Not that he's not worth getting, he's not worth the cost of what it would take to get him. There is a difference there. The JVR for Schenn deal has zero to do with that.
- MJL

the thing with the jvr schenn trade is you to this day, pretty much still defend it, even tho we swung and missed miserably and at the time was a risk. the real risk in this case would be on phoenix, because what they would get in return is more risk in that all the players mentioned EVEN couturier and schenn are yet to be proven or have reached their potential, in yandle you get a finished product, that helps a team now and for the next decade with the way defenseman play into their late 30's especially guys like yandle, who in 10 years at worst would THEN be comparable to mark streit.

If they can't re-sign Boychuk, it would be a big blow for them.

Edit: They do have guys like Reinhart and Pulock on the way, but they need Boychuk back.
- PhillySportsGuy

The kids can come in a play third pair and shoulder less responsibility. It's pretty vital to hang on to Boychuk. If I was Snow, I'd be trying to keep the entire top 4-Vishnovsky, Hamonic, Boychuk & Leddy-just to ensure the kids can be spoon fed.

Give Vish another one or two year deal, pay Boychuk, get Leddy a fair deal and then you have deHaan, Reinhart, Pulock, Pelech and Strait for depth. None of the kids will have to step in and be a stud

Didnt Wang sell to Ledecky or someone? Or did that not go through?
- Doc_Sarcasm

It's a two year process. Ledecky group is a large minority shareholder, and within the two year transition period, he will become majority owner.

From the articles I read on it back in the summer, Wang will retain some stake in the organization.

Someone is going to throw some dough at J. Boychuk. I wonder if Snow will be allowed to spend to the cap now.
- Doc_Sarcasm

He's going to have to if he wants to keep some of the major pieces.

Actually it's not about what I wish to think their worth presently is, it's what it is to the team trading for the player thinks he is. And I assure you that the value of a player like Lupul, was about what kind of player he was at the time of the trade, rather then as a first round pick.

And same for all those players you named in your bag of donuts trade. It's quite simple. The Flyers did not trade 4 first round draft picks for Pronger. They traded Lupul, Sbisa, and two first round picks in the deal.
- MJL

Who were first round picks.

So if you'd care to read back, which I'm quite sure you won't, you'll see where you stated you didn't consider Lupul a first round pick.

Regardless of what you choose to consider him, I'm afraid history would not be on your side.

I'm not saying your entire post was about swapping in Lecavalier for Laughton. My comment was basically pointing out that it would be stupid to do so, despite the fact that similar moves have been made by many teams in the past.

Right now, I'm not impressed by anything they've done. But the combo of Laughton and Simmonds has been highly effective, whether they have had Schenn or Raffl on the LW. They have been generating chances, scoring some goals and been a solid two way line.

Put Lacavalier on that line. It's no longer a good two way line, because Vinny is not a good two way player. They probably won't generate as many chances. The forechecking ability won't be as strong.

From what Berube said-that he is going to use Lecavalier on a "skill " line, give him a good number of minutes and play him at center, it's very possible that he means Laughton is moving to another line or wing. To me, that's stupid. I don't care how Vinny has looked at practice
- Jsaquella

It's not stupid, it may not be the optimal choice. Looking at it objectively, if they want to give Lecavalier, another chance, why not put him on a scoring line, and see what happens? He's been talking about how he still feels like he can play, and has more to offer a team, and wants more ice time, well now it's put up or shut up time. Show us what you got, and if you can back it up. If not, then you go back to the press box. This is it, if he can't show that he can play now, then they know, and they can do what they have to do. So what if Laughton centers the 4th line for a few games, or is moved to wing on another line. He can be effective there with his overall game. This is something they have to do at some point. We'll see how motivated Lecavalier is, and if it's about that, or he just doesn't have the physical tools still. To me looking at it that way, is having an open mind and being objective, versus being close minded and refusing to look at it from a different perspective, and just calling it stupid.

Who were first round picks.

So if you'd care to read back, which I'm quite sure you won't, you'll see where you stated you didn't consider Lupul a first round pick.

Regardless of what you choose to consider him, I'm afraid history would not be on your side.
- 77rams

And the Flyers TRADED another former first round pick to get Lupul.

I'm not saying your entire post was about swapping in Lecavalier for Laughton. My comment was basically pointing out that it would be stupid to do so, despite the fact that similar moves have been made by many teams in the past.

Right now, I'm not impressed by anything they've done. But the combo of Laughton and Simmonds has been highly effective, whether they have had Schenn or Raffl on the LW. They have been generating chances, scoring some goals and been a solid two way line.

Put Lacavalier on that line. It's no longer a good two way line, because Vinny is not a good two way player. They probably won't generate as many chances. The forechecking ability won't be as strong.

From what Berube said-that he is going to use Lecavalier on a "skill " line, give him a good number of minutes and play him at center, it's very possible that he means Laughton is moving to another line or wing. To me, that's stupid. I don't care how Vinny has looked at practice
- Jsaquella

When I hear Berube harp praise, I like to read it in Lewis Black's voice.

"Vinny works great in practice. He's gonna be great. You're gonna love him!"

The kids can come in a play third pair and shoulder less responsibility. It's pretty vital to hang on to Boychuk. If I was Snow, I'd be trying to keep the entire top 4-Vishnovsky, Hamonic, Boychuk & Leddy-just to ensure the kids can be spoon fed.

Give Vish another one or two year deal, pay Boychuk, get Leddy a fair deal and then you have deHaan, Reinhart, Pulock, Pelech and Strait for depth. None of the kids will have to step in and be a stud
- Jsaquella

I think Boychuk is the integral piece. I'd be surprised if they were able to keep both Visnovsky and Boychuk and pay Leddy his raise.

Who were first round picks.

So if you'd care to read back, which I'm quite sure you won't, you'll see where you stated you didn't consider Lupul a first round pick.

Regardless of what you choose to consider him, I'm afraid history would not be on your side.
- 77rams

It has nothing to do with history. It has to do with what Lupul was when he was traded, which is why I answered that he was not a first round pick. You just can't get that. Of course I'm aware that Lupul was a FORMER first round pick, but he wasn't a draft pick that was traded, he was a player.

And I'll offer another analogy, by the terminology you want to use, the Flyers didn't trade 4 first round picks for Pronger, they traded 4 first round pick for a first round pick!

I think Boychuk is the integral piece. I'd be surprised if they were able to keep both Visnovsky and Boychuk and pay Leddy his raise.
- PhillySportsGuy

A quick glance at Capgeek (not 100% accurate!) says they're 24M(ish) under the cap.

the thing with the jvr schenn trade is you to this day, pretty much still defend it, even tho we swung and missed miserably and at the time was a risk. the real risk in this case would be on phoenix, because what they would get in return is more risk in that all the players mentioned EVEN couturier and schenn are yet to be proven or have reached their potential, in yandle you get a finished product, that helps a team now and for the next decade with the way defenseman play into their late 30's especially guys like yandle, who in 10 years at worst would THEN be comparable to mark streit.
- JoeRussomanno

You're deflecting Joe, the JVR has nothing to do with the possibility of trading for Yandle. I don't care what risk Phoenix is taking, not my concern. It's about what I would think it would cost the Flyers to trade for Yandle. Yandle may be a finished product, but he is still not the right kind of defenseman to pay that high of a price for in my opinion.

A quick glance at Capgeek (not 100% accurate!) says they're 24M(ish) under the cap.
- Doc_Sarcasm

No, that's the cap hits they could take on at the deadline, in terms of prorated cap hits. They're about 9.2M under.

When I hear Berube harp praise, I like to read it in Lewis Black's voice.

"Vinny works great in practice. He's gonna be great. You're gonna love him!"
- PhillySportsGuy

It's not even that, really.

At some point Vinny was going to get another shot. We all know that. But why break up an effective line? Why not give Vinny a shot on the 4th line, and see if he can give enough effort there to justify a promotion?

Just because Vinny is ineffective as a 4th liner? Wasn't that used as an excuse when people wanted to see Akeson used in a role more suited to his skillset? That he didn't show enough?

If some people are fine with handing a guy a plum role because he was a good player a couple few years ago, great.

No, that's the cap hits they could take on at the deadline, in terms of prorated cap hits. They're about 9.2M under.
- MJL

no, actually thats the projection for next year before they sign ANY of their UFAs or RFAs.

edit: i should have specified which column i was looking at.

And the Flyers TRADED another former first round pick to get Lupul.
- Jsaquella

The key word there is former.

no, actually thats the projection for next year before they sign ANY of their UFAs or RFAs.

edit: i should have specified which column i was looking at.
- Doc_Sarcasm

I see what you're looking at.

You're deflecting Joe, the JVR has nothing to do with the possibility of trading for Yandle. I don't care what risk Phoenix is taking, not my concern. It's about what I would think it would cost the Flyers to trade for Yandle. Yandle may be a finished product, but he is still not the right kind of defenseman to pay that high of a price for in my opinion.
- MJL

its not deflecting its using an example of logic youre applying to defend trades and how it changes for whatever reason.

I think Boychuk is the integral piece. I'd be surprised if they were able to keep both Visnovsky and Boychuk and pay Leddy his raise.
- PhillySportsGuy

He's the guy they need to get to sign for 4-5 years. Leddy's still a RFA, they could go 2-3 years on him and a year or two on Vishnovsky and be in good shape.

The only significant FAs up front are Brock Nelson and Anders Lee, and both are RFA.

It's not even that, really.

At some point Vinny was going to get another shot. We all know that. But why break up an effective line? Why not give Vinny a shot on the 4th line, and see if he can give enough effort there to justify a promotion?

Just because Vinny is ineffective as a 4th liner? Wasn't that used as an excuse when people wanted to see Akeson used in a role more suited to his skillset? That he didn't show enough?

If some people are fine with handing a guy a plum role because he was a good player a couple few years ago, great.
- Jsaquella

berube is out of his league and needs to be relieved asap

It's not even that, really.

At some point Vinny was going to get another shot. We all know that. But why break up an effective line? Why not give Vinny a shot on the 4th line, and see if he can give enough effort there to justify a promotion?

Just because Vinny is ineffective as a 4th liner? Wasn't that used as an excuse when people wanted to see Akeson used in a role more suited to his skillset? That he didn't show enough?

If some people are fine with handing a guy a plum role because he was a good player a couple few years ago, great.
- Jsaquella

Akeson and Lecavalier is not the same situation, and you know that.

its not deflecting its using an example of logic youre applying to defend trades and how it changes for whatever reason.
- JoeRussomanno

Each trade is looked at individually, and on it's own merit. It is deflecting, and the JVR trade has zero to do with any prospective trade for Yandle.

It has nothing to do with history. It has to do with what Lupul was when he was traded, which is why I answered that he was not a first round pick. You just can't get that. Of course I'm aware that Lupul was a FORMER first round pick, but he wasn't a draft pick that was traded, he was a player.

And I'll offer another analogy, by the terminology you want to use, the Flyers didn't trade 4 first round picks for Pronger, they traded 4 first round pick for a first round pick!

- MJL

Correct.

See, it took you some time but you finally figured it out.

It's not even that, really.

At some point Vinny was going to get another shot. We all know that. But why break up an effective line? Why not give Vinny a shot on the 4th line, and see if he can give enough effort there to justify a promotion?

Just because Vinny is ineffective as a 4th liner? Wasn't that used as an excuse when people wanted to see Akeson used in a role more suited to his skillset? That he didn't show enough?

If some people are fine with handing a guy a plum role because he was a good player a couple few years ago, great.
- Jsaquella

I honestly believe playing VL makes him a less tradable. Keeping him benched allows for some mystery. Like maybe the Flyers don't know what they have!

Each trade is looked at individually, and on it's own merit. It is deflecting, and the JVR trade has zero to do with any prospective trade for Yandle.
- MJL

and that is your opinion and you ate most certainly entitled to it