I don't believe that. I beleive the Flyers feel that Laughton has offensive upside, and could be a 2nd line center caliber player in this league, along with his strong overall game. I feel if they felt he would be a 3rd line checking center, they would not have used a first round pick on him. Flyers draft BPA, not where they feel a player will fit in on the current lineup.
- MJL

I think they thought he was BPA, and I think they saw a chance to fill a need, strengthen a position, and draft BPA all in one.

It seems you are minimizing the importance of a shut down center (not third line center), we can agree to disagree.

Does Vinny 2m kick in at 12 ?
- Winning

Midnight. He has to deposit the check and make sure the funds clear before he flips anyone off.

Does he ever pass coots or giroux ? No? Than he's not necessary part the future.
- Tfaehner

Giroux, ofc not.

But Coots, yeah. From what I've seen of his assertive attacking style in the ozone, I'd say he has a fair chance of passing up Coots at some point for that 2C/2nd line slot.

I would not include Laughton in a deal for Byfuglien. Do you think the Flyers drafted Laughton with a first round pick thinking he would only be a 3rd line center in the league?
- MJL

Back to the original question. No, I do not think the Flyers drafted him to only be a 3rd line center. When he was drafted there were comparisons of Mike Richards, so I expect the Flyers thought he'd be of that caliper of a player. I don't think he has reached those expectations nor do I think he will reach them. Not saying he is a bad player, but I don't see him playing any more minutes than a 3rd line center.

And for the next thrilling argument topic: Keynesian Economics vs Supply Side Economics.

Pros and Cons, which do you favor, and would Homer be able to screw up either system if he was still GM of the Flyers?

Go!

tbo... if hexy can get a backup goalie for 2 years and just move 1 or 2 bad contracts today id be absolutely estatic

And for the next thrilling argument topic: Keynesian Economics vs Supply Side Economics.

Pros and Cons, which do you favor, and would Homer be able to screw up either system if he was still GM of the Flyers?

Go!
- wolfhounds

Yes.

Giroux, ofc not.

But Coots, yeah. From what I've seen of his assertive attacking style in the ozone, I'd say he has a fair chance of passing up Coots at some point for that 2C/2nd line slot.
- Tomahawk

Honestly, I'm not sure that either one has what it takes to be a 2nd line center on a contending team.

And for the next thrilling argument topic: Keynesian Economics vs Supply Side Economics.

Pros and Cons, which do you favor, and would Homer be able to screw up either system if he was still GM of the Flyers?

Go!
- wolfhounds

I like turtles

I like turtles
- BiggE

You mad man.

Back to the original question. No, I do not think the Flyers drafted him to only be a 3rd line center. When he was drafted there were comparisons of Mike Richards, so I expect the Flyers thought he'd be of that caliper of a player. I don't think he has reached those expectations nor do I think he will reach them. Not saying he is a bad player, but I don't see him playing any more minutes than a 3rd line center.
- Streit2ThePoint

I read comparisons to John Madden. Either way, a shut down center, is different in my estimation that a generic third line center designation.

And for the next thrilling argument topic: Keynesian Economics vs Supply Side Economics.

Pros and Cons, which do you favor, and would Homer be able to screw up either system if he was still GM of the Flyers?

Go!
- wolfhounds

Homer will give a 2nd rounder to change the subject

Honestly, I'm not sure that either one has what it takes to be a 2nd line center on a contending team.
- BiggE

I don't have confidence that either of them will be in that upper-echelon Brind'Amour class of 2C... but I could see either/both becoming serviceable ones w/ the right linemates.

Maybe Holmgren did but maybe Hextall thinks he is just a 3rd line center and expendable.
- J35Bacher

Maybe he does, who knows. One method of building a team is to trade from excess to shore up a weaker area. The Flyers have a lot of young depth at center. If Laughton is traded, it doesn't neccessarily mean that they don't think highly of him.

I don't have confidence that either of them will be in that upper-echelon Brind'Amour class of 2C... but I could see either/both becoming serviceable ones w/ the right linemates.
- Tomahawk

Agreed. I'd just like, if possible, a stronger 2C by the time they are a contender.

Edit: Clarke/Macleish, Sakic/Forsberg, Yzerman/Federov, Datsyuk/Zetterberg

That's the kind of 1-2 punch I want up the middle.

Honestly, I'm not sure that either one has what it takes to be a 2nd line center on a contending team.
- BiggE

Line 1 G
Line 3a Coots
Line 3b Laughts

who cares if it results in a cup

Agreed. I'd just like, if possible, a stronger 2C by the time they are a contender.
- BiggE

Maybe... it's this guy?

I don't have confidence that either of them will be in that upper-echelon Brind'Amour class of 2C... but I could see either/both becoming serviceable ones w/ the right linemates.
- Tomahawk

I wouldn't mind seeing how Laughton handles LW

I think they thought he was BPA, and I think they saw a chance to fill a need, strengthen a position, and draft BPA all in one.

It seems you are minimizing the importance of a shut down center (not third line center), we can agree to disagree.
- MBFlyerfan

My comments don't have anything to do with minimizing the importance of a shut down center, in fact on the last couple of pages I've twice posted that you need 3-4 quality lines to compete in today's NHL. My comments were on Laughton as an individual player, and how I think the Flyers see him and what potential he has.

Maybe... it's this guy?


- Tomahawk

Could well be.

I don't have confidence that either of them will be in that upper-echelon Brind'Amour class of 2C... but I could see either/both becoming serviceable ones w/ the right linemates.
- Tomahawk

Brind'Amour in his prime was really a first line center caliber player.

I wouldn't mind seeing how Laughton handles LW
- PhillySportsGuy

I wouldn't mind them trying that.

Could well be.
- BiggE

Or this guy:

I wouldn't mind seeing how Laughton handles LW
- PhillySportsGuy

good chance we may see this with the current line up

maybe SG plays LW a bit too this year

Maybe he does, who knows. One method of building a team is to trade from excess to shore up a weaker area. The Flyers have a lot of young depth at center. If Laughton is traded, it doesn't neccessarily mean that they don't think highly of him.
- MJL

And that could go for a lot of players. Guys might have been viewed one way by Holmgren but Hextall might have a different feeling on them. That's why I think there could be a move where we look and might be surprised. Not Giroux or Voracek but maybe Simmonds, Read, Streit and even Mason