HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Flyers Top 20 Prospects, #5

View Poll Results: 5th best Flyers prospect?
Mike Testwuide 4 5.63%
Ben Holmstrom 15 21.13%
Kevin Marshall 6 8.45%
Joonas Lehtivuori 1 1.41%
Marc-Andre Bourdon 0 0%
Petr Placek 0 0%
Marcel Noebels 1 1.41%
Tom Sestito 4 5.63%
Matt Read 18 25.35%
Brandon Manning 0 0%
Nick Cousins 1 1.41%
Jason Akeson 4 5.63%
Zac Rinaldo 5 7.04%
Oliver Lauridsen 4 5.63%
Brendan Ranford 8 11.27%
Voters: 71. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-03-2011, 04:22 PM
  #1
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,714
vCash: 9000
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Flyers Top 20 Prospects, #5

1. C Brayden Schenn, (76.58%)
2. C Sean Couturier, (so obvious not even doing a poll)
3. D Erik Gustafsson(71.19%)
4. LW Eric Wellwood(41.98%)
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 04:25 PM
  #2
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,714
vCash: 9000
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
I'm going to keep voting for Read until he wins. He impressed me at prospect camp with good speed, some skill, and a willingness to battle. On top of 4 good years at Bemidji State and a great end of the year in the AHL, I think he can be a very effective 3rd line player.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 04:43 PM
  #3
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Tough choice between Ranford or Cousins, but I'll go with Ranford since he is a little more proven.

Read is 25, too old for a prospect, IMO.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 04:53 PM
  #4
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
Read is 25, too old for a prospect, IMO.
But still technically a prospect per HF.

I'm not entirely sure, but I believe Billy is going by HF-designated prospects.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:00 PM
  #5
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
But still technically a prospect per HF.

I'm not entirely sure, but I believe Billy is going by HF-designated prospects.
What is the cut off for prospects?

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:06 PM
  #6
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,553
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Sestito! I'm thinking he makes the big club this year.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:12 PM
  #7
tuckrr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
Akeson/cousins for sure

tuckrr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:14 PM
  #8
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,731
vCash: 500
Honestly, I chose Holmstrom because I feel he is very NHL ready and will more than likely be a direct replacement for Betts after this season is over. Definitely has some good tools that would be loved on the Flyers (hitting, agitation, PKing and faceoffs).

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:17 PM
  #9
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
I went with Holmstrom. He didn't look out of place when he was called up last season.

Guys like Read and Ranford obviously have higher ceilings, but I want to see more of them before I put any hopes in them actually achieving anything at NHL level.

Maybe add Kalinski as well? Even if he's coming off a pretty bad season, he's still fairly young and has at least had a sniff at the big league.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:23 PM
  #10
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
jd2210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,526
vCash: 500
went with Holmstrom again but once again I'm fine with about 5 other guys. I guess I just figure with Ben we pretty much know what he can bring to the table and with some of the others there are some pretty big questions marks. He doesn't have the highest ceiling but he has a decent chance at an NHL career. I'd say add Kalinsky, Parks or Sullentrop (sp?)

jd2210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:24 PM
  #11
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
What is the cut off for prospects?
For the vast majority of all prospects, it's 65 NHL games to graduate or the completion of the season that includes the player's 24th birthday before they are removed from the list. That pretty much handles all players signed before or at 21.

For NCAA players signed at or above 22, they have three seasons regardless of what year they were signed to reach the 65 game mark otherwise they are taken from the prospect pool. The same applies for European players, but before without transfer agreements things got a little convoluted and confusing when Europeans were concerned; teams could hold onto players' rights for years without signing them leading to some bizarre scenarios. Since that has been mostly cleared up thanks to transfer agreements.

On top of that there are some special scenarios where I'm allowed to declare a specific player a prospect even outside of the above criteria, but I haven't seen any real need to do that so far.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:47 PM
  #12
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
For the vast majority of all prospects, it's 65 NHL games to graduate or the completion of the season that includes the player's 24th birthday before they are removed from the list. That pretty much handles all players signed before or at 21.

For NCAA players signed at or above 22, they have three seasons regardless of what year they were signed to reach the 65 game mark otherwise they are taken from the prospect pool. The same applies for European players, but before without transfer agreements things got a little convoluted and confusing when Europeans were concerned; teams could hold onto players' rights for years without signing them leading to some bizarre scenarios. Since that has been mostly cleared up thanks to transfer agreements.

On top of that there are some special scenarios where I'm allowed to declare a specific player a prospect even outside of the above criteria, but I haven't seen any real need to do that so far.
Thanks for the info. That makes sense there are different rules for NCAA prospects.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 06:52 PM
  #13
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
I feel like the boat has passed for Holmstrom. Even if he amounts to anything, he would be a fill in call up for 4th line and PK.

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 06:53 PM
  #14
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
I feel like the boat has passed for Holmstrom. Even if he amounts to anything, he would be a fill in call up for 4th line and PK.
You don't think he will be our replacement for Betts?

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:01 PM
  #15
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
You don't think he will be our replacement for Betts?
I think they could easily replace Betts in FA.

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:05 PM
  #16
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
I think they could easily replace Betts in FA.
Why do that when we already have Holmstrom and Talbot? Can we not use home grown players anymore or something?

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:08 PM
  #17
RIPRichardsCarter
Registered User
 
RIPRichardsCarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,954
vCash: 500
And this is where things get sketchy.

RIPRichardsCarter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:09 PM
  #18
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,553
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
Why do that when we already have Holmstrom and Talbot? Can we not use home grown players anymore or something?
Not if there's a better option on the free agent market. Sure, Holmstrom or Talbot probably could replace Betts and the Flyers wouldn't miss a beat. But if there's a better option that can be had, why wouldn't you go for it? Just to say that the fourth line center is home grown?

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:10 PM
  #19
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
Why do that when we already have Holmstrom and Talbot? Can we not use home grown players anymore or something?
What? Can we not use acquire proven talent instead of a long shot home grown player?

I mean Betts has a cap hit of 700k, less than Holmstrom. In fact other good 4th line centers like Konopka are paid similarly, and I'd prefer to go that route.

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:14 PM
  #20
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Not if there's a better option on the free agent market. Sure, Holmstrom or Talbot probably could replace Betts and the Flyers wouldn't miss a beat. But if there's a better option that can be had, why wouldn't you go for it? Just to say that the fourth line center is home grown?
No, but what I mean is that we have someone already that can directly replace Betts and don't have to take a chance somewhere on the FA market. Even if we don't sign who exactly we want, we would still fall back on Holmstrom anyways wouldn't we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
What? Can we not use acquire proven talent instead of a long shot home grown player?

I mean Betts has a cap hit of 700k, less than Holmstrom. In fact other good 4th line centers like Konopka are paid similarly, and I'd prefer to go that route.
I'd rather have someone that can play when we need him to, not be in the box all the time with Konopka. So Holmstrom being 50K more is too much? Just nevermind... this is going to create more problems for everyone if this goes on.

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:21 PM
  #21
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
No, but what I mean is that we have someone already that can directly replace Betts and don't have to take a chance somewhere on the FA market. Even if we don't sign who exactly we want, we would still fall back on Holmstrom anyways wouldn't we?



I'd rather have someone that can play when we need him to, not be in the box all the time with Konopka. So Holmstrom being 50K more is too much? Just nevermind... this is going to create more problems for everyone if this goes on.
Konopka was an example...

Well I'll say one last thing. Its ironic how intent you are on how we will replace someone we got from the FA...

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:22 PM
  #22
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
Konopka was an example...

Well I'll say one last thing. Its ironic how intent you are on how we will replace someone we got from the FA...
Not now, it's just an idea of that we have someone to replace the guy we did get over FA, as in Talbot and Betts. Maybe I just really like what I've seen from Holmstrom. Same with Wellwood. They may be checking line/shutdown guys, but they are still very useful. I guess I'm just excited to see more from them.

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:44 PM
  #23
tuckrr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
it really doesnt make sense to "home grow" these 4th liners. The good ones are the ones with veterancy. And homer has an eye for that (ala betts/lappy...and apparently even shelley has a "locker room presence")

more to the point though:
shouldnt we be ranking by "value"... like if we were to trade these guys to another team?

Value is determined by ceiling (potential) accomplishments (proven) and talent.

tuckrr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 07:49 PM
  #24
JCameron418
Registered User
 
JCameron418's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,448
vCash: 500
Steve Downie's still not on the list...

JCameron418 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 08:56 PM
  #25
ilovetheflyers8
Registered User
 
ilovetheflyers8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: D.C.
Country: French Guiana Independentist
Posts: 4,884
vCash: 500
I was choosing between Read and Holmstrom, and went with Read. I know very little about Ranford and Akeson. The Scouting Report ( http://www.thescoutingreport.org/ ) doesn't have very positive things to say about Cousins, but I don't know much about that site.

ilovetheflyers8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:59 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.