If I thought he'd keep himself in shape for four or five years, I'd take a deep breath and do it

I just don't think he's going to do that. Don't know that for sure, obviously, but I think he's going to cash out and get huge
- AllInForFlyers

I just don't feel like that would happen. Kinda scary to think about how good he'd be if he's been playing out of shape this whole time.

I know he got huge during the last lockout, but that was a while ago. If people believe he comes to camp out of shape on a consistent basis, I'd like to see a stat comparison of his numbers by month to show this disparity.

Just a question for anyone who cares to answer; it's your opinion. Not right or wrong, whatever you say.

But my question is this: I think Ghost might very well be a top-pair defenseman. Not the prototypical size/strength, but more like Erik Karlsson is and Paul Coffey was, where they control the game with finesse, skill and hockey sense

Does anybody else see that? Because what I see is a kid who, while learning, is actually a solid defender with a good stick and very good instincts in his own zone and in the neutral zone

I just don't feel like that would happen. Kinda scary to think about how good he'd be if he's been playing out of shape this whole time.

I know he got huge during the last lockout, but that was a while ago. If people believe he comes to camp out of shape on a consistent basis, I'd like to see a stat comparison of his numbers by month to show this disparity.
- PhillySportsGuy

Really...it's all about risk tolerance. I would give him the $7 million he's probably going to get. I just don't think I could swallow the seven years

Just a question for anyone who cares to answer; it's your opinion. Not right or wrong, whatever you say.

But my question is this: I think Ghost might very well be a top-pair defenseman. Not the prototypical size/strength, but more like Erik Karlsson is and Paul Coffey was, where they control the game with finesse, skill and hockey sense

Does anybody else see that? Because what I see is a kid who, while learning, is actually a solid defender with a good stick and very good instincts in his own zone and in the neutral zone
- AllInForFlyers

He has surprisingly good NZ attributes and a terrific stick. He's played only a few months of pro hockey to boot. I didn't realize how good he was at certain areas defensively. He's also a bit messy in zone. If he could play with a reliable partner, who can get him the puck in the d zone, it's possible.

Really...it's all about risk tolerance. I would give him the $7 million he's probably going to get. I just don't think I could swallow the seven years
- AllInForFlyers

Seven years! I thought it was 5

Seven years! I thought it was 5
- PhillySportsGuy

I think someone is going to swallow hard and give him the seven -- you certainly said five

With the league is, though, I think some GM is going to find a way to give him seven

Just a question for anyone who cares to answer; it's your opinion. Not right or wrong, whatever you say.

But my question is this: I think Ghost might very well be a top-pair defenseman. Not the prototypical size/strength, but more like Erik Karlsson is and Paul Coffey was, where they control the game with finesse, skill and hockey sense

Does anybody else see that? Because what I see is a kid who, while learning, is actually a solid defender with a good stick and very good instincts in his own zone and in the neutral zone
- AllInForFlyers

He's got a lot more smarts or at least better instincts than he was sold as having. He makes a lot of really smart plays in the NZ and the top of the DZ. Stuff like that will mitigate the weaknesses, which right now is primarily DZ coverage and areas where his size is a negative factor.

I had hoped he could be a Brian Campbell type guy, and that still would be great, but I'm actually hoping for more having seen him play for awhile.

Just a question for anyone who cares to answer; it's your opinion. Not right or wrong, whatever you say.

But my question is this: I think Ghost might very well be a top-pair defenseman. Not the prototypical size/strength, but more like Erik Karlsson is and Paul Coffey was, where they control the game with finesse, skill and hockey sense

Does anybody else see that? Because what I see is a kid who, while learning, is actually a solid defender with a good stick and very good instincts in his own zone and in the neutral zone
- AllInForFlyers

I don't think he is ever going to be a legitimate top pair defenseman. I think he is going to be one of the top offensive point producing defenseman in the league, whose ability to skate, and read plays, as well as having a good stick, is going to help off set his lack of physical ability down low.

I think someone is going to swallow hard and give him the seven -- you certainly said five

With the league is, though, I think some GM is going to find a way to give him seven
- AllInForFlyers

Word choice.

I think someone is going to swallow hard and give him the seven -- you certainly said five

With the league is, though, I think some GM is going to find a way to give him seven
- AllInForFlyers

I find 7 years hard to believe. It was rumored that he wanted 5 years, $7M AAV from Winnipeg I believe. Winnipeg has to pay so many guys though.

He has surprisingly good NZ attributes and a terrific stick. He's played only a few months of pro hockey to boot. I didn't realize how good he was at certain areas defensively. He's also a bit messy in zone. If he could play with a reliable partner, who can get him the puck in the d zone, it's possible.
- Mononoke

That's what I'm seeing -- it's always hard to say if a player is actually going to clean up what they don't do well, but at the same time, I have tended to believe the old axiom about 300 games for a defenseman before it slows down...can you imagine what he could be if there actually is another level to his game, as he gains experience?

He could maybe be Duncan Keith-like

Really...it's all about risk tolerance. I would give him the $7 million he's probably going to get. I just don't think I could swallow the seven years
- AllInForFlyers

There's going to be a team who is right in the middle of their contention window who needs a guy like Byfuglien, who will bite the bullet. The Flyers could use him, too, but they're not quite there yet in terms of being close to a contender.

RIP Glenn Frey. 2016 sucks.

Seven years! I thought it was 5
- PhillySportsGuy

Defenseman who aren't great skaters (but have good offensive skills, so not Hal Gill), can last a bit longer than a forward. They do less skating up and down. Typically. Look at Streit. He's the worst skater on the team at full speed north to south. And yet he can skate it into the zone. A 5 year deal I could stomach. But he'd have to be conditioned. I do worry about Dustin Sandoval

Just a question for anyone who cares to answer; it's your opinion. Not right or wrong, whatever you say.

But my question is this: I think Ghost might very well be a top-pair defenseman. Not the prototypical size/strength, but more like Erik Karlsson is and Paul Coffey was, where they control the game with finesse, skill and hockey sense

Does anybody else see that? Because what I see is a kid who, while learning, is actually a solid defender with a good stick and very good instincts in his own zone and in the neutral zone
- AllInForFlyers

I definitely think he has top pair potential. Not sure he can lead a top pair as a true #1, but he can definitely ride shotgun with another player equally as good (in other areas) or better than Ghost.

RIP Glenn Frey. 2016 sucks.
- MBFlyerfan

Holy poop! You're kidding me! What happened?

There's going to be a team who is right in the middle of their contention window who needs a guy like Byfuglien, who will bite the bullet. The Flyers could use him, too, but they're not quite there yet in terms of being close to a contender.
- Jsaquella

That's what I'm thinking. There's gonna be a team that says "We can win for the next four years or so. Pay him and worry about years 6 and 7 later"

That's what I'm thinking. There's gonna be a team that says "We can win for the next four years or so. Pay him and worry about years 6 and 7 later"
- AllInForFlyers

And you know what, I'd do the same. If I can win a Cup or two, the couple/few rough years at the end can be handled better.

That's what I'm seeing -- it's always hard to say if a player is actually going to clean up what they don't do well, but at the same time, I have tended to believe the old axiom about 300 games for a defenseman before it slows down...can you imagine what he could be if there actually is another level to his game, as he gains experience?

He could maybe be Duncan Keith-like
- AllInForFlyers

I just worry about his size a little bit. Top pairing guys take a beating throughout the season. Even Timonen, who was a well built smaller dman, was a shell of himself come playoff time. He held up much better when he was moved to the 2nd pair with Pronger taking the lead.

I just worry about his size a little bit. Top pairing guys take a beating throughout the season. Even Timonen, who was a well built smaller dman, was a shell of himself come playoff time. He held up much better when he was moved to the 2nd pair with Pronger taking the lead.
- PhillySportsGuy

I certainly could see that, as well.

Certainly, a high-end second pair defensemen would not make me weep. I do really see some special attributes in him, the hockey sense, that the elite ones have

Defenseman who aren't great skaters (but have good offensive skills, so not Hal Gill), can last a bit longer than a forward. They do less skating up and down. Typically. Look at Streit. He's the worst skater on the team at full speed north to south. And yet he can skate it into the zone. A 5 year deal I could stomach. But he'd have to be conditioned. I do worry about Dustin Sandoval
- Mononoke

5 years is the longest I'd go

And you know what, I'd do the same. If I can win a Cup or two, the couple/few rough years at the end can be handled better.
- Jsaquella

My risk tolerance is usually pretty high -- I normally wouldn't be scared to take him on because of what he can do

But when you hit 33, 34 years old...you have to freaking care about conditioning. You have to be all about it in this league. You can fake it a little with his size and strength, but if he's carrying too much weight and then his legs and hips go...you're just carrying LTIR, hoping for a player to play who might never give you more than five or 10 games in a row

I certainly could see that, as well.

Certainly, a high-end second pair defensemen would not make me weep. I do really see some special attributes in him, the hockey sense, that the elite ones have
- AllInForFlyers

He's still 22 going on 23. He's a naturally slender guy. He will add some weight inevitably. It will just take a more natural progression than with some other guys. Duncan Keith at his age was in his first NHL season and put up 21 in 81. So who knows? He has work to do, if it can indeed be done. I still think he will be partner reliant in certain aspects of his game.

My risk tolerance is usually pretty high -- I normally wouldn't be scared to take him on because of what he can do

But when you hit 33, 34 years old...you have to freaking care about conditioning. You have to be all about it in this league. You can fake it a little with his size and strength, but if he's carrying too much weight and then his legs and hips go...you're just carrying LTIR, hoping for a player to play who might never give you more than five or 10 games in a row
- AllInForFlyers

Yep. I have real concerns about a guy like Byfuglien aging badly. While he's going good, he's a dynamic, potentially dominant player. But I get the feeling that when he starts the down turn, it's not going to be a gentle slope, but a sheer cliff into a dark abyss

5 years is the longest I'd go
- PhillySportsGuy

If it could be done for 5/$7mil, it's worth exploring.

But we also have to consider Ek will have won. Is Byfuglien worth that?