I don't see that difference in play. Of course Richards didn't play half the game on defense either.

Richards
58 pts, 50 pts, 53 pts, 36 pts

Laughton
23 pts, 53 pts, 56 pts, 87 pts
- mayorofangrytown

I'm not saying he won't be a good player in the NHL, just don't see him being a PPG player in the NHL like Richards.

He could easily be a 2nd line center, though. You don't need to put up 60 points to be considered a good one, especially when you have the defensive game that Laughton possesses.

Point taken sir. No need to yell.
- aightwebang17

You are looking at the assist column for those three years. Richards point totals in juniors were:

58
87
89
58
- aightwebang17

Woops. You are correct sir.

Its difficult to evaluate both players based solely on points anyway. I dont know about Richards, but Laughton was being used in a shutdown role for much of the season. He wasn't given the opportunity to play with Dal Colle a lot. If he was, his numbers would be much higher.
- PhillySportsGuy

It's not the only way to evaluate a junior player, but historically, guys who put up PPG seasons in the NHL also first did so at a young age in juniors (16 or 17 years old).

On the flip side, some guys who were big scorers in juniors only did so because they developed sooner and were bigger and stronger than their competition. As the went up in levels, and the playing field was more even, they couldn't put up the same numbers.

Woops. You are correct sir.
- mayorofangrytown

nice try

If Hartnell isn't an effective player for the last year of his deal then so be it. 5 years from now, his cap hit may be that of a 3rd line player anyway. It may not hurt the team as much as you think. Look what Clarkson got. Thats the type of deal Hartnell was looking at too. At least Hartnell is effective NOW.
- PhillySportsGuy

Ok. But I don't want him on the 3rd or 4rth line because he is not good defensivly and not a good enough skater to be an energy guy. I know what clarkson got but why do i have to wait for him to fail instead of maybe moving him now before it happens. Clarkson could get himself bought out. He is the same type of player. His skill set is limited. If he isn;t scoring they don't provide much more then.

I'm not saying he won't be a good player in the NHL, just don't see him being a PPG player in the NHL like Richards.

He could easily be a 2nd line center, though. You don't need to put up 60 points to be considered a good one, especially when you have the defensive game that Laughton possesses.
- bradleyc4

Richards only had 2 seasons that were close to point per game. It would be like calling Hartnell a 30 goal scorer. In reality, hartnell is more like a 25 goal, 50 point player. Richards is a 65 point player with great two-way ability.

nice try
- Crimsoninja

GAH! the man owned up, that's impressive on this board.

GAH! the man owned up, that's impressive on this board.
- FlyersGrace

don't let him off the mat

Woops. You are correct sir.
- mayorofangrytown

nice try
- Crimsoninja

I'm working hard here, not always as effectively as I'd like.

Richards only had 2 seasons that were close to point per game. It would be like calling Hartnell a 30 goal scorer. In reality, hartnell is more like a 25 goal, 50 point player. Richards is a 65 point player with great two-way ability.
- PhillySportsGuy

My apologies for citing the man's prime years as a descriptor for what we think Laughton's prime years might or might not look like.

Yeah, it's not like Hextall had veto power over contract decisions over the past 7-8 months... he was in a supplemental, support role, not an executive one.

With that said, he did admit that AMac was making too much money for his liking, which was interesting. He also revealed that AMac's agent thought they left money on the table... we'll see this summer.

Hopefully he's more of a pennypincher than Homer... cap efficiency does have a lot of room for improvement here.
- Tomahawk

Isn't that the nature of negotiation? Both sided compromising and meeting in the middle. He also said that both sides being a little unhappy is what makes it a fair deal for both sides.
That Cap efficiency has a lot fo room for improvement, is a matter of opinion. There's a lot of confusion of what's market value, and what players are worth. And disagreeing with a team's philosophy on how the manage the cap, doesn't make it inefficient, or mismanaged.

don't let him off the mat
- -davies-

Why am I always the one who ends up on the mat with Crims, aright and Brad? It's not right.

It's not the only way to evaluate a junior player, but historically, guys who put up PPG seasons in the NHL also first did so at a young age in juniors (16 or 17 years old).

On the flip side, some guys who were big scorers in juniors only did so because they developed sooner and were bigger and stronger than their competition. As the went up in levels, and the playing field was more even, they couldn't put up the same numbers.
- bradleyc4

I agree with you for the most part. As a general rule, you're right. I remember when the Flyers drafted Laughton, they said he's got offensive ability, but was stashed away as a shutdown forward on a very deep team.

I dont think Laughton will be a point per game player. I dont think he'll ever have a season like Richards' best seasons. I do think he's capable of getting to 60 points a few times in his career. That would be nice considering his strength is his all around play.

Ok. But I don't want him on the 3rd or 4rth line because he is not good defensivly and not a good enough skater to be an energy guy. I know what clarkson got but why do i have to wait for him to fail instead of maybe moving him now before it happens. Clarkson could get himself bought out. He is the same type of player. His skill set is limited. If he isn;t scoring they don't provide much more then.
- J35Bacher

I think most fans have a love hate relationship with Hartnell, he's almost always on our best lines, his balance is atrocious, he's a great lockeroom guy, if I see another cross ice pass I may slap him, he drives other teams to distraction with his chirping and on the edge hits, he take un-discplined idiotic penalties. All of this adds up to conflicted emotions... It's like watching an avatar of chaos skate across the ice. I can't stand to watch him, I can't stand to look away...

This league is funky right now. MacDonald is a test case for a lot of things about the NHL of the 2010s.

Because both sides are right. A 27-year-old MacDonald who has the skating ability he does, with the level of hockey sense that he does, was going to score a long-term contract, for those dollars, with someone.

That doesn't mean it's a good contract. It means that someone was going to pay it.

I'm...uneasy about it, as I've said before. Because MacDonald gets exposed as a top pairing defenseman. I'd need to see a bit more to know if he can totally handle second-pairing minutes without being exposed.

To me, it's a poor deal if he plays on the third-pairing, at that salary, because of exposure concerns. But as uneasy as I am right now...I guess I still need to see a few more games.
- AllInForFlyers

I don't think there is any doubt that he can handle second pair minutes. And I don't think that there is any indication that he is a 3rd pair player.

Why am I always the one who ends up on the mat with Crims, aright and Brad? It's not right.

- mayorofangrytown

They like your MOAT man smell?
No clue...

GAH! the man owned up, that's impressive on this board.
- FlyersGrace

don't let him off the mat
- -davies-

That's how this board feels, most days

Ok. But I don't want him on the 3rd or 4rth line because he is not good defensivly and not a good enough skater to be an energy guy. I know what clarkson got but why do i have to wait for him to fail instead of maybe moving him now before it happens. Clarkson could get himself bought out. He is the same type of player. His skill set is limited. If he isn;t scoring they don't provide much more then.
- J35Bacher

In the end, I ask myself "Is Hartnell's $4.75M cap hit during his last few years going to hold the team back from winning a cup?"

I think the answer is no.

The long term benefit is marginal while it leaves the team with no top line LW in the short term unless they want to overpay in FA. That, essentially, leaves the team in a similar state as it was WITH Hartnell.

I don't think there is any doubt that he can handle second pair minutes. And I don't think that there is any indication that he is a 3rd pair player.
- MJL

There's no doubt in your mind, which is fine. You're entitled to your opinion -- not saying you aren't.

There's doubt in mine, and I want to see how he plays if Timonen's gone and there is no replacement brought in from the outside.

And we'll see, ultimately, whether or not the new GM of the Flyers has any doubts of his own.

grossmann is making the same money as hjalmarsson in chicago. he's nowhere near the player hjarlmarsson is. grossmann is an ok player. never understood the need to re-sign him for the term that they did. streit is making almost as much as duncan keith. ugh!
- 13kdub13

This is where we see misunderstandings on the NHL salary market. Keith signed a long term deal with low years on the back end, that lower the Cap hit. If Hjalmarsson signed his deal at the same point in age and experience that Grossmann did, he would get considerably more. All of those factors have to be considered.

I think most fans have a love hate relationship with Hartnell, he's almost always on our best lines, his balance is atrocious, he's a great lockeroom guy, if I see another cross ice pass I may slap him, he drives other teams to distraction with his chirping and on the edge hits, he take un-discplined idiotic penalties. All of this adds up to conflicted emotions... It's like watching an avatar of chaos skate across the ice. I can't stand to watch him, I can't stand to look away...
- FlyersGrace

Yeah. I am not saying I want to move just for the sake of moving him. But if it helps manipulate the roster better and creates space i think it would be stupid not to look into it. He has does good things. But as he gets older can we keep expecting the good or bad? He is streaky. What streaks will we be getting more of

Yeah. I am not saying I want to move just for the sake of moving him. But if it helps manipulate the roster better and creates space i think it would be stupid not to look into it. He has does good things. But as he gets older can we keep expecting the good or bad? He is streaky. What streaks will we be getting more of
- J35Bacher

Whats your plan for replacing him though? Its easy to say "get rid of this guy and find a better player for cheaper money."

It's more difficult to follow through with that plan.

In the end, I ask myself "Is Hartnell's $4.75M cap hit during his last few years going to hold the team back from winning a cup?"

I think the answer is no.

The long term benefit is marginal while it leaves the team with no top line LW in the short term unless they want to overpay in FA. That, essentially, leaves the team in a similar state as it was WITH Hartnell.
- PhillySportsGuy

This.