It's HB. We all know the rules: Never retreat, never surrender
- AllInForFlyers

Can I tell you about the time they misspelled my last name?

The only possible hold up with umby is there any issues with passing a physical. I remember rathje having a back injury and couldn't play. I know umby had surgery last off season and did come back. I'm pretty sure he has to pass a physical to be bought out.

No thanks.

It's just a discussion.

I see merits of both sides. Sometimes I feel we overvalue guys on our team. I am not high on Laughton. So for me I don't see it a bad idea to attach him to Umberger to move him and get some picks back.

Yes I know Laughton could maybe develop more. But I don't think his ceiling is that high. I also think with the past few drafts, hextall has found guys that have a higher ceiling and will soon be replacing Laughton.

That's just me. You might not think it but I do respect others opinions.
- J35Bacher

If you want to trade Laughton, fine. But attaching him to Umberger lowers his cost. So trade him for his maximum value (don't know what it is, but you'll get more if you don't attach Umberger) and buy out Umberger.

Can I tell you about the time they misspelled my last name?
- jmatchett383

Sure -- I got nothing but time for a few hours, at least

The only possible hold up with umby is there any issues with passing a physical. I remember rathje having a back injury and couldn't play. I know umby had surgery last off season and did come back. I'm pretty sure he has to pass a physical to be bought out.
- ravishingone

He played just fine (well, not crippled) in the finale last year.

No they traded for Bickell and a good young player. I don't want to move any quality assets just to get rid of RJ, and no one is trading for him unless you do.
- BiggE

I'm all for not making this too complicated. Nust buyout RJ and move forward. If anyone wants him, without leaving us with a massive cap hit, take him.

J35Bacher, why are you so adamantly against an Umberger buyout? I agree it's not the ideal plan, but it's the best option. Everything else involves losing additional assets or tying up large amounts of cap space. Or Umberger just deciding that he doesn't like large sums of money.
- jmatchett383

I understand what the buyout does. Frees up some space for the Flyers to move forward. But what Chicago did was avoid the buyout and some dead space while also bring back some assets in picks. Yes they moved TT and maybe he develops maybe he doesn't. Maybe the picks work for Chicago and maybe they don't.

If Chicago didn't think TT was what they thought he would be, since they see him first hand everyday, it was smart that they at least got picks back that could turn into something over just buying out Bickell for the space.

No thanks.

It's just a discussion.

I see merits of both sides. Sometimes I feel we overvalue guys on our team. I am not high on Laughton. So for me I don't see it a bad idea to attach him to Umberger to move him and get some picks back.

Yes I know Laughton could maybe develop more. But I don't think his ceiling is that high. I also think with the past few drafts, hextall has found guys that have a higher ceiling and will soon be replacing Laughton.

That's just me. You might not think it but I do respect others opinions.
- J35Bacher

There is literally no reason on earth to spend assets to get rid of Umberger. Not a single one. Chicago needed cap space and draft picks, which made that deal worth it. The Flyers need neither of those two things.

I think Hextall has found guys that are playing well in the CHL, none of them have shown any higher NHL potential than Laughton.

I am not saying it cant be discussed or that someones opinion should be disrespected...I am just saying that maybe we shouldn't spend 6 pages talking about a problem that doesnt exist

Sure -- I got nothing but time for a few hours, at least
- AllInForFlyers

So my last name is "Public" but they misspelled it "Pubic" so that had to add the "L."

However, when presenting this to the board as a whole, I didn't mention that it had since been fixed, and therefore people assumed my last name is "Plublic." Which is just not true.

I understand what the buyout does. Frees up some space for the Flyers to move forward. But what Chicago did was avoid the buyout and some dead space while also bring back some assets in picks. Yes they moved TT and maybe he develops maybe he doesn't. Maybe the picks work for Chicago and maybe they don't.

If Chicago didn't think TT was what they thought he would be, since they see him first hand everyday, it was smart that they at least got picks back that could turn into something over just buying out Bickell for the space.
- J35Bacher

Chicago also did not have the space for a buyout, or at least as much as the Flyers do. A lot of people are also saying Chicago got raped in the deal.

Again, the buyout is the best realistic option. You can stand your ground and have your take, but I honestly think you're lying to yourself if you disagree.

I've never seen a uses for Scott Laughton since day one. We signed Vinny a year after drafting him and we were stacked at center when we felt Schenn would play the middle. I'm disappointed with him but also recognize he's young.

I would only go youth for youth in a Laughton trade. Rychel for Laughton for an example.

So my last name is "Public" but they misspelled it "Pubic" so that had to add the "L."

However, when presenting this to the board as a whole, I didn't mention that it had since been fixed, and therefore people assumed my last name is "Plublic." Which is just not true.
- jmatchett383

If that's true, that's hilarious

So my last name is "Public" but they misspelled it "Pubic" so that had to add the "L."

However, when presenting this to the board as a whole, I didn't mention that it had since been fixed, and therefore people assumed my last name is "Plublic." Which is just not true.
- jmatchett383

I still think this entire story has some holes, and if I had to take a guess, I am leaning towards it being completely false

I still think this entire story has some holes, and if I had to take a guess, I am leaning towards it being completely false
- YuenglingJagr

Sounds like a lot of heresay.

There is literally no reason on earth to spend assets to get rid of Umberger. Not a single one. Chicago needed cap space and draft picks, which made that deal worth it. The Flyers need neither of those two things.

I think Hextall has found guys that are playing well in the CHL, none of them have shown any higher NHL potential than Laughton.

I am not saying it cant be discussed or that someones opinion should be disrespected...I am just saying that maybe we shouldn't spend 6 pages talking about a problem that doesnt exist
- YuenglingJagr

Well you don't have to respond.

Interject another conversation topic and you can talk about that.

If that's true, that's hilarious
- AllInForFlyers

Well, the part about me posting it is true.

Well you don't have to respond.

Interject another conversation topic and you can talk about that.
- J35Bacher

So let me tell you about the time they misspelled my last name...

No thanks.

It's just a discussion.

I see merits of both sides. Sometimes I feel we overvalue guys on our team. I am not high on Laughton. So for me I don't see it a bad idea to attach him to Umberger to move him and get some picks back.

Yes I know Laughton could maybe develop more. But I don't think his ceiling is that high. I also think with the past few drafts, hextall has found guys that have a higher ceiling and will soon be replacing Laughton.

That's just me. You might not think it but I do respect others opinions.
- J35Bacher

The interesting thing is, what is the basis for that opinion on Laughton. For the record, you could be right, he might be a bust. I don't think there is a single expert who could tell you definitively how Laughton is going to turn out. I also don't know how you can know that there are guys that have higher ceilings and soon may be replacing Laughton. How do you know that? Based on what exactly? Laughton was a first round draft pick who is just 21 years old. The impatience of some hockey fans really astounds me. Regardless of how it turns out, just as a matter of sound hockey principals, it would be flat out stupid to give up on Laughton at this point.

Well you don't have to respond.

Interject another conversation topic and you can talk about that.
- J35Bacher

Per HB code of conduct I have to point out when people are ridiculously wrong about a topic that is being discussed...so as much as I would like to talk about something else...I am obligated

I've got a conversation topic:

Say you're one of the teams out there that needs a goalie.

Which one would you go after?

I've got a conversation topic:

Say you're one of the teams out there that needs a goalie.

Which one would you go after?
- AllInForFlyers

Carey Price

I've got a conversation topic:

Say you're one of the teams out there that needs a goalie.

Which one would you go after?
- AllInForFlyers

Of the ones we know should be on the market

1. Beeshoppe
2. Anderson

Carey Price
- jmatchett383

Ha! Come on, be serious

There are likely some good ones available -- at least it's a real topic, because a team like Calgary could really look a lot different with even a top-15-18 goalie in net

He played just fine (well, not crippled) in the finale last year.
- jmatchett383

Yup, just speculating why there has been no,clarity on the situation yet. I wouldn't be shocked to see him wave his NMC and go to the phantoms. He still is playing professional hockey at full salary. Flyers would get some cap relief and no penalty going forward.

Athletes want to play. Max talbot signed in the Khl to continue his career. Playing in Allentown might not be so bad as opposed to moving over seas.

Of the ones we know should be on the market

1. Beeshoppe
2. Anderson
- YuenglingJagr

Where are you on Fleury? He's been pretty good the last two seasons, at least