Couldn't Briere have just said we made a move that we feel will make our team better in the long run and leave it at that?


- rayc16

The majority of informed fans would've seen right through that. It is well regarded that the Flyers gave up the player with the biggest upside and that would not adequately explain why the move was made.

That would be like cutting your nose to spite your face. That would be a lose-lose strategy.
- PT21

I believe the term you were looking for is spiderface.

oh no, no. Sorry. I think the Flyers did what anyone would have done, what they should have done. Sending Leclair and Sharp to a BC game was pretty funny, and somewhat poignant, but worth a shot, sure.

What I do hold against them is trying to spin this contractual matter into a "no one who bleed anything other than black and orange ever puts on black and orange" kinda shtick. That one was profoundly annoying because it was one more instance of ham-handed manipulativeness from what is frankly a deceitful and duplicitous organization, which largely functions as a programming appendage for a media company. I mean, give me a effing break.

Having said that, I am guessing CG and agent probably laughed for a good hour at those comments, so there is that.
- PT21

Interesting. When you defend Gauthier and his agent, you spin it as all business. When the Flyers come out and do what they feel is best for their business. You call it ham-handed manipulativeness and deceitful.

"The family is taking the high road by keeping it private."


This statement bothers me. And it is the reason why I want to know the reason why. Because to me, short of the FO stating they wanted to run a train on Quitters mother, I cant imagine what "high road" they could be taking that drove this kid to cut off all communication with the organization and say he wasn't playing there.

So please, tell us what high road you are travelling so we can rightfully rip our own organization for doing something that would lead to this. And it had better be a pretty high road....
- MBFlyerfan

Agreed. I thought this sentence was some savy penmanship. The worst I can conjure is that they saying we were promised something and it didn’t happen but we’re too big to talk about it.

It was after the mens World championships in 2023.
- MBFlyerfan

I knew it was some kind of World Championship in May of 23. Thanks

Culture and money. You lose face and money not signing asap with that team.
- coffee junkie

Yes, part of it. Also simple right and wrong, respect. Integrity of the game and many other factors come into play.

Agents use draft order in negotiations for a second contract. Plus the Flyers brought him to his first prospect camp on their dime giving him instructions on improving his game at the professional level.

I don’t care the reason. I don’t even care about the player as I think the Flyers might be way better off after the trade as far as building a Stanley Cup contender. However refusing to talk to the new management who owns his rights is unprofessional IMO. I think most would agree but it’s fine if you think different.
- psuhockey

Fair enough, but you have to admit, these are exceptionally marginal considerations to Cutter's value.

They did talk. Both sides say they talked. A decision was conveyed. That decision was not accepted by one party. They kept asking for a reason, with the very clear intent that provision of such reason would only have led to further wheedling and messiness.

I don't quite understand why some of you are so fixated on the reason. If the Flyers cut a player or don't sign a draftee, are they legally or morally obligated to providing a reason?

Especially if the reason may be poorly received: what if the real reason is: after further examination, we made a mistake, and we don't think you can ever be a good hockey player? There is nothing personal, you are just structurally flawed. Too many issues.

Should that be told? How would that help matters?

The majority of informed fans would've seen right through that. It is well regarded that the Flyers gave up the player with the biggest upside and that would not adequately explain why the move was made.
- MJL

I would have been pissed if this trade happened without the backstory. ANA got the better player. The 2nd is nice but not enough after the world juniors (which by the way had the fan base foaming at the mouth for the kid- we would have said, unreadable after that). I’m not sure all four needed to say something in such an organized manner but something needed to be said IMHO.

Some important factors here. The Flyers did try and ask for a meeting. Apparently numerous times and the Gauthier camp would not respond and cut off all communication after the junior World Championship in 2023. Jones and Briere wen to Sweden out of desperation to try and talk to the player.

I'm going to ask you the same question I've asked a number of other posters and they don't seem to want to answer. Why do 99.9% of players who are good enough to get offered a contract, sign with the team that drafted them? If it is a business and it's well within their rights not to sign, why don't we see many players taking this option? Why do players clearly seem to feel obligated to sign with the team that drafted them?
- MJL

It’s a low occurrence event for sure. I trust his agent laid out all the pros and cons and consequences of taking this path. Yet he took this path. Some folks see things differently.

I believe the term you were looking for is spiderface.
- mickel25

Yes, part of it. Also simple right and wrong, respect. Integrity of the game and many other factors come into play.
- MJL

To me, that is bound in culture. Culture is a demonized word because of politics but it simply means the expectations that we don’t see which influence how we act.

Fair enough, but you have to admit, these are exceptionally marginal considerations to Cutter's value.

They did talk. Both sides say they talked. A decision was conveyed. That decision was not accepted by one party. They kept asking for a reason, with the very clear intent that provision of such reason would only have led to further wheedling and messiness.

I don't quite understand why some of you are so fixated on the reason. If the Flyers cut a player or don't sign a draftee, are they legally or morally obligated to providing a reason?

Especially if the reason may be poorly received: what if the real reason is: after further examination, we made a mistake, and we don't think you can ever be a good hockey player? There is nothing personal, you are just structurally flawed. Too many issues.

Should that be told? How would that help matters?
- PT21

How much wonder is there if a team cuts a player or doesn't offer him a contract? People pretty much figure out that they don't think the player is good enough or worth what they have to pay him. Salary cap reasons. We normally have data nd information to come to a conclusion. Now contrast that with the Gauthier situation and all of the posts made and the speculation on why Gauthier made the decision on not to play for the Flyers.

To me, that is bound in culture. Untrue is a demonized word because of politics but it simply means the expectations that we don’t see which influence how we act.
- coffee junkie

It’s a low occurrence event for sure. I trust his agent laid out all the pros and cons and consequences of taking this path. Yet he took this path. Some folks see things differently.
- Minnyhock

What about the question?

Fair enough, but you have to admit, these are exceptionally marginal considerations to Cutter's value.

They did talk. Both sides say they talked. A decision was conveyed. That decision was not accepted by one party. They kept asking for a reason, with the very clear intent that provision of such reason would only have led to further wheedling and messiness.

I don't quite understand why some of you are so fixated on the reason. If the Flyers cut a player or don't sign a draftee, are they legally or morally obligated to providing a reason?

Especially if the reason may be poorly received: what if the real reason is: after further examination, we made a mistake, and we don't think you can ever be a good hockey player? There is nothing personal, you are just structurally flawed. Too many issues.

Should that be told? How would that help matters?
- PT21

Because they can learn from their mistakes for the future. The reason matters. "I just didn't want to play there" doesn't cut it for me. Pius it would be Armageddon in the league if that was an accepted reason for the future. Why even have a draft?

As for cutting a player or draftee, usually a reason can be sussed out from his play or some concrete occurrence. The "I just don't wanna, nya nya nya" doesn't hold water here because it affects every team in some way down the line.

oh no, no. Sorry. I think the Flyers did what anyone would have done, what they should have done. Sending Leclair and Sharp to a BC game was pretty funny, and somewhat poignant, but worth a shot, sure.

What I do hold against them is trying to spin this contractual matter into a "no one who bleed anything other than black and orange ever puts on black and orange" kinda shtick. That one was profoundly annoying because it was one more instance of ham-handed manipulativeness from what is frankly a deceitful and duplicitous organization, which largely functions as a programming appendage for a media company. I mean, give me a effing break.

Having said that, I am guessing CG and agent probably laughed for a good hour at those comments, so there is that.
- PT21

His agent got a big laugh at out of it? Because agents are never deceitful and duplicitous?

The Jamie Drysdale era begins!
- mikeyo27

Will he be the leading member of DRYsdale Island?

The majority of informed fans would've seen right through that. It is well regarded that the Flyers gave up the player with the biggest upside and that would not adequately explain why the move was made.
- MJL

Oh completely agree. Especially right after the wjc he just had. Also, we really need a player with his skill set with the limited offense we currently have

His agent got a big laugh at out of it? Because agents are never deceitful and duplicitous?
- Dkos

Nope, never ever! LOL It's a business for Gauthier. When the Flyers protect their business, they're deceitful.

Does that company own the "work" rights to you? That would have to be present for the analogy to be on even footing.
- MJL

For most yes. You work for a company and come up for a new invention. The company own the rights, you do not.

Will he be the leading member of DRYsdale Island?
- hockeylover

See my mind went immediately to "Clydesdale".

Fair enough, but you have to admit, these are exceptionally marginal considerations to Cutter's value.

They did talk. Both sides say they talked. A decision was conveyed. That decision was not accepted by one party. They kept asking for a reason, with the very clear intent that provision of such reason would only have led to further wheedling and messiness.

I don't quite understand why some of you are so fixated on the reason. If the Flyers cut a player or don't sign a draftee, are they legally or morally obligated to providing a reason?

Especially if the reason may be poorly received: what if the real reason is: after further examination, we made a mistake, and we don't think you can ever be a good hockey player? There is nothing personal, you are just structurally flawed. Too many issues.

Should that be told? How would that help matters?
- PT21

As I stated I don’t care about the reason or the player even. I am just stating that not talking to the new administration, even just a personal 2 minute phone call to reiterate his view that his is not going to play for the Flyers is unprofessional and having his agent do it is immature. Was he too scared or uncomfortable to talk to Jones? If you would like to continue to use a girlfriend metaphor, he essential broke up with his fiancée by text which is his right but not a good look.

For most yes. You work for a company and come up for a new invention. The company own the rights, you do not.
- WhiskeyMan

They own the rights to the invention, not to you as a person.

This isn’t turning down a job at Walmart. This is undermining the draft system by using a loophole. The reason that the rest of the league kept this quiet for the Flyers is because of how terrible for the league this would be if other high end draft prospects did this. Other GMs could have stole him for nearly nothing if they leaked it to the press and yet 18-20 kept their mouth shut. Why would they hurt their team if this wasn’t a gigantic crap move.
- psuhockey

not a loophole, its part of the rules

As I stated I don’t care about the reason or the player even. I am just stating that not talking to the new administration, even just a personal 2 minute phone call to reiterate his view that his is not going to play for the Flyers is unprofessional and having his agent do it is immature. Was he too scared or uncomfortable to talk to Jones? If you would like to continue to use a girlfriend metaphor, he essential broke up with his fiancée by text which is his right but not a good look.
- psuhockey

Even worse, he didn't even text.