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

Pick #20 - Scott Laughton, Center, Oshawa Generals (OHL)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-23-2012, 02:04 PM
  #126
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 BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
It's not that he wasn't good enough. I think everyone within the Flyers organization realizes Richards was good enough. But when a player is unhappy, you have to make a choice. Do you try to reason and coddle said player into making them happy again or do you move them? The Flyers decided to move Richards. Not the worst move in the world either. Yes, he won a Stanley Cup with the Kings, but can anyone honestly say that he was the driving force behind the Kings winning? Exactly. That team was carried to the Cup by Quick, Kopitar, Brown and Doughty. Richards was a secondary player on that team. He was the lead dog here and he became miserable. Philadelphia is an incredibly tough place and you need incredibly thick skin to survive here. I think if Richards stayed any longer, his misery was going to have a negative effect on everyone else.

Now that the draft is over, I'm interested in what's going to happen when July 1 rolls around. You know that this club will be VERY active that day.
If Richards was miserable it was because they brought in aging defender who didn't respect that Richards was the leader. There weren't any issues until that trade - a trade which ended up a huge bust.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:14 PM
  #127
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
If Richards was miserable it was because they brought in aging defender who didn't respect that Richards was the leader. There weren't any issues until that trade - a trade which ended up a huge bust.
It no secret the two didn't get along but there is no proof of what you are claiming or insinuating....(that Pronger was the cancer). Also there were plenty of issues before the trade...and the trade almost netted us a cup.

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:16 PM
  #128
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
If Richards was miserable it was because they brought in aging defender who didn't respect that Richards was the leader. There weren't any issues until that trade - a trade which ended up a huge bust.
Say what you will about the Pronger/Richards relationship, but to call that trade a bust is absurd.

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:21 PM
  #129
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 Coutsiephan View Post
It no secret the two didn't get along but there is no proof of what you are claiming or insinuating....(that Pronger was the cancer). Also there were plenty of issues before the trade...
There wasn't talk of locker room issues until he arrived. There is also no proof that Richards was a problem, miserable, and couldn't hack it here.

The fact is Mike Richards had better seasons in Philly while wearing the C and went to the Stanley Cup Finals while wearing the C. The idea that he can only hack it in a secondary role is bull. It is completed disputed by the facts.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:25 PM
  #130
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
There wasn't talk of locker room issues until he arrived. There is also no proof that Richards was a problem, miserable, and couldn't hack it here.

The fact is Mike Richards had better seasons in Philly while wearing the C and went to the Stanley Cup Finals while wearing the C. The idea that he can only hack it in a secondary role is bull. It is completed disputed by the facts.
You are entitled to your own opinions but not to your own facts. The Flyers were constantly having to have daddy Holmgren come into the locker room and read the team the riot act when they would have their yearly long slumps and at the worst times of the year. But that's ok totally disregard it....

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:30 PM
  #131
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 hockeyfreak7 View Post
Say what you will about the Pronger/Richards relationship, but to call that trade a bust is absurd.
It's a bust.

They gave up youth and picks to an aging defender to win now and it didn't work out. In a shocker of all shockers, the aging defender gets hurt and they are left scrambling for a replacement. They have nothing in the farm system and this trade is a reason why. They are also stuck with his contract for the next 5 years.

Short term it was fine, but long term they would have been better off not overpaying for an old defenseman.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:32 PM
  #132
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 Coutsiephan View Post
You are entitled to your own opinions but not to your own facts. The Flyers were constantly having to have daddy Holmgren come into the locker room and read the team the riot act when they would have their yearly long slumps and at the worst times of the year. But that's ok totally disregard it....
Teams slump. Big deal. Only in Philly do we expect teams to go 82-0 and panic any time they go into a slump.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:32 PM
  #133
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Anyway this is the Laughton thread. We can take the discussion elsewhere.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:36 PM
  #134
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
Teams slump. Big deal. Only in Philly do we expect teams to go 82-0 and panic any time they go into a slump.
You can engage in hyperbole and exaggeration all you want to support a baseless argument that wasn't even made but the fact is that those slumps were not healthy..I mean the owner would say things like something is going on in that locker room and we're gonna find out. I mean it's absurd what you are saying...I guess that horrible season where we were the worst team in the league and got Clarke and Hitch fired everything was just peachy.

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 02:41 PM
  #135
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
It's a bust.

They gave up youth and picks to an aging defender to win now and it didn't work out. In a shocker of all shockers, the aging defender gets hurt and they are left scrambling for a replacement. They have nothing in the farm system and this trade is a reason why. They are also stuck with his contract for the next 5 years.

Short term it was fine, but long term they would have been better off not overpaying for an old defenseman.
Pronger took us to game 6 of the SCF. It was not a bust. Really no debate to be made.

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 03:16 PM
  #136
Brock
Moderator
 
Brock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oakville
Posts: 9,434
vCash: 500
I had Laughton ranked 9th among OHL players for the draft. Here's what I wrote.

No forward in this crop did more for their draft stock in the final few months of the season than Scott Laughton. While several of the team's top players were away during December, Laughton really took off offensively with the increased ice time. It was from then on that he became a two way beast, playing in all situations for the Generals. Laughton is a jack of all trades center who does pretty much everything well. What makes him so effective is how aggressive he is at all times. He is a very difficult player to play against at both ends of the ice. He's not incredibly big, but he's a bull on the puck and very hard to separate from it. He's aggressive in driving to the net and has surprisingly good hands which allows him to be deceptively dynamic. He catches defenders by surprise at times by how well he can carry the puck. Laughton is also excellent along the boards. He's a very effective forechecker who can force turnovers and work the cycle to wear down opposing defenses. It was his forechecking ability and hard work along the wall which made him so effective at the Under 18's, where I felt like he was one of Canada's top players. Laughton was also one of the top face-off men at the tourney, a very valuable skill for a strong two way centerman. The real stickler among scouts appears to be what his high end potential is; can he be a top 2 line center, or is he more likely a solid 3rd line guy (which means there is little separation between Laughton and a guy like Brady Vail).? I remember scouts having this same debate about a guy in 2003 named Mike Richards, and he turned out alright. I see Laughton as a very comparable player at the same age

__________________
OHL Prospects Blog - http://ohlprospects.blogspot.com/
OHL Prospects on Twitter - @BrockOtten
Brock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 08:57 PM
  #137
Blueland89
Registered User
 
Blueland89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cartersville, Ga
Country: United States
Posts: 1,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by usahockey22flyers View Post
Really like the player, wanted Maatta though.
Happy with laughton but wanted henrik sammuelson

Blueland89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2012, 10:01 PM
  #138
Joey Mac
Registered User
 
Joey Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,007
vCash: 500
not that i know much about laughton, but i wanted gaunce... hopefully he pans out

Joey Mac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 08:35 AM
  #139
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
I'm ok with this pick. Even if we're deep at center right now, it's not a bad problem to have. Also, Laughton is most likely 2-4 years away from being a regular at the NHL level, and as we all know the Flyers roster might not look the same by then. I would have preferred if we could trade down when we make these picks that are a bit of a stretch, but that's not always an option, you need to find a willing trade partner as well.

I wouldn't mind having Couturier-Schenn-Laughton down the middle in a couple of years (Giroux will be on Couturier's wing).

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 08:55 AM
  #140
RoDu
Shagga likes axes
 
RoDu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,469
vCash: 500
This kid could also rise as a player and be moved for another prospect down the road

RoDu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 11:20 AM
  #141
Giroux 4 MVP
Girøux #28
 
Giroux 4 MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirimon View Post
I'm ok with this pick. Even if we're deep at center right now, it's not a bad problem to have. Also, Laughton is most likely 2-4 years away from being a regular at the NHL level, and as we all know the Flyers roster might not look the same by then. I would have preferred if we could trade down when we make these picks that are a bit of a stretch, but that's not always an option, you need to find a willing trade partner as well.

I wouldn't mind having Couturier-Schenn-Laughton down the middle in a couple of years (Giroux will be on Couturier's wing).
With how much better giroux got on face offs as the season went on, I would rather have schenn on his wing then schenn playing center

Giroux 4 MVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 01:17 PM
  #142
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,751
vCash: 5888
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Pronger took us to game 6 of the SCF. It was not a bust. Really no debate to be made.
The Flyers made that trade to win the Stanley Cup, not lose in Game 6 of the Finals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock View Post
I had Laughton ranked 9th among OHL players for the draft. Here's what I wrote.

No forward in this crop did more for their draft stock in the final few months of the season than Scott Laughton. While several of the team's top players were away during December, Laughton really took off offensively with the increased ice time. It was from then on that he became a two way beast, playing in all situations for the Generals. Laughton is a jack of all trades center who does pretty much everything well. What makes him so effective is how aggressive he is at all times. He is a very difficult player to play against at both ends of the ice. He's not incredibly big, but he's a bull on the puck and very hard to separate from it. He's aggressive in driving to the net and has surprisingly good hands which allows him to be deceptively dynamic. He catches defenders by surprise at times by how well he can carry the puck. Laughton is also excellent along the boards. He's a very effective forechecker who can force turnovers and work the cycle to wear down opposing defenses. It was his forechecking ability and hard work along the wall which made him so effective at the Under 18's, where I felt like he was one of Canada's top players. Laughton was also one of the top face-off men at the tourney, a very valuable skill for a strong two way centerman. The real stickler among scouts appears to be what his high end potential is; can he be a top 2 line center, or is he more likely a solid 3rd line guy (which means there is little separation between Laughton and a guy like Brady Vail).? I remember scouts having this same debate about a guy in 2003 named Mike Richards, and he turned out alright. I see Laughton as a very comparable player at the same age
I like what I see here, Brock.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 01:48 PM
  #143
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
The Flyers made that trade to win the Stanley Cup, not lose in Game 6 of the Finals.
So that's the metric used to judge trades? Please.


Thornton traded for Primeau, Stuart, Sturm. Cup? Bust
Ottawa trades Yashin for Chara and Spezza. Cup? Bust
Kovalchuk trade? Lost in game 6 of the SCF, I guess that's a bust.



If you want to tell me the Pronger trade didnt work out as planned, then fine. But to call it a bust because we didnt win the Cup is downright idiotic. I dont think that's what you're saying, GKJ, but the point remains-- in no sense of the word was the Pronger trade a bust.


And I'd also like to point out that no trade is made simply to "win the Cup". General managers, and reasonable fans, understand that winning the Cup has a lot of luck involved. Thus, trades are made to improve your chances of winning the Cup. Pronger did that-- therefor, it's a successful trade.

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 01:50 PM
  #144
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
So that's the metric used to judge trades? Please.


Thornton traded for Primeau, Stuart, Sturm. Cup? Bust
Ottawa trades Yashin for Chara and Spezza. Cup? Bust
Kovalchuk trade? Lost in game 6 of the SCF, I guess that's a bust.



If you want to tell me the Pronger trade didnt work out as planned, then fine. But to call it a bust because we didnt win the Cup is downright idiotic. I dont think that's what you're saying, GKJ, but the point remains-- in no sense of the word was the Pronger trade a bust.


And I'd also like to point out that no trade is made simply to "win the Cup". General managers, and reasonable fans, understand that winning the Cup has a lot of luck involved. Thus, trades are made to improve your chances of winning the Cup. Pronger did that-- therefor, it's a successful trade.
And before anyone says it, yes, obviously the circumstances were different for all of those teams-- the point is, judging the success of trades by whether or not teams won the Cup is obviously stupid.


Hell, the Gretzky trade didnt even result in a Cup for LA

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 02:05 PM
  #145
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giroux 4 MVP View Post
With how much better giroux got on face offs as the season went on, I would rather have schenn on his wing then schenn playing center
There's more to being a center than faceoffs though. Of Couturier, Schenn and Giroux I think I'd prefer to put Giroux on the wing, allowing him to focus more on the offensive side of the game. He's not terrible defensively, but if he wants to improve it kind of has to come at the expense of his offensive production. He's cheating on his defensive assignments quite often, hoping for a counter attack instead. Both Couturier and Schenn has more of a mindset for the defensive work a center has to do, I think. If Couturier can develop his offensive game the next few years, he could be a pretty good combo with Giroux I think. He's got some sniper qualities that could be put to use with Giroux as setup man. It would be terrific if both Couturier and Schenn could become top six centers.

That's all a few years down the line though. For now, let's just move Brière to the wing already.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 04:27 PM
  #146
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
jd2210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,533
vCash: 500
So what is a realistic timetable on this guy? One more year of junior at least I assume? I haven't read anything yet that would suggest he is NHL ready. Normally we always assume a year or two or 3 of development, but Coots really spoiled us.

jd2210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 04:41 PM
  #147
Schenn10
Registered User
 
Schenn10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd2210 View Post
So what is a realistic timetable on this guy? One more year of junior at least I assume? I haven't read anything yet that would suggest he is NHL ready. Normally we always assume a year or two or 3 of development, but Coots really spoiled us.
I'd expect at least 1 more year of juniors because he needs to be 20 before he can play in te ahl, and you'd think they'd give him at least a half season- to full season there. So my guess would be 2 years if he can make the team out of camp, or 3 years if they want to take him slow.

Schenn10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 04:42 PM
  #148
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd2210 View Post
So what is a realistic timetable on this guy? One more year of junior at least I assume? I haven't read anything yet that would suggest he is NHL ready. Normally we always assume a year or two or 3 of development, but Coots really spoiled us.
I expect it depends on this year. He'll definitely return to his junior team. After that, it's all about how his game has developed. The thing that works for him getting to the NHL sooner is his two-way game. If he plays solid defense, he has the chance to get here sooner and stay up while his offensive game matures.

Take it one year at a time and see how it goes.

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 04:49 PM
  #149
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,514
vCash: 500
He started to break out at the end of the season, so I would like for him to go back down for another season, and maybe continue the offensive progress he started to have.

sa cyred is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2012, 04:50 PM
  #150
Damaged Goods
Registered User
 
Damaged Goods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
The Flyers made that trade to win the Stanley Cup, not lose in Game 6 of the Finals.
The Flyers haven't made a good trade since 1975, then.

Damaged Goods 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 06:24 AM.

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.