Bill Meltzer: Quick Hits: Sanheim, McClennon, Flyers Daily, TIFH (1997 ECF Clincher)

Bill Meltzer: Quick Hits: Sanheim, McClennon, Flyers Daily, TIFH (1997 ECF Clincher)
- bmeltzer

The important question is does McClennon play flyers hockey......

bring back Sandin yet potentially let this guy walk. Rather take a chance on the unknown.

Why force a captain if there is none there. Couts would be a big mistake. Run a season without a captain seems to be working for Rangers.

The important question is does McClennon play flyers hockey......

bring back Sandin yet potentially let this guy walk. Rather take a chance on the unknown.
- hello it's me 2050

Sandin is a so-so skater but otherwise has NHL role player ability if he could stay healthy enough. He's had miserable luck with injuries since coming to North America.

McClennon is a competitive little player. Has skill but not elite skill. He's not a bad skater but he's more quick/shifty than fast. Decent hockey sense but not off the charts. Combine that with being 5-foot-8 and it's an uphill climb to be considered an NHL prospect. But even if he's "only" a good AHL player, so what? You need those, too. Maybe he'd even come up and pop a goal in a big game as a callup.

Would I rather have a Connor McClennon or -- and nothing against these players specifically -- a Gerry Mayhew or Max Willman or Hayden Hodgson type playing on the upper end of an AHL lineup and as a potential call up here and there? I'll take the younger homegrown player most of the time.

Sandin is a so-so skater but otherwise has NHL role player ability if he could stay healthy enough. He's had miserable luck with injuries since coming to North America.

McClennon is a competitive little player. Has skill but not elite skill. He's not a bad skater but he's more quick/shifty than fast. Decent hockey sense but not off the charts. Combine that with being 5-foot-8 and it's an uphill climb to be considered an NHL prospect. But even if he's "only" a good AHL player, so what? You need those, too. Maybe he'd even come up and pop a goal in a big game as a callup.

Would I rather have a Connor McClennon or -- and nothing against these players specifically -- a Gerry Mayhew or Max Willman or Hayden Hodgson type playing on the upper end of an AHL lineup and as a potential call up here and there? I'll take the younger homegrown player most of the time.
- bmeltzer

My point with Sandin is you know what you have in him is all. Agree with your assessment of Connor

Hodgson is a guy I will root for seeing his career path.

Bill with Wade, Tanner, and Ratcliff all needing to pass waivers. What do you think the plan is with all 3? No way I see them keeping all on the NHL roster. Allison imo will get claimed if waived.

My point with Sandin is you know what you have in him is all. Agree with your assessment of Connor

Hodgson is a guy I will root for seeing his career path.

Bill with Wade, Tanner, and Ratcliff all needing to pass waivers. What do you think the plan is with all 3? No way I see them keeping all on the NHL roster. Allison imo will get claimed if waived.
- hello it's me 2050

I think any of the 3 are at risk of being claimed. The only way they'd likely sneak through is if they (Allison or Laczynski) got banged up in training camp, started the season on IR, and needed games after being activated to get back up to the NHL. Ratcliffe closed out this past season with his best stretch as a pro -- 10 points in the final 13 games -- and also impressed during his 10-game NHL callup. I think he'd be claimed. The other two, especially Allison, might scare teams off due to their injury histories but both are NHL caliber players.

I think any of the 3 are at risk of being claimed. The only way they'd likely sneak through is if they (Allison or Laczynski) got banged up in training camp, started the season on IR, and needed games after being activated to get back up to the NHL. Ratcliffe closed out this past season with his best stretch as a pro -- 10 points in the final 13 games -- and also impressed during his 10-game NHL callup. I think he'd be claimed. The other two, especially Allison, might scare teams off due to their injury histories but both are NHL caliber players.
- bmeltzer

Wade i think a team would take a risk even with his injury history as the skill is there to contribute.

Made no sense then or now why they didn't give him a longer look than 10 games. As you said he was fine in his 10 game stint. It is like the GM had no idea he has to clear waivers. Had to play the zac's and browns of the world. Mind boggling to develop a guy for years then not give him the opportunity when it was the perfect time to give that opportunity.

I think any of the 3 are at risk of being claimed. The only way they'd likely sneak through is if they (Allison or Laczynski) got banged up in training camp, started the season on IR, and needed games after being activated to get back up to the NHL. Ratcliffe closed out this past season with his best stretch as a pro -- 10 points in the final 13 games -- and also impressed during his 10-game NHL callup. I think he'd be claimed. The other two, especially Allison, might scare teams off due to their injury histories but both are NHL caliber players.
- bmeltzer

Remember how stressed people were about Sam Morin surviving waivers?

The fact is very few teams will have the cap space to toss at oft-injured, unproven kids coming out of camp.

And every team will have their own motley group of prospects that they'll be forced to waive as well.

I don't have the feeling that any of those three Flyers kids would be at much risk of getting picked up out camp.

Remember how stressed people were about Sam Morin surviving waivers?

The fact is very few teams will have the cap space to toss at oft-injured, unproven kids coming out of camp.

And every team will have their own motley group of prospects that they'll be forced to waive as well.

I don't have the feeling that any of those three Flyers kids would be at much risk of getting picked up out camp.
- Tomahawk

Waivers are a crapshoot. Flyers never figured they'd lose Danick Martel to waivers, but they did. Nic Aube-Kubel got through waivers in 2019 but got claimed in-season by a team at end of the waiver claim priority order.

I absolutely think that Allison or Laczynski if healthy would be at risk of waiver claims. Also there are multiple orgs who've been intrigued by Ratcliffe over the years and he's finally (it seems) started to turn the corner in his development.

Remember how stressed people were about Sam Morin surviving waivers?

The fact is very few teams will have the cap space to toss at oft-injured, unproven kids coming out of camp.

And every team will have their own motley group of prospects that they'll be forced to waive as well.

I don't have the feeling that any of those three Flyers kids would be at much risk of getting picked up out camp.
- Tomahawk

generally I agree with you. With Allison it isn't a talent issue imo. If not for injuries he would be in the NHL.

I was not one of those Morin paranoid nuts!!!

Waivers are a crapshoot. Flyers never figured they'd lose Danick Martel to waivers, but they did. Nic Aube-Kubel got through waivers in 2019 but got claimed in-season by a team at end of the waiver claim priority order.

I absolutely think that Allison or Laczynski if healthy would be at risk of waiver claims. Also there are multiple orgs who've been intrigued by Ratcliffe over the years and he's finally (it seems) started to turn the corner in his development.
- bmeltzer

Martel was unexpected and 28 teams had passed on him before TB claimed him. Still, it was more of an outlier than anything.

NAK didn't get claimed until after he had already established himself as a legit NHL player. The three kids in question don't have that going for them.

But yeah, it only takes one team to like a kid to screw the Flyers over. But the vast majority of prospects waived out of camp do make it thru.

Would you guys rather sign Trotz or Tortorella at this point?

generally I agree with you. With Allison it isn't a talent issue imo. If not for injuries he would be in the NHL.

I was not one of those Morin paranoid nuts!!!
- hello it's me 2050

As long as they aren't waiving and losing kids to make room for Nate Thompsons and Nick Seelers, I'm fine with it. Give the kids every chance to make the team. If they don't, then roll the dice. It's unavoidable, especially with the # of kids the Flyers have.

Would you guys rather sign Trotz or Tortorella at this point?
- Barnaby36

you

As long as they aren't waiving and losing kids to make room for Nate Thompsons and Nick Seelers, I'm fine with it. Give the kids every chance to make the team. If they don't, then roll the dice. It's unavoidable, especially with the # of kids the Flyers have.
- Tomahawk

Well we shall see what crappy vet they sign and if zac is back. If both happen imo they will waive those others or at least 2 of them.

The Seller thing is funny to me. The d was terrible and you want to bring back someone who part of that terrible instead of waiting for other options. It is pure laziness to me. If he is signed purely as the #7 to fill in here and there no issue. I just do not think that is the case.

As long as they aren't waiving and losing kids to make room for Nate Thompsons and Nick Seelers, I'm fine with it. Give the kids every chance to make the team. If they don't, then roll the dice. It's unavoidable, especially with the # of kids the Flyers have.
- Tomahawk

This is the basic concern right there. If the Flyers keep all forwards under contract including Brown plus all RFAs including McEwen they have 13 forwards already (12–if Brink starts with the Phantoms). It would truly be worst case scenario for those forwards plus all 3 younger forwards mentioned (not sure if there are others also) to be fully healthy throughout training camp and then each of the young guys be claimed off waivers by various teams. Maybe we have been conditioned a bit to be prepared for the worst. No denying that scenario would be tough and sad asset management.

Well we shall see what crappy vet they sign and if zac is back. If both happen imo they will waive those others or at least 2 of them.

The Seller thing is funny to me. The d was terrible and you want to bring back someone who part of that terrible instead of waiting for other options. It is pure laziness to me. If he is signed purely as the #7 to fill in here and there no issue. I just do not think that is the case.
- hello it's me 2050

I think your trying to make it something it's not. He will be a 7th, 8th defender and if someone is out long term I belive they would call up someone like Zamula or Attard depending on how he is playing. I also could see them bring in a vet to play on the 3rd pair with York. He's a UFA now but would you be ok with someone like Hagg coming back to be on the 3rd pair with York? Run something like this:

Ellis - Provorov
Sanheim - Risto
Hagg - York

Seeler 7th defender.

Or maybe you make a hockey trade and move someone like Lindblom to get a defender. That would also open a roster spot for one of the younger guys like Allison or Ratclif if you want. I mean they have some ways they could go. I just think they know what they have in Seeler, he came in cheap and if he needs to go to the AHL there won't be an issue.

I think your trying to make it something it's not. He will be a 7th, 8th defender and if someone is out long term I belive they would call up someone like Zamula or Attard depending on how he is playing. I also could see them bring in a vet to play on the 3rd pair with York. He's a UFA now but would you be ok with someone like Hagg coming back to be on the 3rd pair with York? Run something like this:

Ellis - Provorov
Sanheim - Risto
Hagg - York

Seeler 7th defender.

Or maybe you make a hockey trade and move someone like Lindblom to get a defender. That would also open a roster spot for one of the younger guys like Allison or Ratclif if you want. I mean they have some ways they could go. I just think they know what they have in Seeler, he came in cheap and if he needs to go to the AHL there won't be an issue.
- J35Bacher

I will believe he will be the 7th/8th dman when it happens. That's what everyone said last year.

I do not believe they will call up Zamula or Attard as their history suggest otherwise.

They need to go into the off season with the notion that Ellis will not play. If he does he will miss some time more than likely. They need to sign/trade for a legit top 4 guy. If Ellis plays great as makes you that much better.

In no order:
Ivan - trade/free agent
Sanheim - RR
York- ?

So me they need a bottom pair guy and a top 4 guy. Then and only then will Seller be the #7. No interest in Haag as been there done that. Also do not think they would have york and another young guy in the top 6 at the same time.

tbh

I will believe he will be the 7th/8th dman when it happens. That's what everyone said last year.

I do not believe they will call up Zamula or Attard as their history suggest otherwise.

They need to go into the off season with the notion that Ellis will not play. If he does he will miss some time more than likely. They need to sign/trade for a legit top 4 guy. If Ellis plays great as makes you that much better.

In no order:
Ivan - trade/free agent
Sanheim - RR
York- ?

So me they need a bottom pair guy and a top 4 guy. Then and only then will Seller be the #7. No interest in Haag as been there done that. Also do not think they would have york and another young guy in the top 6 at the same time.
- hello it's me 2050

So by what your saying then maybe you need to move someone like Laughton/Lindblom/Konecny to get a top 4 guy.


Not sure who in free agency would fit your need. Maybe Zadorov or Klingberg but they could be pricey. You would need to move a forward then to clear some cap.

Waivers are a crapshoot. Flyers never figured they'd lose Danick Martel to waivers, but they did. Nic Aube-Kubel got through waivers in 2019 but got claimed in-season by a team at end of the waiver claim priority order.

I absolutely think that Allison or Laczynski if healthy would be at risk of waiver claims. Also there are multiple orgs who've been intrigued by Ratcliffe over the years and he's finally (it seems) started to turn the corner in his development.
- bmeltzer

Do you see the Flyers moving a forward or two? Like a Lindblom? Depth is on the wing, it seems they are likely to lose someone, why not trade?


What do you see Lindbloms value as? Is there one of the Allison's etc that have value, where they could move them for a mid round pick?

I think there's no way Fletch brings back Hagg. The risk of embarrassing himself is too high. Could you imagine if he did bring him back at a fraction of the cost that was just spent to extend RR, and then Hagg started playing just as well or better than Risto?

So by what your saying then maybe you need to move someone like Laughton/Lindblom/Konecny to get a top 4 guy.


Not sure who in free agency would fit your need. Maybe Zadorov or Klingberg but they could be pricey. You would need to move a forward then to clear some cap.
- J35Bacher

They need to address the top 4 on defense as you can not count on Ellis at all. How they go about it is up to them. Now mind you this is all based on the direction the Flyers are likely to take.

Do you disagree they need a top 4 guy?

They need to address the top 4 on defense as you can not count on Ellis at all. How they go about it is up to them. Now mind you this is all based on the direction the Flyers are likely to take.

Do you disagree they need a top 4 guy?
- hello it's me 2050

I don't know. I get what your saying about Ellis, not arguing that part. I mean Provorov and York looked pretty good together so if needed could you ride them if Ellis were out? I need to know more about the actual injury he has and the recovery on it.

If you can roll with York and Provorov then maybe you don't need a top 4 per se but maybe a more 4-5ish type.


I still think they need to move a forward or two especially if you want to keep Allison, Ratcliff and Laczynski.

I didn't mind Macewan but I would not resign him to take an NHL spot. I would be ok with him on the Phantoms and a call up if needed.

I would like to see a guy Hodgson win a spot on the fourth line. He seemed like he could find the net and his skating wasn't bad. Put him with players like Laczynski and Ratcliff and that line has some size and skill.

I don't know. Just thinking out loud.

Or they just don’t bring Haag back cause he is not really all that good.

I would def agree they need another top 4 dman and or change the mix. Other than Ellis I’m not sure who I can trust up a goal in the last minute.

There is not one defensemen I am all that crazy about other than a healthy Ellis on this current roster in that spot.