handedly help turned Luke Schenn's game around...but still, MacDonald's Cap hit is way too high.
- SuperSchennBros

It's not way too high, it's slightly high. He possibly could've gotten more in Free Agency. From MacDonald's point of view, it's probably low.

Yes, it is pure conjecture. It's based on Laviolette's interest in Lecavalier while he was the coach in Philly. That doesn't mean that he still would have interest, or that more importantly, Poile would. It's purely circumstantial. As opposed to rumors that are created when sources get wind that the teams are actually discussing a trade for player.
- MJL

So, the GM saying that "one of the reasons Vincent Lecavalier struggled is because Peter Laviolette, who recruited him, left, and Lecavalier wasn't a fit in Craig Berube's system" gives no reason to believe that the Flyers would be interested in moving him and that Nashville would have interest? You must be using a different definition of "conjecture" than me.

No one's saying it's a done deal. But since Philly's former coach liked him, the current coach didn't have a spot, and that Philly's former coach is now in Nashville, it's entirely possible Nashville would/could have some interest.

What proof do you need for it to not be conjecture. Do you need a quote that 100% says that Vinny Lecavalier is being traded to Nashville verified by 600 sources?

So, it is clear why Homer lied/dissembled about not being in any hurry to change seats etc? From all that has come out, it seems this move was months in the making. They were not ready to reveal things, I presume, but why be so categorical? Why not say - we will evaulate things etc.? I think it just makes the organization look really dumb.
- PT21

You must have missed the discussion yesterday about how professional organizations and businesses handle transitions.

By the way, saying they were going to have it under discussion would have resulted in a week-long feeding frenzy by the local beats, who really have nothing better to do but stir up controversy.

the intermission is awful. and i do miss dorney.
- hammarby31

I was thinking about this the other day. Do you realize, that if things were done in 1974 like they are today, we wouldn't have the famous, "THE FLYERS WIN THE STANLEY CUP!" by Hart, because it would be national coverage?

So, the GM saying that "one of the reasons Vincent Lecavalier struggled is because Peter Laviolette, who recruited him, left, and Lecavalier wasn't a fit in Craig Berube's system" gives no reason to believe that the Flyers would be interested in moving him and that Nashville would have interest? You must be using a different definition of "conjecture" than me.

No one's saying it's a done deal. But since Philly's former coach liked him, the current coach didn't have a spot, and that Philly's former coach is now in Nashville, it's entirely possible Nashville would/could have some interest.

What proof do you need for it to not be conjecture. Do you need a quote that 100% says that Vinny Lecavalier is being traded to Nashville verified by 600 sources?
- jmatchett383

Bolded part is by definition conjecture.

I was thinking about this the other day. Do you realize, that if things were done in 1974 like they are today, we wouldn't have the famous, "THE FLYERS WIN THE STANLEY CUP!" by Hart, because it would be national coverage?
- jmatchett383

But you'd still have a radio call by a local broadcaster, so there's that.

Bolded part is by definition conjecture.
- bodiva88

No, that's plausibility. Conjecture is an opinion based on incomplete information.

But you'd still have a radio call by a local broadcaster, so there's that.
- bodiva88

I'd prefer Gene Hart over the 1974 version of Saunders/Therien.

i actually like it. makes the beats crazy. anything that yanks their chain is fine w/ me.
- wilsonecho91

Dubious short term gain.

Possible long term fallout in terms of legacy:

"The humiliating epitaph of his term as general manager of the Flyers was written on May 7 2014 when Holmgren was forced to vacate his job in favor of Ron Hextall one day after declaring that he had no intentions of doing so."

Worth it?

So, the GM saying that "one of the reasons Vincent Lecavalier struggled is because Peter Laviolette, who recruited him, left, and Lecavalier wasn't a fit in Craig Berube's system" gives no reason to believe that the Flyers would be interested in moving him and that Nashville would have interest? You must be using a different definition of "conjecture" than me.

No one's saying it's a done deal. But since Philly's former coach liked him, the current coach didn't have a spot, and that Philly's former coach is now in Nashville, it's entirely possible Nashville would/could have some interest.

What proof do you need for it to not be conjecture. Do you need a quote that 100% says that Vinny Lecavalier is being traded to Nashville verified by 600 sources?
- jmatchett383

Conjecture is simpy an opinion based or formed on incomplete information. There are only comments from one side. It takes two teams to make a trade. Where are the comments from the other side?
The only proof that can be offered is if the trade is actually consumated. And a rumor from a legitimate source that actually states that a deal is actually being discussed, with both sides, has a lot more validity, then one that is generated purely from circumstantial evidence.
It's just throwing something up against a wall and seeing what sticks. In my view there isn't much solid there. It's pure conjecture and specualation at this point.

No, that's plausibility. Conjecture is an opinion based on incomplete information.
- jmatchett383

You want to argue semantics, there are places for that on the internet.

Here, you discussing plausible situations is your conjecture and anyone is welcome to discuss how your logical process is or is not flawed.

I was thinking about this the other day. Do you realize, that if things were done in 1974 like they are today, we wouldn't have the famous, "THE FLYERS WIN THE STANLEY CUP!" by Hart, because it would be national coverage?
- jmatchett383

what's weird about that is the game was broadcast nationally, iirc, and i think gene hart actually split that game with another broadcaster? stu nahan maybe? one of the networks, nbc, i think had a contract then. peter puck and all that.

but yes, i hate that the games go national after the first or second round.

You want to argue semantics, there are places for that on the internet.

Here, you discussing plausible situations is your conjecture and anyone is welcome to discuss how your logical process is or is not flawed.
- bodiva88

If you don't want to have semantics argued on here, don't try to define conjecture using bolded parts of posts as loose definitions. ("Bolded part is by definition conjecture.")

You must have missed the discussion yesterday about how professional organizations and businesses handle transitions.

By the way, saying they were going to have it under discussion would have resulted in a week-long feeding frenzy by the local beats, who really have nothing better to do but stir up controversy.
- bodiva88

Why affirm one way or another then? Simply deflect the question or no comment the sucker... it's not exactly kosher anywhere to offer up a lie to buy time, especially if the truth comes out in a matter of days and your GM is left looking like a stooge.

Conjecture is simpy an opinion based or formed on incomplete information. There are only comments from one side. It takes two teams to make a trade. Where are the comments from the other side?
The only proof that can be offered is if the trade is actually consumated. And a rumor from a legitimate source that actually states that a deal is actually being discussed, has a lot more validity, then one that is generated purely from circumstantial evidence.
It's just throwing something up against a wall and seeing what sticks. In my view there isn't much solid there. It's pure conjecture and specualation at this point.
- MJL

Again, all I'm reading from you is "blah blah blah I'm right because I like Vinny." Enjoy your day.

Dubious short term gain.

Possible long term fallout in terms of legacy:

"The humiliating epitaph of his term as general manager of the Flyers was written on May 7 2014 when Holmgren was forced to vacate his job in favor of Ron Hextall one day after declaring that he had no intentions of doing so."

Worth it?
- PT21

Who cares? Oh no, the beats might spin it!

Why affirm one way or another then? Simply deflect the question or no comment the sucker... it's not exactly kosher anywhere to offer up a lie to buy time, especially if the truth comes out in a matter of days and your GM is left looking like a stooge.
- Tomahawk

it doesn't really matter. nobody thinks this was a sudden decision. nobody with a functioning brain, anyway.

Why affirm one way or another then? Simply deflect the question or no comment the sucker... it's not exactly kosher anywhere to offer up a lie to buy time, especially if the truth comes out in a matter of days and your GM is left looking like a stooge.
- Tomahawk

Oh no, not a stooge!